ROL_2012-01-19_16k.timecode

[00:00.000 --> 00:05.000]  This news brief brought to you by the International Newsnet.
[00:05.000 --> 00:10.000]  Anti-cancer drugs pushed by drug companies as the only scientific method of combating the disease
[00:10.000 --> 00:15.000]  have been found to actually make cancer worse and kill patients more quickly.
[00:15.000 --> 00:22.000]  The findings came after research was conducted on certain cancer drugs at the Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center in Boston.
[00:22.000 --> 00:30.000]  Researchers found the leukemia drug Gleevec and the drug for gastrointestinal tumors, Sutent, initially reduced tumor size,
[00:30.000 --> 00:34.000]  but afterwards caused tumors to metastasize aggressively.
[00:34.000 --> 00:43.000]  At least nine people were killed Thursday by Syrian security forces as a month-long Arab League fact-finding mission expired.
[00:43.000 --> 00:50.000]  The 10-month uprising against Syrian President Bashar Assad has turned increasingly militarized and chaotic,
[00:50.000 --> 00:56.000]  as more frustrated regime opponents and army defectors armed themselves and fight government forces.
[00:56.000 --> 01:03.000]  Arab League foreign ministers will consider extending the League's observer mission in Syria at a meeting Sunday.
[01:03.000 --> 01:11.000]  Military commanders in Afghanistan have stopped releasing the number of Allied troops killed by Afghan soldiers and police.
[01:11.000 --> 01:17.000]  The change comes after at least three Allied troops were killed by the Afghan troops they trained in the past month.
[01:17.000 --> 01:21.000]  Since 2005, more than 50 troops have been killed by Afghan security.
[01:21.000 --> 01:24.000]  A third of the attacks stem from combat stress.
[01:24.000 --> 01:30.000]  About one-fifth were caused by insurgents, goading or coercing Afghan troops.
[01:30.000 --> 01:40.000]  The White House Wednesday rejected the proposed Keystone XL pipeline, which would have carried tar sands oil from Alberta to Texas refineries.
[01:40.000 --> 01:47.000]  Barack Obama denied TransCanada Corporation's application to build the pipeline, citing Congress's, quote,
[01:47.000 --> 01:50.000]  rushed and arbitrary deadline to review the project.
[01:50.000 --> 01:59.000]  The administration was examining how it could reject the pipeline without killing XL altogether and said it would make its decision after the 2012 election.
[01:59.000 --> 02:09.000]  But Republicans tied the proposal to an extension of a payroll tax break in December, giving the State Department 60 days to approve or reject the project.
[02:09.000 --> 02:16.000]  Obama's announcement is a major victory for environmental activists who put pressure on the White House to reject the pipeline,
[02:16.000 --> 02:19.000]  citing the ecological devastation it would cause.
[02:19.000 --> 02:24.000]  TransCanada has said it will submit a new application with an alternative route.
[02:24.000 --> 02:32.000]  U.S. authorities say former Liberian leader Charles Taylor worked for U.S. intelligence, including the CIA.
[02:32.000 --> 02:36.000]  The news was revealed in response to a Freedom of Information request.
[02:36.000 --> 02:44.000]  The Boston Globe said this was the first official confirmation of long-held reports of a relationship between Taylor and U.S. spy agencies.
[02:44.000 --> 02:48.000]  Taylor is awaiting a verdict on his trial for alleged war crimes.
[02:48.000 --> 03:02.000]  Rumors of CIA ties were fueled in 2009 when Taylor told his trial at the Special Court for Sierra Leone in The Hague that U.S. agents had helped him escape from a Boston prison in 1985.
[03:02.000 --> 03:10.000]  Pentagon officials have confirmed Taylor started working with U.S. intelligence in the 1980s when he became one of the world's most notorious warlords.
[03:10.000 --> 03:15.000]  He denies charges of murder, rape, and using child soldiers.
[03:15.000 --> 03:18.000]  More details on these stories.
[03:18.000 --> 03:22.000]  This is Iron Man World before 9 o'clock.
[03:22.000 --> 03:27.000]  This news brief brought to you by the International Newsnet.
[03:27.000 --> 03:39.000]  Writers reported Thursday Mitt Romney gave the Mormon Church substantial stock holdings obtained through his private equity firm, Bain Capital, making him eligible for large tax deductions.
[03:39.000 --> 03:47.000]  Romney acquired stocks cheap from companies restructured by Bain and donated them to the church once they'd appreciate it in value.
[03:47.000 --> 03:54.000]  Thus avoiding capital gains tax and deducted the value of the donated stock from his taxable income.
[03:54.000 --> 04:00.000]  Texas Governor Rick Perry announced Thursday he's dropping out of the Republican presidential race.
[04:00.000 --> 04:08.000]  Perry began to slump in the polls last fall after a series of gaffes including forgetting which government agencies he'd shatter if elected.
[04:08.000 --> 04:16.000]  As his poll numbers dropped, he launched vitriolic attacks against gays in the military and secular public education.
[04:16.000 --> 04:32.000]  A leading industry analyst predicted Thursday oil giant BP will pay the Justice Department up to $25 billion to settle civil and criminal charges around the Deepwater Horizon blast and the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.
[04:32.000 --> 04:45.000]  Martin Ratz, head of European oil research at Morgan Stanley, said there was a 70-80% chance the two sides would agree to a deal before the start of legal hearings on February 27th.
[04:45.000 --> 04:54.000]  Media mogul Rupert Murdoch's news corporations settled 36 lawsuits by phone hacking victims, including celebrities and UK lawmakers,
[04:54.000 --> 04:59.000]  admitting as part of the deals that senior managers knew about the practice and covered it up.
[04:59.000 --> 05:10.000]  The admission by News International is part of a wide-ranging settlement of most of these 60 lawsuits filed by victims of voicemail interceptions at the now defunct news of the world.
[05:10.000 --> 05:17.000]  As part of the deal, News International agreed to a range of cash payments and gave more details about phone hacking.
[05:17.000 --> 05:27.000]  The agreements came about a month before the first civil trial was set to begin, including one filed by Welsh pop star Charlotte Church, who sang at Murdoch's wedding in 1999.
[05:27.000 --> 05:31.000]  Police said about 800 people had been targeted by the paper.
[05:31.000 --> 05:41.000]  Mitt Romney has millions of dollars of his personal wealth and investment funds set up in the Cayman Islands, a notorious Caribbean tax haven.
[05:41.000 --> 05:50.000]  On Tuesday, Romney disclosed he has been paying around 15% tax on his annual earnings, a far lower percentage than most Americans.
[05:50.000 --> 05:56.000]  For weeks, Romney has cited a desire for privacy as his reason for not sharing his tax returns.
[05:56.000 --> 05:59.000]  However, tax experts say there are other reasons.
[05:59.000 --> 06:06.000]  Romney has as much as $8 million invested in at least 12 funds listed on a Cayman Islands registry.
[06:06.000 --> 06:15.000]  Another investment, which Romney reports as being worth between $5 million and $25 million, shows up on securities records as having been domiciled in the Caymans.
[06:15.000 --> 06:25.000]  Rebecca Wilkins, a tax expert with Citizens for Tax Justice, said the federal government loses an estimated $100 billion a year because of tax havens.
[06:25.000 --> 06:32.000]  For more details on this story, visit INM World Record.net.
[07:25.000 --> 07:35.000]  The federal government has set up an annual tax return to the Caymans.
[07:35.000 --> 07:45.000]  The federal government has set up an annual tax return to the Caymans.
[07:45.000 --> 07:55.000]  The federal government has set up an annual tax return to the Caymans.
[07:55.000 --> 08:05.000]  The federal government has set up an annual tax return to the Caymans.
[08:05.000 --> 08:20.000]  At this point, we want to bring on our very special guest.
[08:20.000 --> 08:31.000]  We have tonight, we've got Mr. Harmon Taylor, of course, one of our favorite guests, and we are going to be talking about property rights issues.
[08:31.000 --> 08:47.000]  Now, this comes on the heels of a show that was about a week and a half ago where there was a caller on a Friday night that had pulled over into the parking lot, which is a faculty and student parking lot.
[08:47.000 --> 08:58.000]  It wasn't labeled that, however, but it was a parking lot for the St. Edward's University, for the university, for the students and the faculty.
[08:58.000 --> 09:03.000]  And he was sitting there talking on the phone. He just wanted to pull over and rest. He'd been driving for quite a while.
[09:03.000 --> 09:14.000]  I guess he'd been on the road for quite a while, and he pulled off to talk to a friend, and he was asked by the campus police to leave because it's private property.
[09:14.000 --> 09:30.000]  And so he had a debate ensued on the air between me and Eddie and Randy. I think Eddie was kind of neutral on that matter, but mainly between me and Randy concerning whether the public has a right to be on that property or not.
[09:30.000 --> 09:52.000]  And I said no, they don't, because it's private property. And just because there's not a gate where you need a key to open like a gate to get into the parking lot, and just because it's not labeled private property, don't come in here unless you're a student or a faculty member.
[09:52.000 --> 10:02.000]  So that doesn't change the fact that it's private property. Now, yes, it's open and accessible to the public, so people can, of course, drive into that parking lot.
[10:02.000 --> 10:21.000]  There's nothing to stop anyone from doing that, and there's not a no trespassing sign. However, if the property owner or her agent asks you to leave, you still have to leave because it's still private property, even if you're not necessarily causing a disturbance.
[10:21.000 --> 10:28.000]  So that's kind of where the point of contention was, I believe, with Randy, where he's saying, well, just because if you're not causing a disturbance, they can't ask you to leave.
[10:28.000 --> 10:41.000]  And so I'm just kind of giving a summary of the debate, and I said, well, no, Randy, that can't possibly be the way it is because say, for example, if somebody doesn't have a fence across their front yard, obviously anyone can walk onto their front yard.
[10:41.000 --> 10:57.000]  I mean, mailman can deliver mail and such like that, but just because there's not a fence across someone's front yard, like say, for example, I don't have a fence across my front yard, if people decide they just want to come set up camp and have a picnic in my front yard
[10:57.000 --> 11:09.000]  and I don't want them to do that, I have the right to ask them to leave my property, and even if they're not necessarily causing a, quote, disturbance with their picnic.
[11:09.000 --> 11:24.000]  So anyway, we want to get into a little bit, discuss this matter a little bit more with Harman Taylor and the issues of private property and where there's purple ribbons or no purple ribbons and trespassing signs and things like that.
[11:24.000 --> 11:28.000]  And there was another example concerning a Walmart.
[11:28.000 --> 11:34.000]  Well, since the Walmart is open to the public, do they ever have the right to ask you to leave their property?
[11:34.000 --> 11:42.000]  And at one point, Randy was saying, well, if you're not causing a disturbance at the Walmart, no, they can't ask you to leave because they're open to the public.
[11:42.000 --> 11:59.000]  And I said, no, that's absolutely not true because if you're not there to shop, if you're going there and you're handing out, like, say, anti-Walmart propaganda handbills, they're going to ask you to leave even if you're not causing a disturbance.
[11:59.000 --> 12:01.000]  They still have the right to ask you to leave.
[12:01.000 --> 12:08.000]  So that's my stance. I think that Randy somewhat disagrees. I'm not sure how the end of that debate went.
[12:08.000 --> 12:15.000]  But we're going to get Harman's take on all of this first and then we're going to have feedback from Eddie and Randy and such.
[12:15.000 --> 12:18.000]  So Harman, thank you and welcome to the show.
[12:18.000 --> 12:21.000]  Thanks. Always glad to be here.
[12:21.000 --> 12:30.000]  Well, so Harman, why don't you just give us a general idea of where you stand on these issues and concerning private property and such.
[12:30.000 --> 12:36.000]  You mentioned to me when I had asked you to come on the air to discuss this, you said there's no such thing as public property.
[12:36.000 --> 12:38.000]  So why don't we just start with that?
[12:38.000 --> 12:47.000]  I was going to say that's probably the best place to start. There's no such thing as public property. No such thing.
[12:47.000 --> 12:50.000]  Okay, so that next question.
[12:50.000 --> 12:53.000]  And can you explain why there's no such thing as public property?
[12:53.000 --> 12:56.000]  Yeah, we need to go into a little bit of detail on that, don't we?
[12:56.000 --> 13:05.000]  The system that we've got right now is a commercial system that which pretends to be public isn't.
[13:05.000 --> 13:15.000]  And this is one of the gotchas conceptually that allows the current system to do what it does without a whole lot of successful opposition.
[13:15.000 --> 13:19.000]  A lot of opposition, not a lot of successful opposition.
[13:19.000 --> 13:29.000]  Let's just take some examples that I hope are pretty familiar with the audience and there may be some others and of course call in and share those.
[13:29.000 --> 13:32.000]  But let's talk about prayer in school.
[13:32.000 --> 13:39.000]  Why is it that the atheist can show up and shut down prayer in school? Why is that?
[13:39.000 --> 13:48.000]  The answer is it's private property and certain activities are against the policy of the owner.
[13:48.000 --> 14:01.000]  It is literally the equivalent of a trespass to pray in school because the property owner says, don't do that.
[14:01.000 --> 14:05.000]  That's an easy example. Let's do another one.
[14:05.000 --> 14:15.000]  Prayer at the high school football games, pro games, college games, prayer at athletic events.
[14:15.000 --> 14:21.000]  In other situations, why is that now possible to shut down?
[14:21.000 --> 14:24.000]  And the answer is it's private property.
[14:24.000 --> 14:31.000]  You say, well, school district, college, the sporting arena is all public land.
[14:31.000 --> 14:34.000]  No, it's not. It's privately owned.
[14:34.000 --> 14:42.000]  And the owner of that land has a policy that says, don't do that on this property.
[14:42.000 --> 14:45.000]  The house rules concept.
[14:45.000 --> 14:48.000]  So that's the commercial mechanism.
[14:48.000 --> 14:54.000]  We can get into all the kinds of freedom of religion and you can't do this and you can't do that establishment of religion.
[14:54.000 --> 14:56.000]  Okay, that's where a lot of the argument comes in.
[14:56.000 --> 14:59.000]  That's not the actual thing that's going on here.
[14:59.000 --> 15:05.000]  What's going on here is ownership of property and the policy of the owner saying, don't do that.
[15:05.000 --> 15:12.000]  Here's another example. It's probably pretty popular with most, if not all, the listeners for the show.
[15:12.000 --> 15:20.000]  We may remember the good Chief Justice Roy Neuer, M-O-O-R-E, in Alabama.
[15:20.000 --> 15:21.000]  What did he do?
[15:21.000 --> 15:29.000]  He put up a religious affiliated statue in an area of what he thought was public property.
[15:29.000 --> 15:30.000]  What happened?
[15:30.000 --> 15:33.000]  He was told to remove it.
[15:33.000 --> 15:38.000]  He didn't. The people got after him in court.
[15:38.000 --> 15:39.000]  He still fought it.
[15:39.000 --> 15:40.000]  He lost.
[15:40.000 --> 15:42.000]  Took it up to the appeal.
[15:42.000 --> 15:44.000]  Child court was supported.
[15:44.000 --> 15:46.000]  Took it up to the Supremes.
[15:46.000 --> 15:47.000]  Certified.
[15:47.000 --> 15:51.000]  He still didn't do it, so he had to kick him off the court.
[15:51.000 --> 15:54.000]  And we can get into the religious side of this thing one of these days.
[15:54.000 --> 16:02.000]  What we're looking at here is the legal mechanism by which it is possible to make him remove that statue.
[16:02.000 --> 16:07.000]  And the answer is we start with the fact that it is not public property.
[16:07.000 --> 16:13.000]  There's a commercial entity privately owned in that case called State of Alabama.
[16:13.000 --> 16:22.000]  State of Alabama's property on State of Alabama's policy on State of Alabama property is nothing like that.
[16:22.000 --> 16:24.000]  No 10 Commandment Statues.
[16:24.000 --> 16:26.000]  It's a trespass.
[16:26.000 --> 16:30.000]  He was trespassing.
[16:30.000 --> 16:38.000]  So, when we get in mind the concept that we're really in a truly deal with private property,
[16:38.000 --> 16:41.000]  everything else here makes good and perfect sense.
[16:41.000 --> 16:46.000]  Okay, well we're about to head to break, so this is a good place to pause here.
[16:46.000 --> 16:48.000]  Yeah, it's fast.
[16:48.000 --> 16:51.000]  Folks, we will be right back after this break.
[16:51.000 --> 16:57.000]  If you have calls for private property issues, just hold your calls for a moment until we finish this discussion.
[16:57.000 --> 17:00.000]  And then we'll take calls in a little while.
[17:27.000 --> 17:29.000]  14 trillion in debt.
[17:29.000 --> 17:31.000]  This is unemployed.
[17:31.000 --> 17:33.000]  The dollar in decline.
[17:33.000 --> 17:35.000]  We know where they stand.
[17:35.000 --> 17:39.000]  But will our party's leaders repeat the mistakes of the past?
[17:39.000 --> 17:42.000]  Will they choose compromise and conviction?
[17:42.000 --> 17:45.000]  One candidate has always been true.
[17:45.000 --> 17:46.000]  Ron Paul.
[17:46.000 --> 17:47.000]  Cut spending.
[17:47.000 --> 17:49.000]  Balance the budget.
[17:49.000 --> 17:50.000]  No deals.
