Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

We the people are Sovereign! You the citizens are not.

page: 2
10
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 08:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by K67114
I'm absolutly shocked people don't know about this kind of life. And prefer being enslaved. What the American people are livin right now is NOT what the founding fathers wanted for us. I recently found out about Sovereignity and want to know as much as possible. I'd love to be free from the contract I was born into. The more I think about it the more it erks me that not many people stand up and do something... or maybe, liek me.. they dont know where to start?


I too am shocked, calling the Common Law illegal, for one thing. I have successfully these arguments to beat speeding tickets, parking tickets, and one lawsuit. I have seen a prosecuting attorney get red in the face, and judge get up and leave the courtroom, and a speed cop apologize for stopping me in the first place. This is the law TPTB use, and follow, why not use it against them? When you go into a courtroom in America, for one thing, you are on the deck of a British ship, and are at the mercy of British Admiralty Law, just take a good look at the gold fringed flag. The court insists that you have an attorney, because they see you the person as being retarded, and unable to defend yourself. the attorneys work for the court! If you are fighting a speeding ticket, you are before a Criminal Courts Judge, not a Justice of the Peace, and the Judge does not have jurisdiction over you, unless you let him have it. The name they read off is your slave name, in all caps, and when you agree that this is your name, you are now under contract with the court. Why do this? I have always said, know the law, or be a victim of the law. I still stand on that.




posted on Feb, 27 2009 @ 10:27 AM
link   
reply to post by autowrench
 


"When you go into a courtroom in America, for one thing, you are on the deck of a British ship, and are at the mercy of British Admiralty Law, just take a good look at the gold fringed flag"



I find this to be very interesting even though I'm not an American nor a British citizen.

It makes me wonder how the Courts are ruled in the rest of the EU, if British Courts are ruled by British Admiralty Law?

(Is the British Courts ruled by British Admiralty Law?)

Isn't British Laws often overruled by EU Law? In my European Country many Laws can be overruled by EU Law.

Oh man! now I have to study on how EU Law stands vs British Admiralty Laws? - O'boy! where did I put those Aspirines again?


[edit on 27-2-2009 by Chevalerous]

[edit on 27-2-2009 by Chevalerous]



posted on Feb, 8 2010 @ 05:06 PM
link   
There is so much information that could be covered in this thread.

Everything is based in ownership (allodial title) and our right to contract. Did you know that you have a right to contract? How about the right to travel? If you have the right to do something why do you need to get a permit? You do realize that getting a permit means that you are asking for permission from the State to engage in a certain activity, which means that what was once a right has become a privilege...by your volunteering your rights away unknowingly.

If you go into a Court of Law you had better understand the language of law or else you are going to sound like a fool and the Judge and prosecuting Attorneys will string you up.

Take the STRAWMAN argument for instance:

Your STRAWMAN is very real and was created for you on the day of your birth...your birth certificate is a contract/bond on your physical person as collateral for a bankrupt Country.

Under the 14th Amendment you are a US Citizen, which means that you answer to the jurisdiction of the Federal Government.

You CANNOT go into Court and "deny" that your name on paper in all caps (which is your strawman) DALAN GREGORY MILLER, is not you. The court will swab the deck with you...

If you have a Driver's License, if you are a registered voter, if you have ever taken out a loan, if you have a credit card...then you have volunteered yourself into the system created by the 14th amendment, and that is evidence against you in a Court of Law. So denying your strawman will do you no good whatsoever until you declare your political status and voluntarily take yourself out of the system.

Before you do ANYTHING you must study:

The Declaration of Independence

The Articles of Confederation

The Constitution

The Bill of Rights (especially the first ten amendments known as the organic constitution, and study the fourteenth amendment because it is the contract that we volunteered into)

Roman Civil Law

Common Law

Equity Law

Admiralty/Maritime Law

The UCC (Uniform Commercial Code)

I would buy copies of Black's Law Dictionary ALL EDITIONS and study what means what. Know the differences between Amendments, Acts, Statutes, Codes etc. Learn how to navigate through a Courtroom, don't make decisions without the proper knowledge necessary.

Remember in all things that The Contract makes the Law.



posted on Aug, 22 2010 @ 12:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by brickhouse32
For the past few days I had been researching this Freeman-on-the-land stuff, today I got a response from a judge that had been on the bench for 25 years and 6 years as a prosecutor. He said these ideas are all hoax. I tend to believe the judge over a man selling Freedom packets for $380.00. There is some good ideas but I don't think they have the force of law. If this guy did do some of the stuff in his stories, Mr Menard, he merely got away with duping and bullying the police, which would be pretty impressive but not legal.



I think there is much more to it than the two sources you reference here.

Why would you take a judge's word for it? Have you checked his background? Do you know if his Oath of Office is public record?

All lawyers are pledged to the BAR which is a foreign entity associated with the Crown Temple. It is my understanding that those in the Brotherhood of Secret Societies pledge a blood oath that supercedes all other oaths. Could it be that these Brotherhood members have devised ways to keep from publically filing their oaths?



