[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Dead Constitution See other Dead Constitution Articles Title: More Blonde Jokes II More Blonde Jokes Now that I have your attention, I would like to take this opportunity to explain a couple of things. However, so that the one-legged-man and Jethro can not say that I sailed a ship under a false flag; Blonde in a Car A blonde walked into a gas station and said to the manager, ''I locked my keys in my car. Do you have a coat hanger or something I can stick through the window to unlock the door?'' ''Why sure,'' said the manager, ''we have something that works especially well for that.'' A couple minutes later, the manager walked outside to see how the blonde was doing and he heard another voice. ''No, no! A little to the left,'' said the other blonde inside the car. Well, maybe one more; A Child's Prayer One night, a father passed by his son's room and heard his son praying: "God bless Mommy, Daddy, and Grandma. Ta ta, Grandpa." The father didn't quite know what this meant, but was glad his son was praying. The next morning, they found Grandpa dead on the floor of a heart attack. The father reassured himself that it was just a coincidence, but was still a bit spooked. The next night, he heard his son praying again: "God bless Mommy and Daddy. Ta ta, Grandma." The father was worried, but decided to wait until morning. Sure enough, the next morning Grandma was on the floor, dead of a heart attack. Really scared now, the father decided to wait outside his son's door the next night. And sure enough, the boy started to pray: "God bless Mommy. Ta ta, Daddy." Now the father was crapping his pants. He stayed up all night, and went to the doctor's early the next day to make sure his health was fine. When he finally came home, his wife was waiting on the porch. She said, "Thank God you're here -- we could really use your help! We found the milkman dead on our porch this morning!" (No, it was not a blond joke, but it wasn´t bad!) Now that we have that out of our systems, please, permit me to explain a couple of puzzling things. When someone in the government, or an attorney, or someone asking questions concerning credit, asks you where do you live, it goes something like this; Where are you a resident, or, at what location are you resident. Why is it that they do not just plain and simple ask you where you live? What is so complicated about that?! Actually, there is nothing complicated about it. The problem is that you are working and living in the real world, and the government, the attorney, and the credit exists in a legal world, and you were being asked a legal question for purposes of establishing jurisdiction. Simple enough, isn´t it? Yes, I know, no one bothered to explain this to you when they were asking the questions, but that does not mitigate the effect of how you answer the questions. Please permit me to explain what happens when you admit to being a resident. For the purposes of this explanation, let´s use Florida. Everyone wants to talk about Florida, so, let us use it! If you are a resident of Florida, you do not live in Florida state, Florida state would be one of the several states which are a party to the Constitution of the United States. Instead, because you are a resident of Florida, you live in the State of Florida, which is a Federal District State, incorporated under the laws of the District of Columbia, NOT a party to the Constitution of the United States, and a creation of Congress, thus subject to the EXCLUSIVE Jurisdiction of Congress. And since you are a resident of the State of Florida, you are a United States citizen and also are subject to the Exclusive Jurisdiction of Congress. (For understanding of the term resident, see the 14th Amendment. More on this in the Post, Who Controls the United States, Part 3.) Well, yeah, I suppose so, but what does that mean, and how did I get here? I am glad that you asked, for that is the rest of the story, so bear with me for just a few moments and I will explain. In addition, since we do not want to make this any longer of a post than is absolutely necessary, I will point you to other posts where you can learn more details. I suppose that we should start with Republic and Democracy. Now, constantly, you are being told that you live in the greatest Democracy that has ever existed on the face of the earth, correct? Of course you are, and if a politician is not telling you that, it is being broadcast in the news. BUT, did you ever say the Pledge of Allegiance to a Democracy? Or, did you say the Pledge of Allegiance to…. The Republic for which it stands? What in the world is going on here? How can there be two things…. A Democracy and/or a Republic? It is not and/or; it is specifically two separate things; http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Taxes/ChallJurisdiction/FedSubjMtrJurisdiction.htm As we explain throughout this website, our national government of the United States legislates for two distinct territorial jurisdictions. The Federal Zone, which includes the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, Virgin Islands. This jurisdiction is also referred to as the "territorial jurisdiction" or the areas over which the sovereignty of the government of the united States extends. (My