Saturday, July 17, 2010

Joy

I sought a whisper to touch my ear.

to take away an uncertain silence

The day did not bring it to me

and the night seams even more cruel



Still my fight continues without abatement

and i must languish as a soldier

War finds pain eased in death

but life just finds the war



Joy resides deeper than the shrapnel

and that which festers only annoys

Someday this fight will be exhausted

and Christ will be proven victor again

100 comments:

habakkuk said...

Psalms 94:19-23

19 In the multitude of my anxieties within me,
Your comforts delight my soul.

20 Shall the throne of iniquity, which devises evil by law,
Have fellowship with You?
21 They gather together against the life of the righteous,
And condemn innocent blood.
22 But the LORD has been my defense,
And my God the rock of my refuge.
23 He has brought on them their own iniquity,
And shall cut them off in their own wickedness;
The LORD our God shall cut them off.

judge allslop said...

How about it bean, you and fellow bilge rats are all about defending the "little guy" from predators like Kurt Johnson preying on misguided defenseless home owners. Why not switch from ambulance chasing and join the the local sheriffs in prosecuting bank mortgage fraud?


Indymac Bank F.S.B. v Yano-Horoski “Upon the Court’s own motion, . shall be and the same is hereby cancelled, voided, avoided, nullified, set aside…

ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that the Defendant recover judgment against the Plaintiff WELLS FARGO BANK N.A. the sum of $ 200.00 for damages

ORDERED , ADJUDGED and DECREED that Plaintiff, its successors, assigns and others are forever barred,

ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that Defendants ANTHONY J. CORCIONE and JANE CORCIONE residing at 66 Circle Drive, East Northport, New York 11731 recover judgment against Plaintiff EMIGRANT MORTGAGE COMPANY INC. with an office located at 5 East 42nd Street, New York, New York 10017 in the principal sum of $ 100,000.00

“The MERS Mortgage Twilight Zone” Case Dismissed WITH Prejudice – Hon. Arthur M. Schack Slams HSBC Attorney Firm Steven J Baum, PC
Moreover, are so incredible, outrageous, ludicrous and disingenuous that they should have been authored by the late Rod Serling, creator of the famous science-fiction televison series, The Twilight Zone. Plaintiff’s counsel, Steven J. Baum, P.C., appears to be operating in a parallel mortgage universe, unrelated to the real universe. Rod Serling’s opening narration, to episodes in the 1961 – 1962 season of The Twilight Zone (found at www.imdb.com/title/tt005250/quotes), could have been an introduction to the arguments presented in support of the instant motion by plaintiff’s counsel, Steven J. Baum, P.C. – “You are [*7]traveling through another dimension, a dimension not only of sight and sound but of mind. A journey into a wondrous land of imagination.

Clients.” The Baum firm represents both MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS [MERS], as nominee for FREMONT INVESTMENT AND LOAN [FREMONT], the ineffective assignor of the instant mortgage, and plaintiff U.S. BANK, the ineffective assignee of the instant mortgage. affirmation by Steven J. Baum, Esq., the principal of Steven J. Baum, P.C., that both MERS, as nominee for FREMONT, and U.S. BANK each gave “informed consent, confirmed in writing” to the concurrent conflict of interest in their representation by Steven J. Baum, P.C., with both MERS, as nominee for FREMONT, and U.S. BANK each being “aware of the relevant circumstances, including the material and reasonably foreseeable ways that the conflict could adversely affect the interests of that client.”

Accordingly, it is ORDERED, that the order to show cause of defendant IVY MAE JOHNSON, to vacate the January 16, 2008 judgment of foreclosure and sale for the premises because plaintiff, JP MORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., AS TRUSTEE FOR NOMURA ASSET ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2004-AR4, lacked standing to commence the instant action and thus, the Court never had jurisdiction, is granted; and it is further ORDERED, the instant complaint of plaintiff JP MORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., AS TRUSTEE FOR NOMURA ASSET ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2004-AR4 for the foreclosure on the premises located at 47 Rockaway Parkway, Brooklyn, New York (Block 4600, Lot 55, County of Kings) is dismissed with prejudice.

In this mortgage foreclosure action, plaintiff’s motion for judgment of foreclosure and sale is denied with prejudice. The complaint is dismissed. The notice of pendency filed against the above-named real property is cancelled. Plaintiff, WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. d/b/a AMERICAS SERVICING COMPANY (WELLS FARGO), lacks standing to continue this action as to why this Court should not sanction them for making a “frivolous motion,”

sopsback said...

I am glad....

that this entry was a spiritual one, as we near to wrapping up the dorean program.

And on this note, I want to reiterate a few things, that I have been 'preaching' for years now.

We all know about the DG struggle to 'produce the note', all about the STRAWMAN, all about the Federal Corp., aka the Fed Govt, etc., etc.

Everyone now knows about all these things now, even if they didnt when they originally joined the DG to have their mortgage eliminated or cancelled or whatver you want to call it so they could keep their house and not have to make payments to a bank/lender.

Everyone now knows that when you stand before a courtroom judge, whom you really are, not a STRAWMAN, and as such, cannot be held lialble for the debts accrued to your STRAWMAN, as the STRAWMAN is a corporate fiction, ens legis.

COT'D

Well

sopsback said...

Well, I also hope that by now, everyone knows that their favorite place of worship, "the church" is also a STRAWMAN, an ens legis corporate fiction and always has been for over 2000+ years now.


You should all just know spiritually or intuitively that you do not need a STRAWMAN to be taught how to be a Christian or how to worship, ie., a "pastor."

For when you listen to a "paster", you are doing nohting more than listening to a STRAWMAN preach, same as when you get legal letters in all CAPS, it does not represent YOU!

If you have not taken my advice now going on 5 years that the only REAL one to listen to is the Holy Spirit, then you will continue to worship using your STRAWMAN by going to a Corporate church and listening to a "paster" who copies and pastes his Sunday sermons and then 'talks' them out loud standing in front of a dais.

Of course, this assumes that like the UCC-1 financing statment, filed in order to make you the creditor for your STRAWMANs debts, that you have 'filed' and cultivated the Holy Spirit so you can listen to it. You can obviously not claim debts from your STRAWMAN if you have not filed a UCC-1, same as yuo cannot listen to the HS if you have not cultivated it over these past 5 years or so. So just as you will similarly still be responsible for all the debts taht your STRAWMAN racks up in your name, likewise you will still be responsible for all the error that your paster/pastor preaches incorrectly to you.

