Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel

Full story: Newsday 71,559
Safety pins and screws are still lodged in 15-year-old Ami Ortiz's body three months after he opened a booby-trapped gift basket sent to his family. Full Story

Since: Nov 13

Denver, CO

#64652 Dec 26, 2013
Abolish The Fed wrote:
<quoted text>
Corporations wouldn't exist if governments didn't exist.
rabbee: just who are you trying to fool with that illusion - yourself or me? giving them a fancy name, so you can tax them does not mean they did not pre-exist. in fact governments try to thwart corporations, and companies, from becoming more powerful than they. ever hear, of the anti-trust laws?

Since: Dec 13

Mount Prospect, IL

#64653 Dec 26, 2013
Abolish The Fed wrote:
<quoted text>
What a stupid question, a corporation has a privilege to operate as an entity within the host state by statute.
And that privilege can be revoked.
Its existence is a privilege.
A citizen can not operate as a proprietorship without having his personal assets amenable to suit.
And a corporation cannot operate without having its personal assets amenable to suit. Using your own statement previously, it is the shareholders that enjoy the personal asset protection and not the corporation. The corporation is the same as anyone else. Its assets are amenable to suit, to use your phrase. No different than anyone else.

Now tell me how a corporation can have the ability to operate revoked except by failure to renew its charter/articles. And not renewing is an act of its owners not the government.

Since: Dec 13

Mount Prospect, IL

#64654 Dec 26, 2013
Abolish The Fed wrote:
<quoted text>
Why would a company have to afford due process to an individual that they were in contract with and that did not hold title/ownership to the property?
See, you are starting to understand the difference between government action and private action. Very good! Companies have the luxury that you speak of. Governments do not. They are required to give due process no matter what.
Abolish The Fed

Baltimore, MD

#64655 Dec 26, 2013
ericfromchi wrote:
And, ATF, the Supreme Court directly overruled the finding in Paul v. VA in United States v. South-Eastern Underwriters Association 322 U.S. 533 (1944).
That ruling only had to do with insurance contracts being treated under the interstate commerce clause.

Since: Dec 13

Mount Prospect, IL

#64656 Dec 26, 2013
And with that, I am satisfied that you have spelled out why A&E isn't required to give its employees first amendment rights. It's just as you say. The company doesn't have to afford constitutional protections to one in contract with the company and has not right to their job outside of the contract.
\
And remember, A&E is not a corporation.

Since: Nov 13

Denver, CO

#64657 Dec 26, 2013
Abolish The Fed wrote:
A corporation is not afforded any right or privilege against self-incrimination by the Fifth Amendment. Hale V. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43, 75 (1906). The Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination is a personal right, reserved only to a “natural person”, who must directly assert the privilege.**Bellis v. United States, 417 U.S. 85, 89 (1974).
If a corporation was a citizen it would be afforded 5th amendment protection.
rabbee: if only their employees, would apply for citizenship. they would not have this, unnatural personal problem. so the nazi regime, will think of them as people too. at least fascists, don't discriminate.
Abolish The Fed

Baltimore, MD

#64658 Dec 26, 2013
ericfromchi wrote:
<quoted text>See, you are starting to understand the difference between government action and private action. Very good! Companies have the luxury that you speak of. Governments do not. They are required to give due process no matter what.
Not always, back in the day companies would have to do an action in replevin to retrieve goods that weren't paid for.

Since: Nov 13

Denver, CO

#64659 Dec 26, 2013
corporations, companies, business, are not made up governments they are made up of people naturally. if anyone is being unnatural here, it tends to be governments. governments tend to control, regulate corporations, llc, incorporations, companies, business, they do not make them. and there are problems, when the government or military becomes a powerful self regulating corporation or business in itself. this has always been one of the greatest dangers to any democracy. the danger expressed by obama, the executive branch is already so powerful, they no longer need any of us.
Abolish The Fed

Baltimore, MD

#64660 Dec 26, 2013
ericfromchi wrote:
And with that, I am satisfied that you have spelled out why A&E isn't required to give its employees first amendment rights. It's just as you say. The company doesn't have to afford constitutional protections to one in contract with the company and has not right to their job outside of the contract.
\
And remember, A&E is not a corporation.
Have you seen the contract? How do you know? You are going to play lawyer games with me and tell me that a&e is a trade name, blah been there done that.

