Pedophilia Will Only Decrease When All Parties Are Held Responsible For This Crime- January 2023

Gavin Haynes was a model student-athlete 20 years ago at Alleghany High School in Covington, Virginia, USA. before he was the same at Emory & Henry college in S.W.Va . He was a highly respected teacher and coach at his high school alma mater before he was exposed.

This reminds me of the main character in the movie The Craigslist Killer. It was based on a true story of a 3rd-year medical student. He had everything going for him and yet he threw it all away to commit sex crimes. In the end, he explained that he felt the need to be punished. One has to wonder if Gavin Haynes did not feel the same psychological compulsions due to these "demons".

If Haynes is indeed guilty, he should be allowed to serve his time in a confined setting that is both safe and humane. Hopefully there will be no profiteering over this heinous matter.

Haynes pleaded guilty to voluntarily having sex with a minor. He was not convicted of rape or anyone type of forceful activity. With victims' accounts of excursions for a protracted period of time,one has to ask what the roles of the parents, school staff, and even victims were?

It takes two to tango. A pre-teen should be totally absolved but a teenager who is physical mature(boy or girl) and his/her family need to understand that there are consequences for any behaviour that is voluntary.

That student's family could be charged for criminal neglect as they have parental responsibilities. A teenage student who is close to adulthood and is physically mature could be charged with a misdemeanor for being a voluntary participant. Many nations have laws that emphasize responsibility from all parties. Perhaps the USA should adapt such laws. This would definitely make certain that commission of crimes such of this nature would be significantly reduced. The concept of victimhood needs to be less fostered. Instead, prevention must be the central focus. When all are warned of the consequences, only then will behaviour change.

Philosophical Objectives Of The Representarian Party- Part Twenty-Four

Philosophical Objectives Of The Representarian Party- Part Twenty-Four

When an individual(s) chooses to present his own case, he/she must insist on the removal of the gold/yellow fringe flag in the court room. There are certain people who claim that the fringe on the flag has no meaning and it is in existence for decorative purposes only. That simply is not the case because this is not a conspiracy theory, it is an ironclad fact.

Read the following. Dwight Eisenhower signed Executive Order No.10834 on August 21, 1959 and recorded it in the Federal Register at Volume 24 F.R. Pages 6865 & 6867 pursuant to the law. That E.O. does not mention at all the gold/yellow fringe in its requirements for the flag.

Look at Title Four, U.S.C. Chapter One Section 1 & Section 2, It clearly states that this fringe is not authorized on the flag it depicts as the official U.S. flag. Furthermore, Section 3 in this title clearly stated that this fringe is a mutilation.

The yellow fringe is no decoration. It means individual(s) are in a jurisdiction that is foreign to the U.S. Constitution. It means unless there are specific laws that restrain a judge from certain conduct, he/she as de facto commander in-chief of that court can utilize his/her discretion in the adjudication of cases.

That is why individual(s) who present their case as Sui Juris must insist in the removal of that flag so that they can plead in a jurisdiction that respects their basic rights and sovereignty. It must be noted an attorney at-law is indeed an officer of this admiralty/maritime court and is in existence to uphold the administration of this admiralty/maritime court. An attorney at-law will never uphold the constitutionally-protected rights of a client because in these courts, those rights simply do not exist. Instead only privileges, as deemed by the court administration, exist.

The official flag as defines in the U.S. Constitution, E,O.10834, and Title 4 U.S.C. has no fringe. This jurisdiction must be challenged or individual(s) will considered a ward of the court. The courts become colorable and then they have basically de facto power under color of law.

In a de jure court, the courts are restricted by the rule of the law. In a de facto court, unless there is a specific law that restricts a specific act by the court administration, the court administration can function at its own discretion. Moreover, the written law and even common law are considered guidelines for the court administration but are not absolute mandates in de facto courts. In plain words, judicial discretion is above all written law.