So in conclusion, it is/was my hope that some of you have learned and redeemed your ens legis STRAWMAN and also your spiritual strawman/pastor and come to the true knowledge of whom you are; someone whom does not need a 'stand in' to go in front of god (yes, small 'g', as the cap G is another corp act to indoctrinate ppl, as they are brainwashed into thinnking that using small "g" somehow insults god, as if he checks for punctuation/spelling)

As someone who does not need a 'stand in', then you dont need a pastor, as if this "paster" is a politician, and can get you a better seat in the forum.

COT'D

sopsback said...

Go before god righteously or unrighteously, but on your own merits, not occulted by a paster, who can no more take any credit/discredit for your actions or spiritual development than can your ens legis STRAWMAN.


Just remember, KNOW WHOM YOU ARE and stand before god as such, as a child of the creator (again, small c)

I hope that this message is understood by all whom seek to redeem their spiritual STRAWMAN, also known as their 'soul.'

Now their will still be some whom will ask their 'paster' about this, and like the govt., hoping that somehow their paster will give his/her approval. Sort of like asking a judge to give his approval to a UCC-1 filing or asking him to enforce laws involved in 'proving the note' in a mortgage fraud case; IT AINT HAPPENIN'.


Thus, if you dont know whom you are, then you can both continue to use your ens legis STRAWMAN for both your financial and spiritual debts.

BUT, remember one thing, that upon death, your finciancial debts are no longer collectible from you, ie., as if they were paid. However, your spiritual debts may just begin to be getting paid if youve used a STRAWMAN/paster as a stand in for your spiritual redemption.


Peace to all and may god bless,



/s/ SOP

Mortgage free said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Mortgage free said...

Sopsback what are you going to do all day when there actually is no Dorean group and you won't have this to write on all day long. Also Jesus has really done alot for Kurt he remains in Jail and we all all still screwed.

judge allslop said...

Settle they MUST. OTC derivatives cannot stand the light of civil litigation. The real problem for the US Govt crime syndicate and OTC derivatives is in criminal litigation in Italy and elsewhere. You settle those by turning state’s evidence.


The US insurance giant AIG has agreed to pay $725m (£474m) to settle a long-running fraud case against it. The settlement is likely to be one of the biggest in US history, following a class action lawsuit led by three Ohio pension funds. They alleged that AIG had engaged in stock price manipulation, anti-competitive behaviour and accounting fraud between 1999 and 2005. That, they say, resulted in shareholders losing millions. The court now needs to give its approval before payments can be made.

Mortgage free said...

Judge you really think after all of this we are still going to get a settlement?

sopsback said...

"Sopsback what are you going to do all day when there actually is no Dorean group and you won't have this to write on all day long






i will have sum time to thik about it right?

the dg wont be payin' till '27 rember? ;-)

judge allslop said...

It appears Europe knows the great vampire squid is a pillar of the US Govt crime syndicate.

Europe freezes out Goldman Sachs
Shocked by past deals with Italy and Greece, governments are excluding the Wall Street bank from sovereign bond sales
Sunday 18 July 2010
Elena Moya

European governments are turning their backs on Goldman Sachs, the all-conquering investment bank that has suffered a series of blows to its reputation, capped by the biggest ever fine imposed on a Wall Street firm. According to data from Dealogic, Greece, Spain, France and Italy have all denied the bank a lead role in their recent sovereign bond sales. Last Thursday, Goldman agreed to pay a $550m fine to settle US regulators’ claims that the bank misled investors in a mortgage-backed security. Goldman admitted that its marketing materials were incomplete, because they failed to state that the same third party that helped choose the assets had taken a bet against them.

sopsback said...

ok lets go!!


im dun with dinner, now brake out the settle mints. im waiting. i dun wanna wait till' 2027 to haf dem.

brake them in haf rite now!!!

sopsback said...

河水永遠是相同的,可是每一剎那又都是新的 said...




"ah so, asso..."

judge allslop said...

MERS was back in the news again last week with the announcement that they were making additional information on the MERS “secret” system available to mortgagors.
That’s according to a press release issued by the Reston, VA-based data bank late last Friday afternoon to make sure as few people as possible actually saw it.
“Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, (MERS) announced today that investor information for loans registered on the MERS System is now available to borrowers at no charge.”
We aren’t looking for the investor, they may or may not have a beneficial interest in the loan.
The originator doesn’t have a beneficial interest in the loan because the originator received the money before the borrower was ever identified. The announcement is just another misdirection that allows MERS to continue the deception regarding the true creditor by illegally and fraudulently misrepresenting that someone other than the true creditor has a beneficial interest.
The assignments of the note all the way from the borrower to the current holder and true beneficiary, they have yet to make that information public or provide it in discovery.I believe the reason they won’t do that is that they know that this would reveal evidence of the note being duplicated and going to multiple pools. Not only were the loans designed to fail, but the scarcity of borrowers meant that many of them were used to fulfill more than one pool. If it’s all fraud, why not counterfeiting too? Eventually a litigant is going to get to the bottom of this and a whole lot of disturbing information is going to come to light. IF MERS were sincere, they would simply open their entire database to everyone.

judge allslop said...

Is this a Chocoholic or.......


Mystery trader buys all Europe’s cocoa
Even Willy Wonka might struggle to use this much chocolate. Yesterday, somebody bought 241,000 tonnes of cocoa beans.
Jonathan Sibun and Harry Wallop
Published: 7:00AM BST 17 Jul 2010

The purchase was enough to move the entire global cocoa market, sending the price to the highest level since 1977, and triggering rumours and intrigue in the City.
It is unclear which person, or group of traders, was behind the deal, but it was the largest single cocoa trade for 14 years.

judge allslop said...

.....the great vampire squid.


Goldman Sachs sets aside $9bn for pay as revenues drop
By Louise Armitstead and Harry Wilson
Published: 10:11PM BST 17 Jul 2010

Goldman Sachs is set to pay as much as 45pc of its 2010 revenues to its staff in a move that is likely to reignite political anger with the investment bank just days after it settled a high-profile fraud case with American regulators. Analysts expect Goldman to say that its closely-watched compensation ratio, which indicates the intended level of staff pay as a proportion of its revenues, is between 40pc and 45pc when it announces its second quarter results this week. Goldman’s results will also show for the first time a $600m (£392m) hit for the UK’s bonus tax. The bank is estimated to have set aside just over $9bn in pay for its staff in the first half of 2010, working out at an average payout of $235,429 for each of its 38,500 employees for the last six months of work. Goldman bankers are on track to be paid nearly $500,000 each at full year, with senior bankers being paid far more.

near the end said...

S0p, How come every prediction you have ever made on this blog has NOT COME TRUE; WHY?

sopsback said...

did they slop the oil yet???

yep. CNN said so....


ok.

near the end said...

That's your problem cnn lies you need to here the truth watch FOX NEWS.

sopsback said...