Some members of advisory boards and committees appointed by city officials are not required to take an oath because they are "volunteers" serving without compensation.

(Now, how do we know they are not networking, playing favoritisms without repercussion due to "volunteerism", or even receiving kickbacks or promises of future kickbacks? It would appear that only those who are on the state payroll are required to take an oath.)

The oath is a prerequisite to qualification for public office.

However, in a de facto system there are some persons who are not properly qualified who are still allowed to hold their positions! The proper term for this is "Irregularities".

For instance, someone who has been elected to an office but never goes through the installation procedure; or is sworn in by someone who is not qualified or authorized to give the oath; or the oath was not taken in the time allowed by law; or the oath was not administered in the proper form; or the oath taken was not the proper one; or the oath was not filed during the time allowed by law; or has not even taken the oath of office at all!

This is part of what makes it a de facto system.

Sometimes an entire group of elected officials are sworn in at one time. Cases like this allow for a toss-up paper shuffle where some have "inadvertently" signed each others forms and the signatures do not match the type written name on the paper.

Sometimes when more than one person is sworn in at one time, the document may have two names typewritten, but only one signature.

You can find a wealth of information on "De Facto Officers" by searching this term and referencing The American and English Encyclopedia of Law.



As far as the man who was selling information concerning the Free man movement, you can always do your own research. It is time consuming and you need to be discerning. I would not purchase anything without some guarantee....and I doubt there is one. Sovereignty is a personal path. Some people are acting out of principles and ethics; others are still looking for a free ride or how to have their cake and eat it, too. And if your spiritual purpose in all this is not right, you are bound to make mistakes in what you do. Be careful who you follow and document everything for yourself before taking someone's word for it.



posted on Aug, 22 2010 @ 02:03 PM
link   
Should there not be some outrage at those who would wield power and judgement over you when they themselves have not adhered to lawful proper procedure?

Should those in power not be exposed for their own transgressions?

Can't people figure out that there is treason within the ranks of government and that some people in key positions are aligned with a foreign power?

Is this foreign power the "shadow government"? It is not simply a group of elites at the top; these pawns are distributed through every level of society by a network of pledges.



posted on Aug, 22 2010 @ 02:43 PM
link   
There is a lot more to being a Sovereign in a DeJure government than what you could teach in an ATS thread. State Nationals groups are in most states now. To learn the procedure and the LAW read the red amendment from this link...

I haven't been convicted of any driving offenses or arrested for them in over 20 years using common law. NO DAMAGED PARTY, Court can NOT take jurisdiction.

LEARN MORE



posted on Sep, 9 2010 @ 11:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by theindependentjournal
There is a lot more to being a Sovereign in a DeJure government than what you could teach in an ATS thread. State Nationals groups are in most states now. To learn the procedure and the LAW read the red amendment from this link...

I haven't been convicted of any driving offenses or arrested for them in over 20 years using common law. NO DAMAGED PARTY, Court can NOT take jurisdiction.

LEARN MORE


Excellent website! I bought a copy of the Deluxe edition of The Red Amendment and it is one of the most amazing books on this subject that I have ever read.

Someone should start a thread about it, but there is sooo much information, its daunting.



posted on Sep, 11 2010 @ 12:41 AM
link   
The legal wording is written as follows :

----
A citizen is an artificial person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States as per the fourteenth amendment to the Constitution for the United States, and is also subject to those corporate state entities which have contracted with the United States, and;[/EX]
----

Citizen is every person subjected to the artificial jurisdiction thereof known as The United States.Under Corporate Personhood with the US as a corporation decrees the citizens of the USA it's employees and decreeing those persons to be the corporate interests which are supported, endorsed and protected by orders of the corporation (the USA) itself. Effectively decreeing Artifical Law dead and in it's place De Facto/Common Law which works with Natural law and not against it. However, De Facto law keeps those who are deputized to maintain and hand out Artificial law the people it empowers to take back control of the dispertion and dispensemet of Artificial law.

There is a way around Artificial law as that's the law system that no decent, honest American will ever back and is always employed by those with the intent and resources to take down the nation as De Facto/Common law using both Artificial and Corporate Law becomes nullified but however is not eligible for nullification under and using Corporate Personhood. Too many pandora's boxes opened up when Corporate Personhood was enacted as instead of being utilized to destroy the nation as it was originally and intentionally designed to do it is now being utilized by the people to restore the soveriegnty and independance back into the United States Of America.