note; please pay close attention to the small u in united. That means that the word united is not a noun; it is an adjective. That is a very important difference, and for reference, see the Declaration of Independence.) The sovereign 50 states of the Union of states. These states are foreign governments with respect to the United States. They are also referred to as "foreign countries" in 28 U.S.C. §297 and 26 CFR §1.911-2(h) and "foreign states" in 28 U.S.C. §1603. Terms clarifying these concepts appear below: Foreign government: "The government of the United States of America as distinguished from the government of the several states." [Black's Law Dictionary, 5th Edition] Foreign laws: "The laws of a foreign country or sister state." [Black's Law Dictionary, 6th Edition] Foreign States: "Nations outside of the United States...Term may also refer to another state; i.e. a sister state. The term "foreign nations', ...should be construed to mean all nations and states other than that in which the action is brought; and hence, one state of the Union is foreign to another, in that sense." [Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition] Unless expressly provided otherwise in the law itself, all laws passed by the U.S. Congress shall conclusively be presumed to apply only within the former, or first of the two jurisdictions, called the federal zone, above. "A canon of construction which teaches that of Congress, unless a contrary intent appears, is meant to apply only within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States." U.S. v. Spelar, 338 U.S. 217 at 222 (1949); in other words, only within the Federal Zone. (When you see a term that says ´within the United States, now you know that it is a LEGAL term and you know what it means.´) I think that you should read the above several times and digest just what it means, that there are TWO national governments. TWO, not one, and if you do not know where you are, IN A LEGAL SENSE, you may be very confused with what you see happening around, and to, you. This type of legislation by Congress is also known as "municipal" law, because Congress is the municipal authority inside the federal zone. But, are we correct in what we think we know now? Perhaps we should listen to a Supreme Court Justice and see what he thinks. After all, he probably has a better idea as to what is going on that we do! The idea prevails with some -- indeed, it found expression in arguments at the bar -- that we have in this country substantially or practically two national governments; one, to be maintained under the Constitution, with all its restrictions; the other to be maintained by Congress outside and independently of that instrument, by exercising such powers as other nations of the earth are accustomed to exercise. [Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244 (1901)] [emphasis added] To appreciate how alarmed Justice Harlan had become as a result of this new "theory", consider the following from his dissent: I take leave to say that if the principles thus announced should ever receive the sanction of a majority of this court, a radical and mischievous change in our system of government will be the result. We will, in that event, pass from the era of constitutional liberty guarded and protected by a written constitution into an era of legislative absolutism. ... It will be an evil day for American liberty if the theory of a government outside of the supreme law of the land finds lodgment in our constitutional jurisprudence. No higher duty rests upon this court than to exert its full authority to prevent all violation of the principles of the Constitution. [Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244 (1901)] But, even this does not fully explain what is going on. I think that we can now say that, yes, for what it is worth, there is a Democracy AND a Republic, but what does that mean and what does it have to do with the State of Florida? Why is that a Federal District State? That is a pretty good question, and to answer it, perhaps we should look at something else that really confuses a lot of people, and that is Executive Orders. First, you can go here; http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/executive-orders/disposition.html Executive Orders Disposition Tables Index The Disposition Tables list the status of Executive Orders from: January 8, 1937 - August 29, 2006 Executive orders are official documents, numbered consecutively, through which the President of the United States manages the operations of the Federal Government. (Note; you could spend a LOT of time here because there are a LOT of Executive Orders!) That is pretty clear, but is it all of the story? No, not really, because we seldom find anything resembling the truth when we deal with the government, and we all understand that. In Black´s Law Dictionary, we are told that Executive Orders must be published in the Federal Register for thirty days to have the effect of law, and must be justified by the Constitution, some treaty or laws passed by Congress. Of course, as we have already learned, if the President writes something for the Federal Zone, the Constitution does not apply, so things are pretty much wide open. And if the President writes an Executive Order, and Congress does