RAP:

TIM TURNER, RAP GUARDIAN ELDER IS NOW PRESIDENT OF THE united state of America

INTNTL AGREEMENTS SIGNED IN THE HAGUE

RECOGNIZED BY OVER 80 COUNTRIES

FUNDING SET TO OCCUR



http://commonlawgrandjury.com/audio/turner_07_21_10.mp3



:(wonder if this will have an effect on the settle mints :-)

mogel007 said...

For instance, in this case of the last couple of weeks. I don’t deal with the plaintiff who was not at all prepared to get on trial. She gets up on the stand and says that the bank says, “Well, didn’t we loan you the money?” And, she said, “Well, yes.”



Part of learning how to do this is going to be very direct and honest. There are all kinds of maxims of law and court rulings where, if you don’t have clean hands, then they have an argument. If one side of the hands are dirty, then there is your claim. You just win by default.



They asked her a simple question: “Did you get a loan from the bank?” It was over with for her. She said “yes.”



She never got a loan from the bank. Not only is she a liar, but she destroyed her own case. If she had said, “I never got a loan from the bank. I sold them the Promissory Note, they gave me the money, I bought the house with the money and I paid them for the loan, but they never gave me loan.” That would have been it. There is one sum certain, one lump of money (in this case, $500,000). Where did it go? It’s only one lump sum. You sold them the Promissory Note.



This is about winning. It is about doing the right thing. It is very simple. You sold them the Promissory Note, they gave you the cash, you went over and bought the house. Do you all understand that? I don’t care about the Note.



There is a thing in law called res judicata. Those that are attorneys or paralegals understand res judicata. Once it’s done, once it has been decided, it is over with. Res judicata means, “Shut the hell up. Don’t bring it in my Court.”



I can give you a million arguments on this. Do you know which one of them matters? The one that proves whether or not this happened. Nothing else happened. Everything in the documents, the banks have confessed this happened. They cannot argue about this any more. They have already tried to bitch-slap us in thirty different ways to say, “This is over with.” Ok. You bought the Note. This is done.



Now we must discuss this. Did you make your payments for an extended period of time? Shannon and I have a deal. Shannon, I need to borrow $1,000. Shannon agrees and says, “I’ll tell you what. I have plenty of money. You send me $10 a week for the next two years; that’s $1,040. I will lend you the $1,000 now and I will make $40 in the two years after. I am way under the usury laws, etc.” We are both happy. How many $10 payments do I have to make before I say, give me my $1,000? None. If I made a few payments, what number of payments that I have made can I come back and take him into court if he does not give me that $1,000? One-third. That’s it. He is in total default. If I made three payments and he does not give me the money, who is in default? He is.



How many people understand there are two difference cases here? They confessed they bought the Note. This is all done. So we only have the Deed of Trust argument. On their side of the Deed of Trust it says says: “This Deed of Trust is evidenced by the Note.” What Note? It’s sold. It’s gone. So what is the Deed of Trust evidenced by? Nothing. They have no evidence. So what did you do? You paid them. Even though the Mortgage/Deed of Trust has negotiations, that deal is dead. When you pay them, under the law of acceptance (equity chancery law), when this is on the table and no one has actually picked it up. If you go ahead and you start sending them the payment, did you pick it up and hand it to them by giving them payment? In law, if they accepted by payment, what did they also accept? The check. So what must they also do? They have to give you that $500,000 loan. There is only one $500,000 lump sum.



When you look at this deal, you see what is called a “specific performance.” You had a job to do. Did the bank have a job to do? What was your job to do? Make the monthly payments. What was the bank’s job to do? Loan you. Did you specifically perform your duties in pursuance of this convenant/contract?

mogel007 said...

You performed your job. You sent them a check. They cashed it.



This whole thing is a scam. How can you tell if a bank or a lawyer or a politician is lying? There are two rabbit holes. Everyone is going down the wrong rabbit hole. You are not going to find any rabbits down there. You are going to find snakes and worms, etc. Here is the rabbit. That is what you need to argue. That is what it is all about. Inside of there is the right to take your house. In the covenant, they have all kinds of rights. You don’t have any rights. Fraud in the factum; fraud in the inducement. When you believe it is a contract because you do not understand legalese, but it was a covenant, so they really are not tied in to be punished if they fail. Isn’t that the reason they probably made it a covenant and not contract? It’s all there. They did not lie to you, verbally. They did not make a misstatement and they had a liable mission so you can use that against them.



Militia/patriot groups sprung up. The most famous being the Posse Comitatus. Posse Comitatus was an Act by Congress after the Civil War. It states the United States will never use the military against its own people. That was the United States, not the corporate entity of the United States of America. We all remember Waco. That whole Act has some issues. When the Posse Comitatus sprung up, they used the legal doctrine of filing documents which we call liens. What these different groups did was they put liens on sheriffs and judges and government employees creating a nightmare. The way the government attacked these groups through the law was under certain aspects of the law that says when you record something and it is not correct, that is a crime. They had a lot of recordings to deprive people of their property so that it fell into terrorism. They did it in mass quantities to deprive whole areas of their land.



This is important. If you look up Arizona Revised Statutes §13-2301 and read it through (D)(4)(b)45, it defines filing false documents to deprive people of their lands as terrorism. It is terrorism for a group of people to get together and file false, fraudulent or forged documents in a public office. It is defined in Arizona law as one type of criminal act: terrorism.

mogel007 said...

Under terrorist laws, they do not have to prove you are a terrorist. The onus probandi is extrapolated from the Patriot Act to all acts of terrorism. The terrorists must disprove they were a terrorist. When you get charged as a terrorist and there is any evidence therein, you have to dispute it. There are all kinds of people in Guantanamo Bay who don’t have anything to do with anything, but they had some kind of association somewhere where they got charged as terrorists. They are there waiting to dispute that they are terrorists.



The law states that if you record documents that are fraudulent, forged or false, to deprive people of property, you are a terrorist. How many people have looked at the documents that the banks have filed and recorded? How many people have found one that is not false, fraudulent or forged? It goes a prima facie evidence.



The nuclear option

There is no way, under Arizona or U.S. law, that a CEO of any bank in this country can disprove that he is not a terrorist. They cannot. The law defines every CEO of every bank in this country as a terrorist. There are judicial notices of case law in support of this. That will get posted. Read it. It shows this. The banks did this about a thousand times every day.



It is ground in legal fact. We’ve got the recorded documents and I have the laws. They cannot state they accidentally recorded it. Accident a thousand times a day throughout the country?



For all of these people, it is imprisonment for life. If you read the Posse Comitatus, the banks are following their playbook. The only difference in the laws between the bankers and the so-called terrorists that are doing life imprisonment in recording this stuff is they wore camping t-shirts and the bankers are in Armani suits. You talk about whether or not you can prove this or whether or not it is factual: they have already admitted to it. They gave us all the evidence we need. It really is this simple. They have done everything we need to do to jump over to the nuclear option and go against them. They have already said they own the note, they have already recorded the documents – all those documents are fraudulent.



