December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

1251.html
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

§ 1251. Original jurisdiction * (a) The Supreme Court shall have original and exclusive jurisdiction of all controversies between two or more States. * (b) The Supreme Court shall have original but not exclusive jurisdiction of: + (1) All actions or proceedings to which ambassadors, other public ministers, consuls, or vice consuls of foreign states are parties; + (2) All controversies between the United States and a State; + (3) All actions or proceedings by a State against the citizens of another State or against aliens.

1 0

29.html
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

SUPREME COURT OF THE U.S. - RULES ..Part VII. Practice and Procedure _________________________________________________________________ Rule 29. Filing and Service of Documents; Special Notifications; Corporate Listing * 1. Any document required or permitted to be presented to the Court or to a Justice shall be filed with the Clerk. * 2. A document is timely filed if it is sent to the Clerk through the United States Postal Service by first-class mail (including express or priority mail), postage prepaid, and bears a postmark showing that the document was mailed on or before the last day for filing. Commercial postage meter labels alone are not acceptable. If submitted by an inmate confined in an institution, a document is timely filed if it is deposited in the institution's internal mail system on or before the last day for filing and is accompanied by a notarized statement or declaration in compliance with 28 U. S. C. §1746 setting out the date of deposit and stating that first-class postage has been prepaid. If the postmark is missing or not legible, the Clerk will require the person who mailed the document to submit a notarized statement or declaration in compliance with 28 U. S. C. §1746 setting out the details of the mailing and stating that the mailing took place on a particular date within the permitted time. A document also is timely filed if it is forwarded through a private delivery or courier service and is actually received by the Clerk within the time permitted for filing. * 3. Any document required by these Rules to be served may be served personally or by mail on each party to the proceeding at or before the time of filing. If the document has been prepared as required by Rule 33.1, three copies shall be served on each other party separately represented in the proceeding. If the document has been prepared as required by Rule 33.2, service of a single copy on each other separately represented party suffices. If personal service is made, it shall consist of delivery at the office of the counsel of record, either to counsel or to an employee therein. If service is by mail, it shall consist of depositing the document with the United States Postal Service, with no less than first-class postage prepaid, addressed to counsel of record at the proper post office address. When a party is not represented by counsel, service shall be made on the party, personally or by mail. * 4. (a) If the United States or any federal department, office, agency, officer, or employee is a party to be served, service shall be made on the Solicitor General of the United States, Room 5614, Department of Justice, 10th St. and Constitution Ave., N. W., Washington, DC 20530. When an agency of the United States that is a party is authorized by law to appear before this Court on its own behalf, or when an officer or employee of the United States is a party, the agency, officer, or employee shall be served in addition to the Solicitor General. + (b) In any proceeding in this Court in which the constitutionality of an Act of Congress is drawn into question, and neither the United States nor any federal department, office, agency, officer, or employee is a party, the initial document filed in this Court shall recite that 28 U. S. C. §2403(a) may apply and shall be served on the Solicitor General of the United States, Room 5614, Department of Justice, 10th St. and Constitution Ave., N. W., Washington, DC 20530. In such a proceeding from any court of the United States, as defined by 28 U. S. C. §451, the initial document also shall state whether that court, pursuant to 28 U. S. C. §2403(a), certified to the Attorney General the fact that the constitutionality of an Act of Congress was drawn into question. See Rule 14.1(e)(v). + (c) In any proceeding in this Court in which the constitutionality of any statute of a State is drawn into question, and neither the State nor any agency, officer, or employee thereof is a party, the initial document filed in this Court shall recite that 28 U. S. C. §2403(b) may apply and shall be served on the Attorney General of that State. In such a proceeding from any court of the United States, as defined by 28 U. S. C. §451, the initial document also shall state whether that court, pursuant to 28 U. S. C. §2403(b), certified to the State Attorney General the fact that the constitutionality of a statute of that State was drawn into question. See Rule 14.1(e)(v). * 5. Proof of service, when required by these Rules, shall accompany the document when it is presented to the Clerk for filing and shall be separate from it. Proof of service shall contain, or be accompanied by, a statement that all parties required to be served have been served, together with a list of the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of counsel indicating the name of the party or parties each counsel represents. It is not necessary that service on each party required to be served be made in the same manner or evidenced by the same proof. Proof of service may consist of any one of the following: + (a) an acknowledgment of service, signed by counsel of record for the party served; + (b) a certificate of service, reciting the facts and circumstances of service in compliance with the appropriate paragraph or paragraphs of this Rule, and signed by a member of the Bar of this Court representing the party on whose behalf service is made or by an attorney appointed to represent that party under the Criminal Justice Act of 1964, see 18 U. S. C. §3006A(d)(6), or under any other applicable federal statute; or + (c) a notarized affidavit or declaration in compliance with 28 U. S. C. §1746, reciting the facts and circumstances of service in accordance with the appropriate paragraph or paragraphs of this Rule, whenever service is made by any person not a member of the Bar of this Court and not an attorney appointed to represent a party under the Criminal Justice Act of 1964, see 18 U. S. C. §3006A(d)(6), or under any other applicable federal statute. * 6. Every document, except a joint appendix or amicus curiae brief, filed by or on behalf of one or more corporations shall list all parent companies and nonwholly owned subsidiaries of each of the corporate filers. If there is no parent or subsidiary company to be listed, a notation to this effect shall be included in the document. If a list has been included in a document filed earlier in the case, reference may be made to the earlier document (except when the earlier list appeared in an application for an extension of time or for a stay), and only amendments to the list to make it current need be included in the document being filed. _________________________________________________________________ [Previous Section -] [Next Section +] [Overview] _________________________________________________________________