not like it, what happens? Congress could over-ride the Executive Order, with a super-majority vote, but this has never happened, and, I suspect, never will, so in essence, the President of the United States writes law just as any potentate would in the old world! What do you think of the so-called Founding Fathers of the United States? And does what you think of them have anything to do with what you were taught in the Public schools… controlled by the government? Of course it does! I would like to recommend that you read a post titled The Public School Nightmare. It is listed under Editorials. Here is a brief excerpt; … Now think about Sweden, a beautiful, healthy, prosperous and up-to-date country with a spectacular reputation for quality in everything it produces. It makes sense to think their schools must have something to do with that. Then what do you make of the fact that you can't go to school in Sweden until you are 7 years old? The reason the unsentimental Swedes have wiped out what would be first and seconds grades here is that they don't want to pay the large social bill that quickly comes due when boys and girls are ripped away from their best teachers at home too early. It just isn't worth the price, say the Swedes, to provide jobs for teachers and therapists if the result is sick, incomplete kids who can't be put back together again very easily. The entire Swedish school sequence isn't 12 years, either--it's nine. Less schooling, not more. The direct savings of such a step in the US would be $75-100 billion, a lot of unforeclosed home mortgages, a lot of time freed up with which to seek an education. … … So the world got compulsion schooling at the end of a state bayonet for the first time in human history; modern forced schooling started in Prussia in 1819 with a clear vision of what centralized schools could deliver: Obedient soldiers to the army; Obedient workers to the mines; Well subordinated civil servants to government; Well subordinated clerks to industry. Citizens who thought alike about major issues. Schools should create an artificial national consensus on matters that had been worked out in advance by leading German families and the head of institutions. Schools should create unity among all the German states, eventually unifying them into Greater Prussia. … Then I want you to consider this, and ask yourself why something like the following has never made it into the public school system. … When did the first Executive Order get written, and by whom, and for what reason? On the internet, at 'http://civil-liberties.com', is a very interesting on-line book titled The United States is Still a Subject of Great Britain. Recently new to this on-line book is a summary section in which I found the following information: "In reading the Messages and Papers of the Presidents, vol. I, 1789-1897, I discovered the following: Gentlemen of the Senate: Pursuant to the powers vested in me by the act entitled "An act repealing after the last day of June next the duties heretofore laid upon distilled spirits imported from abroad and laying others in their stead, and also upon spirits distilled within the United States, and for appropriating the same," I have thought fit to divide the United States into the following districts, namely: The district of New Hampshire, to consist of the State of New Hampshire; the district of Massachusetts, to consist of the State of Massachusetts; the district of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, to consist of the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations; the district of Connecticut, to consist of the State of Connecticut; the district of Vermont, to consist of the State of Vermont; the district of New York, to consist of the State of New York; the district of New Jersey, to consist of the State of New Jersey; the district of Pennsylvania, to consist of the State of Pennsylvania; the district of Delaware, to consist of the State of Delaware; the district of Maryland, to consist of the State of Maryland; the district of Virginia, to consist of the State of Virginia; the district of North Carolina, to consist of the State of North Carolina; the district of South Carolina, to consist of the State of South Carolina; and the district of Georgia, to consist of the State of Georgia." March 4, 1791 (page 99). In George Washington's Proclamation of March 30, 1791, he declares the district of Columbia to be created and its borders established, he says further: "And Congress by an amendatory act passed on the 3rd day of the present month of March have given further authority to the President of the United States..." This replaced the States in Union with the District States in Union formally known as the States of... . This was also necessary for the newly formed Bank of the United States, February 25, 1791, to do business in the State of..., but is actually the District State. Subjection of the States of... was complete, all that was necessary was for a permanent state of war to exist, such as we have had since the Civil War, to invoke statutory law over the enemy, requiring them to obey all license requirements, because enemies have no rights in an occupied territory. Washington declared, under the War Powers, acting as Commander-in-Chief, that the States