August 16, 2018

Let the Subjects Keep The Idea That Their Freewill Is Associated With Your Corporate Government

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

One of the WLNs “Brains” showing its ignorance; These people are just as silly as any other citizen claiming they are sovereign, and have intellectual rights to the COTUS.. The COTUS is and can be comprehended, Patrick Henry did so he was there with various other anti federalists. Also, Lysander Spooner. John Taylor.. And no obviously this “brain” never touched a copy of the Law of Nations.. It is an legal impossibility for a citizen to be a sovereign. A sovereign builds corporate nations under the guidelines of the Law of Nations which the Founding Farters did. The citizens just looked for work. Those 322 million citizens are not party to the constitutional contract according to the Padelford Case in the U.S. Supreme Court. The framers intent is SIMPLE. It was for them “We The People” only and their “Posterity.”

Not the people that would end up being the subjects under this constituted authority.

The COTUS is the private intellectual property of the corporate entity these men established. Their Posterity meaning their bloodlines are managing that corporate entity. All 322 million citizens, the majority of which are completely clueless on the subject itself are all subjects. Slaves. Human resources property. It was simply in their best interests that the populace believed in the lie that it was for all of them.. As Edmond Burke advised in his speech.

“….Let the colonies always keep the idea of their civil rights associated with your government — they will cling and grapple to you, and no force under heaven will be of power to tear them from their allegiance. But let it be once understood that your government may be one thing and their privileges another, that these two things may exist without any mutual relation — the cement is gone, the cohesion is loosened, and everything hastens to decay and dissolution. As long as you have the wisdom to keep the sovereign authority of this country as the sanctuary of liberty, the sacred temple consecrated to our common faith, wherever the chosen race and sons of England worship freedom, they will turn their faces towards you. The more they multiply, the more friends you will have, the more ardently they love liberty, the more perfect will be their obedience. Slavery they can have they may have it from Spain, they may have it from Prussia. But until you become lost to all feeling of your true interest and your natural dignity, freedom they can have from none but you. This commodity of price, of which you have the monopoly. This is the true Act of Navigation, which binds to you the commerce of the colonies, and through them secures to you the wealth of the world. Deny them this participation of freedom, and you break that sole bond which originally made, and must still preserve, the unity of the empire. . . Let us get an American revenue as we have got an American empire. English privileges have made it all that it is; English privileges alone will make it all it can be.” Edmund Burke, speech on conciliation with America, pages 71-72, March 22, 1775.

 

“You do realize none of the US Constitution’s framers are available to explain to you what their “initial intent, purpose and duty” was, don’t you? Or have you found a way to go back in time? If so, do you think any two of them will agree on every particular?

Or do you think there’s some kind of objective reality underlying the words of the Constitution, that you can discern all by yourself? Why do you think you will succeed when, for more than two and a quarter centuries, all others have failed?

Who else do you suggest should “re-examine” the rulings of the Supreme Court of the US, if not you alone? Whose particular interpretation of the framer’s intent should we prefer, if not SCOTUS’s? Why not involve “the Citizenry”? Shouldn’t all 322-million-odd of us have an equal part, since every one of us has an equal stake in the outcome? Surely you don’t think “popular sovereignty” means “some are more sovereign than others”, do you?”—Mal Adapted

“Never mind, I yield to your vastly superior ignorance, with my fear for our country’s future vastly magnified. I’m ever more thankful I’m not a father!”—Mal Adapted

Also while he prattles on that no one really comprehends the COTUS he seems to think he does..

So Mal Adapted like HLB doesn’t know what he’s talking about either.. And there is 2500+ pages of legal references in the law libraries on this issue that prove it.

“We the People” pertains primarily to the signatories, a deal they all went in on together. The United States of America is a British plantation formerly referred to as the American Colonies. Their reason for doing this was to secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves (meaning them, the signatories) and our Posterity. (meaning their Posterity, their offspring) Posterity, all the descendants of a person in a direct line to the remotest gen POSTHUMOUS CHILD 920 POTENTIAL eration. [Breckinridge v. Denny, 8 Bush (Ky.) 027] When they use capitalization it changes the meaning of a word. Thatcapitonym, that Capital “P” in Posterity, it’s for emphasis. It’s a “direct line” to a proper noun, a direct descendant, because in the language procedure if I capitalize the first letter in the middle of a sentence like that, then I am not referring the general definition. I can’t be, which only leaves what remains, a Bloodline.This is all just family owned corporate business… And as Carlin stated, you ain’t in it.

The ultimate question here is where is your contract?