1 0

constitution.amendmentxi.html (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Amendment XI > > The judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to > extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against > one of the United States by citizens of another state, or by citizens > or subjects of any foreign state. Of note is that this amendment *only* covers cases where a citizen sues a *single* state, not 49 of them. There is no Constitutional rule that covers the process between a individual and more than a single state. It simply ain't there. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

2 1

http:--allpolitics.com-1997-12-28-clinton.budget-
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[IMAGE] community Join a thread, start a thread -- it's your chance to sound off! Infoseek search __________ ______ Help Navigation CLINTON ADVISER: NO MAJOR TAX CUT IN 1998 Tax Cut WASHINGTON (AllPolitics, Dec. 28) -- President Bill Clinton will not propose any across-the-board tax cut or push for any major overhaul of the tax system in his 1998 budget, a senior White House adviser said Sunday. But speaking on NBC's "Meet The Press," Rahm Emanuel also said that Clinton would not necessarily veto any tax cut sent to the White House by Congress, provided it didn't bust an existing spending agreement that would balance the budget by 2002. "If others have an approach, we'd love to see it," he said. "(But) where are they going to pay for it? Are they talking about cuts in health care? Are they talking about cuts in senior programs?" Some Wall Street analysts have forecast a surplus of as much as $40 billion in the current fiscal year, which runs through September 30 -- a surplus that proponents of a tax cut say could be used to pay for it. Emanuel But Emanuel said the White House believes that no decisions about what to do with the surplus should be made until a surplus actually materializes. "Washington should not return to its bad habits of spending money it doesn't have," he said. "That's what got us into trouble in the first place in the 1980s." In addition to tax cuts, a number of Republicans, including House Majority Leader Dick Armey and 1996 presidential candidate Steve Forbes, have also proposed so-called "flat tax" plans that would radically alter the income tax system. Others want to replace income tax entirely with a national sales tax. Even Democratic House Minority Leader Dick Gephardt has a modified "flat tax" plan that would simplify the system and reduce tax rates for middle and lower income taxpayers. But Sunday, Emanuel made it clear the White House wasn't looking to make any such radical changes in the tax code in 1998. "We finally have gotten the deficit under wraps and lifted it off the back of the economy," he said. "We shouldn't do anything reckless or irresponsible." However, Clinton will propose new tax credits targeted toward helping middle-class families pay for child care, Emanuel said. Reuters contributed to this report. Advertise on AllPolitics. Click here for info. Come see the cures of tomorrow Congressional Quarterly Search the Web with InfoSeek Barnes & Noble book search _________________________________________________________________ home | news | in-depth | analysis | what's new | community | contents | search _________________________________________________________________ Click here for technical help or to send us feedback. Copyright © 1997 AllPolitics All Rights Reserved. Terms under which this information is provided to you.

1 0

http:--www.cnn.com-US-9712-28-briefs.pm-britain.getty.ap-
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

CNN logo Navigation COMMUNITY Message Boards Chat Feedback SITE SOURCES Contents Help! Search CNN Networks SPECIALS Quick News Almanac Video Vault News Quiz Infoseek/Big Yellow Pathfinder/Warner Bros Barnes and Noble Year In Review Main banner Click here for TIME daily rule JOHN PAUL GETTY II NOW A BRITISH CITIZEN December 28, 1997 Web posted at: 9:58 p.m. EST (0258 GMT) LONDON (AP) -- American billionaire John Paul Getty II is an American no longer. The London Sunday Telegraph says the philanthropist has become a British citizen and revoked his U.S. citizenship. Sources in the British government confirm the move. Getty is 65 and has lived in Britain for 25 years. During that time, he's become one of the country's major benefactors. In 1986, he even received an honorary knighthood from Queen Elizabeth II. The Forbes magazine list of the 400 richest Americans estimates Getty's fortune at $1 billion. _________________________________________________________________ Infoseek search ____________________ ____ ____ _________________________________________________________________ rule Message Boards Sound off on our message boards & chat [INLINE] Click here for TIME daily rule To the top © 1997 Cable News Network, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms under which this service is provided to you.

