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
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.
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" |
No comments:
Post a Comment