QUOTE FROM THE SEPTEMBER 17, 1787 CONSTITUTION FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
POWERS FORBIDDEN TO CONGRESS
SECTION 9.[8]
No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.
Where was the Consent of Congress whereby the Queen knighted SIR TED KENNEDY? Was Kennedy not an Esquire = Attorney? A Barrister = Tax Collector for the Crown? See “inn of court” BLACKS' LAW DICTIONARY, 8TH ED. Page 805.
Article II [5] = Office of the President
[5] No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the Untied States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution shall be eligible to the Office of the President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
AMENDMENT XIV
CIVIL RIGHTS
Section 3.
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military,under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.
QUOTE FROM THE SEPTEMBER 17, 1787 CONSTITUTION FOR THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Term limits were therefore established by this Constitution for the President, Vice-President, Senate and House of Representatives:
Article 1
THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCH
Section2.
[1] The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States, and the Electors in each State shall have the Qualifications requisite for Electors of the most numerous Branch of the State Legislature.
Section 2.
[2] No Person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty-five Years, and been seven Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State I which he shall be chosen.
Section 3.
[1] The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, [chosen by the Legislature thereof,] (Note: Changed by the section 1 of the Seventeenth Amendment.) for six Years; and each Senator shall have one Vote.
AMENDMENT XVII
DIRECT ELECTION OF SENATORS
The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof, for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote. The electors in each State shall have the qualifications requisite for electors of the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.
When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct.
This amendment shall not be so construed as to affect the election or term of any Senator chosen before it becomes valid as part of the Constitution.
AMENDMENT XVI
INCOME TAX = VOID = NEVER RATIFIED
1993) Key Case: U. S. v. LLOYDE R LONG; FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT TN.; CASE NO. CR-1-93-91 Not guilty on all charges whereas the 16th Amendment was never lawfully ratified
Public Notice to public servant to the city county or court of Clerk~
The minute you receive any document, it is recorded according to the following case site.
Biffle v. Morton Rubber Indus., Inc., 785 S.W.2d 143, 144 (Tex.1990).
“An instrument is deemed in law filed at the time it is delivered to the clerk, regardless of whether the instrument is “file-marked.”
Should you refuse to record My documents, once deposited with you, you are committing a crime under Title18 USC § 2071 and it is punishable by fines and imprisonment. If your attorney told you not to file any documents like mine, you are still responsible, as I do not accept any third party intervenors. Any attorney, district attorney, or anyone from the lawyering craft are all third parties and do not have a license to make a legal determination in this matter as they do not represent Me and you, the county clerk, and do not have the authority to represent Me.
Title 18 USC – Crimes and Criminal Procedure
Part I – Crimes
Chapter 101 – Records and Reports
Section 2071 – Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally
(a) Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term ''office'' does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.
Revised Statutes of The United States, 1st session, 43 Congress 1873-1874.
Title LXX.---CRIMES.--- CH. 4. CRIMES AGAINST JUSTICE
SEC. 5403. (Destroying, &c., public records.)
Every person who willfully destroys or attempts to destroy, or, with intent to steal or destroy, takes and carries away any record, paper, or proceeding of a court of justice, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of such court, or any paper, or document, or record filed or deposited in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer, shall, without reference to the value of the record, paper, document, or proceeding so taken, pay a fine of not more than two thousand dollars, or suffer imprisonment, at hard labor, not more than three years, or both: [See § § 5408, 5411, 5412.1]
SEC. 5407. (Conspiracy to defeat enforcement of the laws.)
If two or more persons in any State or Territory conspire for the purpose of impeding, hindering, obstructing, or defeating, in any manner, the due course of justice in any State or Territory, with intent to deny to any citizen the equal protection of the laws, or to injure him or his property for lawfully enforcing, or attempting to enforce, the right of any person, or class of persons, to the equal protection of the laws, each of such persons shall be punished by a fine of not less than five hundred nor more than five thousand dollars, or by imprisonment, with or without hard labor, not less than six months nor more than six years, or by both such fine and imprisonment. See § § 1977-1991, 2004-2010, 5506-5510.1
SEC. 5408. (Destroying record by officer in charge.)
Every officer, having the custody of any record, document, paper, or proceeding specified in section fifty-four hundred and three, who fraudulently takes away, or withdraws, or destroys any such record, document, paper, or proceeding filed in his office or deposited with him or in his custody, shall pay a fine of not more than two thousand dollars, or suffer imprisonment at hard labor not more than three years, or both-, and shall, moreover, forfeit his office and be forever afterward disqualified from holding any office under the Government of the United States. Federal Law also prohibits Cities and Counties from issuing citations against businesses, see Title 18 U.S.C.891-896, quoting Section 891 "An extortionate means is any means which involves the use, or an express or implicit threat of use, of violence or other criminal means to cause harm to the person, reputation, or property."
"Silence can only be equated with fraud where there is a legal or moral duty to speak, or where an inquiry left unanswered would be intentionally misleading. . . Our revenue system is based on the good faith of the voluntary taxpayer and the voluntary taxpayers should be able to expect the same from the government in its enforcement and collection activities. If that is the case we hope our message is clear. This sort of deception will not be tolerated and if this is routine it should be corrected immediately." U.S. v. Tweel, 550 F.2d 297, 299. See also U.S. v. Prudden, 424 F.2d 1021, 1032; Carmine v. Bowen, 64 A. 932.2.7-14
LAW OF THE LAND: Finally, the Supreme Court says, "He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their Rights." The Sovereign indivi...dual does not have to pay taxes. If you should discuss Hale v. Henkel with a run-of-the-mill attorney, he or she will tell you that the case is "old" and that it has been "overturned." If you ask that attorney for a citation of the case or cases that overturned Hale v. Henkel, there will not be a meaningful response. We have researched Hale v. Henkel and here is what we found :We know that Hale v. Henkel was decided in 1905 in the U. S. Supreme Court. Since it was the Supreme Court, the case is binding on all courts of the land, until another Supreme Court case says it isn't. Has another Supreme Court case overturned Hale v. Henkel? The answer is NO. As a matter of fact, since 1905, the Supreme Court has cited Hale v. Henkel a total of 144 times. A fact more astounding is that since 1905, Hale v. Henkel has been cited by all of the federal and STATE appellate court systems a total of over 1600 times. None of the various issues of this case has ever been overruled. So if the STATE through the office of the judge continues to threaten or does imprison you, they are trying to force you into the STATE created office of "person." As long as you continue to claim your Rightful office of Sovereign, the STATE lacks all jurisdictions over you. The STATE needs someone filling the office of "person" in order to continue prosecuting a case in their Courts. A few weeks in jail puts intense pressure upon most "persons." Jail means the loss of job opportunities, separation from loved ones, and the piling up of debts. Judges will apply this pressure when they attempt to arraign you. When brought in chains before a crowded courtroom the issue of counsel will quickly come up and you can tell the court you are In Propria Persona or simply "PRO PER", as yourself and you need no other. Do not sign their papers or cooperate with them because most things about your life are private and are not the STATE's business to evaluate. Here is the Sovereign People's command in the constitution that the STATE respect their privacy: Right of privacy -- Every man or woman has the Right to be let alone and free from governmental intrusion into their private life except as otherwise provided herein. This section shall not be construed to limit the public's Right of access to public records and meetings as provided by law. See U.S. Constitution, Ninth Amendment If the judge is stupid enough to actually follow through with his threats and send you to jail, you will soon be released without even being arraigned and all charges will be dropped. You will then have documented prima facie grounds for false arrest and false imprisonment charges against him personally. Now that you know the hidden evil in the word "person", try to stop using it in everyday conversation. Simply use the correct term, MAN or WOMAN. Train yourself, your family and your friends to never use the derogatory word "person" ever again. This can be your first step in the journey to get yourself free from all STATE COUNTY and CITY Elected and public Servant's control.