[17:50.000 --> 17:53.000]  Standing up to the Washington Machine.
[17:53.000 --> 17:55.000]  Guided by principle.
[17:55.000 --> 17:57.000]  Door America now.
[17:57.000 --> 18:00.000]  I'm Ron Paul, and I approve this message.
[18:00.000 --> 18:05.000]  Are you being harassed by debt collectors with phone calls, letters, or even lawsuits?
[18:05.000 --> 18:09.000]  Stop debt collectors now with the Michael Meara's proven method.
[18:09.000 --> 18:15.000]  Michael Meara's has won six cases in federal court against debt collectors, and now you can win two.
[18:15.000 --> 18:21.000]  You'll get step-by-step instructions in plain English on how to win in court using federal civil rights statutes.
[18:21.000 --> 18:24.000]  What to do when contacted by phones, mail, or court summons?
[18:24.000 --> 18:26.000]  How to answer letters and phone calls?
[18:26.000 --> 18:29.000]  How to get debt collectors out of your credit report?
[18:29.000 --> 18:34.000]  How to turn the financial tables on them and make them pay you to go away?
[18:34.000 --> 18:39.000]  The Michael Meara's proven method is the solution for how to stop debt collectors.
[18:39.000 --> 18:41.000]  Personal consultation is available as well.
[18:41.000 --> 18:47.000]  For more information, please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the blue Michael Meara spanner.
[18:47.000 --> 18:50.000]  Or email Michael Meara's at yahoo.com.
[18:50.000 --> 18:57.000]  Visit ruleoflawradio.com or email m-i-c-h-a-e-l-m-i-r-r-a-s at yahoo.com
[18:57.000 --> 19:23.000]  to learn how to stop debt collectors next.
[19:27.000 --> 19:55.000]  We are here with Harman Taylor and we are discussing the issue of property, private property,
[19:55.000 --> 20:02.000]  and Harman is asserting that there's no such thing as public property and he's been giving some examples.
[20:02.000 --> 20:05.000]  And these are interesting examples to me.
[20:05.000 --> 20:12.000]  So Harman, you're basically saying since there's no public property, then like say for example here in Austin,
[20:12.000 --> 20:21.000]  City Council, the way that they are issuing these edicts saying that certain people can't attend City Council meetings.
[20:21.000 --> 20:29.000]  And at first we've been saying well they can't do that without a court order, some kind of court order restraining order
[20:29.000 --> 20:36.000]  because it's public property and now you're saying no, City Council can do that because it's really private property.
[20:36.000 --> 20:38.000]  Is that what you're saying?
[20:38.000 --> 20:39.000]  We can start there.
[20:39.000 --> 20:42.000]  That's exactly where we start the analysis.
[20:42.000 --> 20:59.000]  If they are the owner or can speak for the owner, then they've got a lot more authority than is understood simply on the trespass theory.
[20:59.000 --> 21:03.000]  Pretty interesting change of perspective, huh?
[21:03.000 --> 21:05.000]  May I chime in here?
[21:05.000 --> 21:06.000]  We hope you will.
[21:06.000 --> 21:07.000]  Go ahead.
[21:07.000 --> 21:22.000]  Okay, this is speaking to the property as to ownership and it makes no difference if the property is privately owned.
[21:22.000 --> 21:36.000]  If the owner of the property has made the property available for public use, he has entered into a contract with the public.
[21:36.000 --> 21:40.000]  We mentioned Walmart earlier.
[21:40.000 --> 22:03.000]  It used to be that when a owner of an establishment opened their establishment to the public, they could at their caprice decide who they would allow to use the public property and who they would not.
[22:03.000 --> 22:12.000]  And in the mid-60s, we had a number of riots and a lot of issues that ended that nonsense.
[22:12.000 --> 22:18.000]  You go into a restaurant and you see a sign that says we deserve the right to refuse service to anyone.
[22:18.000 --> 22:20.000]  No, they do not.
[22:20.000 --> 22:28.000]  When they open that door to the public, they enter into a contract that says that they will treat people equally.
[22:28.000 --> 22:36.000]  And they will not deny people access capriciously or arbitrarily, goes to civil rights.
[22:36.000 --> 22:55.000]  So when I enter into onto public property, I have a reasonable expectation of fair use and don't expect to have people pawn loaded pistols at me capriciously or arbitrarily.
[22:55.000 --> 22:57.000]  That was my issue today.
[22:57.000 --> 23:02.000]  I think pointing a gun at somebody is different from having it holstered.
[23:02.000 --> 23:04.000]  And I think what happened in the situation...
[23:04.000 --> 23:06.000]  It's not different.
[23:06.000 --> 23:11.000]  Well, from the research that I've read according to statute, it is different.
[23:11.000 --> 23:23.000]  And having a security guard come up to you and ask you to leave is quite different than having a security guard coming up and pointing a gun at your head telling you to leave.
[23:23.000 --> 23:25.000]  I think that there is a difference in that.
[23:25.000 --> 23:32.000]  He doesn't have to shoot you to threaten you with a loaded pistol.
[23:32.000 --> 23:43.000]  All he has to do under law is walk around with that pistol in plain view, a prominent display.
[23:43.000 --> 23:45.000]  That's what aggravated assault goes through.
[23:45.000 --> 23:54.000]  I think it's legal for people to walk around with holsters visible, openly displayed on their own property, on private property.
[23:54.000 --> 23:56.000]  Okay.
[23:56.000 --> 24:01.000]  That goes to the issue, the definition of private.
[24:01.000 --> 24:04.000]  Are we talking about privately owned?
[24:04.000 --> 24:05.000]  Yes.
[24:05.000 --> 24:07.000]  We're talking about private property.
[24:07.000 --> 24:08.000]  Let me finish.
[24:08.000 --> 24:10.000]  Let me finish.
[24:10.000 --> 24:16.000]  Privately owned or privately used?
[24:16.000 --> 24:23.000]  The statute that I have read to answer your question, the statute that I have read, and this goes to the open carry statute,
[24:23.000 --> 24:26.000]  and the concealed carry laws.
[24:26.000 --> 24:40.000]  It's very clear in statute that somebody who owns property has the right to bear openly carry firearms openly displayed on their own property,
[24:40.000 --> 24:44.000]  and anyone else that they invite on their property is also allowed to do that.
[24:44.000 --> 24:46.000]  That's directly in the Texas statute.
[24:46.000 --> 24:52.000]  Well, in my shop in Nacodotius where I did my computer repair, I didn't carry a firearm.
[24:52.000 --> 24:57.000]  I carried my pistol on my hip all day.
[24:57.000 --> 25:00.000]  In my shop, there's nothing they can do about it.
[25:00.000 --> 25:03.000]  That is a different issue.
[25:03.000 --> 25:08.000]  Carrying a weapon is not assaulting someone with a weapon.
[25:08.000 --> 25:17.000]  Now, if I go into your shop, which you have opened to the public, and you decide you don't like the way I look,
[25:17.000 --> 25:25.000]  and you accost me whilst you're prominently displaying that weapon, that changes everything.
[25:25.000 --> 25:33.000]  Okay, we need to define what you mean by accosting here, because if Eddie decides he wants to ask someone to leave,
[25:33.000 --> 25:42.000]  then if he has his pistol holstered and he tells someone who's on his property, will you please leave?
[25:42.000 --> 25:43.000]  He has the right to do that.
[25:43.000 --> 25:44.000]  That's not assault.
[25:44.000 --> 25:46.000]  That's not accosting.
[25:46.000 --> 25:51.000]  Here we get into the civil rights issue.
[25:51.000 --> 25:59.000]  Since he opened his property to the public, he's entered into a contract with the public.
[25:59.000 --> 26:06.000]  And part of the contract is that he won't arbitrarily or capriciously deny someone access.
[26:06.000 --> 26:14.000]  Okay, well, there's a difference between arbitrarily and capriciously denying access and denying access for a specific reason,
[26:14.000 --> 26:18.000]  like say what happened with the St. Edward situation.
[26:18.000 --> 26:21.000]  That was not arbitrary or capricious.
[26:21.000 --> 26:26.000]  That was a parking lot that was meant for students and faculty.
[26:26.000 --> 26:32.000]  And even though it didn't have a gate, even though it wasn't marked, no trespassing,
[26:32.000 --> 26:39.000]  once you get into that parking lot, you can see signs that faculty park here in a special area,
[26:39.000 --> 26:44.000]  students park here in another area.
[26:44.000 --> 26:46.000]  Hold on, let me finish.
[26:46.000 --> 26:51.000]  When he was asked to leave by the security guard, it was not for an arbitrary or capricious reason.
[26:51.000 --> 26:58.000]  It was because he was not a faculty or staff member or a student and that parking lot was for that purpose.
[26:58.000 --> 27:02.000]  So that's not arbitrary or capricious.
[27:02.000 --> 27:15.000]  Okay, how is a reasonable person of ordinary prudence to know what property they can enter on to and risk and not risk criminal trespass
[27:15.000 --> 27:18.000]  or being accosted to someone with a pistol?
[27:18.000 --> 27:31.000]  How are we to know that if the property has the appearance of being opened to the public and it does have parking places labeled visitor?
[27:31.000 --> 27:36.000]  Well, it absolutely is open to the public.
[27:36.000 --> 27:48.000]  And now we as the public have to somehow magically know when we can drive on that and when we cannot or risk someone accosting this with a pistol.
[27:48.000 --> 27:59.000]  I don't think that a security guard who is armed for obvious reasons to protect himself and the property owner asking you to leave could be considered accosting.
[27:59.000 --> 28:01.000]  Let's go back over to Harman at this point.
[28:01.000 --> 28:07.000]  Harman, does St. Edward's University or any other business owner for that matter, a property owner such as Eddie with a shop,
[28:07.000 --> 28:17.000]  do they have a right to hire security guard that is armed to go around patrol the premises for safety reasons and if someone's there that is not supposed to be there?
[28:17.000 --> 28:21.000]  Does that security guard have the right to politely walk up to that person and say please leave?
[28:21.000 --> 28:24.000]  Is that considered accosting?
[28:24.000 --> 28:33.000]  Well, that goes into, in Texas of course, that goes into the criminal trespass statute and that's pretty much a judgment call of the owner.
[28:33.000 --> 28:36.000]  And you can hire somebody or just tell them yourself.
[28:36.000 --> 28:46.000]  Criminal trespass, if the property is not posted, then anyone can go onto the property.
[28:46.000 --> 28:51.000]  If the owner of the property direction to leave, then they have a duty to leave.
[28:51.000 --> 29:01.000]  So what Julius was doing was questioning these people as to their authority to order him to leave.
[29:01.000 --> 29:05.000]  This was on private property. Did he have a permit to be there?
[29:05.000 --> 29:12.000]  He was on property open for public use. I don't care who owned it.
[29:12.000 --> 29:15.000]  Yeah, he probably did. He probably does.
[29:15.000 --> 29:22.000]  Actually, it's not actually. He says if I go to any store, any place, nothing, anywhere, everywhere, it's public.
[29:22.000 --> 29:30.000]  So I have to go to protect myself and get a list of permitted uses for that property.
[29:30.000 --> 29:32.000]  This doesn't make sense.
[29:32.000 --> 29:40.000]  Hold on, Randy. We need to back up here because that parking lot is not designated for public use.
[29:40.000 --> 29:48.000]  Okay, it's private property. No, hold on. There's a difference between that parking lot not having a gate
[29:48.000 --> 29:53.000]  and not having a no trespassing sign and being designated for public use.
[29:53.000 --> 29:59.000]  It was not designated for public use. It just happened to be open to the public to come on without a sign.
[29:59.000 --> 30:01.000]  We'll be right back.
[30:01.000 --> 30:07.000]  A Noble Lie, Oklahoma City, 1995 will change forever the way you look at the true nature of terrorism.
[30:07.000 --> 30:11.000]  Based on the damage patting to the building, but the government seems impossible.
[30:11.000 --> 30:14.000]  The grand jury did not want to hear anything I had to say.
[30:14.000 --> 30:18.000]  The decision was made not to pursue any more of those individuals.
[30:18.000 --> 30:23.000]  Some of these columns were ripped up, shredded, tossed around.
[30:23.000 --> 30:27.000]  The people that did the things they did knew doggone well what they were doing.
[30:27.000 --> 30:31.000]  Expose the cover up now at anoblelie.com.
[30:31.000 --> 30:40.000]  Marketers are getting really creative and sometimes deceitful with the labels they're putting on food packages.
[30:40.000 --> 30:47.000]  I'm Dr. Cameron Albright and I'll tell you about a campaign to take the empty claims off of food labels next.
[30:47.000 --> 30:53.000]  Privacy is under attack. When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again.
[30:53.000 --> 30:58.000]  And once your privacy is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[30:58.000 --> 31:03.000]  So protect your rights. Say no to surveillance and keep your information to yourself.
[31:03.000 --> 31:06.000]  Privacy. It's worth hanging on to.
[31:06.000 --> 31:09.000]  This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com.
[31:09.000 --> 31:13.000]  The private search engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[31:13.000 --> 31:16.000]  Start over with StartPage.
[31:16.000 --> 31:19.000]  Food labels are supposed to tell us what's in the food we eat.
[31:19.000 --> 31:24.000]  So what does it mean to say made with natural goodness or doctor recommended?
[31:24.000 --> 31:27.000]  Tell me, what is doctor recommended food anyway?
[31:27.000 --> 31:31.000]  The Center for Science and the Public Interest is calling for an end to misleading labels.
[31:31.000 --> 31:35.000]  They say these claims make food sound healthier than it really is.
[31:35.000 --> 31:40.000]  One example, lightly sweetened cereal. Just how much sugar is in that exactly?
[31:40.000 --> 31:47.000]  Another reads all natural until you check the ingredients to see it's chock full of modified corn starch and other chemicals.
[31:47.000 --> 31:53.000]  Finally, here's my favorite, kid approved. Since when did parents need kids approval to fill the cupboard?
[31:53.000 --> 31:58.000]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht. More news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[32:23.000 --> 32:39.000]  Okay, we are back folks.
[32:39.000 --> 32:52.000]  We're talking about the private property issues and we want to take this back to Harmon now concerning the parking lot area.
[32:52.000 --> 32:59.000]  And we can give Walmart as an example or the St. Edward's University as an example.
[32:59.000 --> 33:03.000]  And I'm not trying to play wordsmith games here.
[33:03.000 --> 33:11.000]  I'm not trying to play games with words or be convoluted or be like a sharp practicing attorney or anything like that.
[33:11.000 --> 33:15.000]  But we need to have definitions. I mean, this is what Eddie does.
[33:15.000 --> 33:18.000]  This is what Harmon does. This is what Randy is always doing.
[33:18.000 --> 33:27.000]  Before we really start getting into legal discussions, first we have to define our terms so that everybody knows what we're talking about.
[33:27.000 --> 33:34.000]  Because if I have an idea in my head that public use means one thing and Randy has an idea in his head that public use means a different thing,
[33:34.000 --> 33:43.000]  then when we start into a discussion, we end up getting into an argument and then it comes out that the reason we're having an argument is because he has a different definition for that term than I do.
[33:43.000 --> 33:48.000]  So let's define what public use actually means.
[33:48.000 --> 33:54.000]  What I've always understood public use to mean is say, for example, a national forest.
[33:54.000 --> 34:07.000]  Well, I used to think it was public lands, but now we understand it's private, but it does say in the statute that it is designated for public use.
[34:07.000 --> 34:15.000]  In other words, anybody can go there for any reason, except if you want to engage in commerce there, you have to get a permit for that.
[34:15.000 --> 34:21.000]  But say, for example, the Walmart parking lot or the St. Ed's parking lot.
[34:21.000 --> 34:32.000]  In my mind, those parking lots cannot be construed as being designated for public use for anybody to go there and do whatever they want or just hang out.
[34:32.000 --> 34:38.000]  Because the purpose for those parking lots, especially say Walmart, is for shoppers.
[34:38.000 --> 34:41.000]  It's open to the public, obviously.
[34:41.000 --> 34:45.000]  It's open for the public to go and shop there.
[34:45.000 --> 34:57.000]  But if you're going to park in that parking lot for reasons other than getting out of your car and going into the store to shop, they will ask you to leave because it's not public use.
[34:57.000 --> 35:04.000]  It's private use. It's for shoppers. And the same thing applies with the university campus parking lot.
[35:04.000 --> 35:08.000]  It's not public use. It's not for anybody to just go park there.
[35:08.000 --> 35:18.000]  It's not a public parking lot like, say, when you go downtown Austin and you have these designated public parking lot, public use.
[35:18.000 --> 35:22.000]  They don't care why you're parking your car there. You go and park your car there.
[35:22.000 --> 35:28.000]  Some of them are free. Some of them you have to pay to park. But the point is, they don't care why you're parking your car there.
[35:28.000 --> 35:31.000]  Anyone can go park their car there for any reason.
[35:31.000 --> 35:33.000]  That's a public use parking lot.
[35:33.000 --> 35:45.000]  Say I would use parking lot. In my mind, it's not public use. It's for people who are there for university business because they're either staff or a student or faculty and such.
[35:45.000 --> 35:52.000]  And if you're not there for university business, they have the right to ask you to leave because it's not a public use parking lot.
[35:52.000 --> 35:55.000]  That's the way I see the difference in terms here.
