Application to United States legislature (Representative and Senate) for performance of subordinate United States Constitution contractual duty
The below following letter was sent as a valid contract request by one of the making owners of the USC contract. This information is being openly posted so others will know how to evaluate the honor and duty of our hired hands when measured against the contract they created hired hands have asked to be our faithful servants in our household. I have not figured out (if it is even possible) to copy and use .pdf files to do posting. The below letter is filed as a public record in the El Pasco County, CO clerk’s office at number 208074828. You can get a record copy straight from that office, or contract me via email at sjcaruthers@yahoo.com and I will provide you a .pdf file of the recorded letter and receipt confirmation number.
RE: Application to United States legislature (Representative and Senate) for performance of subordinate United States Constitution contractual duty for their help in abolishing this nation of domestic Violence from created persons against me, Siegfried J Caruthers and others of the body politic.
To:
US House of Representative
% Clerk Lorraine C Miller or current clerk person
US Capital, Room H154
Washington, DC 20515-6601
and
US Senate
% of Office of Secretary of the Senate: Nancy Erickson or current person
232 Senate Hart Office Bldg.
Washington, DC 20510
and
See last page for those persons sent a copy without any attachments for notice of this letter information.
Date: June 15, 2008
House of Representative and Senate or congress:
I am known as Siegfried J Caruthers, one of many of the body politic, who is a making owner by birthright and knowing adoption of the Supreme Law of this land. That Law is known as the Declaration of Independence (DoI) of July 4, 1776. An earlier signed and openly filed copy of that DoI is attached to this letter.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. –
I am one of the making owners of the United States Constitution of America (USC), by birthright, adoption, public utterances, use, and open filing of signed subordinate law to the DoI. An earlier signed and openly filed copy is attached to this letter.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
The intent of Union (face to face with no 3rd party between) with Our created congress is My purpose with and for this letter. I have dealt with before --1: your created head inferior administrative United States Supreme Court; 2: then made application to the President for assistance in protection against domestic Violence. Both persons ignored my application as no correction/help was forth coming. I then impeached the person of the President, and provided the Senate with notice and provided Myself as the self-appointed Chief Justice of the contractual supreme Court. The Senate has refused to do their contractual duty per the USC contract and clear the impeachment or let it stand that the person of Bush as President is not morally nor contractually qualified to hold the office. Congress is attempting to run this nation as a king type democracy via pretense of following and adhering to the DoI and the subordinate USC.
Three times or more congress has denied to me and taken from me by force my unalienable Rights from the Creator, failed to support my efforts to get the DoI and subordinate USC contract terms enforced. The same failure of congress applies to getting contract chartered entities and or persons removed from my nation for failure to follow or honor the DoI and subordinate USC contracts in freewill subordinate contracts dealings with me. These items must be in accordance with the DoI and subordinate USC contract congress pretends to follow. I am invoking my duty and issue this letter call for adherence to strict contract intent and terms.
Unless you meet the following contract intent and terms, congress has forfeited the contract right to exist. There are too many failures of congress to correctly and properly follow the contact terms for one owner to cover with this one letter. If congress makes this a start of returning to the intent of the DoI and subordinate USC, the making Owners and honorable persons will have more to change later.
Absolute corrections required as of this letter:
1. The signing making Owners of the DoI and the subordinate USC are the only People who can take any unalienable Rights from the Creator from any People or persons, and that by action by Jury of making Owners of a supreme Court using USC due process. Liberty is defined as no one above and that includes all created persons as NOT being over or above the making Owner or another off work duty person.
2. All persons will be directed to honor any persons’ request for a habeas corpus at the time the habeas corpus is given. Plus the due process of the USC contract requires any proper valid warrant for a non-consensual search of private property, person, things, or making owners shall only be issued by an active supreme Court grand jury. All inferior administrative courts who wish to issue warrants must clearly indentify on the paper of the warrant that the warrants are only valid for consensual and non-coerced use.
3. The charters of all entities who do not follow the intent of the contract rules, will die a civil death and the remaining USC charter entities will do no business with the former entities.