Notice: All Rights Reserved. Permission to distribute for non-commercial purposes is hereby granted, in whole or part, provided attribution and a link to this article is included. Commercial distribution without the written permission of the author is prohibited. This Public email message, including any attachment(s) is limited to the sole use of the intended recipient and may contain Privileged and/or Confidential Information. Any and All Political, Private or Public Entities, Federal, State, or Local Corporate Government(s), Municipality(ies), International Organizations, Corporation(s), agent(s), investigator(s), or informant(s), et. al., and/or Third Party(ies) working in collusion by collecting and/or monitoring My email(s),and any other means of spying and collecting these Communications Without my Exclusive Permission are Barred from Any and All Unauthorized Review, Use, Disclosure or Distribution. With Explicit Reservation of All My Rights,Without Prejudice and Without Recourse to Me. Any omission does not constitute a waiver of any and/or ALL Intellectual Property Rights or Reserved Rights Notice.Copy right lawful bloodline Americans , lawful Americans 2013*The Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. 119 Sections 2510-2521 et seq., governs distribution of this “Message,” including attachments. The originator intended this Message for the specified recipients only; it may contain the originator’s confidential and proprietary information. The originator hereby notifies unintended recipients that they have received this Message in error, and strictly proscribes their Message review, dissemination, copying, and content-based actions. Recipients-in-error shall notify the originator immediately by e-mail, and delete the original message. Authorized carriers of this message shall expeditiously deliver this Message to intended recipients. See: Quon v. Arch. Anything stated in this email may be limited in the content and is not to be taken out of context.**Wireless Copyright Notice**. Federal and State laws govern copyrights to this Message. You must have the originator’s full written consent to alter, copy, or use this Message.Originator acknowledges others’ copyrighted content in this Message. Otherwise Without Prejudice and Without Recourse to Me. Any omission does not constitute a waiver of any and/or ALL Intellectual Property Rights or Reserved Rights U.C.C, 1-207.1-308. NOTICE TO AGENTS IS NOTICE TO PRINCIPALS. NOTICE TO PRINCIPALS IS NOTICE TO AGENTS
Legatus Non Violatur ,Without Prejudice , Non Assumptsit , I-207--I-308 All Rights Reserved
Autograph in red ink _____________________________________________Dateandtime____________
Redink seal_________________
Acknowledgment of woman or and man the Individual
STATE OF OREGON
COUNTY OF _______________
This instrument was acknowledged before me on _____________________ (date) by ____________________________. (name(s) of person(s))
______________________________
Notary Public
Print Name: ___________________
My Commission Expires:
____________________
Acknowledgment of Corporation
STATE OF OREGON
COUNTY OF _______________
This instrument was acknowledged before me on __________________________ (date) by ___________________________________________________ (name(s) of person(s)) as ______________________________________________ (type of authority, e.g., officer, trustee, etc.) of _____________________________________. (name of party on behalf of whom instrument was executed)
______________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC
Print Name: ___________________
My Commission Expires:
____________________
(3) For a verification upon oath or affirmation:
STATE OF OREGON
COUNTY OF _______________
Signed and sworn to (or affirmed) before me on ______________________ (date) by _________________________________________ (name(s) of person(s) making
statement)
______________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC
(SEAL) Title (and Rank): _______________
Print Name: ___________________
My Commission Expires:
____________________
(4) For witnessing or attesting a signature:
STATE OF OREGON
COUNTY OF _______________
Signed or attested before me on _____________________________ (date) by ________________________________________________ (name(s) of person(s))
______________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC
(SEAL) Title (and Rank): _______________
Print Name: ___________________
My Commission Expires:
____________________
(5) For attestation of a copy of a document:
STATE OF OREGON
COUNTY OF _______________
I certify that this is a true and correct copy of a document in the possession of ___________________________________________.
Dated: ______________________________________
______________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC
(SEAL) Title (and Rank): _______________
Print Name: ___________________
My Commission Expires:
____________________
REFERENCE
94.575 Short forms. The following short form certificates of notarial acts are sufficient for the purposes indicated, if completed with the information required by ORS 194.565
[1983 c.393 s.9]
Oregon
Or. Rev. Stat. § 194.505 (1999) Definitions
http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/194.html
Or. Rev. Stat. § 194.515 (1999) Notarial Acts
Or. Rev. Stat. § 194.525 (1999) Who May Perform
Or. Rev. Stat. § 194.535 (1999) Notarial Acts in Other Jurisdictions
Or. Rev. Stat. § 194.546 (1999) Notarial Acts Under Federal Authority
Or. Rev. Stat. § 194.555 (1999) Foreign Notarial Acts
Or. Rev. Stat. § 194.565 (1999) Certificate of Notarial Acts
Or. Rev. Stat. § 194.575 (1999) Short Forms
Or. Rev. Stat. § 194.582 (1999) Use of Electronic Signatures
Here is some information to keep Public Servants in check.The Uniform Bonding Code - (UBC)
5.2 -- Bonding of District Attorneys
A city, county, state or federal district attorney (including a U.S. district attorney called a "U.S. Attorney') shall lose his bonding and shall not be bonded:
1. if he refuses to properly identify himself to the citizen when asked to do so, including giving the citizen the name and address (or telephone number) of his bonding company and his bond policy number (bond number),
2. if he fails or refuses to receive, for filing, a criminal complaint from a citizen against a citizen or an official,
3. if he refused to mark or stamp the citizen's confirmed (compare with original) copy of the citizen's complaint with any of the following
A. "Received"
B. name of receiving office
C. date
D. time
E. signature or initial of receiving clerk or official, so that the citizen can have an official receipt for delivery of his complaint;
4. if he fails or refuses to make a reasonably diligent effort to process the citizen's complaint (42 USC 1986),
5. if he fails or refuses to see to it that the citizen's complaint is placed in the right hands for processing and/or answering, (return)
6. if he does not make every effort to make sure that the complaining party knows of the status or location of the complaint in the legal system, and does not give the complainant written notice of the same when it is possible.
5.3 - The Bonding of Prosecuting Attorneys
A prosecuting attorney shall lose his bonding, shall not be bonded, and shall be deemed unbondable:
1. if he refuses to prosecute a complaint when it is possible to do so, regardless of whom the complaint is against,
2. if he resorts to "selective prosecution," i.e., any excuse of immunity for an official in order to protect a malfeasant official from prosecution,
3. if he resorts to "selective prosecution,"i.e., false or malicious prosecution of a citizen, in order to punish or destroy a citizen for attempting to have a malfeasant official prosecuted.
5.4 - Bonding of Judges
A judge shall lose his bonding, shall not be bonded, and shall be deemed unbondable:
1. if he fails to protect the U.S, national constitutionally guaranteed remedies of due process and the equal protection of the laws of any citizen appearing in his court of law, or of any citizen appearing in any court of the county in which he works whose case may come to his attention 12y a means.
5.5 - Bonding of Attorneys
A lawyer or an attorney shall lose his bonding, shall not be bonded, and shall be deemed unbondable,:
if he fails to protect the remedies of due process and the equal protection of the law of either his client or of the adverse party in an action. In an adversary system of law, each lawyer or attorney shall protect the representation of fact not only for their own party, but shall protect the legal process for both parties without, exception.
7.6 - Bonding Municipal Corporations
Many municipal corporations (city, county, state) have quietly chosen to operate without malpractice bonding in violation of state corporate public hazard bonding laws because their bonding is expensive. Often municipal corporations claim to be "self bonded," but because civil rights suit claims are often, and properly, astronomically large, such in-house bonding is actually fraud, and passes liability on to the officials, officers and clerks of the municipal corporation. Municipal corporations have had to resort to lies and deceptions concerning the bonding of their officers in order to get their officers to put on a uniform and go out to fight for the corporation. The officers are not told that their public hazard bond is not adequate, and they are not told that if their on¬the-job activities involve them in a situation where the face value of the bond is not sufficient to cover an injury (physical, mental, emotional, legal, etc.) to a public citizen, that then the citizen will have the right to sue the officer for a sufficient amount of the officer's personal property (real and/or movable) in order to be paid the difference between the amount of the damage claim and the face value of the bond.
A municipal corporation will lose its executive enforcement bond or be rendered unbondable:
1. if it hires an enforcement officer and sends him out into the public to do official enforcement duties without bonding his enforcement processes and actions. The officer must be provided with a written notarized declaration of his job description;
2. if it fails to tell an officer or clerk that he is not adequately bonded, the officer must be provided with a written notarized declaration of his bonding status;
3. if it fails to issue an identification card to an enforcement officer declaring:
1. that the officer is bonded,
2. the name of the officer,
3. the officer's enforcement classification,
4. the name of the municipal corporation for which he works,
5. the name of the bonding company which is bonding his enforcement,
6. the bond (policy) number of the officer,
7. the address and/or telephone number of the bonding company (bonding companies may want to know who is cheating them. Many municipal corporations are not adequately bonded and never tell their employees about it),
8. a picture of the officer.
4. if it does not provide a law enforcement officer with a sufficient education in law and process so that the officer can properly carry out his law enforcement duties as agreed to in his job description,
5. if it engages an enforcement officer to enforce an unbonded "statute" which by its hazardous nature must be bonded, or
6. if it engages an enforcement officer to violate a citizen's U.S. constitutional rights or equal protection of the laws.
8.0 - EXECUTIVE CONTROL
The control/enforcement process of an executive/enforcement officer will be bonded only if the bonding company finds that:
1. before executing an order of execution the officer had in his possession:
1. a faithful recap (recapitulation) of the case representing both sides of the argument, hand-signed by the author of the recap (who is liable for his recap),
2. an original hand-signed verified bonding check list of the complete court process,
3. an original hand-signed copy of the judgment and the order of execution of judgment,
4. a proper personal identification card including:
1. that the officer is bonded,
2. the name of the officer,
3. the officer's enforcement classification,
4. the name of the municipal corporation for which he works,
5. the name of the bonding company which is bonding his enforcement,
6. the bond (policy) number of the officer,
7. the address and/or telephone number of the bonding company, and
8. a picture of the officer,
5. a proper personal business card which the officer could hand out to the public and to the person(s) arrested, containing all of the same information as given in Part (1) (D) except for the picture, because of the expense of picture cards.