[35:55.000 --> 36:00.000]  So, Harman, can you please straighten this out and give us your take on this?
[36:00.000 --> 36:04.000]  That sounds accurate to me.
[36:04.000 --> 36:10.000]  There are things that, I mean, they're truly private. It's state of Texas property. It's privately owned property.
[36:10.000 --> 36:17.000]  It's just they generically say it's open to anyone that wants to go there. There'll be restrictions on it.
[36:17.000 --> 36:21.000]  The parks are that way. The lakes are that way.
[36:21.000 --> 36:26.000]  And it's generically open to anyone who wants to go there.
[36:26.000 --> 36:44.000]  That is a different type of property than the college, university, school, public school property, business property, all of which is for the business purpose of that business.
[36:44.000 --> 36:51.000]  Who is the private owner of, say, the courthouse?
[36:51.000 --> 36:53.000]  Say again?
[36:53.000 --> 36:56.000]  It's the private owner of the courthouse instead of private property.
[36:56.000 --> 37:01.000]  Probably the county or the state. Whose courthouse is it?
[37:01.000 --> 37:05.000]  What is the county or the state?
[37:05.000 --> 37:10.000]  What is the county or the state? There are commercial entities with EIN numbers.
[37:10.000 --> 37:14.000]  And they're also under strict contract.
[37:14.000 --> 37:16.000]  What contract with what?
[37:16.000 --> 37:18.000]  Constitution.
[37:18.000 --> 37:19.000]  What constitution?
[37:19.000 --> 37:22.000]  And statute. Okay. Statutes.
[37:22.000 --> 37:26.000]  Everything that's in the Constitution is essentially in statute.
[37:26.000 --> 37:29.000]  And not everything. But anyway.
[37:29.000 --> 37:31.000]  I would argue it is statute.
[37:31.000 --> 37:34.000]  But the civil rights are in the statutes.
[37:34.000 --> 37:38.000]  Okay. Purely private obligations there. Purely private rights.
[37:38.000 --> 37:44.000]  Doesn't matter. The private, they're not, okay, this goes to what you mean by private.
[37:44.000 --> 37:47.000]  Yeah, I'm sure it does.
[37:47.000 --> 37:54.000]  By your definition, public is not something that even exists.
[37:54.000 --> 37:57.000]  We get there. We get there.
[37:57.000 --> 38:05.000]  The concept that we have been raised with to think of as being something public does not exist.
[38:05.000 --> 38:07.000]  That's correct.
[38:07.000 --> 38:09.000]  Everything's private.
[38:09.000 --> 38:11.000]  And everything's contract.
[38:11.000 --> 38:13.000]  Everything's agreement.
[38:13.000 --> 38:16.000]  The two different kinds of agreements. Contracts and trusts.
[38:16.000 --> 38:21.000]  So everything is 99% of everything is controlled by the agreement.
[38:21.000 --> 38:22.000]  That's correct.
[38:22.000 --> 38:27.000]  Okay. So we have an agreement called Civil Rights Act.
[38:27.000 --> 38:31.000]  We also have a social contract.
[38:31.000 --> 38:33.000]  This is a civil society.
[38:33.000 --> 38:39.000]  And a reasonable person looking at that, saying Edward's parking lot,
[38:39.000 --> 38:48.000]  with the cost of experiencing this society, we'd have the impression that is open to the public.
[38:48.000 --> 38:50.000]  It's not open to the public.
[38:50.000 --> 38:52.000]  If it's not finished.
[38:52.000 --> 38:58.000]  There are parking lots that look just like that that aren't open to the public.
[38:58.000 --> 39:03.000]  And as a reasonable person, I expect that when I start to enter one of those,
[39:03.000 --> 39:09.000]  I'll have some signage letting me know, giving me reasonable notice.
[39:09.000 --> 39:12.000]  Does it say faculty, students, something like that?
[39:12.000 --> 39:19.000]  Faculty, students that says which parking places faculty must use and student must use.
[39:19.000 --> 39:21.000]  And then there's some for visitors.
[39:21.000 --> 39:22.000]  Okay.
[39:22.000 --> 39:26.000]  That would tell me that since they're for visitors, I can visit there.
[39:26.000 --> 39:30.000]  You can if you're visiting there to do something there.
[39:30.000 --> 39:32.000]  Well, it doesn't say that.
[39:32.000 --> 39:35.000]  You can visit there to set up a tent.
[39:35.000 --> 39:40.000]  So you just arbitrarily make up these limitations.
[39:40.000 --> 39:43.000]  What does a visitor mean?
[39:43.000 --> 39:50.000]  I mean, someone's going to come visit the campus, talk to the students, talk with faculty, talk with a student.
[39:50.000 --> 39:53.000]  That's the visitor to the university.
[39:53.000 --> 39:55.000]  I have duty to fair notice.
[39:55.000 --> 40:03.000]  See, I have friends that attend St. Edward's and they've invited me to events they've had there before,
[40:03.000 --> 40:05.000]  specific campus events.
[40:05.000 --> 40:12.000]  And every parking lot that I've entered into, it doesn't say no trespassing on the sign when you enter the parking lot,
[40:12.000 --> 40:15.000]  but it does say you're entering St. Edward's University.
[40:15.000 --> 40:17.000]  So there was notice.
[40:17.000 --> 40:19.000]  So what?
[40:19.000 --> 40:22.000]  I'm just letting you know you're to answer.
[40:22.000 --> 40:27.000]  Wait, wait, so what is that I'm answering the question that you asked because you said,
[40:27.000 --> 40:29.000]  you know, many parking lots look the same.
[40:29.000 --> 40:36.000]  How am I supposed to know if I'm entering into a private area, a private property, or any other parking lot?
[40:36.000 --> 40:42.000]  And the answer to your question is that there is a sign there that says you're entering St. Edward's University.
[40:42.000 --> 40:54.000]  Your answer is nonresponsive in that the fact that it is St. Edward's University does not limit use.
[40:54.000 --> 40:59.000]  If they wanted limited use, I would expect reasonable notice.
[40:59.000 --> 41:11.000]  For St. Edward's faculty, students, and visitors' omens, I would have reasonable notice.
[41:11.000 --> 41:22.000]  And even that's okay, but when these guys approached Julius, since there was no notice,
[41:22.000 --> 41:32.000]  and he genuinely that was there for a valid civil purpose to get off highway while he was using the cell phone,
[41:32.000 --> 41:41.000]  it wasn't unreasonable to question to the UMass to their authority.
[41:41.000 --> 41:43.000]  That was the issue.
[41:43.000 --> 41:52.000]  And I don't disagree that if I have property that has to be open for public use and someone comes onto that property and I say,
[41:52.000 --> 41:55.000]  hey, Bubba, this ain't open for public use.
[41:55.000 --> 41:57.000]  You've got to hit the road, Jack.
[41:57.000 --> 41:59.000]  Then I would have to hit the road.
[41:59.000 --> 42:04.000]  There's no certain statute in trespass.
[42:04.000 --> 42:13.000]  If it is open and it's not, there's no barrier, there's no signage, then I can clearly enter onto the property.
[42:13.000 --> 42:18.000]  And if the owner directs me to leave, then I have a duty to leave.
[42:18.000 --> 42:28.000]  However, if just someone comes up and orders me to leave, how do I know he has authority to do that?
[42:28.000 --> 42:38.000]  I could go on to St. Edward's and tell you to get off the property. Would you have a duty?
[42:38.000 --> 42:42.000]  You're saying if a visitor were there telling another visitor to get off?
[42:42.000 --> 42:43.000]  Yeah.
[42:43.000 --> 42:53.000]  The party with the authority to say leave is someone that is the owner or has a parent authority to speak for the owner.
[42:53.000 --> 42:57.000]  And that's what Julius was asking for, his authority.
[42:57.000 --> 43:07.000]  Well, someone wearing a uniform saying I'm security for this property clearly has a parent authority to speak on behalf of the owner.
[43:07.000 --> 43:11.000]  And when they made their position clear, he did leave.
[43:11.000 --> 43:15.000]  And the question was about him even asking.
[43:15.000 --> 43:19.000]  Originally the issue was that he was even on the property to start with.
[43:19.000 --> 43:22.000]  And I said, well, we're going to be on the property to start with.
[43:22.000 --> 43:27.000]  Well, if he had an emergency, I don't think anyone would talk about that.
[43:27.000 --> 43:31.000]  Even if he didn't, he's not committing trespass unless he's fighting.
[43:31.000 --> 43:41.000]  Trespass. The private property is not there as an invitation to do business.
[43:41.000 --> 43:45.000]  It's not the implied business invitation.
[43:45.000 --> 43:46.000]  Access.
[43:46.000 --> 43:49.000]  He's not there to do anything with the school at all.
[43:49.000 --> 43:51.000]  Let's go to trespass.
[43:51.000 --> 43:52.000]  Okay.
[43:52.000 --> 43:53.000]  I'm looking to get up here.
[43:53.000 --> 43:55.000]  Okay, okay, we've got to go to break.
[43:55.000 --> 44:02.000]  Randy, me now be able to hear the music. We'll be right back.
[44:02.000 --> 44:06.000]  The Oakland City bombing. Top 10 reasons to question the official story.
[44:06.000 --> 44:09.000]  Reason number two, why was the ATF AWOL?
[44:09.000 --> 44:13.000]  Paramedic Tiffany Bible, who was on the scene within five minutes,
[44:13.000 --> 44:20.000]  has stated in an affidavit that agents of the Bureau of Alcohol and Tobacco and Firearms told her that they were not in the office that morning.
[44:20.000 --> 44:27.000]  D&T Catherine Mallet also overheard one agent say to another, close, is that why we got the page to not come in today?
[44:27.000 --> 44:35.000]  Through Shaw's interview on KFOR TV, it was also told by ATF agents that they had been paged to not come in to work.
[44:35.000 --> 44:41.000]  The ATF initially denied these claims, and now variously claim that one of their agents was in a free-falling elevator,
[44:41.000 --> 44:46.000]  which has been disproven, or that they'd been in an all-night stakeout, or that they'd been in a golf tournament.
[44:46.000 --> 44:51.000]  As they try to sort out their lies, all we want to know is, did the ATF receive a warning,
[44:51.000 --> 44:56.000]  and if so, why did they not pass it on to others and memorials?
[44:56.000 --> 45:19.000]  For more information, go to OVCFalminTruth.com.
[45:26.000 --> 45:28.000]  And now you can too.
[45:28.000 --> 45:34.000]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case-winning experience.
[45:34.000 --> 45:43.000]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand about the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[45:43.000 --> 45:52.000]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases, prosa-tastics, and much more.
[45:52.000 --> 46:02.000]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner, or call toll-free 866-LAW-E-Z.
[46:02.000 --> 46:25.000]  Music playing
[46:25.000 --> 46:27.000]  Okay folks, we are back.
[46:27.000 --> 46:31.000]  And Randy, you were just about to talk about the statute.
[46:31.000 --> 46:33.000]  Yes, criminal trespass.
[46:33.000 --> 46:37.000]  I thought I had definitions, burglary.
[46:37.000 --> 46:39.000]  I've got to hear some more.
[46:39.000 --> 46:41.000]  I just looked at it.
[46:41.000 --> 46:42.000]  Oh, here it is.
[46:42.000 --> 46:43.000]  Criminal trespass.
[46:43.000 --> 46:52.000]  A person commits an offense if the person enters or remains on property, on or in property of another,
[46:52.000 --> 47:02.000]  including residential land, agricultural land, and a recreational vehicle park or building aircraft or other vehicle without effective consent,
[47:02.000 --> 47:12.000]  and the person had noticed that the entry was forbidden or received notice to depart but failed to do so.
[47:12.000 --> 47:15.000]  That defines criminal trespass.
[47:15.000 --> 47:24.000]  If I had no notice that entry was forbidden and I hadn't been told to leave, I'm not committing trespass.
[47:24.000 --> 47:31.000]  Now once someone with authority orders me to leave, then I'm committing trespass.
[47:31.000 --> 47:46.000]  And that's not an argument I would have if someone with authority in Walmart came to me and I'm parking my motorhome out there on the parking lot out towards the end,
[47:46.000 --> 47:51.000]  which a lot of people do, and Walmart normally allows that.
[47:51.000 --> 47:53.000]  I don't think anyone would argue that.
[47:53.000 --> 47:58.000]  That is not a intended use of the parking lot.
[47:58.000 --> 48:03.000]  The parking lot is open to the public, and it's open for intended use.
[48:03.000 --> 48:16.000]  And as long as I'm using it as it's intended, I would argue that these guys with apparent authority don't have the authority to order me to leave,
[48:16.000 --> 48:21.000]  unless I am using it for some purpose other than its intended use.
[48:21.000 --> 48:24.000]  And that was my position in the beginning.
[48:24.000 --> 48:32.000]  And the thing with Julius yesterday, he was questioning them as their authority to order him to leave the property.
[48:32.000 --> 48:43.000]  So was he just trying to determine if this apparent security guard was a phony and wasn't a real security guard for St. Ed's?
[48:43.000 --> 48:48.000]  Just somebody wearing a costume, having fun, going around, asking people to leave parking lots?
[48:48.000 --> 48:51.000]  That is unfairness in program.
[48:51.000 --> 48:56.000]  Okay, I'm being exaggerating here because I'm trying to find out what was the line of questioning.
[48:56.000 --> 49:04.000]  Just because somebody walks up to me with a badge and a pistol doesn't mean he has authority to do what he's trying to do.
[49:04.000 --> 49:11.000]  And it's not reasonable for me to request his actual authority.
[49:11.000 --> 49:14.000]  Okay, so again, what was the exact nature of Julius' question?
[49:14.000 --> 49:15.000]  Because I didn't hear that part.
[49:15.000 --> 49:17.000]  Was he just trying to find out if this guy was actually...
[49:17.000 --> 49:19.000]  He asked him, who are you?
[49:19.000 --> 49:20.000]  Okay.
[49:20.000 --> 49:23.000]  And then they told him they were security guards as well.
[49:23.000 --> 49:25.000]  This is a public parking lot.
[49:25.000 --> 49:28.000]  I don't see signs that says I can't use it.
[49:28.000 --> 49:30.000]  But it was a policy that says I can't use it.
[49:30.000 --> 49:32.000]  It's what policy you're enforcing.
[49:32.000 --> 49:37.000]  And he was asking them to support their position.
[49:37.000 --> 49:41.000]  They're the ones that made the claim.
[49:41.000 --> 49:47.000]  So he's asking them to validate the claim.
[49:47.000 --> 49:48.000]  And that's not unreasonable.
[49:48.000 --> 49:50.000]  And then what happened at that point?
[49:50.000 --> 49:51.000]  If we can't...
[49:51.000 --> 49:52.000]  He left.
[49:52.000 --> 49:56.000]  Well, I mean, so did the security guard validate and say, yes, I'm a security guard.
[49:56.000 --> 49:59.000]  I work for St. Edward's University and blah, blah.
[49:59.000 --> 50:00.000]  Okay.
[50:00.000 --> 50:01.000]  Yeah.
[50:01.000 --> 50:02.000]  And then he left.
[50:02.000 --> 50:04.000]  Okay.
[50:04.000 --> 50:14.000]  But it went to, in a civil society, we should be able to move freely in a civil manner.
[50:14.000 --> 50:17.000]  And what Julius was doing was absolutely civil.
[50:17.000 --> 50:22.000]  And it's my position that when someone straps a pistol on their hip,
[50:22.000 --> 50:28.000]  they take on a very, very serious responsibility.
[50:28.000 --> 50:35.000]  And someone walks up to me and starts giving me commands.
[50:35.000 --> 50:39.000]  And he's prominently displaying a deadly weapon.
[50:39.000 --> 50:42.000]  I take that command to include the deadly weapon.
[50:42.000 --> 50:50.000]  That's why I told Julius to ask them if those pistols were loaded.
[50:50.000 --> 50:53.000]  And they assured him that it was.
[50:53.000 --> 50:57.000]  Now he's being accosted by someone with a loaded pistol.
[50:57.000 --> 51:02.000]  And, Junior, when I do that, I ask them if they're fixing to pull that pistol on me.
[51:02.000 --> 51:06.000]  And they always tell me, not unless they have to.
[51:06.000 --> 51:16.000]  Well, I take that as a direct threat or notice that they are prepared to use that loaded pistol.
[51:16.000 --> 51:20.000]  And I do do that to remind them of the position area.
[51:20.000 --> 51:25.000]  And that's, but apparently did just fine for Julius because they, they just,
[51:25.000 --> 51:26.000]  these guys did good.
[51:26.000 --> 51:28.000]  They never lost it cool.
[51:28.000 --> 51:29.000]  Okay.
[51:29.000 --> 51:30.000]  All right.
[51:30.000 --> 51:31.000]  I know.
[51:31.000 --> 51:32.000]  Okay.
[51:32.000 --> 51:35.000]  This is where the point I want to ask Harman the question, which I threw out there earlier,
[51:35.000 --> 51:37.000]  we sort of changed subject.
[51:37.000 --> 51:44.000]  Harman, is it considered a costing for a property owner or an agent of a property owner,
[51:44.000 --> 51:50.000]  such as a security guard, to come up and politely ask someone to leave with a loaded pistol strapped on their hip?
[51:50.000 --> 51:52.000]  It could even be rude about it.