4. The serial numbered federal reserved note will be redeemable at any member bank with the various states within 90 days of the date of this letter. This is mandatory, otherwise the state inferior administrative court are prevented from any ruling concerning non-obtainable standard lawful money of account. ….. make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts,…… All consensual parties to such a hearing would have to agree that the USC contract was not being adhered to or used and these facts put on the hearing record and what the rules of the hearing were. In addition, it is the intent of the DoI and subordinate USC, that the state sets the salary for their congressman, collects and sends that money to the federal treasury. The federal treasury then pays the state set salary, with state sent and provided funds. This condition is expected to be in affect for any congress taking office in 2009. What making owner would let the created hired persons set their own salary? PS: Attached for notice is a letter minus attachments to Treasury Sec Paulson dated June 21, 2008 concerning redeemable or non-redeemable Federal Reserve treasury notes.
5. All congress persons starting with 2009, when they accept the job, will not be inhabitants of the state they serve…..( ….Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which he shall be chosen.) This means they are non-voters for their contract period of service to me.
6. For the person the electors choose for starting the office term of President in 2009, the vice-president will be the electors second place vote getter. Other wise, the person of the President is starting off by not following the USC contact. That would be doing or accepting a violation of the USC contract on the first day in office, an impeachable act. For 2009 starting term, I expected to be hired as the Chief Justice so all making owners and persons understand the valid contractual impeachment power is in place and has been acknowledged by congress and the new presidential person. .
7. Only the accepted version of the USC has been changed by the making owners. The created hired persons can not change the Body Politics’ governmental contacts. Only the first class making Owners can make changes to their creation.
The Ratification of the Conventions of nine States, shall be sufficient for the Establishment of this Constitution between the States so ratifying the Same. In keeping with the intent of the USC contract that it required making Owners acceptance when changes were made, and contract interpretation maxim that only parties to a contract had standing to be a party to contract actions, the following actions have been performed. 1. The Ratification of the following making owners was done by convention of remote wireless communication for nine states, and is valid to ratify this accepted USC for this congress and nation. The making Owners and the states are as follow: 1. Justin Irvin—Wyoming; 2. Robert Intlekofer--- Iowa; 3. Mary Severance---Colorado; 4. Siegfried J Caruthers--- Tennessee; 5. Patrica Korsval & Lars Stephan---California; 6. John Paul Fagot---Missouri; 7. James Mozingo---Maryland; 8. Rita Critel---Nebraska; 9. Robert Cook---Alabama. We nine have accepted and signed on as making Owners of the DoI and the subordinate USC. We each have also provided a letter of this action to the US Secretary of State, to notify each of the states, the appropriate federal agencies, and affected treaty nations.
If any one burdens the unalienable Rights of any individual in those states that are not yet a signing partaker of the accepted contracts, any action not in accordance with the intent of the in force contract much be explained in clear simple English of what rules the moving party is using and their assumed jurisdiction. I do not consent to have my law besmirched with unlawfulness from others who wrongly blame my just DoI and subordinate USC contract law.
I expect the congress to convene within 10 days of receipt of this letter, and ensure the necessary action items are taken care of. If said convening and corrections are not complete with 10 to 15 days, then I will have to consider my next steps to get the contracts honored by another group of hired created persons. I would suggest a joint convening of the two houses of congress.
Siegfried J Caruthers: ________________________________________
Making owner, and a judicial power per the USC
Attachments:
signed Declaration of Independence – 5 pages
signed accepted subordinate United States Constitution – 15 pages
notice via signed letter to Sec Paulson of US Treasury – 2 pages date 6/21/08
Notice is given by this letter without any attachments to the following persons/US Departments:
Person of Sec. Paulson or current; US Treasury Department; 1500 Pennsylvania Ave, NW; Washington, DC 20220
Person of AG, Michael Mukasey or current; Department of Justice; 950 Pennsylvania Ave., NW; Washington, DC 20530-0001
Person of Sec. Rice or current; Department of State; 2201 C Street NW; Washington, DC 20520
Sunday, July 20, 2008
unalienable rights & USC required contract money
State of standard lawful money from Paulson (head of US Treasury)
I do not know how most of you folks read and understand the law of this nation. Just as I do not try to convince flat earth believer that the earth is really another shape I will not try to spoon feed anyone my view of contract law. Does it matter whether the flat earth believers are correct or I am? This is the first of two done actions that I consider valid orders from my status with respect to the contract laws of this nation. If this works for posting, it will be followed by a second posting. I do hope the readers of this posting, enjoy becoming making owners, hence drivers of the contract law.
Please note: there is a blank space before the .pdf file of the publicly recorded letter concerning money kicks in. As far as I know, this allows my actions to be used by others as supporting their position concerning funny money and the contract requirements for this land.