9.0 - EXECUTIVE OUTPUT
The output/enforcement act of an executive/enforcement officer will be bonded only if the bonding company finds to its satisfaction that, taking into consideration the urgency and hazard of the situation, the officer while enforcing the paper process acted in a reasonable manner as regards:
1. the reading and understanding of the recap,
2. the reading and understanding of the verified bonding list,
3. the reading and understanding of the judgement, and
4. the reading and understanding of the order of execution of judgment, And when enforcing¬
5. properly identifying himself,
6. properly serving necessary papers, and
7. properly notifying people of their rights.
9.1 - Bonding Jail. Procedure
A government, or an official, officer or clerk of a government, will lose its/his bond, will not be bonded and will not be bondable if a person, hereinafter referred to as the "prisoner," which it/he handles, who has been charged and arrested but who has not been convicted:
1. has been denied or delayed anything, or any right, or the equal protection of the law necessary for the prisoner's defense which an uncharged and unarrested citizen would have at his use, service and disposal,
2. has been denied or delayed legal paperwork in the prisoner's case, including but not limited to affidavits of accusation, police reports, arrest warrants, mailing addresses for the delivery of all leg paperwork, etc.,
3. has been denied or delayed. the assistant counsel of, or communication with any lawyer, attorney, spouse, relative, friend, non-union paralegal, non-union lawyer, etc., needed for his personal safety and legal defense,
4. has been denied or delayed necessary appearances and opportunity to speak before a judge in court and on the court record ("necessary" as defined by the prisoner, not as defined by the jail. Ear, the judge or the court), and/or consideration from the jailer, the judge of the court, and/or a hand-signed record of the proceedings before the judge and the court,
5. has been denied or delayed a copy of anything:
1. (A) the prisoner has signed while enteringor dwelling in the jail, or
2. (B) the prisoner has been required to sign while entering or dwelling in the jail ("It is best not to sign anything."),
6. has been denied or delayed the physical basics; namely, light, heat, simple comforts, rest, writing materials or any other obvious physical means necessary to compose, write and perfect the prisoner's defense, said basics to be provided at no cost to the prisoner,
7. has been denied or delayed the opportunity to effectively file counter complaints against the prisoner's accusers, and those who have handled and processed the prisoner's case (see also 4.0 Judicative Input,_specifically),
8. has been denied or delayed a readable copy of the Holy Bible printed in a language in which the prisoner is educated or fluent,
9. has been denied or delayed access to law books of the prisoner's choice,
10. has been denied or delayed medical needs. NOTE: The county shall provide all of the above services immediately to the unconvicted prisoner at no cost to the prisoner. Any county which fails to meet the above criteria will itself be totally liable for its own acts. It is not inconceivable that a county violating the above criteria could accumulate over one hundred million dollars worth of civil damages in one day's time involving only one prisoner, and no credible bonding company wants anything to do with that kind of obligation.
9.2 - Escalation
Further:
A law enforcement officer will lose his bond if he oppresses a citizen to the point of civil. rebellion when that citizen attempts to obtain redress of grievances (U.S. constitutional 1st so-called amendment).
When a state, by and through its officials and
agents, deprives a citizen of all of his remedies by the due process of law and deprives the citizen of the equal protection of the law, the state commits an act of mixed war against the citizen, and, by its behavior, the state declares war on the citizen. The citizen has the right to recognize this act by the publication of a solemn recognition of mixed war. This writing has the same force as the Declaration of Independence. It invokes the citizen's U.S. constitutional 9th and 10th so-called amend guarantees of the right to create an effective remedy where otherwise none exists.
Edward Johnston
to
Northwest Service Academy
September 28, 2012 · Eugene ·
Know your strawman Account is your original birth certificate true fact,are you owned by England,, or you a real American, Labor is the only legal way of employment,,
www.sodahead.com/united-states/the...of-school-and...2380273 - Cache
d
Hi lars,larson You know if folks would tell facts for life not for money we could have, but you know, as the bible states when kindness goes from ones heart ,, well..As
the old ,the pen is mighty then the sward some would say.men don't have confront one anther they send out the gooone squad, I once live that life as you a were of,,, It amazes me folks claim they believe, but they send the children to the devils play ground today, well its coming..I would not but any child in public schools our controlled event, because you have no rights of you children wen the our in the custody of the devils system..
There is no heart in folks unless claimed if its a taxes right off to England and the pope, Let me clarify for all, As you may say the state of oregon, Is your enslavement citizen of your strawman,www.nomoretyranny.org/strawman.htm ,
strawman account
An if you say oregon state, or I'm a legal American,
Are you a REAL AMERICAN! Two or more generations
born in the USA Do you believe in your rights?
Take the test her www.oregontrackers.com.
Family's today, well there our NO family's keeping up with the jones mentality, Controlment
Stop blaming others for what you don't know or willing to learn
god gave you freedom an this is the way we respect god's children
an treat the children, programing them for Adolf Hitlers
enslavement, Oh I mean thee pope..
stop blaming others because you don't take responsibility for you education and your children education or enslavement
remember you gave you child to the devil..
If I had a chance to make a change
Make amends, an raises them with those who teach
gods freedom ,http://www.patriotnetwork.info/Citizens_rule_book.htm
The purpose of driving God out of school and society is what ...
There are Jews, Muslims ... "Parents give up their rights when they drop the children off at public school."1 —Texas Federal District Judge Melinda Harmon
www.sodahead.com/united-states/the...of-school-and...2380273 - Cached
strawman account Rev ed
man of god,
14th Amendment Citizenship: Citizen or citizen? - YouTube
Prior to the alleged ratification of the 14th Amendment, there was no legal definition of a " citizen of the United States", as everyone had primary ...
www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4xV4MTnCdc - Cached
State Rights | Treaties Do Not Supersede the Constitution
1) Treaties do not override the U.S. Constitution. 2) Treaties cannot amend the Constitution. And last, 3) A treaty can be nullified by a statute passed by the U.S ...
Know your strawman Account is your original birth certificate true fact,are you owned by Engla
nd,, or you a real American, Labor is the only legal way of employment,,
This is not legal advise consult a professional, just research..
GET IT YET
THE FINAL WARNING VIDEO - YouTube
THE FINAL WARNING VIDEO https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=4092563000974¬if_t video_reply
www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YPUldouCzY - Cached
.Play Video
CAFR1 Home Page
CAFR1 - Walter Burien, since 1998 has diligently worked for you bringing forward into the light of day what you need to know about the collective scope of government ...
cafr1.com - Cached
Know your strawman Account were is your original birth certificate, originally issued in 1878 . After the civil war its a document to the free the color Americans from slavery. to comply with the 14th amendment From 18 USC Chapter 306 - TRANSFER TO OR FROM FOREIGN COUNTRIES. united states is a corporation code title 3002 (15) (A) a federal corporation} (B) an agency department commission, board,or other entity of the united states Or} (C) an instrumentality} Originally to comply with the fourteenth amendment of the Untied states constitutional and commune laws, Not the corporation, to honer your individual States sovereignty ( Example Oregon's Treaty of 1846 from the British Government, Your sovereignty to travel American soil The Right to Travel vs Driver's License Scam - APFN also All the Navigable Waters of the State shall be Common Highways and Forever Free"publicriversforever.org, Subsidence hunting and fishing food gathering from public lands,RS-2477 Rights of Way | BlueRibbon Coalition with out paying the king or Queen of England, Elected and public employees or its courts, Treaty's of your state sovereignty sign by our for-fathers)
1913 Federal Reserve Act of the British government sign by Pres Woodrow Wilson Allowed the united states,county,city corporation to create an start borrowing for building developed and employees of its unions member's debt of employment, Prier to this the Constitution an legal Americans of the untied states is not in debt or is in debt,. Only Legal Americans our the stock holders of the united states,county's and city's.Woodrow Wilson Quote - Liberty Quotes Blog... Act in 1913 ... banking trust in misleading the American people in 1913... ... Woodrow Wilson (1856-1924), 28th President of the United States, Excerpt from 1912 campaign speech ...
quotes.liberty-tree.ca/quote_blog/Woodrow.Wilson.Quote.51CE - Cached
This created the 1929 depression from said borrowing for the Federal,State, county and city's corporations employes and of progress of development and debt of employment .
Is allowing conspiracy,racketeering ,clusion,Extortion, of legal Americans, you did not build your business if your are taking debt to your strawman account.