[51:52.000 --> 51:53.000]  That's not costing.
[51:53.000 --> 51:55.000]  And that's not considered a costing.
[51:55.000 --> 51:57.000]  I didn't think so.
[51:57.000 --> 52:07.000]  Well, no, and until they got demanding, if someone is displaying a deadly weapon,
[52:07.000 --> 52:10.000]  then they make a demand on me.
[52:10.000 --> 52:16.000]  Can I recently presume that the demand includes the potential use of the deadly weapon?
[52:16.000 --> 52:21.000]  Well, costing is nothing more than coming up and talking to somebody in a forceful manner,
[52:21.000 --> 52:24.000]  not necessarily in a bad way, just a forceful manner.
[52:24.000 --> 52:27.000]  You mean like the assault that becomes an issue?
[52:27.000 --> 52:28.000]  Okay.
[52:28.000 --> 52:30.000]  What's assault?
[52:30.000 --> 52:31.000]  Wait a minute.
[52:31.000 --> 52:36.000]  First, let's answer Randy's question that you asked a minute ago about, can I assume
[52:36.000 --> 52:43.000]  that the person making the demand with a loaded pistol is prepared to use the pistol to back up their demand?
[52:43.000 --> 52:44.000]  Okay.
[52:44.000 --> 52:46.000]  Let's go back to that question.
[52:46.000 --> 52:50.000]  I would say, yes, you could make that assumption.
[52:50.000 --> 52:54.000]  So, for me, that is real serious.
[52:54.000 --> 52:55.000]  Assault.
[52:55.000 --> 52:57.000]  Yes, okay.
[52:57.000 --> 53:06.000]  Assault, a person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly or recklessly causes bodily injury to another, including the person's spouse.
[53:06.000 --> 53:14.000]  Intentionally, knowing or knowingly threatens another with imminent bodily injury, including the person's spouse.
[53:14.000 --> 53:19.000]  Intentionally and knowingly causes physical contact.
[53:19.000 --> 53:35.000]  Then, Mr. Chancis used to say, if you speak to someone in a way that a reasonable person would find offensive, then I'm not finding that language in here.
[53:35.000 --> 53:36.000]  Okay.
[53:36.000 --> 53:37.000]  Well, I guess back to the...
[53:37.000 --> 53:38.000]  Okay.
[53:38.000 --> 53:39.000]  But intention...
[53:39.000 --> 53:40.000]  Okay.
[53:40.000 --> 53:44.000]  It's enough to say a person or actor and offensive...
[53:44.000 --> 53:46.000]  I'm going to make it a little bit...
[53:46.000 --> 53:50.000]  Intentionally and knowingly threatens another with imminent bodily injury.
[53:50.000 --> 54:06.000]  When someone comes up to me in a society where open-carrying weapons is not allowed, generally, and they are openly displaying a type of weapon,
[54:06.000 --> 54:17.000]  I take that to mean that they are in a position where they feel authorized to use that weapon and are prepared to use that weapon.
[54:17.000 --> 54:21.000]  I take that as a threat.
[54:21.000 --> 54:25.000]  And if you don't, you're suicidal.
[54:25.000 --> 54:38.000]  So my position here is, is when they put that pistol on, they can't just go out and do whatever they want to, and it's interesting when I was in Australia.
[54:38.000 --> 54:47.000]  One of the guys there makes this comment about the fact that nobody has guns.
[54:47.000 --> 54:56.000]  They say, you can go down to the local beer joint and get in a fight, or you can get mad at your neighbor and get in a fight with him.
[54:56.000 --> 55:01.000]  You don't have to worry about him shooting you.
[55:01.000 --> 55:15.000]  I thought that was absolutely nuts, that the fact that people didn't carry deadly weapons opened the door for them to be openly assaultive to one another.
[55:15.000 --> 55:32.000]  Okay, let's go back to the main question here that I'm still trying to vet out, which is, does a property owner have the right to either he or she, himself or herself,
[55:32.000 --> 55:44.000]  or an agent of the property owner to carry openly a loaded weapon on the property, which automatically, period, just that answer is yes, it's in statute.
[55:44.000 --> 55:55.000]  Does that person also have the right to continue to openly carry a weapon and either politely or rudely go up and ask somebody else on their property to leave?
[55:55.000 --> 55:57.000]  Is that considered assault?
[55:57.000 --> 56:00.000]  I say no.
[56:00.000 --> 56:02.000]  But Randy, it sounds like you're saying yes.
[56:02.000 --> 56:11.000]  Are you trying to say that people don't have the right to hire security guards that are armed to ask people to leave the property that aren't supposed to be there?
[56:11.000 --> 56:13.000]  Are you saying that they don't have the right to do that?
[56:13.000 --> 56:14.000]  No.
[56:14.000 --> 56:16.000]  Okay, okay, okay.
[56:16.000 --> 56:21.000]  I'm trying to determine what your issue is here.
[56:21.000 --> 56:29.000]  Do you really have a problem with the fact that St. Edward's University had a security guard that night that was armed and went up and asked Julius to leave the property?
[56:29.000 --> 56:31.000]  Do you have a problem with that?
[56:31.000 --> 56:34.000]  Do you think that there's something wrong with that?
[56:34.000 --> 56:35.000]  No.
[56:35.000 --> 56:37.000]  Okay, okay, okay, all right.
[56:37.000 --> 56:45.000]  The thing about it was, and Julius asked him for their authority and they provided it.
[56:45.000 --> 56:49.000]  That was exactly as it should have been.
[56:49.000 --> 56:50.000]  Okay.
[56:50.000 --> 57:00.000]  We have, our police here have gotten absolutely completely out of control.
[57:00.000 --> 57:07.000]  And these particular individuals apparently were not absolutely out of control.
[57:07.000 --> 57:11.000]  And I was glad to see that.
[57:11.000 --> 57:21.000]  But if I could pull it over by a police officer and he orders me to do something no matter what it is, if I don't do it instantly, his hand goes to his pistol.
[57:21.000 --> 57:26.000]  And when his hand touches that pistol, I consider that aggravated assault.
[57:26.000 --> 57:30.000]  Okay, now you're talking about excessive force, though, versus the assault.
[57:30.000 --> 57:34.000]  Anybody can use excessive force to do something against another person.
[57:34.000 --> 57:37.000]  No, no, that's not excessive force.
[57:37.000 --> 57:39.000]  He has pulled it yet.
[57:39.000 --> 57:46.000]  It's not excessive, but he has clearly threatened me with a deadly weapon.
[57:46.000 --> 57:48.000]  That's where I'm going.
[57:48.000 --> 58:06.000]  And if you look in the assault statutes, especially for a public official, and you cited this for the legislature, actually, you didn't cite it to that legislative subcommittee.
[58:06.000 --> 58:09.000]  You crammed it right down there.
[58:09.000 --> 58:10.000]  It's gross.
[58:10.000 --> 58:12.000]  Okay, well, Randy, that is a totally...
[58:12.000 --> 58:13.000]  It should have.
[58:13.000 --> 58:17.000]  Yeah, that's a totally different scenario than a security guard who is armed.
[58:17.000 --> 58:18.000]  Oh, absolutely.
[58:18.000 --> 58:21.000]  And asking someone to leave their property.
[58:21.000 --> 58:24.000]  Oh, no.
[58:24.000 --> 58:27.000]  The point was, he was asking them for their authority.
[58:27.000 --> 58:30.000]  If they had the authority, five, and when they established it, they left.
[58:30.000 --> 58:31.000]  Right.
[58:31.000 --> 58:46.000]  But if they couldn't establish it, if they're carrying a loaded pistol in a manner that indicates they're prepared to use it, then they're implying an authority they don't have or exerting the authority they don't have.
[58:46.000 --> 58:50.000]  While purporting to be a public official, that's first-degree settlement.
[58:50.000 --> 58:53.000]  Or purporting themselves to be a security guard when they're really not.
[58:53.000 --> 58:54.000]  Yeah, okay, I agree with that.
[58:54.000 --> 58:56.000]  All right, listen, we're about to go to break.
[58:56.000 --> 59:00.000]  We're going to be discussing more about private property issues with Harman Taylor on the other side.
[59:00.000 --> 59:19.000]  The Bible remains the most popular book in the world, yet countless readers are frustrated because they struggle to understand it.
[59:19.000 --> 59:38.000]  First, this new translation is extremely faithful and accurate, but the real story is the more than 9,000 explanatory footnotes. Difficult and profound passages are opened up in a marvelous way, providing an entrance into the riches of the Word beyond which you've ever experienced before.
[59:38.000 --> 59:43.000]  Bibles from America would like to give you a free recovery version simply for the asking.
[59:43.000 --> 59:57.000]  This comprehensive yet compact study Bible is yours just by calling us toll-free at 1-888-551-0102 or by ordering online at freestudybible.com.
[59:57.000 --> 01:00:00.000]  That's freestudybible.com.
[01:00:00.000 --> 01:00:04.000]  This news brief brought to you by the International Newsnet.
[01:00:04.000 --> 01:00:25.000]  Internet opposition to anti-piracy legislation in Congress forced lawmakers Wednesday to back off. A blackout by Wikipedia, Reddit and thousands of other sites protested the Stop Online Piracy Act and the Protect IP Act, allowing the government to shut down websites that display or link to copyrighted intellectual property.
[01:00:25.000 --> 01:00:30.000]  4.5 million people signed Google's petition against the bills.
[01:00:30.000 --> 01:00:45.000]  Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel Tuesday backed off a plan to increase fines for resisting arrest in the face of complaints he's trying to muzzle free speech during the NATO and G8 summits in Chicago this spring.
[01:00:45.000 --> 01:00:57.000]  Surviving measures include more surveillance cameras, parks and beaches closed until 6 a.m., sweeping parade restrictions and empowering the chief of police to deputize out-of-state police.
[01:00:57.000 --> 01:01:06.000]  A bombshell interview with Newt Gingrich's ex-wife set to air Thursday could catapult Ron Paul into second place in South Carolina.
[01:01:06.000 --> 01:01:17.000]  The Drudge Report says the interview with Marian Gingrich could end her ex-husband's career. The ex-Mrs. Gingrich said Gingrich wanted an open marriage so he could have a mistress and a wife.
[01:01:17.000 --> 01:01:22.000]  The broadcast will go out Thursday on Nightline, two days before the primaries.
[01:01:22.000 --> 01:01:29.000]  16% of New York's subway fares go to some of Wall Street's biggest banks.
[01:01:29.000 --> 01:01:45.000]  A new report from the United New York details how the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, which runs the subway, entered into agreements with the likes of AIG, City Group, JPMorgan Chase and others in hopes of protecting itself against financial instability.
[01:01:45.000 --> 01:01:56.000]  Instead, the same banks that engineered the global finance crisis and were later bailed out by taxpayers have trapped the MTA in a quote web of toxic swaps.
[01:01:56.000 --> 01:02:03.000]  The money goes toward paying off the financial products that will cost at least $1.3 billion by 2030.
[01:02:03.000 --> 01:02:12.000]  The MTA would have to pay $714 million in termination fees to stop the hemorrhaging, an amount that went up 40% this fall.
[01:02:12.000 --> 01:02:22.000]  The MTA's net swap payments in 2010 alone could have prevented deep service cuts and salvaged 1,800 jobs with $40 million to spare.
[01:02:22.000 --> 01:02:40.000]  Greek workers took to the streets again this week against further austerity measures as the nation's political leaders tried to strike a deal with private creditors, bondholders and the International Monetary Fund to restructure loans to fend off the default of Greek sovereign debt.
[01:02:40.000 --> 01:02:46.000]  The EU and the IMF have assembled a bailout package in exchange for enormous cuts in government spending.
[01:02:46.000 --> 01:02:56.000]  Meanwhile, Greek bondholders are pushing back against the EU plan, which includes recalling old bonds and replacing them with new ones at lower interest rates.
[01:02:56.000 --> 01:03:12.000]  Hedge bonds have been buying up Greek bonds at steep discounts, capturing as much bailout money as possible. If Athens fails to pay its debts in March, it would trigger large credit default swaps payouts from the large financial firms that sold bondholders the insurance.
[01:03:12.000 --> 01:03:28.000]  The two biggest issuers are Goldman Sachs and AIG.
[01:03:42.000 --> 01:03:58.000]  The MTA's net swap payments in 2010 alone could have prevented deep service cuts and salvaged 1,800 jobs with $40 million to spare.
[01:03:58.000 --> 01:04:14.000]  First of all, paranoia seems to be really over hade liquonomous.
[01:04:14.000 --> 01:04:33.000]  We're back, Randy Kelton, everyone's been great, here's our radio, we're here with
[01:04:33.000 --> 01:04:38.400]  our special guest, Armand Cameron, who always gives me a headache, always takes me two or
[01:04:38.400 --> 01:04:44.040]  three days to get my head to good spinning, every time I talk to Armand, because he's
[01:04:44.040 --> 01:04:46.840]  a little deeper than I am.
[01:04:46.840 --> 01:04:54.160]  And one of those deep issues that we were talking about earlier was private property
[01:04:54.160 --> 01:05:04.880]  and how everything is private property, and I moved around in an apparently public society
[01:05:04.880 --> 01:05:12.480]  and I am somewhat confused as to precisely what you mean by the private nature of the
[01:05:12.480 --> 01:05:13.480]  property.
[01:05:13.480 --> 01:05:15.480]  Okay.
[01:05:15.480 --> 01:05:22.440]  The system that we're dealing with is a commercial system.
[01:05:22.440 --> 01:05:27.680]  We don't have an entity out there, for example, that's created by a Constitution.
[01:05:27.680 --> 01:05:30.280]  They're created by, what's a Constitution?
[01:05:30.280 --> 01:05:35.760]  The Constitution is a process of law.
[01:05:35.760 --> 01:05:41.840]  It's language that comes about by law, it creates an entity by law, and we don't have
[01:05:41.840 --> 01:05:48.120]  any of that, but we have our entities that are created by commercial declaration and
[01:05:48.120 --> 01:05:49.120]  that's nothing.
[01:05:49.120 --> 01:05:53.000]  Anybody can go declare or any kind of business they want into existence.
[01:05:53.000 --> 01:05:56.040]  Now, there's certain rules about certain types of business.
[01:05:56.040 --> 01:05:59.880]  You want to declare a corporation into existence, there's a certain thing.
[01:05:59.880 --> 01:06:05.880]  You've got to file with a certain office, articles of corporation, articles of incorporation
[01:06:05.880 --> 01:06:10.720]  with Secretary of State, but you file the articles of incorporation with the Secretary
[01:06:10.720 --> 01:06:17.520]  of State, pay the fee, follow those basic guidelines for that and what happened?
[01:06:17.520 --> 01:06:21.360]  That commercial entity has just been declared into existence.
[01:06:21.360 --> 01:06:24.480]  That's not an act by law.
[01:06:24.480 --> 01:06:28.080]  That's an act by commercial declaration.
[01:06:28.080 --> 01:06:32.480]  The entities that we're dealing with today that pretend to be government are created
[01:06:32.480 --> 01:06:35.000]  by commercial declaration.
[01:06:35.000 --> 01:06:39.480]  They're not created by law, they're created by commercial declaration.
[01:06:39.480 --> 01:06:43.880]  They own property, they have property interests and all kinds of things.
[01:06:43.880 --> 01:06:50.920]  They have kind of a dual role, I say kind of a dual role, it's absolutely a dual role.
[01:06:50.920 --> 01:06:58.160]  It's a little different by operation than we're taught, but they've got a commercial side.
[01:06:58.160 --> 01:07:04.960]  They've got a governmental side which goes under the pretext of the sovereign authority
[01:07:04.960 --> 01:07:07.120]  and they've got the commercial side.
[01:07:07.120 --> 01:07:11.960]  Okay, it's the commercial side where they're going to own all the property.
[01:07:11.960 --> 01:07:16.480]  They are an ongoing business concern that owns property.
[01:07:16.480 --> 01:07:23.760]  They get to say what goes on their property, house rules, okay?
[01:07:23.760 --> 01:07:34.080]  So they may say it's a roadside park, anyone on that roadside can stop at that park and
[01:07:34.080 --> 01:07:37.120]  have their lunch there and all of these things.
[01:07:37.120 --> 01:07:42.600]  Okay, there's certain rules, I mean you still can't rob your neighbor of their lunch or
[01:07:42.600 --> 01:07:50.120]  their pocketbook just because it's public, obviously, all of the criminal stuff applies.
[01:07:50.120 --> 01:07:55.560]  You can't clobber your neighbor to take the lunch or their pocketbook and all of that's
[01:07:55.560 --> 01:08:00.200]  obvious in common sense, but the state owns that roadside park.
[01:08:00.200 --> 01:08:09.640]  The state owns that roadside restroom and all of the appurtenances to it, private property.
[01:08:09.640 --> 01:08:15.400]  And public access, private property.
[01:08:15.400 --> 01:08:17.040]  So that's how that works.
[01:08:17.040 --> 01:08:21.440]  Now of course we can go a little bit farther into this to understand a little bit more
[01:08:21.440 --> 01:08:25.920]  about private ownership and who gets to say what in the property.
[01:08:25.920 --> 01:08:32.200]  How does a property tax work privately?
[01:08:32.200 --> 01:08:39.040]  A property tax functions because there's a private agreement set up and the nature of
[01:08:39.040 --> 01:08:45.920]  the agreement is such that the party who doesn't pay the tax gets kicked off the property.