The documents that they record that lead to the criminal acts that Arizona law defines as terrorism are: a substitution of trustee. In other words, this person gets to steal that property because we have a financial interest, etc. That is what the bank does. The other one is an assignment of rights where that leads to who has the rights to do what. They are going to record those documents. Some of them now they are stamping that they are recorded and not recording them. The crime happens when you record. Either way, they are still claiming it and using it to steal your property.

mogel007 said...

In criminal law, after the prosecution rests, you claim Rule 20, that they have not proved their prima facie case. They may have proved a lot of things, but they did not prove you did the act. That case gets dismissed, with prejudice.



In civil law you do not get it dismissed, but you get summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff or the defendant. That, basically, is reliant on the same concepts of the prima facie case. Then someone proves, prima facially, a certain concept. When we say, “Here is the law that says you are a terrorist and it states that if you do this, you are a terrorist.” And we put all the other with it; that is a prima facie evidence. They are a terrorist. How many times do you think we have done a prima facie case? Under the law, you only have to do it once. We have about a dozen cases.



That is the nuclear option.



There is a little confusion that I am going to clear up.



When the banks bought your Promissory Note, they did not actually give you money. When the banks bought your Promissory Note from you, they stamped it, “paid to the order of (the third party name) without recourse” and turned it into a check. They took that check and cashed it. They bought the house and you got the house. It is just the same as if you got the money. Here is the fraud: they bought everything in their name. You sold them the Promissory Note, yes, they paid you. They paid the builders, the builder gave you the house. The thing is, they bought everything in their name. That is illegal. That is a criminal act in and of itself.

mogel007 said...

If they upheld the law and did things not as a criminal enterprise - you sold them the Promissory Note, they took the money, they paid for the builder in your name, you were given the house in your name - this would not have generated the fraud. They were not supposed to purchase anything with that money using their name. They got the Promissory Note. They should have just given you the money, but they did all these little tricks to confuse everyone. They did everything in their name to make it look like they were doing the purchase, but they were using your money. They were really just an agent for you.



The money that they were supposed to give you, instead of giving it to you, they took that money and bought your old lien or bought your house with the money. It is spelled out in the handout.



Under the adjustable rate note, “In return for the loan that I have received, I promise to pay… ” Now we are playing a game of legalese: “In return for a loan that I received” is past tense, not current tense. We are talking about something that is extraneous. Whether it did or did not happen is not intrinsic to our argument.

mogel007 said...

They are playing these games and you are falling for it. You are making assumptions that you have got to get away from. What if you never had a loan before? Then that is just a fraudulent statement. What if you had a loan before? That would be what they are talking about. No where do they really claim that they were. You just read it, took it for granted, because you were doing this all at the same time. The whole thing is: where is the loan? Everyone is screaming, “Where is the Note?”, show me the loan. The loan I had received was in past tense, why are we bringing that up? That is intrinsic to the argument, but it is not substantial when we get into the case. It will be brought up. It is just evidence in the process.

mogel007 said...

SHOW ME THE LOAN

A legal doctrine developed by: John Chester; of the family Stuart



The government did not want to end prohibition. It was great for the politicians. Over a period of time, over 70,000 lawsuits were filed against prohibition. The government could not fight them anymore and got rid of prohibition.



The new concepts are based on these concepts of law which fall under contract law. Specific performance in real estate: You go to buy a house, they screw up and you don’t get the house. Under specific performance you can refuse to take another house or your money returned – you want that house. You have to go into a replevin concept where they give you some reasonable value. Those are fights that you have in contract law, which is what we want to use.



The nice aspect of it is that we have come along this far to the documentation and everything we are going to be claiming here, they have already confessed to by fighting us. Now they cannot change their minds. A lot of what kind of blackballed me from the guru aspect of this was the fact that I was right. But, they don’t need to be right. They just need to make money. A lot of it was based on the concept, in law, that most people do not really understand It is the difference between a covenant and a contract.



There is a difference between a contract and a covenant. If you read the law and the legal definitions, they are substantially different. If you remember when you were in school, you said the Pledge of Allegiance. “I pledge allegiance to the flag of the united States of America.” Exactly what was that flag giving in return? Nothing. That is a pledge. “I pledge allegiance.” A pledge is a covenant. It’s unilateral.



When you do a covenant:

Go through your Deed of Trust, your Mortgage, etc., they use the word “covenant.” They do not use the word “contract.” There is a reason for it. They are never going to give you anything. You already have everything. It is legalese for, “I’m going to shaft you really bad and you’re going to thank me later.” You have to understand the difference between a contract and a covenant. The laws are so applicable that you enter into it believing it was a contract.



Here is the issue: We go through this whole thing, and the whole time the banks are yelling and screaming that, “We never separated the Note and the Deed of Trust.” Are they telling the truth or are they lying? They are telling the truth because those two documents were never together. That is where they have you. They were never intended to be together. They can never be together in law. The Deed of Trust got recorded and the Note went to the lender.



We have all kinds of evidence of that. The first thing they do with the Note is they give it over to someone to cash it. The first thing they do with the Deed of Trust is they run it over to the County Recorder’s Office. Did they separate them which would invalidate everything, or were they never together? They were never together to begin with. They never lied about that. They tricked us.



The Deed of Trust (Mortgage) – that contractual agreement which is truly a covenant says, “This Deed of Trust is evidenced by the Note.” There is no note. That is all a separate deal. What is the Deed of Trust evidenced by? Nothing. It does not exist in law. It is a mortgage. It is dead. You eventually bring it back to life because you send them a check or cash or money order every month. In law, if you make someone an offer, and behind that offer is written ‘in valuable consideration’ (in this instance, it would be cash) and they accept that cash, then we have brought that deal back to life.

mogel007 said...

The mortgage was dead. There were two deals. You sold them a Promissory Note, i.e., you are buying a house for $500,000. You give them a Promissory Note, they give you the $500,000 or they give it to the home builder and now you have the house. That is a fair and even exchange, lawful and legal. You are done



Now, for some reason, you wanted to borrow $500,000 from them. That is a separate deal. This deal (Promissory Note) is done, now you want to do this other deal. If you pay them, when did you get the $500,000? There is a bit of an issue there. Here is what happened in law and in reality, and here is what the law has to say about this... Example/concept: Now that we are here and now that the banks say, “It is our note.” Okay, it is your note. You bought it fair and square.



If I sell you my car, can I come back yelling at you saying, “You can’t take the doors off it, you can’t paint it pink, you can’t do anything.” Do I have a legal right to say that? No. They can do whatever they want. They don’t even need to bring it to court.