In any case we are back to square one. It makes no common sense that a&e is forced to not have a "we hire whites only" policy yet they are allowed to control its employees speech.
A private whites only club can discriminate amongst its prospective members.
Remember the boyscout arguments?
Eric

Mount Prospect, IL

#64661 Dec 26, 2013
Abolish The Fed wrote:
<quoted text>
Not always, back in the day companies would have to do an action in replevin to retrieve goods that weren't paid for.
1. We are not back in the day.
2. If you read the Adams case, it gives a history of repo, including common law repo.
3. Has nothing to do with whether A&E (which is not a corporation) has to accord first amendment protections to its employees. As you stated, the relationship is contractual and not governmental.

Since: Nov 13

Denver, CO

#64662 Dec 26, 2013
ericfromchi wrote:
And with that, I am satisfied that you have spelled out why A&E isn't required to give its employees first amendment rights. It's just as you say. The company doesn't have to afford constitutional protections to one in contract with the company and has not right to their job outside of the contract.
\
And remember, A&E is not a corporation.
rabbee: sorry to bust your bubble, but A&E, is an llc (limited liability corporation). which essentially means that one segment, is not held accountable for the others.
Eric

Mount Prospect, IL

#64663 Dec 26, 2013
yehoshooah adam wrote:
<quoted text>
rabbee: sorry to bust your bubble, but A&E, is an llc (limited liability corporation). which essentially means that one segment, is not held accountable for the others.
and what part of A&E is not a corporation did you not understand? I have said from the start that it's not a corp. You just said the same thing.
Eric

Mount Prospect, IL

#64664 Dec 27, 2013
Abolish The Fed wrote:
<quoted text>
Have you seen the contract? How do you know? You are going to play lawyer games with me and tell me that a&e is a trade name, blah been there done that.
In any case we are back to square one. It makes no common sense that a&e is forced to not have a "we hire whites only" policy yet they are allowed to control its employees speech.
A private whites only club can discriminate amongst its prospective members.
Remember the boyscout arguments?
Since when does an employment contract have to be written. Everyone who works for someone else has a contract. Some are written. Some are not.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 is a written statute. Do you have a written statute that says that private companies have to give their employees free speech rights? There isn't one.

And, A&E is not a trade name. A&E is not a corporation.

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#64665 Dec 27, 2013
ericfromchi wrote:
<quoted text>What in the hell are you talking about? Go back to your own post No. 64613. You used the reply function. Everything you asked for is contained therein.
I just checked the Allah thread. Although you unethical slime excuse for a person had my post deleted it's still in the cache for the site. Here it is again (note the update on the date):
ericfromchi
Since: Dec 13
196
Arlington Heights, IL
Reply »|Report Abuse|Judge it!|#197551Tuesday Dec 24
Alex WM wrote:
<quoted text>
Greetings dear HughBe, long time! Hope you are well.
Good question indeed.
As long as the rest of the baggage is not excessive, s/he should not pay for a piece of essential medical equipment to combat a life-threatening disease.
Hope it helps.
All the best for the Season to you and your loved ones.
Alex
Example
There are no weight limits or overweight charges for personal wheelchairs, mobility aids and medical equipment but please check our special assistance information for some rules and requirements.
http://www.britishairways.com/en-lb/informati ...
IF YOU ARE GOING TO BE SO DISHONEST AS TO HAVE MY POST DELETED, YOU HAD BETTER HAVE THEM DELETE THE CACHE TOO. WHEN YOU DON'T, MY PRIOR POST IS STILL ACCESSIBLE.
You have now shown your true colors. When you get caught, you have the prior post deleted. Then you challenge people to show the post knowing you had it deleted. You've done it twice now to me. But you have forgotten that the original post is still contained in replies. And you have forgotten that the cache is still available. You are scum.
I expected you to renege on your promise. I didn't expect you to go to such lengths of dishonesty.
I do not blame the Christians or the Jamaicans for your lack of ethics and honesty. It's all on your shoulders.
Actually , I suspect he has done that to me a few times as well, once recently - I just didnt realize it

Right before I started to "shun" him, I tried to look up a recent post just to silence the stupidity quicker. It wasnt there, I assumed the problem was my recollection as to when it was posted, and I lost interest and moved on.