[01:08:45.920 --> 01:08:53.440]  There's nothing by law about that obligation, it's made to look that way, but it isn't.
[01:08:53.440 --> 01:08:55.280]  It facially isn't.
[01:08:55.280 --> 01:08:56.280]  Why?
[01:08:56.280 --> 01:09:01.600]  We're not dealing with a legit system, how do we know because we don't have a legitimate
[01:09:01.600 --> 01:09:03.640]  money system.
[01:09:03.640 --> 01:09:08.600]  The system, the money tells us the foundational choice of law for the system and when we have
[01:09:08.600 --> 01:09:13.200]  funny money, the operational choice of law is law of the sea.
[01:09:13.200 --> 01:09:14.200]  What does that mean?
[01:09:14.200 --> 01:09:17.000]  It means everything's commercial.
[01:09:17.000 --> 01:09:22.280]  So by the existence of the money alone, we know that all of these taxes exist because
[01:09:22.280 --> 01:09:25.640]  we agreed to them and by no other means.
[01:09:25.640 --> 01:09:32.320]  Okay, the ability of the city or the county or the appraisal district to kick someone
[01:09:32.320 --> 01:09:41.000]  off the land is a direct result of their having a private property interest in that
[01:09:41.000 --> 01:09:42.000]  land.
[01:09:42.000 --> 01:09:44.320]  That's how they enforce the property tax.
[01:09:44.320 --> 01:09:52.280]  The private property interest, they have an equitable ownership interest in the land.
[01:09:52.280 --> 01:09:54.400]  And I call it rent, it is.
[01:09:54.400 --> 01:09:59.520]  When the rent isn't paid, the rentor is kicked off the property.
[01:09:59.520 --> 01:10:06.560]  So private, private, private, private, private, it appears to be public, but that's just
[01:10:06.560 --> 01:10:08.520]  to keep the blood pressure down.
[01:10:08.520 --> 01:10:13.240]  When we really understand the ownership nature of what's happening, then we see nothing
[01:10:13.240 --> 01:10:15.240]  but private property.
[01:10:15.240 --> 01:10:19.120]  Does that help?
[01:10:19.120 --> 01:10:20.120]  I'm not sure.
[01:10:20.120 --> 01:10:24.240]  Well, it's just kicking around some more in the city.
[01:10:24.240 --> 01:10:32.360]  But it's, those apparent rights that I have are actually rights by agreement.
[01:10:32.360 --> 01:10:33.360]  Correct.
[01:10:33.360 --> 01:10:40.040]  And it's right now, that's 100% correct.
[01:10:40.040 --> 01:10:46.040]  But there's still rights by enforceable agreement.
[01:10:46.040 --> 01:10:51.880]  Yeah, it's an enforceable agreement, it's voluntarily entered into, there's no illegal
[01:10:51.880 --> 01:10:57.960]  purpose for it, and it's deemed legitimate because the terms of the agreement are actually
[01:10:57.960 --> 01:11:00.960]  in statutes.
[01:11:00.960 --> 01:11:10.320]  The property tax code is the term, let me get this straight, the statute, the language
[01:11:10.320 --> 01:11:15.600]  that's there and the code provides the terms of the agreement.
[01:11:15.600 --> 01:11:18.080]  So the canons of the contract essentially.
[01:11:18.080 --> 01:11:19.760]  Yeah, terms of the deal.
[01:11:19.760 --> 01:11:22.960]  That's exactly right.
[01:11:22.960 --> 01:11:27.880]  So that's a statute that doesn't apply because it's printed.
[01:11:27.880 --> 01:11:32.880]  Statutes outside the penal code, which is the church's book of discipline.
[01:11:32.880 --> 01:11:36.160]  Church's book of discipline is going to apply whether it's agreed to or not.
[01:11:36.160 --> 01:11:41.520]  There are a lot of people saying, oh, Title 18 doesn't work, it wouldn't pass, look at
[01:11:41.520 --> 01:11:42.520]  all these things.
[01:11:42.520 --> 01:11:47.560]  Yeah, book of discipline is going to apply whether it's consented to or not.
[01:11:47.560 --> 01:11:55.560]  Now, almost no matter what process book of discipline comes into existence, it's going
[01:11:55.560 --> 01:11:56.560]  to apply.
[01:11:56.560 --> 01:12:00.120]  So penal code is going to apply, that's the church's book of discipline.
[01:12:00.120 --> 01:12:03.720]  Outside of that, we've got some issues.
[01:12:03.720 --> 01:12:04.720]  We've got some issues.
[01:12:04.720 --> 01:12:09.320]  The question is, where's the commercial nexus?
[01:12:09.320 --> 01:12:15.160]  And that's the right place to start in looking at the statutory language.
[01:12:15.160 --> 01:12:17.760]  Does it apply because it is printed?
[01:12:17.760 --> 01:12:21.480]  The penal code, we just presume yes.
[01:12:21.480 --> 01:12:25.720]  Outside of that, it's a different matter.
[01:12:25.720 --> 01:12:28.240]  Some of it yes, most of it no.
[01:12:28.240 --> 01:12:30.400]  It doesn't, and what am I saying?
[01:12:30.400 --> 01:12:35.960]  It's not invalid language, it's just if it applies, it applies because it has first been
[01:12:35.960 --> 01:12:38.840]  agreed to.
[01:12:38.840 --> 01:12:45.360]  This is the nature of the environment in which we find ourselves today.
[01:12:45.360 --> 01:12:54.280]  This is one of my favorite subjects you talk about is choice of law.
[01:12:54.280 --> 01:13:02.880]  We choose to be, I'm trying to make sure I understand this right, I'm involved in that
[01:13:02.880 --> 01:13:09.320]  particular contract because of choices that I made.
[01:13:09.320 --> 01:13:10.320]  Yes.
[01:13:10.320 --> 01:13:16.480]  And whether I realized I was involving myself in the contract or not, it's more available.
[01:13:16.480 --> 01:13:17.480]  Amen.
[01:13:17.480 --> 01:13:19.800]  And that's extremely important to understand.
[01:13:19.800 --> 01:13:24.040]  We don't have to know what even that we're entering into the agreement.
[01:13:24.040 --> 01:13:29.440]  It's one of the magic things about the place called this state, it's one of the magic things
[01:13:29.440 --> 01:13:34.560]  about the legal system we have right now evidenced by the funding money.
[01:13:34.560 --> 01:13:38.960]  That choice of law changed the evaluation standard for the agreements.
[01:13:38.960 --> 01:13:45.480]  Ordinarily, we would be able to get into where is the mutual assent?
[01:13:45.480 --> 01:13:47.240]  Where is the meeting of the minds?
[01:13:47.240 --> 01:13:53.360]  Where did I consciously enter into a deal with this thing called government?
[01:13:53.360 --> 01:13:59.280]  And under the evaluation standards that we have under this present choice of law, we
[01:13:59.280 --> 01:14:01.160]  don't have to know a thing about anything.
[01:14:01.160 --> 01:14:02.360]  That's how all this stuff works.
[01:14:02.360 --> 01:14:08.760]  If they had to confess the commercial nature of this thing, the whole plan would fall apart.
[01:14:08.760 --> 01:14:14.120]  So they've designed it, we're turning everything on its ear to where all these agreements work
[01:14:14.120 --> 01:14:16.400]  and we don't have any idea that they're agreements.
[01:14:16.400 --> 01:14:26.440]  There's a good example of that I read in a case about the tax, about federal taxation.
[01:14:26.440 --> 01:14:34.720]  Where they were taxing carriages and the carriage operators got all up in arms and the court
[01:14:34.720 --> 01:14:43.200]  said that if you were using a carriage for personal transportation, that's not a choice,
[01:14:43.200 --> 01:14:45.200]  that's a necessity.
[01:14:45.200 --> 01:14:52.560]  But if you chose to use a carriage as a way to generate income, that was a personal choice
[01:14:52.560 --> 01:15:00.920]  you made, and that entered you into the contract with the taxman, it was strictly a matter of
[01:15:00.920 --> 01:15:01.920]  personal choice.
[01:15:01.920 --> 01:15:10.720]  So this is what it comes down to.
[01:15:10.720 --> 01:15:19.080]  So if I want to have a place to live, I can live out on the street if I want to, but if
[01:15:19.080 --> 01:15:24.560]  I want property, I'm entering into a contract with the state to borrow that property from
[01:15:24.560 --> 01:15:25.560]  them.
[01:15:25.560 --> 01:15:26.560]  Okay.
[01:15:26.560 --> 01:15:39.200]  Borrow, rent, we can get into that distinction, but yeah, that's the ownership paradigm we
[01:15:39.200 --> 01:15:41.240]  are all taught.
[01:15:41.240 --> 01:15:48.760]  We are taught and raised to be good Prussians, what's a good Prussian, a Prussian, a good
[01:15:48.760 --> 01:15:55.240]  Prussian is someone who does exactly what he's told and doesn't ask any questions.
[01:15:55.240 --> 01:16:00.840]  So when we do what we're told and we don't ask questions, we're a good Prussian, and
[01:16:00.840 --> 01:16:09.720]  in this frame of mind, we are led down the Primrose path, we become the controlled entity
[01:16:09.720 --> 01:16:18.120]  that those that want power over us in that manner want us to assume.
[01:16:18.120 --> 01:16:19.480]  We have choices.
[01:16:19.480 --> 01:16:24.560]  We have choices we don't exist, but don't realize exist.
[01:16:24.560 --> 01:16:28.960]  We have choices we do not realize exist.
[01:16:28.960 --> 01:16:33.480]  I think that's the most important issue to come out of this, and one of the hardest things
[01:16:33.480 --> 01:16:43.240]  for me to get my head wrapped around is how the choices I make lead me into contracts that
[01:16:43.240 --> 01:16:47.000]  I wasn't consciously aware I was entering into.
[01:16:47.000 --> 01:16:50.880]  This is Randy Kelton, Deborah Stevens, Andy Craig with my radio.
[01:16:50.880 --> 01:17:01.520]  Our call in number is 512-646-1984, and we'll be right back.
[01:17:01.520 --> 01:17:05.120]  Capital Corn and Bullion is a family owned and operated business that has helped many
[01:17:05.120 --> 01:17:09.960]  families and friends in protecting their assets, and we would like to do the same for you.
[01:17:09.960 --> 01:17:16.240]  In addition to corns and bullion, we now offer Patriot Saves, ammunition, Berkey water products,
[01:17:16.240 --> 01:17:21.680]  gift certificates, wristbands, and our new Silver Pool, a new way to guarantee silver
[01:17:21.680 --> 01:17:24.280]  by prepaying at a locked price.
[01:17:24.280 --> 01:17:27.760]  We can even help you set up a metals IRA account.
[01:17:27.760 --> 01:17:32.880]  Call us at 512-646-6440 for more details.
[01:17:32.880 --> 01:17:38.400]  As always, we buy, sell, and trade precious metals and cater to those with all sizes of
[01:17:38.400 --> 01:17:39.400]  coin collections.
[01:17:39.400 --> 01:17:46.480]  We're located at 7304 Burnett Road, Suite A, about a half a mile north of Canig, next
[01:17:46.480 --> 01:17:49.520]  to the Ikebon Sushi and the Genie Car Wash.
[01:17:49.520 --> 01:17:53.680]  We're open Monday through Friday, 10-6, Saturdays, 10-5.
[01:17:53.680 --> 01:18:00.640]  Visit us at CapitalCornandBullion.com or call 512-646-6440.
[01:18:00.640 --> 01:18:05.040]  What's been the problem with phone companies, high prices, and contracts that lock you in
[01:18:05.040 --> 01:18:09.000]  for two years minimum, not freedomtelephones.com.
[01:18:09.000 --> 01:18:13.720]  Freedomtelephones are designed around the concept and reality of patriotism, loyalty,
[01:18:13.720 --> 01:18:14.720]  and privacy.
[01:18:14.720 --> 01:18:20.320]  With FreedomTelephones.com, there are no contracts, no credit checks, and no social security numbers
[01:18:20.320 --> 01:18:21.320]  required.
[01:18:21.320 --> 01:18:23.560]  That's why our name is FreedomTelephones.com.
[01:18:23.560 --> 01:18:28.640]  Finally, residential, mobile, and business telephones and plans that are private and
[01:18:28.640 --> 01:18:30.760]  never lock you into a long-term contract.
[01:18:30.760 --> 01:18:36.600]  When a low price, residential and business plans started only $14.99 and mobile plans
[01:18:36.600 --> 01:18:42.000]  started just $39.99, plus every month you pay your bill, freedomtelephones.com contributes
[01:18:42.000 --> 01:18:43.920]  to your favorite programs.
[01:18:43.920 --> 01:18:44.920]  Don't wait.
[01:18:44.920 --> 01:18:52.360]  Support the cause and get the highest quality and the lowest prices by calling 1-800-600-5553.
[01:18:52.360 --> 01:18:55.800]  That's 800-600-5553.
[01:18:55.800 --> 01:18:57.320]  Freedomtelephones.com.
[01:18:57.320 --> 01:19:07.320]  Supportable, private, perfect.
[01:19:07.320 --> 01:19:29.520]  Freedomtelephones are designed around the concept and reality of patriotism, loyalty, and
[01:19:29.520 --> 01:19:40.520]  privacy.
[01:19:40.520 --> 01:19:52.920]  Freedomtelephones are designed around the concept and reality of patriotism, loyalty,
[01:19:52.920 --> 01:20:02.400]  and privacy.
[01:20:02.400 --> 01:20:07.560]  We are going to start opening the phone lines now for your calls.
[01:20:07.560 --> 01:20:13.560]  If you have a call, if you've got a question for Harman Taylor or us about property rights
[01:20:13.560 --> 01:20:21.520]  issues, private property issues, you can call in 512-646-1984.
[01:20:21.520 --> 01:20:25.720]  I've got a couple more questions for Harman as well, and we do have a caller on the line
[01:20:25.720 --> 01:20:29.720]  right now, Mary from Texas, who actually wanted to ask a question that I was going to ask
[01:20:29.720 --> 01:20:30.720]  concerning UT.
[01:20:30.720 --> 01:20:31.720]  Mary, are you there?
[01:20:31.720 --> 01:20:32.720]  Yes, ma'am, I am.
[01:20:32.720 --> 01:20:33.720]  All right, thank you.
[01:20:33.720 --> 01:20:34.720]  What is your question for Harman Taylor?
[01:20:34.720 --> 01:20:35.720]  Harman, I appreciate your work.
[01:20:35.720 --> 01:20:36.720]  I've seen some of the documentation in Eddie's Sunday Discussion Group.
[01:20:36.720 --> 01:20:37.720]  I'm glad you're using the word admiralty in there and stuff.
[01:20:37.720 --> 01:20:38.720]  I think some of that's a pretty interesting concept.
[01:20:38.720 --> 01:20:39.720]  In regards to UT, I had a 10-year-old friend who was working with me.
[01:20:39.720 --> 01:20:40.720]  I had a 10-year-old friend who was working with me.
[01:20:40.720 --> 01:20:41.720]  I had a 10-year-old friend who was working with me.
[01:20:41.720 --> 01:20:42.720]  I had a 10-year-old friend who was working with me.
[01:20:42.720 --> 01:20:53.720]  I'm glad you're using the word admiralty in there and stuff, I think some of that's
[01:20:53.720 --> 01:20:54.720]  pretty interesting concept.
[01:20:54.720 --> 01:20:58.520]  In regards to UT, I had attended an Excel pipeline event there and started documenting
[01:20:58.520 --> 01:21:02.120]  the fact they wouldn't allow people to put flyers out.
[01:21:02.120 --> 01:21:10.840]  I confronted the Department of State, and at first the agency that was holding this
[01:21:10.840 --> 01:21:17.120]  public meeting forum, and they said that flyers were not allowed, and then I went and talked
[01:21:17.120 --> 01:21:23.200]  to the Department of Justice and the LBJ Library and Conference Center.
[01:21:23.200 --> 01:21:24.200]  I was videotaping.
[01:21:24.200 --> 01:21:29.280]  They started getting really disturbed and some fellow looked like the Homeland Security
[01:21:29.280 --> 01:21:34.640]  guy said, you know, I didn't have the right to hand up flyers there because it was a rented
[01:21:34.640 --> 01:21:35.640]  property.
[01:21:35.640 --> 01:21:39.480]  A lady from UT came out and said, no, no, no, that's against our agreement.
[01:21:39.480 --> 01:21:40.480]  That's against our policy.
[01:21:40.480 --> 01:21:42.080]  You can not hand out flyers.
[01:21:42.080 --> 01:21:44.080]  I was not there with flyers.
[01:21:44.080 --> 01:21:50.320]  I didn't know much about the event at all, but as a legal activist, I got really concerned
[01:21:50.320 --> 01:21:57.920]  with people's rights, freedom of speech being encroached, including mine at UT.
[01:21:57.920 --> 01:21:59.920]  Carmen?
[01:21:59.920 --> 01:22:00.920]  Okay.
[01:22:00.920 --> 01:22:09.760]  So the question is, does UT have the authority to disallow flyers for various things?
[01:22:09.760 --> 01:22:12.360]  In general, yes.
[01:22:12.360 --> 01:22:13.360]  What was the event?