When you sold them the Note, what did they do with it? They stamped the note: “Paid to the Order of __________ (put a third party name on it) without recourse.” According to the Federal Reserve, what is that Note now? It’s a check. Did they cash the check? It is a bearer instrument payable to the holder. Do we have a name for that? Check. It’s a bearer’s instrument. It’s a check. What is a check? A check is a bearer’s instrument. If I have a check given from you by you to me, am I the bearer of that? Yes. They cashed the check.



Do you understand what happened here? If I sell you this book for $1.00 and you go away with this book, is that all right? Yes. What does this other book have to do with that deal? Nothing. It is a separate book. We now want to make a deal over this book. How do we know this for certain?



We have to start talking about the Mortgage. You sold them the check (Note), that deal is done. Now we have to talk about the other deal. What is happening is, everyone is saying, “Show me the note.” We should be saying, “Show me the Loan.” Because you sold them your check for $500,000. You got the $500,000. That Note is completed and perfected. It’s done



Now we are over here talking about a Mortgage – a Deed of Trust – a loan – a contract that is really a covenant where you are borrowing $500,000. You are paying them every month. When did they loan you the $500,000? They never did. Who, by law, is in default? They are. Who is responsible to inform the Court when the other party is in default? You are. If you don’t inform the Court the other party is in default, what must the Court therefore presume? They are not in default. The Court and law are very clear on these aspects. It is not the Court’s job to come and do your job for you. The Court does not know who is in default. The bank says you are in default through the non-judicial process. You don’t argue it – that’s it. In Connolly v. General Accounting and numerous other cases: acquiescence is agreement. If you don’t say anything, you are in agreement.



Credit card companies operate on this concept. They send you a note or a letter stating you owe us this much money, and you don’t respond. By the time you respond, you are already being garnished. Do you understand why? Because you never argued. Affidavits stand in law if un-rebutted. If somebody says something and you don’t rebut it, you are in agreement with it. That is not in all cases.

mogel007 said...

CALIFORNIA BANKRUPTCY COURT HOLDS THAT MERS CANNOT TRANSFER NOTE
FOR WANT OF OWNERSHIP; CITES BOYKO, LANDMARK (KANSAS), LAMY, AND
VARGAS CASES

July 9, 2010

The United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of
California has issued a ruling dated May 20, 2010 in the matter of
In Re: Walker, Case No. 10-21656-E-11 which found that MERS could
not, as a matter of law, have transferred the note to Citibank from
the original lender, Bayrock Mortgage Corp. The Court's opinion is
headlined stating that MERS and Citibank are not the real parties
in interest.

The court found that MERS acted "only as a nominee" for Bayrock
under the Deed of Trust and there was no evidence that the note was
transferred. The opinion also provides that "several courts have
acknowledged that MERS is not the owner of the underlying note and
therefore could not transfer the note, the beneficial interest in the
deed of trust, or foreclose on the property secured by the deed",
citing the well-known cases of In Re Vargas (California Bankruptcy
Court), Landmark v. Kesler (Kansas decision as to lack of authority
of MERS), LaSalle Bank v. Lamy (New York), and In Re Foreclosure
Cases (the "Boyko" decision from Ohio Federal Court).

The opinion states: "Since no evidence of MERS' ownership of the
underlying note has been offered, and other courts have concluded
that MERS does not own the underlying notes, this court is convinced
that MERS had no interest it could transfer to Citibank. Since MERS
did not own the underlying note, it could not transfer thebeneficial
interest of the Deed of Trust to another. Any attempt to transfer
the beneficial interest of a trust deed without ownership of the
underlying note is void under California law."

mogel007 said...

Read that again: "Any attempt to transfer the beneficial interest of
a trust deed without ownership of the underlying note IS VOID UNDER
CALIFORNIA LAW." This conclusion was based upon California law cited
in the opinion that the note and the mortgage are inseparable, with
the former being essential while the latter is "an incident", and
that an assignment of the note carries the mortgage with it, "while
an assignment of the latter [the mortgage] alone is a nullity." As
MERS must own the note in order to assign the incident deed of trust,
MERS is legally precluded from assigning the deed of trust for want
of ownership of the note, and cannot assign the note in any event
as it never owned it. MERS' lack of ownership interest in promissory
note is a matter of decided case law based on a record stipulation of
MERS' own lawyers in the MERS v. Nebraska Dept. of Finance decision.

This opinion thus serves as a legal basis to challenge any
foreclosure in California based on a MERS assignment; to seek to
void any MERS assignment of the Deed of Trust or the note to a
third party for purposes of foreclosure; and should be sufficient
for a borrower to not only obtain a TRO against a Trustee's Sale,
but also a Preliminary Injunction barring any sale pending any
litigation filed by the borrower challenging a foreclosure based
on a MERS assignment.

The Court concluded by stating: "Since the claimant, Citibank,
has not established that it is the owner of the promissory note
secured by the trust deed, Citibank is unable to assert a claim for
payment in this case." Thus, any foreclosing party which is not the
original lender which purports to claim payment due under the note
and the right to foreclose in California on the basis of a MERS
assignment does not have the right to do so under the principles
of this opinion.

This ruling is more than significant not only for California
borrowers, but for borrowers nationwide, as this California court
made it a point to cite non-bankruptcy cases as to the lack of
authority of MERS in its opinion. Further, this opinion is consistent
with the prior rulings of the Idaho and Nevada Bankruptcy courts
on the same issue, that being the lack of authority for MERS to
transfer the note as it never owned it (and cannot, per MERS' own
contract which provides that MERS agrees not to assert any rights
to mortgage loans or properties mortgaged thereby).

judge allslop said...

The Associated Press
Jul 20, 2010

FLORENCE, S.C. — Two former bank officials in South Carolina have pleaded guilty to fraud charges.
Multiple media outlets reported 58-year-old Gary Albert Hager and 44-year-old Jill Diane Brennan pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit bank fraud in federal court in Florence on Monday. Hager and Brennan admitted falsifying information on loan applications so banks would approve mortgages that wound up in foreclosure. Hager worked at the J.P. Morgan Chase office in Myrtle Beach. Brennan worked at a Bank of America office in Myrtle Beach.
U.S. District Judge Terry Wooden agreed to allow them to remain free until they are sentenced in about two months. Each face up to 30 years in prison.Hager and Brennan also face possible fines of up to $1 million each and could be ordered to pay restitution.

Mortgage free said...

OK how do we get out trust documents back in our names?

Mortgage free said...

Can we now say how much of a prick Dr. Johnson is and always has been!

Mortgage free said...

OK how do we get out trust documents back in our names?

Mortgage free said...