of the Union were now overlaid by District States, … … The Constitution granted legislative authority to Congress only over a ten square mile District, making Congress the supreme authority, Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17, over the District. Washington extended this District without Constitutional authority. Washington put in place officers of the District to oversee the District States. As a result of the military rule imposed by Washington, District courts and Appeals courts were ordered to enforce collection and fines and imprisonment of anyone defying the laws of the United States. THESE DISTRICTS CREATED BY GEORGE WASHINGTON HAVE NEVER BEEN REMOVED. The Judicial Districts were created by the Judiciary Act of 1789, two years before Washington said Congress gave him additional powers, thereby HE created the District States, so the federal government could use the militias to crush the tax protesters in Pennsylvania, by Washington's order. Since the Judicial Districts already existed, why did they recreate them? Washington said he was dividing the United States into District States."... This means that we have finally arrived at where you, as a United States citizen, live, in a Federal District State, under the Exclusive Jurisdiction of Congress, and outside of the protections offered by the restrictions on government power by the Constitution. But wait, we have not finished the story because we have yet to explain WHY the Constitution does not apply to the Federal District States! United States v. Cornell 25 Fed. Cas. 646, no. 14,867 C.C.D.R.I. 1819 … It is under the like terms in the same clause of the constitution that exclusive jurisdiction is now exercised by congress in the District of Columbia … In Downes v. Bidwell, 1901, the Supreme Court ruled that "exclusive" meant exactly that; EXCLUSIVE jurisdiction, with no control from the Constitution. (In Downes v. Bidwell, the Court ruled that "exclusive" meant "without consideration of the Constitutional restraints...") Because the Constitution was specifically written to permit Congress to have Exclusive Jurisdiction over the Federal Zone, and it is obvious, with the actions of George Washington in creating the Federal District States and thus extending the Federal Zone over the top of the several states of the Union that the so-called Founding Fathers knew exactly what they were doing. How do we know this? There is a saying that there are no accidents in politics. That makes sense when you think about it, because if what was done was in error, it was corrected. This situation with Exclusive Jurisdiction was not an error, because it has been in place and causing havoc in America since 1791; that is 215 years! I would judge that, indeed, it was no accident. And in judging the actions of the men named as Founding Fathers, it would be difficult to believe that they did what they did in ignorance, or without outside influence. Therefore, since the majority of them were Masons, I think we can judge that this played more than a small part in the affair, especially when you know that Benjamin Franklin, a Mason, printed a book about Constitutions sometime in the early part of the 18th century. This can be confirmed here; http://bessel.org/bkrevs.htm MLC - Masonic Leadership Center web page of Masonic Book Reviews (You will note above that this is a Masonic center; not a figment of my imagination, right?) The information on this web page was prepared by Paul M. Bessel, Executive Secretary of the Masonic Leadership Center. It is an attempt to compile the locations of all reviews of Masonic books, as well as links to reviews of Masonic books on the Internet, plus texts of Masonic books on the Internet. I will try to add to it regularly, to include current reviews of Masonic books and reviews from the past, too. If anyone wants to send me email, especially if any of the information on this chart is not correct or if you know of additional information that should be included, please send me email by clicking on my name: Paul M. Bessel The Constitutions of the Free-Masons (reprint of Anderson's book by Benjamin Franklin), Perhaps I have answered a very few of the many questions that you have had about where everything went wrong, and why is the Constitution not being enforced!? I assure you, no one is violating the Constitution; it is alive and well, and doing exactly what it was intended to do, and that is to establish a Masonic New World Order. There is, perhaps, one other point that should be made here. For decades, I have heard that it will only take one more election, if all of us just work together and elect the right man/woman/wombat to office! But how many catch on that no matter who you are voting for, they are all attorneys!? Roughly 95% of all governors, all legislators, the president, members of Congress, and etc. are attorneys. So, where is the change going to come from? No one I speak to likes attorneys; heck, most attorneys do not like other attorneys! They´ll generally tell you straight out that other attorneys lie to them, cheat on paperwork and filings, and deliberately mislabel or mis-send important documents, all in the interest of the client, of course. Hogwash! All attorneys are officers of the court, and there first responsibility