Also to my understanding Constitutional law, states who signs for any debt is liable, one is not liable for anthers humans debts..Unless you sign for it or agree for debt by a yes vote (in the democracy)..The Ten Mile Square | Ten Mile SquareThe Ten Mile Square. Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 of the United States' Constitution declares that ... of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States corporation.www.tenmilesquare.com/thetenmilesquare - Cached
Emergency Banking relief act march 9 1933 (www.nomoretyranny.org/strawman.htm) Federal Reserve becomes the Government who Created the artificial person for their debt creation, British Maritime law and uniformed commercial codes That has been created by elected employes and corporations members. . your birth certificate is a stock on the new york exchanged As collateral loans ,www.health.ny.gov/vital_records/birth.htm
1997 Americans become human capital again,(Executive order 13037 sign march 3 1997 by Pres Clinton made you a slave of the corruption of the British government Democracy, Clear Violation of the fourteenth Amendment )The Social Security , ( The united states of America corporation order 1997, No 1778, Giving your social security payments to England}, ( The Act of 1871 and presidential executive order 12803..as our Constitutional laws clear state no foreign Government can tell sovereigns how to live read your state Constitutions The Federal Zone: Chapter 11: Sovereignty - Supreme Law Firm
... No foreign power or law can ... clear in its various definitions of "government": ... Law of our Land, the Constitution for the United States of America. Sovereign State ...
www.supremelaw.org/fedzone11/htm/ chaptr11.htm - Cached
,,
As the United Sates corporation owns and directs your Military and police personal.Their primary employment is to protect the corporation and arrest code breakers , Sapp v Tallahassee 348 so.2nd 363 Reiff v . city of Philadelphia 477 F.supp.1262 Lynch v N.C dept of justice 376 S.E 2nd 247.
The most powerful court is the supreme court of Pennsylvania is the keystone state of the corporation or constitutional laws (42Pa.C.S.A 502)(u.s. v. strang,253 us 491, lewis v. US,680 F.2nd, 1239)Information Jordan Maxwell | Esoteric Scholar
Britten is owned by the Vatican(Treaty of 1213}, including Romans
13 international bible.Romans 13 NIV - Submission to Governing Authorities - Bible,Treaty of 1213 - The Beginning of the Lie | Truth Control
On October 3, 1213, by treaty, King John ratified his ... Fathers") whom were controlled by the Treaty of 1213, wherein the Vatican ... Besides the Pope owned England and how ...
www.truthcontrol.com/articles/treaty-1213-beginning-lie - Cached
Please look at the an support your republic YouTube - Republic vs Democracy and www.OathKeepers.org.
Obama Executive Order: Peacetime Martial Law! | Politics
Obama Executive Order: Peacetime Martial Law! ... to “keep the peace ... Executive-order panic: Martial law in U.S.? Order is up-date of long time presidential ...
beforeitsnews.com/politics/2012/03/obama-executive-order... - Cached
As A British subject of the Democrats or democracy Clearly stated You did not build your own business if your had elected and public employment,contracts advertizing,our other income from the British Government ,contacts of federal state, county,city, , when they spend your strawman account in name of your business and your Slavery or
enslavement,Slavery - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Etymology|
Types|
History|
Present day
However, Pope Paul III forbade enslavement of the native Americans in 1537 in his ... the 200th anniversary of the Abolition of the slave trade in the United Kingdom...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery - Cached
Our For-Fathers who wrote your constitutional laws Separation us for church and state. .Gave you the garden of Eden,, Free Air., Water.,subsistence food gathering rights,and land to live, Called YOUR republic.We have to work together so we can have are employment constitutional rights,
Our elected and public employes honer the oath's In protecting our freedom an our rights not to be invaded by our neighbors
rev ed
please mail a gift so I can stay on my land
lets just say the devil wont's me off
I have no family Because I won't comply with the devil
god provides,your our give free air water,food gathering
rights on public lands , It up to you to save your souls
1540 n nye toledo oregon
97391-9998
Image Detail
romans 310,, romans,13
Treason - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In individual...|
List of people...|
Related offences|
See also
In law, treason is the crime that covers some of the more extreme acts against one's sovereign or nation. Historically, treason also covered the murder of specific ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treason - Cached
Treason | Define Treason at Dictionary.com
noun 1. the offense of acting to overthrow one's government or to harm or kill its sovereign. 2. a violation of allegiance to one's sovereign or to one's state. 3 ...
dictionary.reference.com/browse/treason - Cached
The Forbidden Book - History of The English Bible - YouTube
The Forbidden Book, Is A Documentary About How We Came To The AUTHORIZED KJV Holy Bible. With A World Renoun Bible Historian Showing Us A FULL History In ...
www.youtube.com/watch?v=GtO-7xN26ME - Cached
.Play Video
The Forbidden Book - History of the English Bible (1 of 7 ...
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000E9X36U…... DISCOVER THE FASCINATING STORY BEHIND THE PRESERVATION OF THE BIBLE. During the ...
www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRNOW-xVzHU - Cached
.Play Video
Beat Growing Pot Charges! - #2fishygirl on Scribd | Scribd
BEAT GROWING POT CHARGES A Brief history and legal analysis of why mere possession IS ... corrupt WSBA ATTORNEYS will MISSTATE THE LAW and tell you that you can't grow pot ...
www.scribd.com/doc/6139627 - Cached
Legal / Judicial Corruption. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LX_OaRQicFQ&feature=youtu.be
State Rights
Treaties Do Not Supersede
the Constitution
The following qualifies as one of the greatest lies the globalists continue to push upon the American people. That lie is: "Treaties supersede the U.S. Constitution".
The Second follow-up lie is this one: "A treaty, once passed,
cannot be set aside".
HERE ARE THE CLEAR IRREFUTABLE FACTS: The U.S. Supreme Court has made it very clear that
1) Treaties do not override the U.S. Constitution.
2) Treaties cannot amend the Constitution. And last,
3) A treaty can be nullified by a statute passed by the U.S. Congress (or by a sovereign State or States if Congress refuses to do so), when the State deems a treaty the performance of a treaty is self-destructive. The law of self-preservation overrules the law of obligation in others. When you've read this thoroughly, hopefully, you will never again sit quietly by when someone -- anyone -- claims that treaties supercede the Constitution. Help to dispell this myth.
"This [Supreme] Court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty." - Reid v. Covert, October 1956, 354 U.S. 1, at pg 17.
This case involved the question: Does the NATO Status of Forces Agreement (treaty) supersede the U.S. Constitution? Keep reading.
The Reid Court (U.S. Supreme Court) held in their Opinion that,
"... No agreement with a foreign nation can confer power on the Congress, or any other branch of government, which is free from the restraints of the Constitution. Article VI, the Supremacy clause of the Constitution declares, "This Constitution and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all the Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land...’
"There is nothing in this language which intimates that treaties and laws enacted pursuant to them do not have to comply with the provisions of the Constitution nor is there anything in the debates which accompanied the drafting and ratification which even suggest such a result...
"It would be manifestly contrary to the objectives of those who created the Constitution, as well as those who were responsible for the Bill of Rights – let alone alien to our entire constitutional history and tradition – to construe Article VI as permitting the United States to exercise power UNDER an international agreement, without observing constitutional prohibitions. (See: Elliot’s Debates 1836 ed. – pgs 500-519).
"In effect, such construction would permit amendment of that document in a manner not sanctioned by Article V. The prohibitions of the Constitution were designed to apply to all branches of the National Government and they cannot be nullified by the Executive or by the Executive and Senate combined."
Did you understand what the Supreme Court said here? No Executive Order, Presidential Directive, Executive Agreement, no NAFTA, GATT/WTO agreement/treaty, passed by ANYONE, can supersede the Constitution. FACT. No question!
At this point the Court paused to quote from another of their Opinions; Geofroy v. Riggs, 133 U.S. 258 at pg. 267 where the Court held at that time that,
"The treaty power as expressed in the Constitution, is in terms unlimited except by those restraints which are found in that instrument against the action of the government or of its departments and those arising from the nature of the government itself and of that of the States. It would not be contended that it extends so far as to authorize what the Constitution forbids, or a change in the character of the government, or a change in the character of the States, or a cession of any portion of the territory of the latter without its consent."
Assessing the GATT/WTO parasitic organism in light of this part of the Opinion, we see that it cannot attach itself to its host (our Republic or States) in the fashion the traitors in our government wish, without our acquiescing to it.
The Reid Court continues with its Opinion:
"This Court has also repeatedly taken the position that an Act of Congress, which MUST comply with the Constitution, is on full parity with a treaty, the statute to the extent of conflict, renders the treaty null. It would be completely anomalous to say that a treaty need not comply with the Constitution when such an agreement can be overridden by a statute that must conform to that instrument."
The U.S. Supreme court could not have made it more clear : TREATIES DO NOT OVERRIDE THE CONSTITUTION, AND CANNOT, IN ANY FASHION, AMEND IT !!! CASE CLOSED.