OK how do we get out trust documents back in our names?

Mortgage free said...

OK how do we get out trust documents back in our names?

sopsback said...

OK how do we get out trust documents back in our names?



thats what jersy kane was tring to do beefo they assinated him

its the only way that works, change the thrustee. yo wife wont no the diffance.


or is it the 'thrustor'??

sopsback said...

Can we now say how much of a prick Dr. Johnson is and always has been!



ho's dr. jonson??


is he da guy dat invetted 'band-aids'?


and he haf a bother too, rigth?

wast it Johnson & Johnston?


they make medical splies?

sopsback said...

is that same as...


IN GOD WE TRUST?


hose trust is yo house in?

in yo we thrust.


LOLOLLL!!!

sopsback said...

btw

intanet raydio news just reported that a framer got $500K from a juge from a farm clam he filled a few years ago.

a nearby farm cuntaminated his organic farm with GMO corps so he chop sooed them in cort and now he won. 500K worth of corndogs $$$$

sopsback said...

they also sayed that this is the begging of all the fram clams payouts fo big dooolas


also no as 'the packies'

sopsback said...

where burly baal at when yo nedd him?

sopsback said...

maybe he and his alien dawg gut bemmed up by scooty to anther plant.

sopsback said...

ever see burly baal alien dawg with the 'glow in the dark' eyees???

his dawg cum from the
'2 eye lights zone'


http://www.detailshere.com/dog.htm


his eyes was planted with lits

sopsback said...

burly baal had that dawg since he was a poppy.

the guy dat gave burly the dawg tole burly:


BURLY, THIS IS GONG TO BE BIG!!!


and bruly say: "i'll take the dawg!!"


i'll make a spend to yo egold acct and put in "dawg payt" in the comments section

俊宏淑松 said...

實在是太完美了!非常感谢!给心心!(〃ω〃)............................................................

sopsback said...

ah, so...ah, so....

near the end said...

Sop instead of being an asshole why don't you answer mortgage free's question.

sopsback said...

ah, so...ah, so....

sopsback said...

when burly baals HYIPs payout, i already no the car i gonna get...


a smoker'



http://www.motortrend.com/av/roadtests/coupes/1006_2010_hurst_camaro_perfroamance_series_4_supercharged_video/index.html

sopsback said...

http://www.motortrend.com
/av/roadtests/coupes/1006_2010_hurst_camaro_
perfroamance_series_4_
supercharged_video/index.html

Mortgage free said...

NEAR THE END -This is sopsback's life. If this should end in all probability sopsback will also end. He has no other life and will not ever do anything else.

mogel007 said...

UFO flies over international airport in China. When's the last time you heard a major airport was shut down due to a UFO sighting?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOzNOxoNtqI&NR=1

sopsback said...

Do you feel the major earth change drawing near, as do I? Those of us who wish to meet this event with grace should start or continue to prepare ourselves spiritually, mentally and physically; we should prepare for the arrival of God and His trusted servants, and patiently await the working out of His plan for Mother Earth and mankind. It is said that the major earth change will come in a twinkling of an eye, when you least expect it, and that when this event occurs, or if one of the two other cataclysms listed below should occur, we will know that the time of Earth-evacuation is come.

============================


YOUR LIFT-OFF INSTRUCTIONS FOR OUR EVACUATION FROM PLANET EARTH



THREE CATACLYSMS WHICH WILL TRIGGER AN EVACUATION

MAJOR POLE SHIFT Ashtar: Your planet is in imminent crisis, of cataclysmic upheavals because of disruptions in the magnetic field. A major pole shift will cause massive changes and destruction to the surface of the planet, including great tidal waves that will lash your coastlines, great earthquakes causing severe shifting of entire tectonic plates, massive volcanic eruptions over widespread areas, windstorms of unprecedented velocities, and abrupt climate changes in many areas. Portions of your continents will split and sink, while other portions will be thrusted upwards.

NUCLEAR WAR Ashtar: It will not be permitted except on a limited basis contained within your confines. Nuclear detonations not only kill the human body, but also severely damage the soul energy matter and inflict tremendous trauma to that soul entity. ...We have been granted permission to stop all nuclear devices destined for our realms of space beyond one-hundred fifty miles from your surface.

PULVERIZATION OF THE PLANET Hatonn: You now have particle-beam weapons that can pulverize your planet in 15 minutes. Ashtar: Your governments are hostile. We are convinced that there is deliberate determination to extinguish humanity and turn your planet into a burned out cinder or a gaseous ball of energy.

sopsback said...

"LIFT-OFF INSTRUCTONS"



hey, burly baal?


yo strapped in?

ho bout' yo dawg?


LIFT OFF IN 3.....2......1......↑



YOU STONE...WE HAVE LIFT OFF↑↑↑

judge allslop said...

A report that the Wall Street Journal might soon be coming out with an important story to the effect that thieves have hit a major UK metals warehouse. The site is most likely London. Certainly, the story would show a link to the London Bullion Metal Assn. One can only guess. So the London bankers could attempt to sidestep responsibility, claim it aint their fault, on how the gold & silver is all gone. This sounds like the argument by the kid at school that the dog ate the homework. Hey, sure, why not?? Expect, if it is published, to be a lame attempt at a cover-up for missing gold & silver metal. The shortage has become so acute since the December assaults by depositors began, that the LBMA must conjure up a story to conceal their empty vaults. Depositors have been removing precious metal in huge volumes, suspicious of fraud, fearful of lost wealth. My view is simple. Either way, admission of NO METAL is a major major step in breaking the corrupt spine of the illicit gold cartel. Any route that leads to broad recognition of NO METAL is fine with me. Let them try to save face. Let them announce the metal fell in an earthquake fault line, or was teleported by Spock to the Starship Enterprise, or was carted off to an alien spaceship in an inter-galactic raid. It will not work. Outright derision is the likely response by the public, after so many chapters of bold naked fraud. The response would be a rise in the gold price from absent supply and growing demand, after a bank run is heated up.

sopsback said...

every nun no bout 2012 right?

but did yo no dis???

i dun thik so??

2012 end the viral reverse bunk.
-----------------------------







The stage for this all occurring is being set now as the most pivotal day in the history of the United States is racing towards us all….December 21, 2012.

For as this date is more well known as the end of the ancient Mayans long count calendar (and ending of the World?), it is also the date the Federal Reserve’s 99-year old charter to control the American economy ends. And, most importantly, for it to be renewed it would require not only a majority vote in both houses [Senate and House of Representatives] of the US Congress, but also a three-quarter majority vote by every one of their 50 States’ legislative bodies.

Russian diplomatic, historical, financial, and intelligence experts, who have followed this saga for decades, all conclude that the Great Game being played between the Society of Cincinnati and the royal European banking powers amounts to nothing less than the complete reshaping of the entire World for centuries to come, it is that momentous of a moment.