I could not get the .pdf file to post, the following below letter and USPS confirmation of receipt is filed in El Pasco County, CO. at number 2080744829. If you wish to use, you can get from the CO county court clerk, or request via email from me and I will email the .pdf recorded file.
I can be contacted at for work files and my view point at <sjcaruthers@yahoo.com>
Serial Numbered US Federal Reserve Notes per Treasury
Date: June 21, 2008
To:
Person of Henry M. Paulson, Jr. or current Sec.
Treasury Department
1500 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20220
From:
Siegfried J Caruthers
Currently at: 1500 Hillcrest Rd, Apt 613
Mobile, AL 36695
RE: MY Request the enclosed 3 Serial Numbered 20’s I own and hold be exchanged for US minted gold coins.
Sir:
Long ago, I took some of the same type serial numbered notes to a local state member bank of the Federal Reserve banking system, but they could not or would not give me minted coin for the serial numbered legal tender notes. The action was repeated with the same result at one of the 12 Federal Reserve banks.
My status is as follows: I claim to be a making owner and accepter of the Supreme Law of this land known as the Declaration of Independence (hereafter DoI) and the subordinate accepted (my me and others) United States Constitution (hereafter USC). As a making owner and by the DoI and USC contracts a judicial power of this lands supreme Court, I send this judicial request letter to you. You are further informed that I have impeached the Person of President Bush, and you have no valid president above you to block, order, or cover for any contractual duty or non-contractual actions you take with regard to my request. For your peace of mind, I tell you I have provided notice to the appropriate houses of my Congress, with notice of my impeachment and offer to be the trial Chief Justice of the supreme Court mandated by the USC. Congress has chosen to not clear his name and thus, again qualify Bush to be the person of President. Those being the conditions, you working directly as appointed by congress, owe me the contract duty I am requesting.
Find enclosed 3 Federal Reserve serial numbers notes: CG 11078472 A;
GF 64694046 B; and IC 76924108 A. I want these three notes redeemed for indicated face value of minted US coin (standard lawful dollars). Since I have not been able to do so, at a local member system bank, I require shipping to my temporary address of this letter.
If the ordered redeemable does not take place and delivery made within 10 days after receipt, then this request serves as open notice to the world that any Monopoly money notes are as good as these more fancy non-redeemable Federal Reserve notes. By USC contract the federal court system can not order the use of a person or persons worthless piece of paper standing above worthless paper selected, made, or used another person or persons.
My ordered request for an owed contract duty per the USC,
Siegfried J Caruthers: ______________________________________________
A Judicial power of the supreme Court per the USC contract terms
PS: This letter without enclosed Federal Reserve bank notes will be attached to an application to congress I am making per the USC terms.
a: Enclosed are the three above listed serial numbered Federal Reserve Bank notes
I do not know how most of you folks read and understand the law of this nation. Just as I do not try to convince flat earth believer that the earth is really another shape I will not try to spoon feed anyone my view of contract law. Does it matter whether the flat earth believers are correct or I am? This is the first of two done actions that I consider valid orders from my status with respect to the contract laws of this nation. If this works for posting, it will be followed by a second posting. I do hope the readers of this posting, enjoy becoming making owners, hence drivers of the contract law.
Please note: there is a blank space before the .pdf file of the publicly recorded letter concerning money kicks in. As far as I know, this allows my actions to be used by others as supporting their position concerning funny money and the contract requirements for this land.
I could not get the .pdf file to post, the following below letter and USPS confirmation of receipt is filed in El Pasco County, CO. at number 2080744829. If you wish to use, you can get from the CO county court clerk, or request via email from me and I will email the .pdf recorded file.
I can be contacted at for work files and my view point at <sjcaruthers@yahoo.com>
Serial Numbered US Federal Reserve Notes per Treasury
Date: June 21, 2008
To:
Person of Henry M. Paulson, Jr. or current Sec.
Treasury Department
1500 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20220
From:
Siegfried J Caruthers
Currently at: 1500 Hillcrest Rd, Apt 613
Mobile, AL 36695
RE: MY Request the enclosed 3 Serial Numbered 20’s I own and hold be exchanged for US minted gold coins.
Sir:
Long ago, I took some of the same type serial numbered notes to a local state member bank of the Federal Reserve banking system, but they could not or would not give me minted coin for the serial numbered legal tender notes. The action was repeated with the same result at one of the 12 Federal Reserve banks.
