Wikipedia Sarch Link

Search results

Thursday, December 27, 2012

NO BASIS FOR INVOLVEMENT IN PRIVATE MATTERS AS GUARNTEED BY THE CONSTITUTION

This follow-up to my comment # 1 from 12/27/2012 on the COMMENTS 2 Page documents my basis for my position indicating why my former Employer’s should in no way be involved in my plans made as a private individual because even the Constitution limits the powers of the States in Article 10 to form “agreements or compacts with another state…or engage in war”. To restrict the rights of any individual by subtle financial imprisonment can be compared to a type of embargo enacted when making “war” with another and this is what is being meted out to me, which is unconstitutional since the State is complicit in this action otherwise my State Income Tax Refund check would not have been stolen, blatantly (see NOTICE OF STOLEN CHECK).
Just as my position was clearly documented in the communication outlining my basis for declining from taking part in the Company incentive pay award program (see below photos documenting my position), it is only fitting that my former Employer

 
"Maintaned" should be "MAINTAINED" 
 
respectfully carry out the only ethical course of action possible here, namely, reciprocating by non involvement on the part of this entity regarding my personal affairs. This employer has no basis for involvement and should refrain from using any second or third party targeting in association with its “allies” to effect such involvement.

No comments: