Well, here it is folks. Another angle, another injured Party "travelling upon the land" and minding their own business, until someone in "government" pissed them off!

Watch the Video

Comments?

Views: 802

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Mort, with all due respect, if one was to forget about the stupid oaths theory, one would have to dismiss contract law.  The reading of millions upon millions of codes, statutes, edicts, rules, etc. are all futile due to word twisting, wordsmithing, and word definition bastardization, etc. regarding true and natural law.  If one was truly proficient in maxims of law and contract law, that's all that would be needed to lawfully put these tyrants in their box where they belong.

You should notice that both Gene and Phil included an acceptance of these foreign agent's oath or contract, as it would be properly described by included this in their initial petition to the defendants of their purported three branches of government there in WV. Accepting that oath as they did bound them lawfully under contract law.  In short, it's all about maxims and contract law.  The founders left us with Malum Prohibitum common law jurisdiction which basically put the people into a statutory jurisdiction.  They should have put us into Malum In Se or Anglo Saxon common law jurisdiction but the Crown agents and Illuminati of the day would have no part of such; due to the control factor.

I know exactly what you're saying Leonard,

But I have studied this set of "laws" you refer to. None of them operate without standing. You deny yourself standing to bring charges, at least in "their" courts if you Expatriate. I try to look at the Rule of Necessity the same way a Caveman would. He would say,

"screw you and your fancy words. I read your fancy writing. I may be a stupid Caveman, but I know when I'm being threatened; Save your fancy words for Saint Peter. Maybe he will listen much better than I. Then you die and I don't."

Caveman. No excuses, no fancy paperwork. You did the paperwork already. Nice job! Kudos. But once that is done, and "they" leave us no other alternative, it's time to go Caveman on these Sons of you know whats.

I am a firm believer if you are going to have a REAL REPUBLIC government you DEFINETLY need an oath and bond that is SWORN to your God of LAW other than your own self.

If you don't have law by a God of righteousness then you will use your own law and that will always result in adjudicating yourself.. that is what making an idol is.

This my friends is an absolute SHALL to have an oath signed and filed to the people they serve.

If there is no oath there is no government. we are all free willy's to do whatever we please. 

I base this off the Bible.....

exact point > reference Obama never gave an oath to the Constitution the 2nd time he was elected. For the first time in American history  his pledge was never heard by the American people.

layers upon layers of deceit We elected a muslim his second term has shewn us the truth of that.

Now the Question> as Leonard posed what do we do?  my point my answer  is take back your towns cities and law enforcement while elections still count. Soon that window will terminate also on this present course. The Caliphate strengthens and the Kafir grow weaker the Christian is less than a whore in the Koran and the Jew will be slaughtered.

Muslims must rule the world and the Cabal of Rothschild which is ashkinazi not jewish lack the understanding of what they are doing. These truly are perilous times.

Quis,  

I understand what you are suggesting regarding taking back towns and local law enforcement, etc, however, these now franchised corporate local entities were created by the state's corporate legislators and the only true way to conquer this would be the same process in which any non-government corporation is taken to task in the current purported court system.

Take the proper, lawful actions to the principals of said corporation.  Yes, the principals of all of the state's purported government are the (3) three branches which include the Executive, the Legislative, and Judicial.

IMHO,  and in my circles they agree, one could go after their local government only to realize that the state's legislature will most likely just create another franchise off such corporate principal known as the three (3) branches. Make sense?

Understand that realization must start at the City and County level so that they who tend to be of the above normal can be led into the correct path.

Let me tell you a story of our Sheriff who was under the impression that federal police had as much power as he had, until he studied the Idaho Constitution and cases involving his station. He now knows that the Forest Service cop has less [fewer], credentials than an ordinary person of standing.

I had a Forest Service  officer put his hand on his weapon as he was trying to impress me with this standing. I turned to the Sheriffs deputy and told him to arrest the person and the deputy paused until I told him that the 2nd amendment in Idaho was for people of that State. The legislature controlled the nature of the weapons under I think, section 11. I'll have to look it up. He is a servant of the people under his badge.

You see, because of some game officers and an Idaho trapper who killed 2 fish in the 80's, these agencies were given rights to weapons independent of the people.

I told the deputy that because he has placed his hand on his pistol, that is an act of aggression. I guess I have this way of voice but the deputy said to him "take your hand off the weapon or I will construe that as an act of aggression."

A chicken-necked liberal minded narcissist, when confronted, melts very easily. He apologized and went to the vehicle and removed his pistol whereupon, I put my S&W 10 mm into my holster and went back to the meeting by the tree.

Point here is Leonard, we must be strong in our resolve to make any headway.

In order to have a true republican form of gov, there must be a 3 branch form of gov.  Today we only have 2 branches.  The judicial branches on both a state and fed level were all closed between the late 1940's and early 1950's.

In the current legislative branch courts, the people are seen as mere subjects with few rights.

It is the belief of some who study true natural law that the judicial branch of government should not be included into government leaving only the executive and legislative branch. The judicial branch should be totally separate and totally run by a jural society of the people.  This means a court of record jury of your peers upon the filing of a lawful complaint is heard with both sides presenting their evidence within 30 days. No grand jury indictments or presentments and no judges hearing the case and this jury provides the verdict and sentencing in all cases and all verdicts to convict must be unanimous. One vote for acquittal means a not guilty verdict. Sentencing to make whole is also deliberated and the lowest decision for making whole stands. Example: 4 jurors vote for $50K, 5 jurors vote for $38K, and 3 juror's vote for $35K. $35K is the ruling.  

Judicial branch courts were the ones that recognized the people as sovereigns with lots of rights [ common law rights and protections ] and recognized juries as having the right to judge both the law and the facts as stated in the state constitutions.

Legislative branch courts, which we have now, see the gov as sovereign and the people as subjects with few 'very' rights. Juries only have the right to apply the law as the judge gives it to them and not power to rule on behalf of the defendant if the law is bad or badly applied.

Not really Bill. We have but One branch since the unlawful ratification of the 17th Amendment. Now they are ALL politicians.

That did not change the fact that we still have the executive and legislative branches on both a state and fed level.

Rosanna,

You kinda missed the point. The point I was making was not about Public Servants taking an Oath, I was simply trying to make the point that the time for ALL words is just about over.

Oaths are only worth the integrity of the person taking them. Integrity is what I was talking about. The integrity to stand behind that "oath". Personal space and the violation of that space being at its end is what I was talking about.

No more will a simple "promise" be enough, from anyone, public servant or civilian "Oath Keeper". We are at a point where no one can be trusted to even know what the heck is up, much less be worthy of trust upon their word alone. I'm tired of words. I want action. That's what I was talking about.

Or as Mike puts it,

"Paper and words cannot protect, only people can. Paper and words are so all the players can have an agreement on the rules of engagement."

RSS

© 2019   Created by Online Professor.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service