Now we must let our elected "representatives" in Washington and the State legislatures know that we no longer believe the BIG LIE... we know that we are not bound by unconstitutional Treaties, Executive Orders, Presidential Directives, and other such treasonous acts.
[Note: the above information was taken from Aid & Abet Police Newsletter, with limited revision. P.O. Box 8712, Phoenix, Arizona. Acknowledgment given to Claire Kelly, for her good assistance and in depth treaty research. The use of this information is not to be construed as endorsement of Aid & Abet Police Newsletter. Claire Kelly is a trusted and knowledgeable friend. - CDR]
__________________________________________
Here's what Thomas Jefferson said on the right to renounce treaties:
"Compacts then, between a nation and a nation, are obligatory on them as by the same moral law which obliges individuals to observe their compacts. There are circumstances, however, which sometimes excuse the non-performance of contracts between man and man; so are there also between nation and nation. When performance, for instance, becomes impossible, non-performance is not immoral; so if performance becomes self-destructive to the party, the law of self-preservation overrules the law of obligation in others".
pg 317 - "The Life and Selected Writings of Thomas Jefferson," A. Koch & Wm. Peden, Random House 1944, renewed 1972. Jefferson also said in a letter to Wilson C. Nicholas on Sept. 7, 1803, Ibid. pg 573
"Our peculiar security is in the possession of a written Constitution. Let us not make it a blank paper by construction [interpretation]. I say the same as to the opinion of those who consider the grant of the treaty making power as boundless. If it is, then we have no Constitution." ______________________________________________________________
Further evidence:
Excerpt from a letter from U.S. Senator, Arlen Specter, (R. Penn.) to constituent, November 3, 1994.
"Dear Mr. Neely:
"Thank you for contacting my office regarding the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. ... I have signed on as a cosponsor of Senator Bradley’s resolution [SR 70, which urges the president to seek the advice and consent of the Senate for ratification] because I believe that the U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child is an appropriate step in the direction of promoting the well-being of children throughout the world. [he goes on to mention concerns that the treaty would subjugate familial and parental responsibility to an international entity, which he denies]
"... Secondly, the Convention would not override the U.S. Constitution; rather, as in the case of any treaty, any provision that conflicts with our Constitution would be void in our country... "
[CDR Note: It is our belief that Arlen Specter would not have been as truthful regarding Constitutional Supremacy over treaties if he had a clue that this letter to a constituent would have found its way into the hands or eyes of the public.]
_________________________________________________
Logical deduction:
No law or treaty supersedes the Supreme Law of the Land. 'Supreme'... meaning 'highest or greatest'. What is higher than highest or greater than greatest, other than our Creator? The Constitution acknowledges our God-given, unalienable rights, and secures those rights in that acknowledgement.
The Constitution gives the US Senate authority to ratify treaties with other nations. Americans have been propagandized into believing that those treaties become the supreme law of the land superseding the Constitution. Let's examine this deception closely and dispel the myth once and for all. Article VI of the Constitution states:
Clause 2 - "This Constitution and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof, and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution [of any state] or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding."
Clause 3 - "The senators and representatives before mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executives and judicial officers, both of the United States and the several states, shall be bound by oath of affirmation to support this Constitution ."
Laws made in pursuance of this Constitution are laws which are made within the strict and limited confines of the Constitution itself. No federal, state, or international law, rule or bureaucratic regulation and no state constitution can supersede B or be repugnant to B this Constitution.
Treaties made under the authority of the United States... the United States (federal government) was authorized by and on behalf of the people and in pursuance of this Constitution to enter into certain treaties with other governments. The United States (federal government) obtains its authority solely from the Constitution. It would be ludicrous to think that it has the power to circumvent (via treaties) that which grants it its authority.
In Clause 3, it is made clear that every elected official, both federal and state, is bound by oath to support this Constitution. Who can rightly, and genuinely claim to be given the power to destroy that which they are elected and sworn to uphold?
The powers granted by the Constitution cannot sanely be construed to provide the authority to usurp, pre-empt or eradicate it.
The U.S. Supreme Court as cited above correctly ruled that the supremacy of the Constitution overrides treaties. It should be noted that if any Court, be it a State, Federal or the U.S. Supreme Court, should ever rule otherwise, the decision would be repugnant to the Constitution and the ruling would be null and void. The answer to this question is self-evident.
The Constitution authorizes the United States to enter into treaties with other nations B the word Anation@ although not explicit, is certainly implied. The United Nations is an Organization - a Global Corporate Bureaucracy. The 'experts' in international law, commerce, banking, environment, etc.; and a cadre of alleged conservative / Christian-conservative leaders -- lawyer, Dame of Malta, Phyllis Schlafly being a prime example -- have been spewing forth propaganda to instill and further the myth of 'treaty-supremacy' for decades. Their 'expertise' is an illusion created apparently with hopes to instill a sense of inferiority in the 'common man' (their term) so we will all defer to their superior intelligence. Let's not go there.
Here's a perfect example of 'expert' propaganda on the supremacy question: On April 11, 1952, Secretary of State, John Foster Dulles (cfr), speaking before the American Bar Association in Louisville, Kentucky said...
"Treaties make international law and also they make domestic law. Under our Constitution, treaties become the supreme law of the land.... Treaty law can override the Constitution. Treaties, for example, ...can cut across the rights given the people by their constitutional Bill of Rights."
Mr. Dulles is confused about the People's rights. To repeat an earlier statement of fact: the Constitution doesn't 'give' us rights. The Constitution acknowledges and secures our inherent, Creator-endowed rights. What Creator gives, no man can take away.
The Dulles brothers worked (lied) long and hard to firmly establish the treaty-supremacy myth. And they realized it would have to be done by deceit -- propaganda. Admittedly by propaganda.
"There is no indication that American public opinion, for example, would approve the establishment of a super state, or permit American membership in it. In other words, time - a long time - will be needed before world government is politically feasible... This time element might seemingly be shortened so far as American opinion is concerned by an active propaganda campaign in this country..."
Allen W. Dulles (cfr) from a UN booklet, Headline Series #59 (New York: The Foreign Policy Association., Sept.-Oct., 1946) pg 46.
The question of "nationhood" in reference to the United Nations seems to have been addressed by the errant Congress. A quick fix apparently took place in the U.S. Senate on March 19, 1970. According to the Anaheim (Cal) Bulletin, 4-20-1970, the Senate ratified a resolution recognizing the United Nations Organization as a sovereign nation. That would be tantamount to recognizing General Motors as a sovereign nation. Are we beginning to get the picture?
Please help me pay for my oxygen an transportation,
I understand this is selfish of me But I enjoy living..
could you not understand,
with a 10.00 gift mailed to
1540 n nye
Toledo Oregon,97391=9998
Rev ed johnston
So I can keep the education your our constitutional born rights for our Legal american children...About me, I'm for real..
www.oregontrackers.com
peace and god bless our 10 commandment and the constitutional laws
[PDF]
“The Controlled Substances, Drugs, Device, and Cosmetic Act”
Adobe PDF
“THE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE, DRUG, DEVICE AND COSMETIC ACT” Act of 1972, P.L. 233, No. 64 ... common or contract carrier, public ... to establish a Bur
eau of Drug Control within ...
ecapps.health.state.pa.us/pdf/ddc/ddcAct2.pdf
SENTENCING - Office of the Ohio Public Defender - Homepage
Boyd (1972), 30 Ohio St. 2d 64, 65. But see ... notify an offender about postrelease control at the sentencing ... 1991), 61 Ohio St. 3d 175 -- When the sentence for a drug ...I received the following in an email.
ENFORCEMENT OF CITY/COUNTY CODES PROHIBITED. California Law prohibits Cities and Counties from enforcing City or County Codes and Ordinances upon property that is not ...
www.usavsus.info/Enforc
ementNotAllowed.htm
- Cached
ConspiracyWatch> ENFORCEMENT OF CITY/COUNTY CODES PROHIBITED
ConspiracyWatch> ENFORCEMENT OF CITY/COUNTY CODES PROHIBITED Jack Bauer bowersecret at gmail.com Thu Jul 1 10:22:56 CDT 2010. Previous message: ConspiracyWatch> Kagan ...
constitutionalgov.us/pipermail/conspiracywatch... - Cached
The Of School And 2380273
sodahead.com
PETITION
IN SUPPORT OF LEGISLATION
TO MANDATE DRUG TESTING FOR JUDGES AND LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS
We, the undersigned citizens of Oregon, urge the state legislature to
pass legislation that mandates drug testing for judges who can hear
drug-related cases and for all law enforcement officers who are, or can
be, involved with enforcement of drug prohibition laws. We believe that
law enforcement is best done by police, troopers and judges who the
public knows are not in any way involved with the illegal drugs which
their job requires them to suppress as illegal and also exposes them
to. We believe that an unknown, probably small but real percentage of
law enforcement and the judges in the state may be involved illegally
in the use or business of selling such drugs - and that even if none
are, the wide belief that some are is itself something that warrants
passage of legislation mandating drug testing for judges and law
enforcement officers. Law enforcement can only be improved by such
legislation, and the public's belief in and support for the law can
only be strengthened by passage of such a state law.