[01:22:13.360 --> 01:22:17.480]  Was it something that UT had invited in or was it somebody renting space?
[01:22:17.480 --> 01:22:18.480]  Yes.
[01:22:18.480 --> 01:22:24.280]  Heavily attended the event that was going all along in the nation from Canada to Port
[01:22:24.280 --> 01:22:30.840]  Arthur regarding a flood line, a tar sands being delivered from Canada to Port Arthur.
[01:22:30.840 --> 01:22:31.840]  Right.
[01:22:31.840 --> 01:22:39.720]  But wait, but Mary, he was asking if this was a UT event or did someone rent like a discussion
[01:22:39.720 --> 01:22:41.600]  area of room at UT?
[01:22:41.600 --> 01:22:45.400]  There is an environmental consulting firm, and they were the first ones I started to
[01:22:45.400 --> 01:22:48.720]  ask in videotape about the policy.
[01:22:48.720 --> 01:22:53.960]  Cardinal Intrix was running the meeting in conjunction with the Department of State at
[01:22:53.960 --> 01:22:55.160]  the university.
[01:22:55.160 --> 01:23:00.960]  It was declared a public meeting and a public hearing where citizenry was asking to look
[01:23:00.960 --> 01:23:07.440]  like two various officials or corporations in the hall questions.
[01:23:07.440 --> 01:23:08.440]  Okay.
[01:23:08.440 --> 01:23:14.760]  So there was a private corporation in conjunction with the Department of Justice, I'm assuming
[01:23:14.760 --> 01:23:18.320]  you're talking about the State Department of Justice, not the feds?
[01:23:18.320 --> 01:23:20.440]  It's the feds, yes.
[01:23:20.440 --> 01:23:21.440]  Okay.
[01:23:21.440 --> 01:23:27.800]  So, but you don't know which entity actually rented this room from UT?
[01:23:27.800 --> 01:23:28.800]  Right.
[01:23:28.800 --> 01:23:34.080]  All three of them, the Department of State, Cardinal Intrix, this environmental consulting
[01:23:34.080 --> 01:23:40.520]  firm that was leading all of these meetings, and UT, openly, and some of them on record
[01:23:40.520 --> 01:23:46.160]  denied that they was an ability for us to hand out flyers.
[01:23:46.160 --> 01:23:47.160]  Okay.
[01:23:47.160 --> 01:23:51.560]  Well, in general, I think I get it in general.
[01:23:51.560 --> 01:23:54.480]  This was obviously a UT-sponsored event.
[01:23:54.480 --> 01:24:01.080]  It wasn't somebody coming in like a major corporation renting space for a thing.
[01:24:01.080 --> 01:24:09.040]  This was a UT-sponsored event open to everybody, and the question is, when everybody comes
[01:24:09.040 --> 01:24:19.320]  on, is there authority in UT to disallow someone from the public to come hand out flyers?
[01:24:19.320 --> 01:24:24.600]  In general, we have to start with a thought, yes, UT has to be able to control that because
[01:24:24.600 --> 01:24:27.080]  it's their property.
[01:24:27.080 --> 01:24:29.080]  Okay.
[01:24:29.080 --> 01:24:31.320]  That's just where we start.
[01:24:31.320 --> 01:24:37.240]  If it was, this is why I'm asking if it were a UT thing or a private thing, if a company
[01:24:37.240 --> 01:24:44.080]  comes in there and rents space, it's open to the public, and that company wants to hand
[01:24:44.080 --> 01:24:50.680]  out flyers, and UT says no, I think that'd be an enormous problem because the whole point
[01:24:50.680 --> 01:24:57.560]  of being there is a commercial purpose, so they ought to be able to hand out their flyers.
[01:24:57.560 --> 01:25:07.400]  This was a quasi-political thing, sounds like, and so it was basically a UT function.
[01:25:07.400 --> 01:25:14.400]  If UT wanted to hand out some flyers, okay, that should be allowed, but just generic access
[01:25:14.400 --> 01:25:19.360]  for handing out political stuff, I can see where they'd want to say no, just as a blanket
[01:25:19.360 --> 01:25:22.240]  rule so they don't have to deal with it.
[01:25:22.240 --> 01:25:29.240]  However, this is not some private commercial building.
[01:25:29.240 --> 01:25:35.760]  This is a building that's under contract to the public in general.
[01:25:35.760 --> 01:25:39.760]  How do you figure it's under contract to the public?
[01:25:39.760 --> 01:25:44.400]  What I'm hoping for, one of the things I thought we'd get into is tax-supported property, and
[01:25:44.400 --> 01:25:50.640]  the difference between public use and private use of tax-supported property, is that where
[01:25:50.640 --> 01:25:53.200]  we get into that part of this?
[01:25:53.200 --> 01:25:54.680]  That's exactly where I'm going.
[01:25:54.680 --> 01:26:16.560]  I just think that if we as the taxpayers authorized this contract under certain conditions, those
[01:26:16.560 --> 01:26:22.040]  conditions don't go away just because they lease part of this property to someone else.
[01:26:22.040 --> 01:26:27.720]  They release the property, knows where they're leasing, and they should be held under the
[01:26:27.720 --> 01:26:33.400]  same contract as the leaseee, the leaseee or the leaseee.
[01:26:33.400 --> 01:26:40.280]  They both should be under the same requirements, because we put these requirements in there
[01:26:40.280 --> 01:26:48.600]  for certain protections, and then those people managing the property, holding it in trust
[01:26:48.600 --> 01:26:56.880]  for us, lease part of it out and say, oh, because we accepted money to lease this out,
[01:26:56.880 --> 01:27:01.040]  all of a sudden the contractual restrictions no longer apply.
[01:27:01.040 --> 01:27:03.160]  How do they get there?
[01:27:03.160 --> 01:27:09.840]  Well, the two terms that you've identified here, and we're, of course, into the reality
[01:27:09.840 --> 01:27:15.880]  of semantics, law is designed around semantics, we're in semantics to the max environment
[01:27:15.880 --> 01:27:16.880]  right now.
[01:27:16.880 --> 01:27:22.520]  I'll tell you that there is a manifest difference between a taxpayer and a citizen.
[01:27:22.520 --> 01:27:30.320]  A taxpayer is making a contribution in a private obligation, in a private setting.
[01:27:30.320 --> 01:27:39.480]  There's nothing public about it except the agreement to make those payments.
[01:27:39.480 --> 01:27:41.400]  The agreement is a public agreement.
[01:27:41.400 --> 01:27:42.400]  What does that mean?
[01:27:42.400 --> 01:27:47.520]  That means it is lawful by definition, and not a whole lot more than that.
[01:27:47.520 --> 01:27:54.280]  It really doesn't mean a whole lot more than that.
[01:27:54.280 --> 01:28:04.280]  The taxes that are collected through the agreements that exist right now are valid for the legal
[01:28:04.280 --> 01:28:05.280]  side of it.
[01:28:05.280 --> 01:28:08.520]  In other words, it's impossible for it to be an illegal agreement.
[01:28:08.520 --> 01:28:10.400]  What does that mean?
[01:28:10.400 --> 01:28:19.760]  That means when the taxing entity turns around and spends its money, financing terrorists.
[01:28:19.760 --> 01:28:22.760]  Money comes in, say, through the federal side.
[01:28:22.760 --> 01:28:32.080]  They have a benefit package that goes over to Hamas, say, it is a proven terrorist organization.
[01:28:32.080 --> 01:28:37.400]  If this were a private agreement, if it were a private agreement we were talking about,
[01:28:37.400 --> 01:28:39.360]  it would be set aside immediately.
[01:28:39.360 --> 01:28:40.360]  Why?
[01:28:40.360 --> 01:28:41.600]  Illegal purpose.
[01:28:41.600 --> 01:28:44.760]  You cannot set up that agreement to do that.
[01:28:44.760 --> 01:28:45.760]  Why?
[01:28:45.760 --> 01:28:50.840]  Because we've got statutes that say terrorism is illegal.
[01:28:50.840 --> 01:28:57.440]  The fact that that agreement is a public agreement means that it's valid, and whatever happens
[01:28:57.440 --> 01:29:00.680]  with the money happens with the money.
[01:29:00.680 --> 01:29:07.440]  When the state thing, we're dealing with the exact same issue, the taxing agreements are
[01:29:07.440 --> 01:29:13.680]  public agreements, which means a little more than they are valid when we get to the question
[01:29:13.680 --> 01:29:15.480]  of legal versus illegal.
[01:29:15.480 --> 01:29:16.480]  They're legal by definition.
[01:29:16.480 --> 01:29:17.480]  Why?
[01:29:17.480 --> 01:29:18.880]  It's a public agreement.
[01:29:18.880 --> 01:29:25.200]  The terms are published there in what we call statutes.
[01:29:25.200 --> 01:29:28.680]  We have, that is the funding mechanism.
[01:29:28.680 --> 01:29:33.200]  All of that money is private.
[01:29:33.200 --> 01:29:34.200]  All of it.
[01:29:34.200 --> 01:29:39.040]  We call it public money because it goes into a public agreement, but it goes into an entity
[01:29:39.040 --> 01:29:42.120]  that basically can do whatever it wants to do with it.
[01:29:42.120 --> 01:29:49.000]  Well, what I'm talking about here is, is the public agreement.
[01:29:49.000 --> 01:29:55.320]  Is the public, because it's in the public, as this means nothing applies, or does the
[01:29:55.320 --> 01:30:00.160]  public agreement apply, it can.
[01:30:00.160 --> 01:30:05.520]  This is Building 7, a 47-story skyscraper that fell on the afternoon of September 11.
[01:30:05.520 --> 01:30:10.960]  The government says that fire brought it down, however, 1,500 architects and engineers concluded
[01:30:10.960 --> 01:30:12.600]  it was a controlled demolition.
[01:30:12.600 --> 01:30:16.600]  Over 6,000 of my fellow service members have given their lives, and 1,000 of my fellow
[01:30:16.600 --> 01:30:18.040]  force responders are dying.
[01:30:18.040 --> 01:30:21.800]  I'm not a conspiracy theorist, I'm a structural engineer, I'm a New York City correction officer,
[01:30:21.800 --> 01:30:24.520]  I'm an Air Force pilot, I'm a father who lost his son.
[01:30:24.520 --> 01:30:27.120]  They're Americans, and we deserve the truth.
[01:30:27.120 --> 01:30:30.120]  Go to RememberBuilding7.org today.
[01:30:30.120 --> 01:30:36.800]  The City of Oxford, England wants to install audio-equipped cameras in taxis so cops can
[01:30:36.800 --> 01:30:38.800]  eavesdrop on passengers' conversations.
[01:30:38.800 --> 01:30:43.400]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, and I'll have details about this outrageous invasion of
[01:30:43.400 --> 01:30:46.920]  privacy in a moment.
[01:30:46.920 --> 01:30:48.520]  Privacy is under attack.
[01:30:48.520 --> 01:30:52.920]  When you give up data about yourself, you'll never get it back again, and once your privacy
[01:30:52.920 --> 01:30:56.640]  is gone, you'll find your freedoms will start to vanish too.
[01:30:56.640 --> 01:31:02.480]  So protect your rights, say no to surveillance, and keep your information to yourself.
[01:31:02.480 --> 01:31:04.680]  Privacy, it's worth hanging on to.
[01:31:04.680 --> 01:31:09.000]  This public service announcement is brought to you by StartPage.com, the private search
[01:31:09.000 --> 01:31:12.480]  engine alternative to Google, Yahoo, and Bing.
[01:31:12.480 --> 01:31:15.480]  Start over with StartPage.
[01:31:15.480 --> 01:31:16.840]  Where to, Mum?
[01:31:16.840 --> 01:31:20.520]  Take me home, driver, it's about the only place left in England where I can get some
[01:31:20.520 --> 01:31:21.520]  privacy.
[01:31:21.520 --> 01:31:25.840]  Now, that's not a real conversation between me and a British cabbie, but if the City Council
[01:31:25.840 --> 01:31:30.800]  of one British community has its way, even dialogue like that would be recorded and sent
[01:31:30.800 --> 01:31:33.200]  to British police with no justification.
[01:31:33.200 --> 01:31:37.640]  Britain has already deployed hundreds of thousands of surveillance cameras in public
[01:31:37.640 --> 01:31:38.640]  places.
[01:31:38.640 --> 01:31:44.120]  Now, officials in Oxford, England want to record all conversations in taxis.
[01:31:44.120 --> 01:31:48.360]  From the moment the cab's engine turns on to a half an hour after the ignition is turned
[01:31:48.360 --> 01:31:50.640]  off, the microphone would be running.
[01:31:50.640 --> 01:31:52.640]  Personally, I'd rather walk.
[01:31:52.640 --> 01:32:21.640]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, more news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:32:22.640 --> 01:32:48.640]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, more news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:32:48.640 --> 01:33:14.640]  I'm Dr. Catherine Albrecht, more news and information at CatherineAlbrecht.com.
[01:33:14.640 --> 01:33:23.520]  All right, boy, this show is just flying by with harm, and we're going to have to have
[01:33:23.520 --> 01:33:27.760]  them back to discuss these issues more at length.
[01:33:27.760 --> 01:33:30.880]  Okay, if you would, Randy, please continue.
[01:33:30.880 --> 01:33:36.560]  You wanted to go to someplace talking about the cannons of the contract and handing out
[01:33:36.560 --> 01:33:41.440]  flyers on the university, and I have another question in line with that also as well.
[01:33:41.440 --> 01:33:42.440]  So go ahead, Randy.
[01:33:42.440 --> 01:33:51.440]  Okay, we were talking about how everything's the agreement, and the university, Texas State
[01:33:51.440 --> 01:34:02.320]  University has an agreement with the citizens, and it was the taxpayers, the citizens.
[01:34:02.320 --> 01:34:10.600]  We have certain contractual cannons that define our rights, and it defines things the university
[01:34:10.600 --> 01:34:14.280]  can do and things it can't do.
[01:34:14.280 --> 01:34:27.520]  Now, when the university rents a meeting room to some other entity, or all of these contractual
[01:34:27.520 --> 01:34:38.240]  restrictions somehow just vacated, or is the person who rents the property, rents the room
[01:34:38.240 --> 01:34:46.680]  that's on the university property under the same contract with the same contractual restrictions?
[01:34:46.680 --> 01:34:53.560]  Well, I'm not 100% sure I've followed the question, but let's see if this answers it.
[01:34:53.560 --> 01:35:00.440]  The fact that some business entity is on UT campus doesn't change UT's agreement about
[01:35:00.440 --> 01:35:03.920]  anything.
[01:35:03.920 --> 01:35:13.400]  So the use of that property can't get inconsistent with the use that UT would make of it.
[01:35:13.400 --> 01:35:17.000]  Let me try to say this another way.
[01:35:17.000 --> 01:35:25.080]  If I have an interest in the Golden Gate Bridge, I can transfer that interest, okay?
[01:35:25.080 --> 01:35:31.360]  But I can't transfer any more interest in the Golden Gate Bridge than I have.
[01:35:31.360 --> 01:35:38.040]  So if UT rents a room and UT's obligated a certain way, they can't grant more authority
[01:35:38.040 --> 01:35:41.240]  than they have in the property in the first place.
[01:35:41.240 --> 01:35:46.440]  Yeah, this is exactly what I say about the legislature and our other public service.
[01:35:46.440 --> 01:35:50.800]  They can't exercise an authority that we couldn't give them, because we don't have it.
[01:35:50.800 --> 01:35:51.800]  Okay.
[01:35:51.800 --> 01:35:59.600]  I think what Randy is asking is that if there's a situation where I hear some feedback from
[01:35:59.600 --> 01:36:04.600]  someone, Randy, I think there's some feedback on your end.
[01:36:04.600 --> 01:36:05.600]  Randy?
[01:36:05.600 --> 01:36:06.600]  Okay, all right.
[01:36:06.600 --> 01:36:07.600]  Yes, I'm here.
[01:36:07.600 --> 01:36:08.600]  Okay.
[01:36:08.600 --> 01:36:09.600]  All right.
[01:36:09.600 --> 01:36:14.280]  I think the situation that Randy's trying to ask is that if the university is bound by
[01:36:14.280 --> 01:36:21.560]  a contract with the citizens in a certain manner and then they rent a room to a private
[01:36:21.560 --> 01:36:30.680]  entity, so to speak, is the private entity also bound to that contract that the university
[01:36:30.680 --> 01:36:37.000]  is bound to with the public, with the citizens, or do they just get to throw that out the
[01:36:37.000 --> 01:36:38.000]  window?
[01:36:38.000 --> 01:36:43.840]  If the entity doesn't have an agreement with the citizens, they don't become parties to
[01:36:43.840 --> 01:36:47.400]  the agreement between the school and the state.
[01:36:47.400 --> 01:36:48.400]  Hold on.
[01:36:48.400 --> 01:36:49.400]  Hold on, Harman.
[01:36:49.400 --> 01:36:56.640]  What I'm saying, what I'm getting from this is you're saying these entities all have some
[01:36:56.640 --> 01:37:00.320]  secret private agreements that we can't know anything about.
[01:37:00.320 --> 01:37:02.120]  We can't have any influence on.
[01:37:02.120 --> 01:37:03.120]  We can't express.
[01:37:03.120 --> 01:37:05.160]  That's all I keep getting.