Catch 22s of the U.S. Constitution

When a society is beset by problems too big or too difficult to solve, that society tends to obsess over trivia, and this society is doing just that.

UN Charter: Chapter 1, Article 1
http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter1.shtml

“To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace”

UN Resolution A/RES/25/2625 1970
http://www.un-documents.net/a25r2625.htm

“By virtue of the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations, all peoples have the right freely to determine, without external interference, their political status and to pursue their economic, social and cultural development, and every State has the duty to respect this right in accordance with the provisions of the Charter.”

AND

“Every State has the duty to promote, through joint and separate action, realization of the principle of equal rights and self-determination of peoples, in accordance with the provisions of the Charter, and to render assistance to the United Nations in carrying out the responsibilities entrusted to it by the Charter regarding the implementation of the principle”

Oxford Public International Law States:
http://opil.ouplaw.com/view/10.1093/law:epil/9780199231690/law-9780199231690-e873

“The political origins of the modern concept of self-determination can be traced back to the Declaration of Independence of the United States of America of 4 July 1776, which proclaimed that governments derived ‘their just powers from the consent of the governed’ and that ‘whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it’.”

International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights: Article 1
https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/UNTS/Volume%20999/volume-999-I-14668-English.pdf

“All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.”

LAW OF NATIONS

“In this treatise it will appear, in what manner States, as such, ought to regulate all their actions. We shall examine the obligations of a people as well towards themselves as towards other nations; and by that means we shall discover the Rights which result from these obligations. For, the right being nothing more than the power of doing what is morally possible, that is to say, what is proper and consistent with duty  …

Book 1: Section 220

“We have observed above (§ 212), that they have a right to enter into the society of which their fathers were members. But every man is born free; and the son of a citizen, when come to the years of discretion, may examine whether it be convenient for him to join the society for which he was destined by his birth. If he does not find it advantageous to remain in it, he is at liberty to quit it,”

US Constitution on the LAW OF NATIONS – Article 1, Section 8

“To define and punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas, and Offences against the Law of Nations”

International Convention concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land and the LAW OF NATIONS (The Hague, 18 October 1907)
http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hague04.asp

Until a more complete code of the laws of war can be drawn up, the High Contracting Parties deem it expedient to declare that, in cases not covered by the rules adopted by them, the inhabitants and the belligerents remain under the protection and governance of the principles of the law of nations, derived from the usages established among civilized peoples, from the laws of humanity, and from the dictates of the public conscience.

The Nation-State and Global Order: A Historical introduction to Contemporary Politics on the Law of Nations – Page 22 (This is very old)

“Parallel to Roman civil law was another system of law based on the practical principles used by the governors of towns and justices when they tried specific cases in the law tribunals. This law was more sensitive to regional differences and the needs and customs of the people living in specific areas. Eventually, this customary law became known as the jus gentium or “law of the nations….the jus gentium gained the idea of the normative law of nature, which embodied universal moral laws that could be perceived through reason.”


After running his website “Matrix Solutions” or therightofselfdetermination.com (now closed for membership), without redaction of any of the material facts presented…Matrix Solutions has archived ALL the material onto 22 DVD’s called the “Deprogramming Series”. As it was stated in the first introduction video: we must first DEPROGRAM before we can REPROGRAM. Matrix Solutions found it NECESSARY to have a hard copy for those who are serious about learning the truth of their self “enslavement”. Those that want to be free and those who have the ability to be free….have a moral duty to do so! Universally, there is no other way.

As Theodore Roosevelt stated at the Jamestown Exposition in 1907:

“It behooves us to remember that men can never escape being governed. Either they must govern themselves or they must submit to being governed by others. If from lawlessness or fickleness, from folly or self-indulgence, they refuse to govern themselves, then most assuredly in the end they will have to be governed from the outside. They can prevent the need of government from without only by showing that they possess the power of government from within. A sovereign cannot make excuses for his failures; a sovereign must accept the responsibility for the exercise of the power that inheres in him; and where, as is true in our Republic, the people are sovereign, then the people must show a sober understanding and a sane and steadfast purpose if they are to preserve that orderly liberty upon which as a foundation every republic must rest.”

Read the simply presented information titled, ‘OF FICTIONS (The world of the imagination)’, approximately 1/2 way down the link given as –

OWNERSHIP OF LAW
https://thereisnodebt.wordpress.com/2015/04/25/ownership-of-law/

You can not use the Constitution to defend yourself because you are not a party to it. (Padelford Fay & Co. v. The Mayor and Alderman of The City of Savannah 14 Georgia 438, 520)

Share