Sign name address date
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________
Bouvier’s Law Dictionary 1856
ABANDONMENT, contracts. In the French law, the act by which a debtor surrenders his property for the benefit of his creditors. Merl. Rep. mot Abandonment.
ABANDONMENT, contracts. In insurances the act by which the insured relinquishes to the assurer all the property to the thing insured.
2.- No particular form is required for an abandonment, nor need it be in writing; but it must be explicit and absolute, and must set forth the reasons upon which it is founded.
3.-It must also be made in reasonable time after the loss.
4.-It is not in every case of loss that the insured can abandon. In the following cases an abandonment may be made: when there is a total loss; when the voyage is lost or not worth pursuing, by reason of a peril insured against or if the cargo be so damaged as to be of little or no value; or where the salvage is very high, and further expense be necessary, and the insurer will not engage to bear it or if what is saved is of less value than the freight; or where the damage exceeds one half of the value of the goods insured or where the property is captured, or even detained by an indefinite embargo ; and in cases of a like nature.
5.-The abandonment, when legally made transfers from the insured to the insurer the property in the thing insured, and obliges him to pay to the insured what he promised him by the contract of insurance. 3 Kent, Com. 265; 2 Marsh. Ins. 559 Pard. Dr. Coin. n. 836 et seq. Boulay Paty, Dr. Com. Maritime, tit. 11, tom. 4, p. 215.
ABANDONMENT. In maritime contracts in the civil law, principals are generally held indefinitely responsible for the obligations which their agents have contracted relative to the concern of their commission but with regard to ship owners there is remarkable peculiarity; they are bound by the contract of the master only to the amount of their interest in the ship, and can be discharged from their responsibility by abandoning the ship and freight. Poth. Chartes part. s. 2, art. 3, 51; Ord. de la Mar. des proprietaires, art. 2; Code de Com. 1. 2, t. 2, art. 216.
ABANDONMENT, lights. The relinquishment of a right; the giving up of something to which we are entitled.
2. - Legal rights, when once vested, must be divested according to law, but equitable rights may be abandoned. 2 Wash. R. 106. See 1 H. & M. 429; a mill site, once occupied, may be abandoned. 17 Mass. 297; an application for land, which is an inception of title, 5 S. & R. 215; 2 S. & R. 378; 1 Yeates, 193, 289; 2 Yeates, 81, 88, 318; an improvement, 1 Yeates, 515 ; 2 Yeates, 476; 5 Binn. 73; 3 S. & R. 319; Jones' Syllabus of Land Office Titles in Pennsylvania, chap. xx; and a trust fund, 3 Yerg. 258 may be abandoned.
3. - The abandonment must be made by the owner without being pressed by any duty, necessity or utility to himself, but simply because he wishes no longer to possess the thing; and further it must be made without any desire that any other person shall acquire the same; for if it were made for a consideration, it would be a sale or barter, and if without consideration, but with an intention that some other person should become the possessor, it would be a gift: and it would still be a gift though the owner might be indifferent as to whom the right should be transferred; for example, he threw money among a crowd with intent that some one should acquire the title to it.
ABANDONMENT for torts, a term used in the civil law. By the Roman law, when the master was sued for the tort of his slave, or the owner for a trespass committed by his animal, he might abandon them to the person injured, and thereby save himself from further responsibility.
2. - Similar provisions have been adopted in Louisiana. It is enacted by the civil code that the master shall be answerable for all the damages occasioned by an offence or quasi offence committed by his slave. He may, however, discharge himself from such responsibility by abandoning the slave to the person injured; in which case such person shall sell such slave at public auction in the usual form; to obtain payment of the damages and costs; and the balance, if any, shall be returned to the master of the slave, who shall be completely discharged, although the price of the slave should not be sufficient to pay the whole amount of the damages and costs; provided that the master shall make abandonment within three days after the judgment awarding such damages, shall have been rendered; provided also that it shall not be proved that the crime or offence was committed by his order, for in such cases the master shall be answerable for all damages resulting therefrom, whatever be the amount, without being admitted to the benefit of abandonment. Art. 180, 181.
3. - The owner of an animal is answerable for the damages he has caused; but if the animal had been lost, or had strayed more than a day, he may discharge himself from this responsibility, by abandoning him to the person who has sustained the injury, except where the master has turned loose a dangerous or noxious animal, for then he must pay for all the harm he has done, without being allowed, to make the abandonment. Ib. art. 2301.
ABANDONMENT, malicious. The act of a hushand or wife, who leaves his or her consort wilfully, and with an intention of causing perpetual separation.
2. - Such abandonment, when it has continued the length of time required by the local statutes, is sufficient cause for a divorce. Vide 1 Hoff. R. 47; Divorce.
305.04 Bond of county commissioners – oath of office.
Before entering upon the discharge of his duties each county commissioner shall give bond, signed by a bonding or surety company authorized to do business in this state, or, at his option, by two or more freeholders having real estate in the value of double the amount of the bond over and above all encumbrances to the state, in a sum not less than five thousand dollars, the surety company to be approved by the probate judge of the county, the bond conditioned for the faithful discharge of the commissioner’s official duties, and for the payment of any loss or damage that the county may sustain by reason of his failure in such duties. Such bond, with the oath of office and approval of the probate judge indorsed thereon, shall be deposited with the county treasurer and kept in his office. The expense or premium for such bond shall be paid by the board of county commissioners and charged to the general fund of the county. Such surety may be discharged in the manner provided by section 2109.18 of the Revised Code for the release of sureties of guardians. http://blog.mansfieldersperspective.com/305-04-bond-of-county-commissioners-oath-of-o
Dictionary of Law 1893
Christianity. The system of doctrines and precepts taught by Christ; the religion founded by Christ. Christianity is said to be part of the common law. "Christianity is parcel of the laws of England; and, therefore, to reproach the Christian religion is to speak in subversion of the law." -Taylor's Case, Ventris 293 (1676). "The essential principles of natural religion and of revealed religion are a part of the common law, so that any person reviling or subverting or ridiculing them may be prosecuted at common law". -Case of Evans, 2 Burn. Ec. L. 185 (1780). The maxim can have no reference to the law of the National government, since the sources of that law are the Constitution, treaties, and acts of Congress. See Wheaton v. Peters, 8 Pet. 591 (1831). See further Law, Common; Blasphemy; Policy, 2.; Religion.
All Elected and public servants need to be registered under 376 U.S. 605
The Foreign Agents Registration Act was first enacted by Congress on June 8, 1938. It required agents of foreign principals to register with the Secretary of State.' '(A)gent of a foreign principal' was defined as 'any person who acts or engages or agrees to act as a public-relations counsel, publicity agent, or as agent, servant, representative, or attorney for a foreign principal * * *.' 52 Stat. 631, 632. (Emphasis added.) 'Foreign principal' was defined as 'the government of a foreign country, a political party of a foreign country, a person domiciled abroad, or any foreign business, partnership, association, corporation, or political organization * * *.' Exempted from the definition of 'agent of a foreign principal' was 'a person, other than a public-relations counsel, or publicity agent, performing only private, non-political, financial, mercantile, or other activities in furtherance of the bona fide trade or commerce of such foreign principal.' 52 Stat. 631, 632. (Emphasis added.) In 1961, the exemption section was amended to apply to persons 'engaging or agreeing to engage only in private and non-political, financial or mercantile activities in furtherance of the bona fide trade or commerce of such foreign principal * * *.
Whereas : THE LAW STATES THE FOLLOWING:
11 U.S. Code § 548 - Fraudulent transfers and obligations
12 U.S. Code § 73 - Oath
15 U.S. Code 1 - Illegal trades
15 U.S. Code 2 - Monopolizing trades
18 U.S. Code § 4 - Misprision of felony
18 U.S. Code § 11 - Foreign government defined
18 U.S. Code Chapter 42 - EXTORTIONATE CREDIT TRANSACTIONS
18 U.S. Code Chapter 43 - FALSE PERSONATION
18 U.S. Code Chapter 47 - FRAUD AND FALSE STATEMENTS
18 U.S. Code 241 - Conspiracy against rights
18 U.S. Code 242 - Deprivation of rights
18 U.S. Code § 245 - Federally protected activities
18 U.S. Code § 371 - Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States
18 U.S. Code 64 §1 - Public money, property or records
18 U.S. Code § 876 - Mailing threatening communications
18 U.S. Code § 880 - Receiving the proceeds of extortion
18 U.S. Code 1028 - Fraud and others
18 U.S. Code § 1341 - Frauds and swindles
18 U.S. Code § 1342 - Fictitious name or address
21 U.S. Code § 848 - Continuing criminal enterprise
27 CFR 72.11 - Meaning of terms.
Commercial crimes. Any of the following types of crimes (Federal or State): Offenses against the revenue laws; burglary; counterfeiting; forgery; kidnapping; larceny; robbery; illegal sale or possession of deadly weapons; prostitution (including soliciting, procuring, pandering, white slaving, keeping house of ill fame, and like offenses); extortion; swindling and confidence games; and attempting to commit, conspiring to commit, or compounding any of the foregoing crimes. Addiction to narcotic drugs and use of marijuana will be treated as if such were commercial crime.