is to the court. So, if all of them are officers of the court, how does that work with the so-called separation of powers? Keeping the legislative, executive and judicial branches of the government separate from each other. (Note; This is a lie. The Separation of Powers that was established by the Constitution was in the election to the House of Representatives directly by the people, and the appointment of the Senators by the legislatures of the several states.) And, is this the only place that all of those licensed attorneys are lying to us?: http://www.landrights.com/Atty-license-fraud.htm ATTORNEY LICENSE FRAUD ATTORNEY'S LICENSE??? AIN'T NO SUCH THING!!! I. AS PER THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT; A. The practice of Law CAN NOT be licensed by any state/State Schware v. Board of Examiners, 353 U.S. 238, 239 B. The practice of Law is AN OCCUPATION OF COMMON RIGHT! Sims v. Aherns, 271 S.W. 720 (1925) II. The "CERTIFICATE" from the State Supreme Court: 1. ONLY authorizes, A. To practice Law "IN COURTS" As a member of the STATE JUDICIAL BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT. And if you study the above carefully, you will note that attorneys are famous for lying because, well, that is what they do! Now, once you begin to understand these things, other things begin to make more sense to you. For instance, that yellow fringed flag that flies in each and every court room and law enforcement office of the United States; … The flags displayed in State courts and courts of the United States have gold or yellow fringes. That is your WARNING that you are entering into a foreign enclave … That foreign enclave is the Federal Zone, and it is under the jurisdiction of the President of the United States. That court is a courts martial court, and YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS OR YOU WOULD NOT BE IN THAT COURT! The problem, of course, is that you contracted into the court under Social Security, and gave up your rights for a pig-in-a-poke. When you look at the Gold Fringed Flag in a court room, note the eagle mounted on top; that is the symbol, by law, for the Commander-in-Chief, of the military forces of the United States. You should pay particular attention to EVERYWHERE that you see such flags, including on the TV. An interesting side note are the flags mounted outside which have a round ball on the top; those are RECRUITING stations, recruiting United States citizens. Actually, you should pay attention to any flags you see displayed, as flags are ALWAYS military. When a banner, which resembles a flag, is displayed, it is mounted on the wall; this is a LEGAL notification when it is so mounted on a wall in a court room that here is a court of the people, under peace. Please understand this; ALL courts now in use within the United States operated by the various private BAR associations MUST fly the gold fringed flag denoting that they are under the jurisdiction of the President of the United States. This means, among other things, that the court is bound by all Executive Orders, and that ALL attorneys practicing in that court are also bound by all Executive Orders. Bound by oath and by law. Now please tell me, how are you going to vote for any attorney and expect that something is going to change?! I think that this is enough for now. There is a LOT more information that I could put in here, but that is up to you because I have Posted most of this information in much more complete form in a number of posts, listed below. I assure you, if you will read the posts below, you will understand, as never before, what went wrong, and you will have a much better idea of what is necessary to fix the problem. After all, if you can not correctly identify the problem, you can hardly be expected to know how to fix it! If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. List of Posts pertaining to this information; Who Controls the United States (under the 9/11 thread) Who Controls the United States, Part 2 (also under the 9/11 thread) This one begins most of the information on the Constitution Who controls the United States, Part 3 (not posted) Who Controls the United States, Part 4 (not posted) Gold Fringed Flag (absolutely necessary to read!) The New Draft (understanding what is coming, and what came before) Republic versus Democracy Confederate States of America What Separation of Church and State The BAR (new post coming soon)
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 7.
#6. To: richard9151 (#0)
II. The "CERTIFICATE" from the State Supreme Court: 1. ONLY authorizes, A. To practice Law "IN COURTS" As a member of the STATE JUDICIAL BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT. It's funny, but we just covered this exact same info on a conference call the other night; same case cites and everything.
Not funny at all... just logical because it is the truth. The only problem is the ignorance of so many, that they are led by so few, to their destruction. Wait till you see The Bar post, which I am still tweaking. At the end of The Bar post is the beginning of The Solution. I think you will like it.
#9. To: richard9151 (#7)
If it involves hanging some of the creeps, I will like it alot. We need more rope! ;0)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||