unalienable rights, accepted USC, salt pillars&other fairy tale lies

Unalienable rights, accepted USC, salt pillars, & other fairy tale lies

I am trying to keep these articles short enough so those interested will check back for the next serial. The articles will not be 30 second sound bites, but will be done as a connected series style. Future articles are considered which will cover the very unlawful attacks on Ed Brown and his wife Elaine of NH, Martha Steward, Eddie Kahn and Wesley Snipes and the third member of that attacked group.

Back to this article. First let me paraphrase two stories from an old well known book in the present day language use. A man and his family were told to leave a wicked system, and not turn back (look back). Which the woman (staff) did and was turned to a pillar of salt. Salt represents a preservative. This story is reinforced a number of time with instructions not to consult with the dead. The second story tells the created to not eat (take) of the fruit of a tree of the land (garden). In the book, this was the instructions given by the Creators/Makers. The Creator’s reason for the rules was not necessary to be given. The Creator sets the rules as the Creator sees fit. If you have a Divinity who does not give you free will, then my adopted contact rules should give you all the freedom you wish.

Since I view the DoI and subordinate USC as contracts, let look at those documents as contracts for understanding interpretation and construction. All contracts are civil in nature and require a free will meeting of the minds by both the writing party and the created or accepting party. How you would do it I can only guess, but I would never take part of/in or write a contract to hire someone to be over me. Since I used the contract form to best protect my unalienable rights, I would never set the hired servants as the only police power “one supreme Court”. Only the bosses can set on that court and judge the hired servants per the contract terms. I realize that many of the hired servants, inferior administrative court black robes, politicians, newspapers, claim we are based on England’s law. That lie comes from scum who does not like unalienable rights or some dummies who know no better. The law of England was based on one king over all. That system is in no way close to or a fore-runner of our contract system. The two are not in any way comparable. By trying to preserve the king system, many wrongs have been done under my government’s name.

I have never hired a president or congress to run a king system and to do so pretending that is what the/my contract says.

There are many dummies out here who say to not have anything to do with my USC contract. There are also dummies saying they are Sovereigns. One, if following the USC contact as I understand the contract, I see no problem for me or any other believing-in-justice individual following those contact rules. Let me make it clear to any readers, I only accept what I consider a valid USC contract, not the servant add on. Only the makers can change their created contract. Once created, the makers can only change the contract as agreed to in the making. I know many of the People have their heart in the right place, but their logic and law language is not what I consider correct. One can only use or deal via the USC as a person, not a Sovereign. As a contract person, the makers can in any issue matter against the created, have and maintain a higher status. Last input this article, whether an owner or a created person, all who deal/use per the USC have to know the USC can only be used as an Adhesion Contract. Until the next article, may your mind be active on this land’s law.