I wonder how long he has been doing this.
Eric

Mount Prospect, IL

#64666 Dec 27, 2013
Frijoles wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually , I suspect he has done that to me a few times as well, once recently - I just didnt realize it
Right before I started to "shun" him, I tried to look up a recent post just to silence the stupidity quicker. It wasnt there, I assumed the problem was my recollection as to when it was posted, and I lost interest and moved on.
I wonder how long he has been doing this.
I think that every time he says prove it, he has already had the post deleted. I should have listened to you and continued to ignore him. I think he's really p.o.'d at me because he was sure I hadn't made the post.

“Legumes of the World Unite ”

Since: Sep 11

Location hidden

#64667 Dec 27, 2013
Eric wrote:
<quoted text>I think that every time he says prove it, he has already had the post deleted. I should have listened to you and continued to ignore him. I think he's really p.o.'d at me because he was sure I hadn't made the post.
He has been doing this prove it game for along time. I guess that explains his blindness. Its not really blindness, its lack of honesty.

Check out the Mess thread. Blange quoted NT that basically said, from a Christian perspective, one could not be both Christian and Jewish. I glanced over it, but I would be curious as to what you thought.

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#64668 Dec 27, 2013
Abolish The Fed wrote:


A corporation is not afforded any right or privilege against self-incrimination by the Fifth Amendment.

If a corporation was a citizen it would be afforded 5th amendment protection.
By law, a corporation is a separate legal entity and treated like a person despite the fact that it is human owners and human legislators who conceive of it (corporation) and bring it into existence and administrate it.

In brief, a corporation is an artificial person.

Self-incrimination undertaken by a corporation (an artificial person)? LOL.

That would depend on its account books, terms of service, treatment of its employees, compliance with FERA, payment of dues/taxes.....

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#64669 Dec 27, 2013
Formal contract between 2 consenting parties say employer and employee of a legal company is usually put in written form, whether the employment be of a temporary kind lasting a few months or of a permanent kind, as required by the law. Freedom of speech within limits (that does not endanger the security or integrity of a nation) is a fundamental right of all citizens of a free nation who are equal before the law. An employee enjoys many fora within the organization to register his remarks and protests. Trade unionism is an example. RTI is another means of acquiring info about an organization that could be one's own organization.

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#64671 Dec 27, 2013
Going shopping. Bye.

Since: May 13

Location hidden

#64672 Dec 27, 2013
HughBe wrote:
Hugh---Finally, the day that I have no ethics is a day that I would have qualified to be a rabbi.
The day you turn into a barbaric subhuman beast you'll become a Patriarch like Abraham, Moses, Elijah and others.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Pinos Altos Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Arts Scene Feb 25 Judith Meyer 1
Grant Co.---rotten corner of NM (Sep '11) Feb 24 guest 46
Former Santa Clara clerk accused of stealing ut... (Apr '10) Feb 16 his ex married lover 93
Dr. Twana Sparks (Dec '09) Feb 15 Steve 52
Do you know how safe your kids are around trust... Feb 9 asdf 2
Former Lt. Gov. Mike Runnels dies in Ruidoso Feb 7 Michele Rebstock 1
Hearse from Pinos Altos Hearst Church moved to ... (Aug '12) Aug '12 Lorina 2
Pinos Altos Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Pinos Altos People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 1:25 pm PST

ESPN 1:25PM
What Will The Broncos Do With Extra Money?
NBC Sports 2:28 PM
Peyton can earn back his $4 million
ESPN 2:55 PM
Sources: Peyton agrees to take $4M pay cut
Yahoo! Sports 4:33 PM
Peyton Manning's pay cut not as much as Broncos first asked for
Yahoo! Sports 4:35 PM
Former player Nate Jackson calls for NFL to allow marijuana