[01:37:05.160 --> 01:37:06.160]  Well...
[01:37:06.160 --> 01:37:10.760]  Do we have authority to enforce a contract or do we not?
[01:37:10.760 --> 01:37:14.680]  Well, if not, if you're not a party to it.
[01:37:14.680 --> 01:37:17.200]  Well, I am a party if I'm a citizen.
[01:37:17.200 --> 01:37:18.920]  How do you figure?
[01:37:18.920 --> 01:37:24.960]  Are you saying you're some secret guy that's got access to their property to send out anything
[01:37:24.960 --> 01:37:28.560]  you want to, and you do not know what he does?
[01:37:28.560 --> 01:37:29.920]  You're over exaggerating.
[01:37:29.920 --> 01:37:30.920]  There are...
[01:37:30.920 --> 01:37:34.360]  Well, wait a minute.
[01:37:34.360 --> 01:37:41.360]  Who are these people that have this contract then, if they're completely totally private?
[01:37:41.360 --> 01:37:42.760]  Who are these people?
[01:37:42.760 --> 01:37:46.240]  Who are these entities?
[01:37:46.240 --> 01:37:53.440]  Who constitutes the boards of these entities that are doing all of these deals and regulating
[01:37:53.440 --> 01:37:59.320]  our lives and we don't have anything to say about anything because we're not parties?
[01:37:59.320 --> 01:38:03.160]  We don't have to rent a room from UT.
[01:38:03.160 --> 01:38:08.840]  If they've got more restrictions than we like, we go down the street to a hotel that doesn't
[01:38:08.840 --> 01:38:10.520]  have that problem.
[01:38:10.520 --> 01:38:11.880]  That's what I'm saying.
[01:38:11.880 --> 01:38:18.520]  And Mary's issue was that something she's normally allowed to do on the university property
[01:38:18.520 --> 01:38:22.720]  that the university decides to rent to this company and...
[01:38:22.720 --> 01:38:27.400]  She doesn't have authority to go pass out flyers on UT campus.
[01:38:27.400 --> 01:38:34.480]  No one has authority to go pass out flyers on UT campus unless UT says please pass out
[01:38:34.480 --> 01:38:37.480]  these flyers another way to get a permit.
[01:38:37.480 --> 01:38:45.640]  Okay, can UT arbitrarily and capriciously decide who can pass out flyers and who cannot
[01:38:45.640 --> 01:38:48.080]  or are there rules and restrictions?
[01:38:48.080 --> 01:38:51.400]  I imagine they've got some kind of a policy.
[01:38:51.400 --> 01:38:52.400]  Can UT...
[01:38:52.400 --> 01:38:53.400]  That is.
[01:38:53.400 --> 01:38:55.920]  Can they arbitrarily and capriciously...
[01:38:55.920 --> 01:38:56.920]  Wait a minute.
[01:38:56.920 --> 01:38:57.920]  The question answers itself.
[01:38:57.920 --> 01:39:00.640]  I'm trying to put some realism at this.
[01:39:00.640 --> 01:39:04.200]  No one can do anything arbitrarily and capriciously.
[01:39:04.200 --> 01:39:08.240]  This is where I'm going and you keep moving away as if no...
[01:39:08.240 --> 01:39:09.840]  I'm not moving away from it, Randy.
[01:39:09.840 --> 01:39:10.840]  How do I...
[01:39:10.840 --> 01:39:11.840]  The question answers itself.
[01:39:11.840 --> 01:39:17.640]  I'm trying to find an arbitrary or capricious about trying to pass out political flyers.
[01:39:17.640 --> 01:39:20.520]  If they do it for one, they've got to do it for everybody.
[01:39:20.520 --> 01:39:26.200]  Everybody shows up to pass out political flyers and the point of the meeting is lost.
[01:39:26.200 --> 01:39:32.800]  I think the issue here is that since there is no such thing as public property, even
[01:39:32.800 --> 01:39:38.920]  though UT is a state-owned university and the property is owned by the state, since
[01:39:38.920 --> 01:39:45.160]  it's technically private property, the public in general does not have the right to go there
[01:39:45.160 --> 01:39:47.000]  and pass out hand bills.
[01:39:47.000 --> 01:39:49.480]  It's fundamentally correct.
[01:39:49.480 --> 01:39:55.840]  The point of Mary's question is actually a different answer than I think what we were
[01:39:55.840 --> 01:39:56.840]  all expecting.
[01:39:56.840 --> 01:40:01.240]  She's trying to say, I normally would have the right to go on UT campus and pass out
[01:40:01.240 --> 01:40:04.680]  whatever flyers I want, but because this entity rented the room, now all of a sudden
[01:40:04.680 --> 01:40:07.080]  I can't, that's actually not the situation.
[01:40:07.080 --> 01:40:10.360]  You can't just go pass out hand bills on UT campus, period.
[01:40:10.360 --> 01:40:15.560]  Any time without their permission, it doesn't matter if a business or entity rents a room
[01:40:15.560 --> 01:40:16.560]  or not.
[01:40:16.560 --> 01:40:17.560]  That's the point.
[01:40:17.560 --> 01:40:18.560]  Right.
[01:40:18.560 --> 01:40:24.400]  What you're saying is I think we've got a premise issue here and the question is, could
[01:40:24.400 --> 01:40:27.440]  anybody just show up and start passing out stuff?
[01:40:27.440 --> 01:40:28.440]  I don't know.
[01:40:28.440 --> 01:40:29.600]  I haven't read their policy.
[01:40:29.600 --> 01:40:31.240]  My guess is no.
[01:40:31.240 --> 01:40:37.000]  I don't think the entities that just want to show up and start passing out stuff can
[01:40:37.000 --> 01:40:38.000]  do that.
[01:40:38.000 --> 01:40:40.000]  They can't along the drag, probably.
[01:40:40.000 --> 01:40:43.960]  I don't know that they can go on the campus and do that.
[01:40:43.960 --> 01:40:44.960]  I'm just saying it.
[01:40:44.960 --> 01:40:46.960]  I have an easement question.
[01:40:46.960 --> 01:40:47.960]  Hold on.
[01:40:47.960 --> 01:40:51.480]  Before you go to the easement question, let me give some information here because I know
[01:40:51.480 --> 01:40:56.600]  a lot of people on campus that work with the Patriot community.
[01:40:56.600 --> 01:41:02.920]  If you're a student, if there's a group of students that have formed an official student
[01:41:02.920 --> 01:41:10.480]  organization that's registered with the university as a student organization, then that organization
[01:41:10.480 --> 01:41:19.200]  and whomever they invite to be part of an event can pass out whatever they want.
[01:41:19.200 --> 01:41:26.440]  That's why back in the day, we had some students that formed a group called PNAC.
[01:41:26.440 --> 01:41:33.080]  The Project for a New American Citizen, which of course is a tongue-in-cheek against the
[01:41:33.080 --> 01:41:36.160]  Project for a New American Century that we all know about.
[01:41:36.160 --> 01:41:40.040]  Anyway, they had this student organization.
[01:41:40.040 --> 01:41:46.120]  They held an event where they invited Professor Stephen Jones to talk about the thermite and
[01:41:46.120 --> 01:41:47.560]  all these things.
[01:41:47.560 --> 01:41:52.720]  We were able, even though I wasn't a student, we were able to go on campus and pass out
[01:41:52.720 --> 01:41:59.000]  all kinds of 9-11 truths of handbills and promote the event, but the reason we were
[01:41:59.000 --> 01:42:03.080]  able to do that is because there was a student organization that was promoting that.
[01:42:03.080 --> 01:42:08.200]  You have to have some kind of a link into the university, some kind of a foothold, but
[01:42:08.200 --> 01:42:11.840]  in general, if you're not a student and that's set up to not in place, you can't just go
[01:42:11.840 --> 01:42:12.840]  and hand out flyers.
[01:42:12.840 --> 01:42:13.840]  There you go.
[01:42:13.840 --> 01:42:18.280]  A student organization, this is the policy concept that we were alluding to a little
[01:42:18.280 --> 01:42:19.280]  while ago.
[01:42:19.280 --> 01:42:28.960]  The student organizations obviously have quote-unquote license to promote their student programs,
[01:42:28.960 --> 01:42:31.280]  their student organizations.
[01:42:31.280 --> 01:42:35.880]  That's just sort of built into the collegiate experience.
[01:42:35.880 --> 01:42:38.080]  So yeah, there you go.
[01:42:38.080 --> 01:42:42.160]  That makes good and perfect sense to me.
[01:42:42.160 --> 01:42:44.480]  And that does to me too.
[01:42:44.480 --> 01:42:53.000]  So my real question was, and the implication I got from Mary's question, is that this was
[01:42:53.000 --> 01:43:00.320]  an activity that was allowed by the university.
[01:43:00.320 --> 01:43:10.520]  And apparently because they decided to rent out a meeting room to a particular company,
[01:43:10.520 --> 01:43:15.280]  they decided to change this policy.
[01:43:15.280 --> 01:43:16.280]  Change my policy.
[01:43:16.280 --> 01:43:17.280]  Change my policy.
[01:43:17.280 --> 01:43:18.280]  Change my policy.
[01:43:18.280 --> 01:43:19.280]  Policy changed.
[01:43:19.280 --> 01:43:20.280]  Easement.
[01:43:20.280 --> 01:43:21.280]  Easement.
[01:43:21.280 --> 01:43:30.480]  If you, if Mary was able to do this without question or intervention, even if there wasn't
[01:43:30.480 --> 01:43:38.800]  a specific right, the university by consistently allowing this created an easement.
[01:43:38.800 --> 01:43:43.160]  The university has never allowed it, that's what I'm trying to say.
[01:43:43.160 --> 01:43:46.800]  The university has never allowed it.
[01:43:46.800 --> 01:43:48.800]  You are changing my question.
[01:43:48.800 --> 01:43:54.600]  Okay, well, I don't understand the question and we're going to break, we will be right
[01:43:54.600 --> 01:43:55.600]  back.
[01:43:55.600 --> 01:43:57.600]  This is the rule of law.
[01:43:57.600 --> 01:44:03.520]  Hey, did you hear, Ron Paul's announced he's running for president in 2012.
[01:44:03.520 --> 01:44:04.520]  Who's Ron Paul?
[01:44:04.520 --> 01:44:05.520]  Really?
[01:44:05.520 --> 01:44:07.160]  Okay, put down the cell phone for one minute.
[01:44:07.160 --> 01:44:10.160]  Your friends really don't care about your Twitter updates on what you had for breakfast.
[01:44:10.160 --> 01:44:13.520]  Oh, but I love to make those little smiley faces with punctuation marks.
[01:44:13.520 --> 01:44:14.520]  Of course you do.
[01:44:14.520 --> 01:44:17.880]  Now listen closely, you need to go down to Brave New Books and learn as much as you can
[01:44:17.880 --> 01:44:20.480]  about Ron Paul and his message before it's too late.
[01:44:20.480 --> 01:44:23.200]  They have all of his books and many of the books he talks about.
[01:44:23.200 --> 01:44:26.840]  They also have t-shirts, bumper stickers and yard signs so that you can show your support
[01:44:26.840 --> 01:44:27.840]  for him during the campaign.
[01:44:27.840 --> 01:44:28.840]  Brave New Books?
[01:44:28.840 --> 01:44:30.840]  Did they have Harry Potter and Twilight?
[01:44:30.840 --> 01:44:35.080]  No, but they do carry a large selection of survival and preparedness books to protect
[01:44:35.080 --> 01:44:36.680]  your family in time of emergency.
[01:44:36.680 --> 01:44:39.280]  Ugh, that sounds like that show on the Discovery Channel.
[01:44:39.280 --> 01:44:43.120]  Yeah, there's even a wilderness survival expert that teaches classes called Earthskill
[01:44:43.120 --> 01:44:47.120]  School that you can sign up for on the website BraveNewBookstore.com.
[01:44:47.120 --> 01:44:48.120]  What are you doing?
[01:44:48.120 --> 01:44:51.600]  I'm tweeting all my friends that they should go to BraveNewBookstore.com or down to the
[01:44:51.600 --> 01:44:52.600]  bookstore in person.
[01:44:52.600 --> 01:44:53.600]  Where's that located?
[01:44:53.600 --> 01:44:54.600]  1904 Guadalupe Street.
[01:44:54.600 --> 01:44:55.600]  There, it's sent.
[01:44:55.600 --> 01:44:57.600]  I even made a smiley face.
[01:44:57.600 --> 01:44:58.600]  Great.
[01:44:58.600 --> 01:45:03.960]  Are you the plaintiff or defendant in a lawsuit?
[01:45:03.960 --> 01:45:10.760]  In your case without an attorney with Jurisdictionary, the affordable, easy-to-understand 4-CD course
[01:45:10.760 --> 01:45:17.400]  that will show you how in 24 hours, step-by-step, if you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer
[01:45:17.400 --> 01:45:18.400]  should be doing.
[01:45:18.400 --> 01:45:22.400]  If you don't have a lawyer, know what you should do for yourself.
[01:45:22.400 --> 01:45:27.680]  Thousands have won with our step-by-step course and now you can too.
[01:45:27.680 --> 01:45:33.480]  Jurisdictionary was created by a licensed attorney with 22 years of case-winning experience.
[01:45:33.480 --> 01:45:38.800]  Even if you're not in a lawsuit, you can learn what everyone should understand about
[01:45:38.800 --> 01:45:43.200]  the principles and practices that control our American courts.
[01:45:43.200 --> 01:45:49.360]  You'll receive our audio classroom, video seminar, tutorials, forms for civil cases,
[01:45:49.360 --> 01:45:51.360]  prosa tactics, and much more.
[01:45:51.360 --> 01:46:16.360]  Please visit ruleoflawradio.com and click on the banner or call toll-free 866-LAW-EZ.
[01:46:16.360 --> 01:46:30.720]  If you have a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing.
[01:46:30.720 --> 01:46:38.720]  Somebody's on a police, that police man, somebody's on a police, police
[01:46:38.720 --> 01:46:43.720]  There's always a room at the top of the hill
[01:46:43.720 --> 01:46:47.720]  I hear things are great fine and it's lonely left to
[01:46:47.720 --> 01:46:51.720]  They're wishing it went more than I positioned to fail
[01:46:51.720 --> 01:46:56.720]  They know that if they don't do it, somebody will
[01:46:56.720 --> 01:47:00.720]  The world will never understand
[01:47:00.720 --> 01:47:04.720]  I realize fully
[01:47:04.720 --> 01:47:07.720]  I don't have anybody to call the police
[01:47:07.720 --> 01:47:10.720]  Okay, we are back, this is the rule of law
[01:47:10.720 --> 01:47:14.720]  We've got a caller on the line, David from Illinois
[01:47:14.720 --> 01:47:20.720]  But first, I wanted to get Harmon's take on one thing
[01:47:20.720 --> 01:47:23.720]  And then if we have time, we're going to go back to Randy
[01:47:23.720 --> 01:47:26.720]  We have a question about an easement issue
[01:47:26.720 --> 01:47:28.720]  But for the sake of time, we're just going to move on quickly here
[01:47:28.720 --> 01:47:32.720]  We're going to have Harmon again on concerning this matter
[01:47:32.720 --> 01:47:36.720]  And this goes back to the public use, public purpose
[01:47:36.720 --> 01:47:39.720]  The difference between public use and public purpose
[01:47:39.720 --> 01:47:44.720]  And Randy and I were discussing before concerning the fact that
[01:47:44.720 --> 01:47:48.720]  Going back to the civil rights thing, we had talked about this earlier in the show
[01:47:48.720 --> 01:47:53.720]  You've got a business that's open to the public for a public purpose
[01:47:53.720 --> 01:47:55.720]  Which is different from public use
[01:47:55.720 --> 01:47:59.720]  Whereas those definitions are public use is again like the National Forest
[01:47:59.720 --> 01:48:01.720]  Where anybody can go there for any reason
[01:48:01.720 --> 01:48:04.720]  As long as they're not committing crimes or being destructive
[01:48:04.720 --> 01:48:07.720]  That's not the same thing as a public purpose
[01:48:07.720 --> 01:48:11.720]  Which is a situation where you've got a business that's like a restaurant
[01:48:11.720 --> 01:48:14.720]  That's open to the public, that's not public use
[01:48:14.720 --> 01:48:18.720]  Nobody can just go there and do whatever they want for whatever reason
[01:48:18.720 --> 01:48:21.720]  It's open to the public, but it's a public purpose
[01:48:21.720 --> 01:48:25.720]  The purpose is for the public to go and be able to sit down at the restaurant and eat
[01:48:25.720 --> 01:48:29.720]  Now of course with the Kelo case, basically the court said that
[01:48:29.720 --> 01:48:33.720]  Governments can now confiscate property under imminent domain
[01:48:33.720 --> 01:48:38.720]  For public purpose now, not just for the sake of public use
[01:48:38.720 --> 01:48:43.720]  In other words, if you're not generating enough tax revenue on your property
[01:48:43.720 --> 01:48:46.720]  And another entity comes along that wants to build a shopping mall
[01:48:46.720 --> 01:48:49.720]  And they're going to have more money for the state
[01:48:49.720 --> 01:48:53.720]  Even though it's a public purpose, not public use, they can take your property
[01:48:53.720 --> 01:48:54.720]  That's Kelo
[01:48:54.720 --> 01:48:57.720]  Anyways, the point being about a business
[01:48:57.720 --> 01:49:00.720]  Randy was saying like a business open to the public for public purpose
[01:49:00.720 --> 01:49:04.720]  Like a restaurant, civil rights acts came in in 1960
[01:49:04.720 --> 01:49:13.720]  Saying you can't exclude someone from your business based on race or gender or religion
[01:49:13.720 --> 01:49:16.720]  And so I was talking to Harmon about this
[01:49:16.720 --> 01:49:20.720]  And Harmon said, well in a way, yes and no
[01:49:20.720 --> 01:49:23.720]  Ultimately if you own private property
[01:49:23.720 --> 01:49:26.720]  You can kick anybody off your property for any reason
[01:49:26.720 --> 01:49:30.720]  Even if it's because of race or religion or whatever
[01:49:30.720 --> 01:49:35.720]  But there's a big but and it has to do with contract
[01:49:35.720 --> 01:49:37.720]  And agreement with the government
[01:49:37.720 --> 01:49:39.720]  So Harmon, you want to speak to that?