28 U.S. Code Chapter 97 - JURISDICTIONAL IMMUNITIES OF FOREIGN STATES
28 U.S. Code § 453 - Oaths of justices and judges
31 U.S. Code § 1321 - Trust funds
31 U.S. Code § 1322 - Payments of unclaimed trust fund amounts and refund of amounts erroneously deposited
42 U.S. Code § 1981 - Equal rights under the law
42 U.S. Code § 1983 - Civil action for deprivation of rights
:
The following facts should wake up anyone who understands basic math...the US and all states are 100% controlled by judicial and political prostitutes and the BAR is the entity that has taken over:
THE BAR CONTROLS THREE out of four of the lawful bloodline American BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT...(See Below)
1.) The ABA/BAR has a 100% racketeering monopoly on Justice........they control every court every law; they control the entire Judicial Branch
2) Up to 70% of all members of every congress are BAR members.....So the BAR has infiltrated the Legislative Branch..up to 70%
3.) Barack Obama a former BAR member, Hillary a BAR member so they have a lock on the Executive Branch
4.) Many Governors are BAR members...........(Are you starting to see a pattern ...the evidence is blatant!)
5) Adding icing to their mafia racketeering cake is the kicker of all .............the BAR controls the FBI, the US marshals, the ATF, the DEA the ENTIRE Department of Justice via BAR member Loretta Lynch and Barack Obama
6.) And the final nail in our coffin is that the BAR controls every Sheriff in almost every Country via a BAR members called the DA.........
When one takes a birds eye view of their insidious work they will realize such infiltration started in 1783 at the Signing of the Treaty of Paris.
Notice of dishonor
NOTICE OF DISHONOR. The notice given by the holder of a bill of exchange or promissory note, to a drawer or endorser on the same, that it has been dishonored, either by not being accepted in the case of a bill, or paid in cue of an accepted bill or note.
2. It is proper to consider, 1. The form of the notice; 2. By whom it is to be given; 3. To whom. 4. When; 5. Where; 6. Its effects; 7. When a want of notice will be excused; 8. When it will be waived.
3.-Sec 1. Although no precise form of words is requisite in giving notice of dishonor, yet such notice must convey, 1. A true description of the bill or note so as to ascertain its identity; but if the notice cannot mislead the party to whom it is sent, and it conveys the real fact without any. doubt, although there may be a small variance, it cannot be material, either to regard his rights or to avoid his responsibility. 11 Wheat. 431, 436; Story on Bills, SS 390; 11 Mees. & Wels. 809. 2. The notice must contain an assertion that their bill has been duly presented to the drawee for acceptance, when acceptance has been refused, or to the acceptor of a bill, or maker of a note for payment at its maturity, and dishonored. 4 C. 340; 7 Bing. 530; l Bing. N. C. 192; 1 M. & G. 76; 3 Bing. N. C. 688; 10 A. & E. 125. 3. The notice must state that the holder, or other person giving the notice, looks to the person to whom the notice is given, for reimbursement and indemnity. Story on Bills, SS 301, 390. Although in strictness this may be required, where the language is otherwise doubtful and uncertain, yet, in general, it will be presumed where in other respects the notice is sufficient. 2 A. & E. N. R. 388, 416; 11 Mees. & Wels. 372; Sto on P. N. SS 353; 11 Wheat. 431, 437; 2 Pet. 543; 2 John. Cas. 237; 2 Hill, (N. Y.) R. 588; 1 Spear, R. 244.
4.- Sec. 2. In general the notice may be given by the holder or some one authorized by him; Story on Bills, SS 303, 304; or by some one who is a party and liable to pay the bill or note. But notice given by a stranger is not sufficient. Chit. on Bills, 368, 8th edit.; 1. T. R. 170; 8 Miss. 704; 16 S. & R. 157, 160. On the death of the holder, his executor or administrator is required to give notice, and, if none be then Appointed, the notice must be given within a reasonable time after one may be appointed. Story on P. N. SS 3Q4. When the bill or note i's held by partners, notice by any of them is sufficient; and when joint-holders have the paper, and one dies, the notice may be given by the survivor; the assignee of the holder who is a bankrupt, must give notice, but if no assignee be appointed when the paper becomes due, the notice must be given without delay after his appointment; but it seems the bankrupt holder may himself give the notice. Story on P. N. SS 305. If an infant be the holder the notice may be given by him, or if he has a guardian, by the latter.
5.- Sec. 3. The holder is required to give notice to all the parties to whom he means to resort for payment, and, unless excused in point of law, as will be stated below, such parties will be exonerated, and absolved from all liability on such bill or note. Story on P. N. SS 307. But a party who purchases a bill, and, without endorsing it, transmits it on account of goods ordered by him, is not entitled to notice of its dishonor. 1 Wend. 219; 4 Wash. C. C. 1. In cases of partnership, notice to either of the partners is sufficient. Story on Bills, SS 299; Story on P. N. SS 308; 20 John. 176; 2 How. Sup. Ct. It. 457. Notice should be given to each of several joint endorsers, who are not partners. 1 Conn. 368; 4 Cowen, 126; 6 Hill, (N. Y.) R. 282; Story on Bills, SS 299. Notice to an absent endorser may be given to bis general agent. 1 M. & Selw. 545; 16 Martin, (Lo.) R. 87. See 12 Wheat. 599; 4 Wash. C. C. 464; 3 Wend. 276.
6.-Sec. 4. The notice of dishonor must be given to the parties to whom the holder means to resort, within a reasonable time after the dishonor of the bill, when it is dishonored for non-acceptance, and he must not delay giving notice until the bill has been protested for non-payment. Bull. N. P. 271; 12 East, 434; 1 Harr. & J. 187; 1 Dall. 235; 2 Dall. 219, 233; 1 Yeates, 147; 3 Wash. C. C. 396; 1 Bay, 177; 11 John. 187; 10 Wend. 304; 13 Wend. 133; 5 Halst. 139; 4 J. J. Marsh. 61; Paine, 156; 2 Hayw. 332; 2 Marsh. 616. Though formerly it was doubtful whether the court or jury were to judge as to the reasonableness of the notice in respect to time; 1 T. R. 168; yet, it seems now to be settled, that when the facts are ascertained, it is a question for the court and 'not for the jury. 10 Mass. 84, 86; 6 Watts & S. 399; 3 Marsh. 262; 2 Harris R. 488; Penn. 916; 1 N. H. Rep. 140; 17 Mass. 449, 453; 2 Aik. 9; Rice, R. 240; 2 Hayw. 45.
7.- Sec. 5. In considering as to where the 'notice should be given, a difference is made between cases, where the parties reside in the same town, and where they do not. 1. When both parties reside in the same town or city, the notice should either be personal or at the domicil or place of business of the party notified, so that it may reach him on the very day he is entitled to notice. 1 M. & S. 545, 554; 2 Pet. 100; 1 Pet. 578, 583; Story on Bills, SSSS 284-290; 1 Rob. Lo. R. 572; 3 Rob. Lo. 261; 20 John. 372; 1 Conn. 329; 17 Mart.,Lo. 137, 158, 359; 19 Mart. Lo. 492; Story on P. N. 322. But see 28 Pick. 305; 6 Watts & Serg. 262; 2 Aik. 263; 8 Ohio, 507, 510; Rice, R. 240, 243; 1 Litt. R. 194. If the notice be put in the post office, the holder must prove it reached the endorser. 2 Pet. 121. But in those towns where they have letter carriers, who carry letters from the post office and deliver them at the houses or places of business of the parties, if the notice be put in the post office in time to be delivered on the same day, it will be sufficient. Chit. on Bills, 504, 508, 513, 8th edit.; 1 Pet. 578; 11 John. 231. 2. When the parties reside in different towns or cities, the notice may be sent by the post, or a special messenger, or a private person, or by any other suitable or ordinary conveyance. Chit. on Bills, 518, 8th ed.; Story on P. N. SS 324; Bayl. on Bills, eh. 7, SS 2; 1 Pet. 582. When the post is re, sorted to, the holder has the whole day on which the bill becomes due to prepare his notice, and if it be put in the post office on the next day in time to go by either mails, when there is more than one, it will in general be sufficient. 17 Mass. 449, 454; 1 Hill, (N. Y.) R. 263; but see contra, 2 Rob. Lo. R. 117.