2 1

Guns: H&K, G3, 7.62 v 5.56 [Guns]
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, I finaly got around to doing some research on Tim's claim regarding H&K's G3 being a 5.56 round while the various folks I have been talking to refer to it as a 7.62. Tim's claim that the 7.62 (.308) is actualy the HK-91/G1 and not the G3 is correct. The confusion comes from the fact that a few years ago the German Bundswehr quit using the HK and began using the FN/G3 which is 7.62. I had assumed the G3 it was refering to was the H&K and when I talked to the local gun nut he thought I was talking about the current model because I had made a comment a while back about it being used by the Germans as their standard infantry model and being .308. So, H&K 91/G1 is 7.62 (.308) (old standard issue) H&K 93/G3 is 5.56 (.223) FN/G3 is 7.62 (.308) (current standard issue) My suggested rifle *is* the H&K 91/G1 which is .308 and the local gun shop says used they run in the $1500 to $3000 range. New ones aren't imported. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

2 1

No Subject
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Timmy May's reheated, refurbished, and regurgitated cud is completely inappropriate for the mailing lists into which it is cross-ruminated. ( )( )________ Timmy May /00 \ _ O_\\--mm---mm /_______)

2 1

need a life Style Change ?
by reality＠kcsmarketing.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This Message was Composed using Extractor Pro Bulk E- Mail Software. If you wish to be removed from this advertiser's future mailings, please reply with the subject "Remove" and this software will automatically block you from their future mailings. /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// You now have the opportunity to join the most extraordinary and most powerful wealth building program in the world ! Because of your desire to succeed, you have been given the opportunity to take a close look at this program. If you're skeptical that's okay. Just make the call and see for yourself. My job is to inform you, your job is to make your own decision. If You Didn't Make $200,000 Last Year... You Owe it to Yourself and Your Family to give Our Program Serious Consideration ! Also, when you start making this kind of money within weeks, you will actually learn how you can preserve it and strategically invest it ! I invite you to call me for more details, at 1-888-839-4318 this is a free 2 minute recording, so call right now !

1 0

Your New Merchant Account is Waiting
by kb1LGeasG＠206.165.6.202 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Your New Merchant Account is HERE. Accept Visa, Master Card, Discover and American Express within the next 10 days. Get INSTANT CREDIBILITY and make it easier for your customer to buy what you're selling ! Get all the information 1-800-601-2612 We've cut out all the RED TAPE !!! > No "Tell us How You Do Your Business" Questions >>> No Financial Statements >>>>> No Tax Returns >>>>>>> No Trade References >>>>>>>>> No Photos of Your Office And NONE of the other BALONEY that most businesses, especially mail order, internet , and new businesses ALWAYS have to go through. Maybe You Have > A Mail Order Business >>> An Internet Business >>>>> A Home Based Business >>>>>>> No Past Financial Statements >>>>>>>>> A New Business >>>>>>>>>>> Past Credit Problems >>>>>>>>>>>>> Already Been Told NO We use a 1 page Super Simple Approval Sheet that a 6 year old could fill out in 5 minutes. You see, We are large enough that We actually Approve the account ourselves... Your application doesn't get submitted to some faceless Bank like it does with literally all other Merchant Account Providers. Because of our financial strength we are authorized to APPROVE the account in our offices and we do !!! Then we GUARANTEE it to the Bank. (THEY CAN'T LOSE...THEY LIKE THAT) WE PUT THROUGH 99.9% OF EVERYONE WHO APPLIES ! But you have to have DEEP pockets to operate this way and we do. That's how we can offer such a fantastic program. We have been doing this so long we know that most folks who come ot us are just honest, hard working business people and we never have a problem. So we designed this program just for YOU. >>Process orders right from your PC >>>Funds wired directly to your Personal or Business Bank Account FAST! FAST! FAST! >>>>Very Competitive Rates, Great 24 hour Service, We are the Largest Provider of Merchant Accounts for Home Based and New Businesses on the Internet Today. We did over 2 billion in transactions last year and we want to double that in '98 !! To do that we have used our size and financial clout to get you the fastest mos >>>USER FRIENDLY<<<< Program ever offered ! If you are ready to do a lot more business (anyone who accepts credit cards does...) Then We want to work with YOU Call right Now to get all the information and get started. You will soon be accepting Credit Cards in your business and be making MORE MONEY ! Better order more product... >>>>>>>>>>>You're gonna need it !!! Call 1-800-601-2612 Today.

1 0

Re: constitution.amendmentxi.html (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > From: "William H. Geiger III" <whgiii(a)invweb.net> > Date: Mon, 29 Dec 97 08:32:34 -0600 > Subject: Re: constitution.amendmentxi.html (fwd) > >Of note is that this amendment *only* covers cases where a citizen sues a > >*single* state, not 49 of them. > > >There is no Constitutional rule that covers the process between a > >individual and more than a single state. It simply ain't there. > > Well considering that the Constitution is a *limiting* document, if the > powers are not explicitly given to the Federal Government they don't have > them. > > Soooo, in the case of a citizen sues multiple states the Federal > Government still has no juristiction as they have never explicitly been > given that power. So what you are saying, though I doubt you realize it, is that a citizen *can't* sue 2 or more states as a group. They *must* sue singly and in the individual state courts. Of course, this isn't explicity described either, so where does this authority come from? This means there is no way to sue states as a group for their actions in regards to relations to the federal government. So the federal government can require the states to do all kinds of things and I as a citizen and effected by those actions can't sue the states but only the federal government. Interesting hole. I wonder if it will hold up. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

2 1