On the side of the Society of Cincinnati are those forces that have, literally, turned on the “money spigot” to force the Federal Reserve into total outright bankruptcy by enlarging the United States debt to stratospheric proportions beyond any hope of it being paid. On the other side are the royal European banking interests who, along with their Vatican allies, are plunging the European Union into the largest monetary contraction known to history by cutting their Nation’s budgets to the “bare bone” in order to have the reserves to prop up what’s left of America when it eventually defaults.

sopsback said...

chit!

i pasted it 8 mints too early!

maybe i can delt it and repose it iin 8 mints or 7 by now

sopsback said...

ATTENTION!! UPDATE!! U.S. AUTHORITIES SHUT DOWN WORDPRESS HOST WITH 73,000 BLOGS
Posted By: Seawitch
Date: Saturday, 24-Jul-2010 20:46:32
UPDATE////////Fw: U.S. Authorities Shut Down WordPress Host With 73,000 Blogs
After the U.S. Government took action against several sites connected to movie streaming recently, nerves are jangling over the possibility that this is just the beginning of a wider crackdown. Now it appears that a free blogging platform has been taken down by its hosting provider on orders from the U.S. authorities on grounds of “a history of abuse”. More than 73,000 blogs are out of action as a result.
LINK: http://torrentfreak.com/u-s-authorities-shut-down-wordpress-host-with-73000-blogs-100716/
WordPress is still running but here is what appears on some of the other sites.
" THIS DOMAIN NAME HAS BEEN SEIZED BY U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT, SPECIAL AGENT IN CHARGE NEW YORK OFFICE IN ACCORDANCE WITH A SEIZURE WARRANT OBTAINED BY THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK AND ISSUED PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 981 AND 2323 BY THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK."
"IT IS UNLAWFUL TO REPRODUCE OR DISTRIBUTE COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL, SUCH AS MOVIES, MUSIC, SOFTWARE OR GAMES, WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION. INDIVIDUALS WHO WILLFULLY REPRODUCE OR DISTRIBUTE COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL, WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION, RISK CRIMINAL PROSECUTION UNDER 18 U.S.C. (2319). FIRST-TIME OFFENDERS CONVICTED OF CRIMINAL FELONY COPYRIGHT LAWS WILL FACE UP TO FIVE YEARS IN FEDERAL PRISON, RESTITUTION, FORTEITURE AND A FINE."

sopsback said...

http://www.henrymakow.com/oil_spill_as_cover_for_
foreclo.html

sopsback said...

ah, so said...


it is also the date the Federal Reserve’s 99-year old charter to control the American economy ends.




so dat wha 2012 relly all abut???


ok, now can i get my freekin' afta diner settle mints now???

then i can have my cut of cough fee.

near the end said...

sop'children have died.

sopsback said...

when yo near da end, yo gonna die too!

sopsback said...

sop'children have lived.

sopsback said...

jus' put up noo pix of bruly baal and his 'aleen' dawg..with the 2 headlites, i meen eyes.



on his dawg page.


http://www.detailshere.com/dog.htm

near the end said...

Sop's kids are dead.

near the end said...

Sop you should have spent more time with them.

near the end said...

sop there dead

near the end said...

there dead sop gone.

near the end said...

sop your kids are dead.

near the end said...

gone.

near the end said...

gone sop.

near the end said...

It's over there dead.

sopsback said...

in the end times, the bable say:


"...there will come a time when they will say, 'blessed are those who are barren (w/o kids).."


go look it up.


well, guess what?


were in the 'end times'


i feel bad for all those with kids whose future is not so bright as we head to 2012


a rapture is the only hope they will have.

if theres no rapture, theres no future for them.

nuff said.

near the end said...

sop your kids are dead.

near the end said...

sop your kids are dead.

near the end said...

sop there dead.

near the end said...

sop there dead

near the end said...

sop there goneeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

曾法幸 said...

Judge not a book by its cover.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

sopsback said...

ah, so...

mogel007 said...

SOP said: if theres no rapture, theres no future for them.
_________________________________

There is a "rapture", but not in the terms that most Christians think of it. Most Christians think of the rapture as some escape from the wicked. This event is not an escape. Those that are changed in the "twinkling of an eye" & meet Christ up in the clouds are resurrected at that time instantaneously. They can no longer die but are immortal at the time of the "rapture". The "rapture" will usher in the 1,000 years of peace on this earth & the beginning of the 1st resurrection talked about in the scriptures. Those resurrected during the 1000 years after Christ's coming in the clouds will also be "changed in the twinkling of an eye". There will be no death where bodies are buried in the ground, since as soon as you die, you become immortal during the millenium, the 1,000 years of peace.

This is the time that all the prophets in the past have looked forward to as a pivotal point in the history of the earth. All the wicked will be destroyed at Christ's coming in the clouds by the resurrected destroying angels and fires that descend upon the earth in God's day of judgment. The rapture won't happen until Christ comes back in the clouds for all the world to see & only after many years of difficult times. All hell will break lose before Jesus comes back. It's Satan's last stand to influence the earth in a significant way for a 1000 years. Christians will go through hard times before Jesus comes back. It's naive to think they won't. The "rapture" is after the times of the tribulations, so all Christians will go through hard times, even the righteous. It's never been God's plan to take them away from trials. You spiritually grow through trials. To say there is no future is silly. The meek & righteous will inherit the earth. To make such a statement shows no faith. With all ends, there is always a new beginning. The earth will come to an end as we know it, but a new earth will be transformed or changed & this earth will be a better place. The future is bright, but we were never promised a rose garden as the song goes. There's no evidence the rapture saves people from the 7 years of tribulations & the horrors of it, but most Christians have their history of events in the wrong order.

There is so little written in the scriptures on this subject. It is amazing to me to see how perverted this subject has gotten by the latter day churches. Explanations of how "the rapture" works and it's timing by the many Churches have no scriptual basis as some escape from difficult times. It's the doctrine of men, not of God. Most churches got things backwards anyway. Those that are left on the earth are the righteous ones. Those that are "taken" are those that are destroyed. LOL

Don't you think if most Christians were right about the rapture being a spritual escape, that there certainly would be more scriptures written on this subject to back up their worldly views & doctrines? There just isn't. So why is that? If it's such an important doctrine, why is so little written on this subject? Can't answer that, can you?

near the end said...

Sop you don't hold a candle to Mogel as far as knowledge goes. Quit posting you are embaressing yourself.

sopsback said...

did they slop the iol yet??


let me no?

near the end said...

Yes the oil has been stopped. You were wrong again on your prediction another embaressing moment for you.

sopsback said...