Philosophical Objectives Of The Representarian Party- Part Twenty-Three

Philosophical Objectives Of The Representarian Party- Part Twenty-Three If a judge pressures an individual to hire an attorney at-law because that officer of the court is familiar with procedures, that individual needs to cite the Judiciary Act of 1789. It clearly states that COURT SHALL NOT DENY FOR WANT OF FORM - "AS ANY REASONABLE PEOPLE UNDERSTAND". This language that should be included in the papers one writes to the court. Sui Juris is the sovereign status an individual, particularly a citizen, should claim in any court. The courts may initially refuse to acknowledge this or may initially try to dismiss that individual's case. One of their favorite ruses is "denied for want of form". This language, from the First Congress in 1789, clearly outlines the intent of what a court is to be and that the court is "deemed to know the law" and must assist sovereign people in our courts to plead their cases before a jury of their peers as they see fit to plead our cases. The court works for the People to protect the basic rights of the individual(s). It has NO discretion to refuse to hear cases of deprivation of rights and criminal injury. The Court functionaries know all this; they just continue to do this as long as the People let them. Use this language and make them state that this is NOT the law. Then ask what jurisdiction they have for this court if this language does not apply. This IS the law and this stands. The Writ SHALL not be dismissed for lack of form or failure of process. All the pleadings must be is as any reasonable man/woman would understand. Clearly written, affidavits of facts and law. Use this under "jurisdiction" in the Complaints you write. "And be it further enacted. That no summons, writ, declaration, return, process, judgment, or other proceedings in civil cases in any of the courts or the United States, shall be abated, arrested, quashed or reversed, for any defect or want of form, but the said courts respectively shall proceed and give judgment according as the right of the cause and matter in law shall appear unto them, without regarding any imperfections, defects or want of form in such writ, declaration, or other pleading, returns process, judgment, or course of proceeding whatsoever, except those only in cases of demurrer, which the party demurring shall specially sit down and express together with his demurrer as the cause thereof. And the said courts respectively shall and may, by virtue of this act, from time to time, amend all and every such imperfections, defects and wants of form, other than those only which the party demurring shall express as aforesaid, and may at any, time, permit either of the parties to amend any defect in the process of pleadings upon such conditions as the said courts respectively shall in their discretion, and by their rules prescribe (a)" Judiciary Act of September 24, 1789, Section 342, FIRST CONGRESS, Sess. 1, ch. 20, 1789

Philosophical Objectives Of The Representarian Party- Part Twenty-Two

Philosophical Objectives Of The Representarian Party-Part Twenty-Two Obviously when an individual chooses, at his/her free will without any coercion or duress at all, to present his/her case, that individual obviously will not have familiarity with procedures. Therefore a judge must order these individuals (accessors) to be properly instructed by a staff member of administrative branch's judicial record-keeping branch, often known as the clerk's office, on any and all basic and fundamentally procedures.

Any government official, including a judge, is lawfully compelled to do the preceding. If for any reason a government official, including a judge, obstructs an individual from presenting his/her own case or doing his/her own legal work, then the following laws must be cited. These laws prevent any judge or government official from doing what was just described. That in itself is a crime. Nothing should ever be allowed to supersede the law (judicial discretion is clearly a violation of the law). All government officials, including judges, have to be told this clearly by the individual presenting his/her own case.

Title 18 U.S.C. §242 Deprivation of Rights under Color of Law makes it a crime for a person acting under color of any law to willfully deprive a person of a right or privilege protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States.

Title 18 U.S.C. §241 Conspiracy Against Rights. If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States.

All reaction

Philosophical Objectives Of The Representarian Party-Part Twenty-One (By Harsha Sankar)

Philosophical Objectives Of The Representarian Party-Part Twenty-One

Judges unlawfully pressure people into hiring attorneys at-law for several reasons. It again must be noted that a voluntary choice must be wholly respected and all pressure tactics from any government official are strictly prohibited.

One reason obviously is to generate revenue for other attorneys at-law. The conflict of interest is apparent and palpable. However, another main reason is since attorneys at-law are indeed officers of the court, judges strongly prefer attorney representation so that litigants are censored.

When an individual is represented by an attorney at-law, he/she is indeed muzzled. That individual litigant is told not to discuss his/her case to others. Court proceedings, instead of being public, become secretive instead. This enables the court administration and its officers to totally control the narrative and do all its filtering.

Philosophical Objectives Of The Representarian Party-Part Twenty (By Harsha Sankar)

Philosophical Objectives Of The Representarian Party-Part Twenty A Bar Association judge will often try to unlawfully intimidate and coerce an individual into hiring an Attorney at-law. That judge will often tell that individual who chooses to present his/her case that he/she is not following procedures and/or is making mistakes. People need to be aware of how to counter that judge's game and tricks.

The choice to present one's case is either a conscience one and/or a necessary one. No government official can coerce or intimidate an individual from doing anything that he/she does not want to do if they have the lawful right to do otherwise. In other words, once a lawful right is declared for the purpose of assertion, it has to be respected.

Once an individual declares that he/she will present his/her case in a court of law and/or do his/her legal work in an administrative branch that handles judicial record-keeping, all government officials including judges must totally respect that decision. The judge or any other government official must be told that if he/she cannot respect that decision from an individual, he/she has to remove himself from the bench or any other office of authority.

"Respect my right to present my own case or remove yourself from the bench, Mr. Judge" is what should be told to any judge. An individual may choose to present his/her case due to social conscience. There are other individuals who simply cannot afford an attorney at-law "officer of the court" and thereby have no choice but to present his/her own case. The courts, the judicial branch of government, must guarantee that all individual(s) have access to it for the purpose of adjudication of the law.