The core structure of how law is dispensed in the USA is as follows :

Tier 1 - Natural Law - The people of The USA as so ordered by The Constitution's part on pertaining to Seperation Of Powers to be the absolute final word on all matters pertaining to the State. People forever stateside have final say. This gives the people the authourity via the 2nd Amendment to take the nation back by deadly force if nessecary and those in power cannot do a thing about it.
Tier 2 - De Facto/Common Law - Corporate Personhood - Defacto is used by the courts system in all matters of Govt-Civil, Govt-Corp Relations and Corporate law is used by corporations in regards to all matters Govt-Corp and Civil-Corp Relations.
Tier 2.5 - God's Law - This is where this sits as we are a nation guided by Man's Law and not by God's Law as we are one of a handful of nations who does not have an Official State Religion. God's Law does not however trump Artificial Law and is exclusively acted upon in matters pertaining to all Civil-Faith, Govt-Faith matters. Corporate-Faith however has no legal standing.
Tier 3 - Artificial Law - Is the law of those charged with the protection and maitenance of all laws as we will forever be a nation "For The People, Of The People and By The People" hence where we got that term from.
Tier 4 - The legal systems for the 43 States, 7 Commonwealths, 8 Territorites, the tens of thousands of Counties/Parishes, millions of Municipalites, the like couple dozen or so religious retreats and like 50 - 100 Native American Indian Nation Territories that all lie within the continental jurisdiction that is the United States of America

A completely voluntary nation where service is not required by law or edict is what The United States Of America is.


edit on 11-9-2010 by TheImmaculateD1 because: Reminder and to include why certain national items are! May God Continue To Bless America! D1!



posted on Feb, 15 2012 @ 10:03 AM
link   
Thank you for that info, OP!



posted on Oct, 26 2013 @ 08:43 AM
link   
Hmmm... Another thread that does not know what the common law is. How can anyone expect their ' research' to be taken seriously when they miss a fundamental understanding of the topic.

Use an actual law text book instead of random people on the web. Start with precedence or stare decisis and you will see how wrong the ops premis is.

In relation to the op you can not own a person in English law. Even artificial persons can not be owned. It's why corporations have share holders as well as limited liability.
edit on 26-10-2013 by Redarguo because: (no reason given)
edit on 26-10-2013 by Redarguo because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 26 2013 @ 09:34 AM
link   
Ya know what I hate about ATS. Lawyers. There are no lawyers.

I never see anyone say, I'm a lawyer and I can confirm or discount this as truth.

I believe there has to be some good statutes that allow the law to work for good of the people but they are almost unknown or twisted in the public's mind so much we cannot know for sure.. too many opinions about this freeman on the land stuff going around and you never know what you should really believe.

Can we get a lawyer in this thread to give opinions on this?



posted on Oct, 26 2013 @ 09:46 AM
link   

JohnPhoenix
Ya know what I hate about ATS. Lawyers. There are no lawyers.

I never see anyone say, I'm a lawyer and I can confirm or discount this as truth.

I believe there has to be some good statutes that allow the law to work for good of the people but they are almost unknown or twisted in the public's mind so much we cannot know for sure.. too many opinions about this freeman on the land stuff going around and you never know what you should really believe.

Can we get a lawyer in this thread to give opinions on this?


www.canlii.org...

In Meads v Meads Queens Bench judge Roukie dismantles FMOTL theory point by point. Of course the proponents see this as evidence of a cover up. Countless lawyers and people with actual legal training continuously debunk this stuff also. Then there is the issue of the legally trained never using any freeman tactics even when its their own ass on the line. Freeman on the land theory is simply fantasy. The most odd thing about it is that people have obviously spent a lot of time learning it, when such time would be of more use using academic sources of law as opposed to people like Mernard who obviously have no idea what they are talking about (or they do and are being deceptive).



posted on Oct, 26 2013 @ 10:09 AM
link   
reply to post by TheImmaculateD1
 



he legal wording is written as follows :

----
A citizen is an artificial person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States as per the fourteenth amendment to the Constitution for the United States, and is also subject to those corporate state entities which have contracted with the United States


An artificial person is a legal fiction, something that is false but for the purpose of law is treated as fact, i.e that a corporation is a person. By definition a human can not be an artificial person.

The point being to give such legal constructs such as corporations legal personality, i.e to sue/be sued, own property, sign a contract be legally liable and prosecuted.....just like a real person can.


Under Corporate Personhood with the US as a corporation decrees the citizens of the USA it's employees and decreeing those persons to be the corporate interests which are supported, endorsed and protected by orders of the corporation (the USA) itself. Effectively decreeing Artifical Law dead and in it's place De Facto/Common Law which works with Natural law and not against it. However, De Facto law keeps those who are deputized to maintain and hand out Artificial law the people it empowers to take back control of the dispertion and dispensemet of Artificial law.


Again a misunderstanding on your part. The state is an incorporated entity, that has legal personality. That is what corporation means, not a privet for profit business. Government offices are also incorporated, ie you sue the office not the individual office holder.

Legal person, artificial person and corporate person/being can all be used interchangeably, I urge you to check the actual legal definition.


The core structure of how law is dispensed in the USA is as follows :


.......... through criminal and civil means.

natural/ gods law ect may raise some philosophical points but is not used nor has no place in a legal system that is concerned only with points of law and the facts of a case.
edit on 26-10-2013 by Redarguo because: (no reason given)
edit on 26-10-2013 by Redarguo because: (no reason given)






top topics



 
10
<< 1   >>

log in

join