Yes the oil has been stopped.


where yo here dat?

CNN.


oh, it muss be troo then?

LOL!!

許惠吟許惠吟 said...

It is easier to get than to keep it.......................................................................

near the end said...

Nope cnn lies. My brother works on that oil rig well he use to. They have stopped it; sorry your disapointed by the news.

sopsback said...

ya, they slap the oil all right.

i lisnin to the rense show right now and theys ppls on there ho saying that the iol is NOT slooped adn you will see that this is the truth.

the seabed flo is also leeking iol too.

but lok at the good noose.

when yo want to have sum fresh fish to cook, yo dun need to put any oil on it, just take it rigth from the line and trow it on the gill.

it cum up a nice brown coola, nice and tasty fo yo.

near the end said...

That show is wrong.

sopsback said...

if yo bleef dat the iol is stop, then i got sum oceanfront land in da desert yo can by.

and the ocean there is free from oil. yo can eat the fish taht cum from it too.


btw- michigan getting sum oil themselfs too.

sopsback said...

yo nut to brite, but even yo can figur this none out.


in the begging, the gov't say that the pressure was cum out @ 70K-100K PIS

now all of a sudden they put a crok in it and it stop.

really?


so what it like if yo take a bottle of champeen an shak it up an then yo put a crok in it an stop it frum cum out?


it that easy eh?


so what hoppen to the 100,000 pis of oil that yose to cum out befo?

waht?

it just go back into the gournd where it cum frum??


LOLOLOL!!!!!!!!!!!!



so da queston is:


were they lying then, o are they lying now???

yo aint capping any liquid with a pressure of 100,000 psi

waht yo crzy?


which is it?


probly both.

sopsback said...

face it.


like yo siad.


it all ova.

yo kids haf no f u sure!


it all ova even beefo 2012 cum.

LOL!!!

sopsback said...

yo mite ass well spend yo kids/g-kids collage funds dat yo safe fo dem.


they wont nedd it.


they neva gonna see collage.

it ova my frend.


get yo's to it.

sopsback said...

it ova.

just like dis bog wil be ova soon when they shunt it down with all the other blaaaaaaaaggggghss.

mogel007 said...

The microbes eat the oil anyway. Mother nature fixes the problem regardless if the oil is stopped or not. Most of the oil is dispersed & gone now, so obviously they capped something or Mother nature is doing her job. So what if the earth's floor is still leaking somewhat? It does that anyway through volcanoes, does it not? You can't get rid of all the volcanoes in the world can you? They've been around since the beginning of time, have they not? Some of those volcanoes in Yellowstone if they erupted on a full scale basis, that would make the Gulf oil leak look like a small rain storm. One of those volcanoes erupting could easily end the world much faster. Maybe you should worry about that too, or maybe a meteor hitting the earth thus destroying all mankind first before any oil spill can. Or maybe you should lose sleep over a nuclear weapon being exploded on this country thus wiping it off the map?? Or maybe some deadly toxin or virus being dispersed in the air through special planes thus killing off most people. That would probably be a faster depopulation plan. I can give you some more choices to worry about if you are interested? Have I uplifted you yet? I know you love to hear about all this stuff & believe the worst!!!!

When Mt. St. Helena erupted, was that the end of the world? Either way, it's kind of premature to call the end of the world & no more education for our children, wouldn't you agree?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ynews_excl/ynews_excl_sc3270

Come on admit SOP, "you were partying like it was 1999," back in the day, because in the year 2000, you also believed that Y2K was going to cause the end of the world and that scared you too. Hey your friend, Reverand Harold Camping, is counting on the end of the world in the Spring of 2011He's even got you beat for being the greatest pessimist there is and believing a lie. He's convinced the Bible says so & knows the exact day the world is coming to an end. LOL He was wrong when he predicted the end of the world many years before, but I suppose his congregation forgave him for being an idiot, but this time "HE'S SURE." I wonder how forgiving his congregation is going to be when that date passes?

Christians have been predicting the end of the world since the days of Christ. Even in Jesus's day, he told them that day would not come until certain events happened. Even in Jesus's day, many Christians were convinced of the end of the world coming very soon, so they were neglecting their crops and really were stopping to really live. When you have the attitude, "nothing matters anymore" because the end of the world is coming, than you are already dead. It's really difficult to reason with a dead person and someone who has lost all hope. When you have no hope, you are in the gall of bitterness and in the bonds of iniquity and are encompassed by the "chains of hell". The sad thing is that you don't see that or even realize that. The Devil is very subtle. The Devil has more power over you than you are willing to admit. Does the Devil inspire any hope? Do you inspire hope and faith through many of your posts of doom & gloom? Are you even receptive to solutions or possible solutions, or are you convinced that we don't have the technology to cap an oil leak?

mogel007 said...

Yea, & there still is oil in the ocean from the spill of the Exon Valdees many years ago up near Alaska. So what? It's not all going to go away completely. So what if there is oil in Lake Michigan? Should we be calling for an evacuation of Michigan now too, along with the State of Florida? LOL

So what if much of seafood is poisoned now? The cow meat you eat is also poisoned by the way they grow the meat & process it, even without an oil spill, what is your point? Are you going to stop eating steaks now too? Hey, look on the bright side, maybe you'll get sued, just like Oprah Winfrey got sued from the Texas Cattleman Association for voicing her opinion on meat. Maybe the Gulf Fisherman will sue you for your views on the oil spill, and the quality of fish and you'll be forced to appear in court to defend your good name? Oh that's right, you aren't rich & famous, and suing you is a waste of time because what would it profit? I almost forgot your high yielding programs still haven't paid out yet. Don't you know you can't get rich by playing ponzi schemes?

mogel007 said...

SOP said: just like dis bog wil be ova soon when they shunt it down with all the other blaaaaaaaaggggghss
________________________________

If a blog is enfringing upon copyrights, than they should be shut down.

The key word being "soon". LOL

Yea, & cell phones will become obscelete too. It will be illegal soon to use a cell phone & cell phone technology will soon becoming to a screeching halt soon. Soon all communications will cease and no one will be able to share information at all. You'll soon have to pay to express yourself in any medium of communication.

Soon SOP will have nothing to say, because he won't be able to afford to say anything to pay the piper.

The American people would never put up with such censorship. Give me a break!!!!

sopsback said...

"I almost forgot your high yielding programs still haven't paid out yet.






that not my falt. blam bruly baal, it his falt they not payed out yet.



be carful to blam him tho. else he will sic his aleen dawg on yo!!!!

sopsback said...

i gonna get one of dose aleen dawgs with the i's dat lit up.


but furs i nedd to no what size bat trees go in to it??

is AA, or A or C or D

and ho many i nedd?


http://www.detailshere.com/dog.htm