8.-Sec. 6. The effect of the notice of dishonor, when properly given, and when it is followed by a protest, when a protest is requisite, will render the drawer and endorsers of a bill or the endorsers of a note liable to the holder. But the drawer and endorsers may tender the money at any time before a writ has been issued; though the acceptor must pay the bill on presentment, and cannot plead a subsequent tender. 1 Marsh. 36; 5 Taunt. 240; S. C. 8 East, 168.
9.-Sec. 7. The same reasons which will excuse the want of a presentment, will in general excuse a want of protest. See Presentment, contracts, n. 8, 9.
10.-Sec. 8. A want of notice may be waived by the party to be affected, after a full knowledge of the facts that the holder has no just cause for the neglect or omission. Story on P. N. SS 858. See Presentment, contracts, n. 9.
Congress cannot by legislation enlarge the federal jurisdiction, and it cannot be enlarged under the treaty making power.” Mayor, Alderman and Inhabitants of City of New Orleans v. U.S., 35 U.S. 662, 10 Pet. 662, 9 L.Ed. 573 (1836). And;
NOTICE OF DISHONOR - NONPAYMENT
To: _____________________ (Party Liable on Instrument)
_____________________ (Address)
_____________________
Please take notice that presentment of a _________________ (Draft), for __________
___________ ($__________) drawn by ____________________ (Drawer), of _______
______________ (Address), __________ (City), __________ (County), ____________ (State), on ______________________ (Drawee), of ____________________(Address), ______________ (City), _____________ (County), _______(State), endorsed by ______________, of __________________________ (Address), ____________ (City), _____________ (County), __________ (State), and payable on __________ (Date) to _______________________ (Payee), of __________________________ (Address), _____________ (County), _______ (State), was made on ____________ (Date). _______________________, the undersigned of ____________________ (Address), __________ (City), __________ (County), __________ (State), who is the present holder of the ___________________ (Draft) presented the ___________ (Draft) to _________________________ (Drawee) for payment. The __________ (Draft) was dishonored when ______________________ (Drawee) refused to make payment. The undersigned looks to you for payment, including all interest, costs, and charges that have already accrued or that may accrue in the future by reason of nonpayment of this _______________ (Draft).
Dated: _____________________
____________________________
(Signature of Holder)
11th Amendment Immunity
The 11th Amendment under the US Constitution reads as follows: “The judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by citizens of another state, or by citizens or subjects of any foreign state.”
On December 9, 1945, International Organization Immunities Act relinquished every public office of the United States to the United Nations. This law makes all public officials foreign citizens, barring them from judicial power. All public officials are administrative agents of the US Corporation. They have no judicial power whatsoever.
22 CFR (Code of Federal Regulations) 92.12-92.31 FR Heading “Foreign Relationship” states that oath is required to take office.
Title 8 USC 1481 states, once oath of office is taken citizenship is relinquished, thus the oath taker becomes a foreign entity, agency, or state. That means every public office is a foreign state, even all political subdivisions; i.e., every single court is considered a separate foreign entity.
Title 22 USC, “Foreign Relations and Intercourse”, Chapter 11 identifies all public officials as foreign agents.
Kidnapping Melisa and her children False imprisonment is the unlawful restraint of a person without consent or legal justification. False imprisonment can be committed by words, acts, or by both[i]. The common law tort of false imprisonment is defined as an unlawful restraint of an individual’s personal liberty or freedom of movement[ii]. In order to constitute the wrong it is not necessary that the individual be actually confined or assaulted[iii].
It is to be noted that, there is no necessity in a false imprisonment case to prove that a person used physical violence or laid hands on another person. It is sufficient to show that at any time or place the person in any manner deprived another person of his/her liberty without sufficient legal authority[iv].
False arrest is sometimes used interchangeably with false imprisonment. False arrest is the unlawful violation of the personal liberty of another consisting of detention without sufficient legal authority. In order to establish a false arrest claim, the person detained must prove that the arrest is unlawful and such unlawful arrest resulted in injury. An arrest is unlawful when the police officers in question did not have probable cause to make the arrest[v].
An arresting officer who fails to take the arrested person before a court or magistrate within a reasonable time or without unnecessary delay is guilty of false imprisonment. Similarly, an officer who arrests a person without a warrant is liable for false imprisonment by detaining the prisoner an unreasonable time[vi].
Generally, false arrest is one of several means of committing false imprisonment. False arrest describes the setting for false imprisonment when it is committed by a peace officer or by one who claims the power to make an arrest. Thus, a tort action for false imprisonment based on false arrest against a person who is not a peace officer implies that the detention or restraint to support the tort was done by one who claims the power of arrest[vii].
However, false arrest is almost indistinguishable from false imprisonment[viii]. The only distinction lies in the manner in which they arise. False arrest is merely one means of committing a false imprisonment. Whereas, false imprisonment is committed without any thought of attempting arrest[ix].
The principal element of damages in an action for false imprisonment is the loss of freedom. Sometimes, a court also takes into account the fear and nervousness suffered as a result of the detention[x]. The tort of false imprisonment involves an unlawful restraint on freedom of movement or personal liberty. Therefore, two essential elements to constitute false imprisonment are[xi]:
Detention or restraint against a person’s will,
Unlawfulness of the detention or restraint.
Whereas, after liability is established for false arrest, the person who suffered may recover nominal damages as well as compensation for mental suffering, including fright, shame, and mortification from the indignity and disgrace, consequent upon an illegal detention[xii]. However, in a suit for false arrest and false imprisonment, a person cannot recover attorney’s fees incurred or loss of earnings suffered while defending an underlying criminal action[xiii].
The elements to be considered by the jury in awarding compensatory damages in a false imprisonment case are physical suffering, mental suffering and humiliation, loss of time and interruption of business, reasonable and necessary expenses incurred, and injury to reputation[xiv]. However, it is to be noted that a mere loss of freedom will not constitute false imprisonment[xv].
In a suit for false imprisonment, the damages award may include compensation for loss of earnings while imprisoned, for bodily and mental suffering caused by the imprisonment, and for expenses incurred in securing discharge from restraint including a reasonable attorney fee[xvi].
The measure of damages for false imprisonment is a sum that will fairly and reasonably compensate the injured person for the injuries caused by the wrongful act including any special pecuniary loss which is a direct result of the false imprisonment[xvii]. A jury can award punitive damages in a false arrest or imprisonment case, if the requisite level of malice or other requisite mental state is established.
All persons who personally participate or cause an unlawful detention are held to be liable. Similarly, persons other than those who actually cause an imprisonment may be held jointly liable with others, as instigators or participants. However, passive knowledge or consent to the acts of another, or acting on a superior’s order, is not sufficient to make a person liable for false imprisonment.
It is to be noted that the jail officials are also held liable for false imprisonment for holding a person for an unreasonable time. A jail official is liable for false imprisonment if s/he knows that an arrest was illegal and that there is no right to imprison the person so arrested.
The liability of a principal for the act of an agent in causing a false arrest or imprisonment depends upon whether the principal previously authorized the act, or subsequently ratified it, or whether the act was within the scope of the employee’s or agent’s employment[xviii]. However, an employer will not be held liable for false imprisonment for the actions of an employee which are outside the scope of employment.
In order to avoid liability in an action for false imprisonment, a person must establish that s/he did not imprison the other person or s/he must justify the imprisonment. The presence of probable cause for imprisonment is a defense if it constitutes reasonable grounds for acting in defense of property or making an arrest without a warrant. A person is not liable for false imprisonment, if the person restrained is a child under the age of seventeen upon certain conditions. However, contributory negligence is not considered a defense if the wrong is something more than mere negligence[xix].
A false imprisonment action cannot be maintained if a person is properly arrested by lawful authority without a warrant. In order to justify an arrest without a warrant, the arrestor must proceed as soon as may be to make the arrest. Therefore, a private person can arrest another for a public offense committed or attempted in his/her presence[xx].
Certain officials and professionals are exempted from civil liability for false imprisonment under certain circumstances. They are:Judicial officers;
Government officials entrusted with judicial functions;
Attorneys;
Physicians.
A judicial officer who has jurisdiction of the person and of the subject matter is exempted from civil liability for false imprisonment so long as the judge acts within that jurisdiction and in a judicial capacity[xxi]. Similarly, officers in other government departments are also exempted from liability for false imprisonment whenever they are entrusted with the judicial exercise of discretionary power. Likewise, an attorney is also protected from personal liability for false imprisonment if s/he acts in good faith on behalf of his/her client. It is to be noted that physicians who give evidence in proceedings to determine sanity are also immune from liability for false imprisonment.
In the case of false imprisonment, the plaintiff has the burden of proving the false arrest. The plaintiff in a false imprisonment action must prove that the defendant proximately caused the injuries for which the plaintiff seeks damages[xxii].
Ed Johnston © 2013 Lawful Bloodline American All rights reserved A.K A. Lawful American