Did that conversation not sound
strange to you?
style="color: rgb(102, 0, 0); text-align: left;">1.) Passport Denied.
Of all the videos that Youtube has censored (upward to a hundred, even
those entirely created by myself and containing no industry protections of
"copyright" material), still what makes this video so amazing to me, is
simply that it is still online!
style="color: rgb(102, 0, 0); text-align: left;">2.) Denied a Home
Initially my 73 year old mother met with George Degenhart, the German
Township Codes Enforcer, and stated her son's intents (I'm her son), She
inquired as to what the requirements were for a home-based business. She
was told by the Codes Enforcement Officer that there were no requirements
and that her son (me) ought to do as him and his wife, put up a sign for a
period as specified allowable (45days), and that following the allowable
time-frame, take the sign down for a week, after which it would be able to
be re-erected for another allowable term and that he was not going to be
religiously checking on the sign anyway. He simply stated to keep the
home-based business low-key. Three days after I moved in, the sign went
up. Two days later we were being threatened for $100.00 per day forfeiture
and criminal proceedings!
Since I was being threatened against having the lawful sign and home-based
business, it was decided to succumb to the manipulation and take the sign
However, so that friends, family, and past customers can locate the
property (now that a sign was not being permitted), a mailbox was clad and
constructed to appear as a computer and checked at the USPS.com website
and the carrier as to it having been approved.
This mailbox was verified as lawful by the Federal United States Postal
Service, but the German Township Codes Compliance Officer made the request
that the mailbox (no reason given) should be removed.
Shortly after, two O.D.O.T. trucks under police escort were recorded in a
mailbox drive-by. There is another vehicle between the O.D.O.T. trucks and
the police officer's car. No comment on that vehicle, since a viewer's
claim cannot be verified.
Within a couple of weeks of having moved to the property in the German
Township of Springfield Ohio, the Codes Department stated there were
"numerous complaints" against me. Those "numerous" complaints melted down
to a solitary complaint, and then ended up being one very QUESTIONABLE
Since the data anyone would need to be able to verify the complaint as
authentic is completely redacted out with a marker, It is not known if the
arguably unlawful redacting was made by the German Township, or the Clark
Wouldn't anyone find that unnecesarily antagonistic? Imagine being told
that someone made a complaint against you but no person can be verified as
having done so. This in of itself should be a clear indication that the
"system" is not good. Taking it a step further, our Nation now indulges in
FISA Courts (where the defendant is not permitted legal representation,
nor is the defendant permitted to speak on his or her behalf). We should
be ashamed of ourselves as a nation to have let this caveman-style
dictatorial polity to baske in such myopia. The way to a faithful,
cheerful citizenry is not to oppress and rob them! And when the damage
begins, it's damn-hard to recoupe the minds and souls of the masses back
to prideful, trustworthy, faithful, production.
style="color: rgb(102, 0, 0); text-align: left;">5.) Initially, I
immediately made numerous requests for the copies of the "numerous"
complaints against me. All were either ignored, in violation of FOIA
(freedom of information act), FOIL (Freedom of information law), the
"Sunshine Law" (seriously), or whatever they're calling being open and
honest this year.
style="color: rgb(102, 0, 0); text-align: left;">However one time,
prior to finally sending the redacted questionable complaint, the D.A.
of Clark County in Springfield Ohio responded by sending incorrect Case
Law of an irrelevant use of restricting common information. In fact, the
case law the D.A. sent was more in bolstering my claim for information
as being allowable by law (the case law he sent to me showed
redacting/obfuscating was permissable only when an underage child was
style="color: rgb(102, 0, 0); text-align: left;">Unless an underage
child made the solitary (aka numerous) complaint(s) against me, then
it's lawful to be honest and open and I ought to be permitted to know
and address the accuser (Was the accuser a neighbor (no. I recorded
conversations with the neighbors on both sides of me and two houses to
the north). The Codes Department stated it was my neighbors that made
the complaints (which ended up being only one ... there seems to be the
making of a pattern offender here. Is the accuser real at all? If the
complaintant was underage, is it lawful for an underage person to file a
complaint? And if so, at what age do they become enforcable? Should a
six-year old be the impetus behind the Codes Department's enforcement?
Since none of my immediate neighbors have underage children in their
houses, how do we know this entire attack is not conjured up and
unwarranted by the same entity that told the apparent misinformation
claiming my neighbors at the root of the evil?
style="font-style: italic; color: rgb(51, 0, 0);">
style="color: rgb(102, 0, 0); text-align: left;">6.) What would we do
without cameras in a political crime-clime such as this?
Misc. Notes concerning the simple request
to address the allegation(s) against me:
In violation of the "Sunshine Law" a.k.a. Freedom of Information Act
(FOIA), a.k.a. Freedom of Information Law (FOIL), the repeated requests
for information consisting of the “complaints” being waged against me
had been arrogantly and antagonistically either ignored or responded
with nonsense codes and law from un-related other areas including
Initially those that receive money
from us via taxation, fees, fines, licenses, etc. had stated that the
numerous complaints against me were coming from my neighbors.
I took the initiative to record the
conversations with each of the neighbors within 300 yards of my
location. Apparently another official has fabricated a lie,
and as of a few months ago my petition can be found on the USGov Site to
join the signatures of tens of thousands of others that have also signed,
giving reasons that are valid, to repeal the immunity clause for
government officials regardless of whether or not they are proven to be
abusive of their privileges for personal gain or otherwise.
After much ado, whether authentic or not, only one solitary REDACTED
document was sent in response to my legal request. That solitary
complaint was illegally REDACTED and made of no avail. In other words,
they sent a paper with black marker through the information so that one
would not even be able to ascertain whether the "complaint" was real at
all. Is this what the workers are programmed to do? Violate our National
law without fear of criminal proceedings against themselves (immunity
clauses, once repealed, could cause a great many to pay dearly for their
thoughtless error in mindless chain of command mentality).
George Degenhart works for the German Township in Springfield Ohio as a
Codes Enforcer, he hasn't any legal right to threaten people
exploitation by means of threats, of causing harm through utilizing
criminal proceedings, monetary forfeitures, investigations, or other
intrusions via mail, telephone, etc.
George Degenhart is an Codes Enforcer and has limited functions.
To make matters worse, the very inspector is the one that is guilty of
the very things he's accused me of.
1.) He and his wife were/are running an illegitimate business
2.) The business is being operated out of their detached garage
a home-based business must be from within the living space itself and
cannot be a detached building, according to his own codes book
3.) The Degenhart's had/have a sign for their illegitimate business
right above the garage door
yet a sign permit could not be found.
definition: Often associated with organized crime, is the act of
offering of a dishonest service (a "racket") to solve a problem that
wouldn't otherwise exist without the enterprise offering the service.
Racketeering as defined by the RICO act includes a list of 35 crimes.
elaborate topic below
style="color: rgb(102, 0, 0); text-align: left;">Advised to change the
color of the lights (* inside
style="color: rgb(102, 0, 0); text-align: left;">
(no, it's not the mobsters, the mexicans, chinese, iraq, iran or
afghanistan, it's not the Russians, Japanese, Vietnamese, libya, It's not
Laos or Cuba .... and we dare not call it what it is: manipulation,
coercion, extortion, racketeering, profiteeering, etc. "Our" Government