[01:49:39.720 --> 01:49:41.720]  Yeah, really briefly
[01:49:41.720 --> 01:49:44.720]  When we're getting toward the end of the hour
[01:49:44.720 --> 01:49:50.720]  The use, like the restaurant cases
[01:49:50.720 --> 01:49:53.720]  We don't serve black people here
[01:49:53.720 --> 01:50:00.720]  Those businesses remained in business during the change of policy
[01:50:00.720 --> 01:50:05.720]  And it actually comes down to a land ownership question
[01:50:05.720 --> 01:50:10.720]  Who has an ownership interest in that land and how can they enforce that policy?
[01:50:10.720 --> 01:50:18.720]  The land ownership interest in the enforcing entity
[01:50:18.720 --> 01:50:30.720]  Namely the state made enforceable the policy that disallowed not serving black people
[01:50:30.720 --> 01:50:36.720]  I think it's an Alabama case where that was first at issue
[01:50:36.720 --> 01:50:43.720]  And it's not because this language exists in statute that that policy is enforceable
[01:50:43.720 --> 01:50:51.720]  They have no authority, no governmental entity has any authority at all ever
[01:50:51.720 --> 01:50:55.720]  At any time for any reason to tell anybody how to use their property
[01:50:55.720 --> 01:51:02.720]  Dallas has lost its mind with the smoking in the restaurant stuff
[01:51:02.720 --> 01:51:11.720]  Absolutely lost their ever loving minds with the smoking in the bar, smoking in the restaurant
[01:51:11.720 --> 01:51:15.720]  It may be widespread
[01:51:15.720 --> 01:51:22.720]  Fundamentally, smoking in the restaurant policies or total no smoking in the restaurant policies
[01:51:22.720 --> 01:51:26.720]  Are not enforceable because the city passes in ordinance
[01:51:26.720 --> 01:51:29.720]  That's not why that works
[01:51:29.720 --> 01:51:36.720]  It works because the property owners have, without realizing it probably, agreed to it
[01:51:36.720 --> 01:51:38.720]  They've agreed?
[01:51:38.720 --> 01:51:41.720]  To the no smoking policies
[01:51:41.720 --> 01:51:45.720]  They've agreed to the no smoking ordinances and the no smoking laws
[01:51:45.720 --> 01:51:52.720]  Similarly like the restaurant owners who may want to have racial discrimination in their restaurant
[01:51:52.720 --> 01:52:00.720]  The reason that they are bound by those civil rights laws is because they have agreed to them
[01:52:00.720 --> 01:52:04.720]  Via the fact that they obtained a restaurant license
[01:52:04.720 --> 01:52:06.720]  That's one mechanism
[01:52:06.720 --> 01:52:10.720]  They agreed to the choice of law
[01:52:10.720 --> 01:52:16.720]  They agreed to the choice of law, but if they had never agreed to that choice of law
[01:52:16.720 --> 01:52:19.720]  Then they could discriminate all they want
[01:52:19.720 --> 01:52:22.720]  That choice of law is part of it, yes
[01:52:22.720 --> 01:52:26.720]  It's not just that, they'd have to agree with the specific provisions
[01:52:26.720 --> 01:52:29.720]  But that's exactly how it's enforced
[01:52:29.720 --> 01:52:34.720]  It sounds like the city is changing the contract
[01:52:34.720 --> 01:52:36.720]  Who's changing it?
[01:52:36.720 --> 01:52:42.720]  Whoever is holding the license, whoever grants the license
[01:52:42.720 --> 01:52:44.720]  Okay, keep going
[01:52:44.720 --> 01:52:51.720]  They grant the license based on a set of contractual conditions
[01:52:51.720 --> 01:52:52.720]  Correct
[01:52:52.720 --> 01:52:55.720]  And then they change the contractual conditions
[01:52:55.720 --> 01:52:57.720]  And so what's the response?
[01:52:57.720 --> 01:52:58.720]  Unconscionable
[01:52:58.720 --> 01:53:00.720]  If it doesn't want to go there, keep going
[01:53:00.720 --> 01:53:10.720]  Then they would have to sue the entity claiming that the change was either illegal or unconscionable
[01:53:10.720 --> 01:53:11.720]  In this case
[01:53:11.720 --> 01:53:13.720]  Not necessarily, there's another option
[01:53:13.720 --> 01:53:15.720]  You're close, there's another option
[01:53:15.720 --> 01:53:17.720]  Never agreed to
[01:53:17.720 --> 01:53:20.720]  Yeah, well then they could close the restaurant
[01:53:20.720 --> 01:53:26.720]  We may be jumping into the conversation at different places here
[01:53:26.720 --> 01:53:29.720]  Where you're headed, that's where I was hoping you'd go
[01:53:29.720 --> 01:53:33.720]  Where we're headed is, we've got policy A in place
[01:53:33.720 --> 01:53:35.720]  Policy B shows up
[01:53:35.720 --> 01:53:41.720]  And party A to policy A says, I don't agree to policy B
[01:53:41.720 --> 01:53:43.720]  Okay, they don't agree to it
[01:53:43.720 --> 01:53:50.720]  So the only way that can be enforced is if they do in fact agree to policy B
[01:53:50.720 --> 01:53:51.720]  That's an option
[01:53:51.720 --> 01:53:55.720]  It may be that the license won't be renewed without it
[01:53:55.720 --> 01:53:57.720]  That's part of it
[01:53:57.720 --> 01:54:00.720]  And the city can do that
[01:54:00.720 --> 01:54:02.720]  Okay, the city can do that
[01:54:02.720 --> 01:54:04.720]  So here's the terms of the agreement
[01:54:04.720 --> 01:54:06.720]  We get to pick
[01:54:06.720 --> 01:54:08.720]  And these are the terms
[01:54:08.720 --> 01:54:11.720]  So for the existence of that first agreement
[01:54:11.720 --> 01:54:13.720]  For the duration of that first agreement
[01:54:13.720 --> 01:54:16.720]  No change can take effect without consent of all parties
[01:54:16.720 --> 01:54:20.720]  They can't compel the change of the agreement
[01:54:20.720 --> 01:54:23.720]  Once there can be a renewal of the agreement
[01:54:23.720 --> 01:54:25.720]  Then we've got a different issue
[01:54:25.720 --> 01:54:32.720]  And then we can decide whether that's something that can really be compelled for change or not
[01:54:32.720 --> 01:54:34.720]  It's a little bit different issue
[01:54:34.720 --> 01:54:38.720]  But where you're headed on the first part of this is exactly right
[01:54:38.720 --> 01:54:41.720]  Just because the city shows up and says now everything's different
[01:54:41.720 --> 01:54:43.720]  Doesn't mean everything's different
[01:54:43.720 --> 01:54:48.720]  It means everything can be different at the next renewal period
[01:54:48.720 --> 01:54:50.720]  It's very good
[01:54:50.720 --> 01:54:53.720]  Okay, that was a part I didn't understand
[01:54:53.720 --> 01:54:58.720]  I thought the city arbitrarily set a date that this took effect
[01:54:58.720 --> 01:55:00.720]  Well, they do
[01:55:00.720 --> 01:55:03.720]  And the question is how is that enforced?
[01:55:03.720 --> 01:55:09.720]  And most people do not snap to the fact that none of that's enforceable unless it's consented to
[01:55:09.720 --> 01:55:11.720]  Just because the city says jump
[01:55:11.720 --> 01:55:14.720]  Doesn't mean anybody has to say how high
[01:55:14.720 --> 01:55:16.720]  Good, that is a very good point
[01:55:16.720 --> 01:55:18.720]  That clarifies the issue
[01:55:18.720 --> 01:55:20.720]  They can pass it
[01:55:20.720 --> 01:55:23.720]  Yes, so they can pass it and they can set an effect date
[01:55:23.720 --> 01:55:26.720]  But if it's not been agreed to
[01:55:26.720 --> 01:55:29.720]  Then the restaurants don't have to comply with it
[01:55:29.720 --> 01:55:32.720]  But as Harmon says, when it's time to renew the restaurant license
[01:55:32.720 --> 01:55:37.720]  Well then you can't get the license if you don't agree to the new policy
[01:55:37.720 --> 01:55:39.720]  And that's an adhesion contract
[01:55:39.720 --> 01:55:40.720]  It's all or nothing
[01:55:40.720 --> 01:55:42.720]  Take it or leave it
[01:55:42.720 --> 01:55:45.720]  Well, maybe
[01:55:45.720 --> 01:55:47.720]  It's not really
[01:55:47.720 --> 01:55:50.720]  An adhesion contract
[01:55:50.720 --> 01:55:52.720]  Okay, it feels that way
[01:55:52.720 --> 01:55:54.720]  Yes, I'll grant that
[01:55:54.720 --> 01:55:58.720]  Anytime we're dealing with government and they say these are the hoops you jump through
[01:55:58.720 --> 01:55:59.720]  Or forget it
[01:55:59.720 --> 01:56:02.720]  It feels like an adhesion contract
[01:56:02.720 --> 01:56:06.720]  Just because they set the policy doesn't make it an adhesion contract
[01:56:06.720 --> 01:56:08.720]  It becomes adhesion if at all
[01:56:08.720 --> 01:56:11.720]  If a negotiation is attempted and
[01:56:11.720 --> 01:56:12.720]  Denied
[01:56:12.720 --> 01:56:13.720]  Approved on availing
[01:56:13.720 --> 01:56:14.720]  Okay, that's it
[01:56:14.720 --> 01:56:15.720]  It's an adhesion contract
[01:56:15.720 --> 01:56:20.720]  If you attempt to negotiate the terms of the contract and they say no, forget it
[01:56:20.720 --> 01:56:21.720]  Yeah
[01:56:21.720 --> 01:56:22.720]  Okay
[01:56:22.720 --> 01:56:25.720]  When it comes to public policy and restaurants and stuff
[01:56:25.720 --> 01:56:27.720]  I'd have to do some study to find out
[01:56:27.720 --> 01:56:29.720]  But I doubt we'd get to an adhesion contract
[01:56:29.720 --> 01:56:31.720]  Okay, okay, very good
[01:56:31.720 --> 01:56:32.720]  All right, we've got a...
[01:56:32.720 --> 01:56:34.720]  But like with the credit card thing
[01:56:34.720 --> 01:56:36.720]  It definitely is an adhesion contract
[01:56:36.720 --> 01:56:40.720]  When somebody tries to negotiate the terms and then they say no
[01:56:40.720 --> 01:56:42.720]  Well, we get there
[01:56:42.720 --> 01:56:43.720]  Yes
[01:56:43.720 --> 01:56:46.720]  Okay, yeah, because that was a case that I read recently
[01:56:46.720 --> 01:56:47.720]  Okay, we've got...
[01:56:47.720 --> 01:56:48.720]  When I was studying for...
[01:56:48.720 --> 01:56:51.720]  You know, when I was looking up case law research about the credit card issue
[01:56:51.720 --> 01:56:52.720]  Okay, we've got a call
[01:56:52.720 --> 01:56:53.720]  We've got two minutes left
[01:56:53.720 --> 01:56:54.720]  David from Illinois
[01:56:54.720 --> 01:56:56.720]  What is your question quickly for Harmon Taylor?
[01:56:56.720 --> 01:56:58.720]  Okay, I have a quick question
[01:56:58.720 --> 01:57:00.720]  It might take another whole show to answer this
[01:57:00.720 --> 01:57:02.720]  Okay, we'll have him back on
[01:57:02.720 --> 01:57:03.720]  Yeah
[01:57:03.720 --> 01:57:08.720]  Okay, I want a complete, proper, lawful way to remove myself from all contracts
[01:57:08.720 --> 01:57:10.720]  With the state
[01:57:10.720 --> 01:57:11.720]  Can that be done
[01:57:11.720 --> 01:57:13.720]  With notices of opening and intent
[01:57:13.720 --> 01:57:14.720]  And claims of right
[01:57:14.720 --> 01:57:16.720]  Or is there more to it
[01:57:16.720 --> 01:57:19.720]  And if so, where do I find out
[01:57:19.720 --> 01:57:21.720]  What else needs to be done to do it
[01:57:21.720 --> 01:57:26.720]  And when I do it, do I lose all right to the roads?
[01:57:26.720 --> 01:57:29.720]  Okay, you're in a transportation area?
[01:57:29.720 --> 01:57:32.720]  No, I'm saying I want to remove myself completely
[01:57:32.720 --> 01:57:34.720]  From all contracts with...
[01:57:34.720 --> 01:57:35.720]  From all of everything
[01:57:35.720 --> 01:57:37.720]  Yes, now then, can I use the road?
[01:57:37.720 --> 01:57:40.720]  Okay, the generic answer to that question is yes
[01:57:40.720 --> 01:57:44.720]  I do not counsel folks to go that direction
[01:57:44.720 --> 01:57:45.720]  At least not at first
[01:57:45.720 --> 01:57:47.720]  Really, really, really quickly
[01:57:47.720 --> 01:57:51.720]  What you're asking about is what I call the political disconnect
[01:57:51.720 --> 01:57:53.720]  Yes, that's possible to do
[01:57:53.720 --> 01:57:57.720]  The only people in their right mind who even think about doing that
[01:57:57.720 --> 01:58:00.720]  Are very, very well off financially
[01:58:00.720 --> 01:58:02.720]  Very well off
[01:58:02.720 --> 01:58:05.720]  Let me tell you some learning that I've had very recently
[01:58:05.720 --> 01:58:08.720]  That really gave me a bad day for a long time
[01:58:08.720 --> 01:58:12.720]  Okay, the political status that you would achieve by doing that
[01:58:12.720 --> 01:58:16.720]  Would put you into what I'm going to call nicely no man's land
[01:58:16.720 --> 01:58:19.720]  It is literally a war zone
[01:58:19.720 --> 01:58:22.720]  This system cannot see you
[01:58:22.720 --> 01:58:24.720]  When you do what you're talking about
[01:58:24.720 --> 01:58:27.720]  This system cannot see you
[01:58:27.720 --> 01:58:29.720]  Therefore, it cannot hear you
[01:58:29.720 --> 01:58:31.720]  What does that mean?
[01:58:31.720 --> 01:58:33.720]  That means you cannot go into court
[01:58:33.720 --> 01:58:35.720]  Asserting your new political status
[01:58:35.720 --> 01:58:39.720]  And expect to get squat
[01:58:39.720 --> 01:58:41.720]  You're an outlaw
[01:58:41.720 --> 01:58:45.720]  Essentially, I wouldn't really go to an outlaw
[01:58:45.720 --> 01:58:49.720]  Quite so much just a complete non-existence of rights
[01:58:49.720 --> 01:58:53.720]  In the common law, they would set you outside of the law
[01:58:53.720 --> 01:58:57.720]  Yeah, but that's an act by some official authority that says
[01:58:57.720 --> 01:58:59.720]  I'm pleased you don't care
[01:58:59.720 --> 01:59:02.720]  Bibles for America is offering absolutely free
[01:59:02.720 --> 01:59:06.720]  A unique study Bible called the New Testament Recovery Version
[01:59:06.720 --> 01:59:10.720]  The New Testament Recovery Version has over 9,000 footnotes
[01:59:10.720 --> 01:59:13.720]  That explain what the Bible says verse by verse
[01:59:13.720 --> 01:59:17.720]  Helping you to know God and to know the meaning of life
[01:59:17.720 --> 01:59:20.720]  Order your free copy today from Bibles for America
[01:59:20.720 --> 01:59:25.720]  Call us toll-free at 888-551-0102
[01:59:25.720 --> 01:59:29.720]  Or visit us online at bfa.org
[01:59:29.720 --> 01:59:32.720]  This translation is highly accurate
[01:59:32.720 --> 01:59:35.720]  And it comes with over 13,000 cross-references
[01:59:35.720 --> 01:59:39.720]  Plus charts and maps and an outline for every book of the Bible
[01:59:39.720 --> 01:59:42.720]  This is truly a Bible you can understand
[01:59:42.720 --> 01:59:45.720]  To get your free copy of the New Testament Recovery Version
[01:59:45.720 --> 01:59:50.720]  Call us toll-free at 888-551-0102
[01:59:50.720 --> 01:59:54.720]  That's 888-551-0102
[01:59:54.720 --> 01:59:59.720]  Or visit us online at bfa.org