Russian Citizenship Drive In "Liberated" Territories-By Harsha Sankar (May 2023)

Russia has made it law that any individual in its "liberated" territories (Kherson, Zaporizhzhya, Donetsk, and Luhansk) which formerly belonged to Ukraine either accept Russian citizenship or will be deemed as foreigners. This law takes effect on July 1st, 2024.

Furthermore, any foreigner who threaten Russia's "national security" may be subject to deportation from Russia.

This law makes sense. While Russia and its President Vladimir Putin have been accused of being "Stalinist" in this measure, this law is legitimate and Russia does not play games with the law. This law is not ethnic cleansing but it tells individual(s) in these areas that it has now incorporated into the Russian Federation that they either become citizens of its nation or they will be afforded foreigner status. Plain and Simple.

Russia has not threatened to intern or deport anyone. Their citizenship drive in those newly acquired territories is not even mandatory. They are merely stating that either an individual(s) becomes a Russian citizen or they do not. If they desire not to become a Russian citizen, they will deemed a foreigner. That is straightforward and fair enough.

In Late May Or Early June, The Real Military Conflict Between Russia And Ukraine Starts- By Harsha Sankar (May 2023)

The real war between Russia and Ukraine has yet to start. The last 14.5 months have been preparations for the long awaited counter-offensives only. That will take place this month.

Each side will employ three to four hundred thousand troops initially. If needed Russia will tap into its reserves and send an additional three to four hundred thousand highly trained troops to try to bring this war to a close. If US led NATO does not send its own troops, this will probably be the case because Ukraine will run out of both highly trained soldiers and ammunition.

Look at the map. Russia currently occupies the oblasts(states) of Luhansk and most of Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson. All should pay attention to the Dnieper River. Russia may very well try to take the other oblasts east of that river such as half of Dnipropetrovsk and all of Poltava, Sumy, Chernihiv, and Kharkiv. This would essentially divide the Ukraine into two.

However with these five oblasts, they could incorporate Kharkiv into the Russian Federation. The others may be allowed to form their own nation of four million people. It could be called Fedorova or East Ukraine and it could serve as a buffer nation between the downsized Ukraine and the augmented Russian nation.

If the war rages on and if Russia decides to use its troops stationed in Transnistria located next to Moldova, Mykolaiv and Odessa Oblasts could be incorporated into the Russian Federation just like Kharkiv due to its large Russian-Speaking population.

A New Nation Could Be Born In Former Eastern Ukraine- By Harsha Sankar (May 2023)

Everything east of the Dnipro River, west of the Seversky Donets River, and west of the entire four territories that Russia occupies most parts of could be the formation of a new nation. It could be called the Federation Of East Ukraine.

This new sovereign nation would consist of the southern half of Chernihiv Oblast, the northwestern part of the Kiev and Cherkasy Oblast, the eastern half of Dnipropetrovsk oblast, the western half of the Kharkiv Oblast, and the entire oblasts of Sumy and Poltava.

This new nation would have in its constitution to not have any race-based policies and to not also ever have any foreign military presence. Other than those two stipulations, it would be entitled to total national sovereign rights.

Finland Joining NATO Is Globally Biggest Geo-Political Plunder Of 21st Century-By Harsha Sankar

Finland recently committed probably the biggest geopolitical blunder in the 21st Century by joining NATO. By forsaking their neutrality, they have placed themselves in extreme harm's way.

Russia has not been a threat at all to Finland in over eight decades. Why then does Finland forsake neutrality and independence just to become a NATO puppet? By joining NATO Russia now has so many of its weapons targeting Finland.

Finland is not just another nation joining NATO. It has an 800 mile border with Russia. By now joining NATO, NATO has doubled its border mileage with Russia and Russia has most certainly taken cue of that. All one has to do is look at this map and see why Russia has to be alarmed by NATO's newest entry.

The thought that a NATO nation can easily deploy nuclear-capable missiles and hundreds of thousands of troops at the border with Russia obviously petrifies Russia. Since this measure Russia has made it clear that if Ukrainian troops are being trained in Finland or if NATO equipment is being stored in Finland, Russia will reserve the right to attack those training centers and equipment warehouses on Finnish soil. Russia has not minced words when they have stated that they will no longer wait to till troops and equipment arrive in Ukraine to attack. This is the significance of Finland joining NATO.

Of course if Russia attacks Finland, then it is all-out World War Three as all 31 members of NATO have to respond aggressively if one of its members is attacked. This could easily escalate to a nuclear conflict. Even if it does not, Russia will have no choice but to attack all of NATO including the USA.

Russia will get Iran, North Korea, and others to assist. North Korea alone has over million highly trained troops at its disposal to assist Russia. Iran has sophisticated missile and air force technology and equipment that could enable Russia to control the sky. Moreover many Arabs and Black African civil war soldiers and militiamen will be willing to fight for Russia if asked.

The entry of Finland to NATO was the game-changer. A conflict that could have been confined to Ukraine may become global in nature. The people throughout the world must brace for that possibility.