My status is as follows: I claim to be a making owner and accepter of the Supreme Law of this land known as the Declaration of Independence (hereafter DoI) and the subordinate accepted (my me and others) United States Constitution (hereafter USC). As a making owner and by the DoI and USC contracts a judicial power of this lands supreme Court, I send this judicial request letter to you. You are further informed that I have impeached the Person of President Bush, and you have no valid president above you to block, order, or cover for any contractual duty or non-contractual actions you take with regard to my request. For your peace of mind, I tell you I have provided notice to the appropriate houses of my Congress, with notice of my impeachment and offer to be the trial Chief Justice of the supreme Court mandated by the USC. Congress has chosen to not clear his name and thus, again qualify Bush to be the person of President. Those being the conditions, you working directly as appointed by congress, owe me the contract duty I am requesting.
Find enclosed 3 Federal Reserve serial numbers notes: CG 11078472 A;
GF 64694046 B; and IC 76924108 A. I want these three notes redeemed for indicated face value of minted US coin (standard lawful dollars). Since I have not been able to do so, at a local member system bank, I require shipping to my temporary address of this letter.
If the ordered redeemable does not take place and delivery made within 10 days after receipt, then this request serves as open notice to the world that any Monopoly money notes are as good as these more fancy non-redeemable Federal Reserve notes. By USC contract the federal court system can not order the use of a person or persons worthless piece of paper standing above worthless paper selected, made, or used another person or persons.
My ordered request for an owed contract duty per the USC,
Siegfried J Caruthers: ______________________________________________
A Judicial power of the supreme Court per the USC contract terms
PS: This letter without enclosed Federal Reserve bank notes will be attached to an application to congress I am making per the USC terms.
a: Enclosed are the three above listed serial numbered Federal Reserve Bank notes
Tuesday, July 1, 2008
unalienable rights vs donkey & elephant circus
Reply to Hope and the world at large:
Your question indicate you and I think differently about the law of this land and how it is suppose to be set up. To say I consider your questions way off point, and indicating a lack of understanding, at least from my view point, is a very mild way of saying --- one of us needs to do a lot more thinking on the law of this land.
I claim ownership of the Declaration of Independence (DoI) and also the subordinate accepted United States Constitution (USC) (as I accept-not as the world talks about). I have signed the contacts and filed as a matter of record and told various and assorted persons of my position/status. My status is -- a making owner of both the DoI and subordinate USC. I am a Citizen of the United States. Both the DoI and USC are contracts. By signing on as a making owner, I hold by contract status, the position of a created judicial power of the USC’s supreme Court. I am one among many and by claiming I have a part in/of the contracts, I have standing. What gives you standing?
That said: I now go the words of the USC:
“”[[Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.
(The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two persons, of whom one at least shall not lie an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves. And they shall make a List of all the Persons voted for, and of the Number of Votes for each; which List they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted. The Person having the greatest Number of Votes shall be the President, if such Number be a Majority of the whole Number of Electors appointed; and if there be more than one who have such Majority, and have an equal Number of Votes, then the House of Representatives shall immediately chuse by Ballot one of them for President; and if no Person have a Majority, then from the five highest on the List the said House shall in like Manner chuse the President. But in chusing the President, the Votes shall be taken by States, the Representation from each State having one Vote; a quorum for this Purpose shall consist of a Member or Members from two-thirds of the States, and a Majority of all the States shall be necessary to a Choice. In every Case, after the Choice of the President, the Person having the greatest Number of Votes of the Electors shall be the Vice President. But if there should remain two or more who have equal Votes, the Senate shall chuse from them by Ballot the Vice-President.) The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.
No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.]]””
Read it and understand:: The contract is set up for us to choose electors who should then find a good man and vote for him. The contract implies strongly that once we choose electors, on a local scale, they then have the job of finding and voting for a presidential candidate. That means all this crap the from various parties and talk for popular vote or election of the president, is simply a Roman bread and circus show and is not according to the contract law of this land. Hope, you seem to have bought into this dog and pony show.
Please note the contract words are person and Native born. This part of the contract has nothing to with the birth of an individual via the birth canal or even by cesarean. I suspect it may take you a while to mull over the real intended time limit requirements, and qualifiers for this part of the contract language.
The governor of California Arnold S. can be president, and is contract suitable. For your info, remember Barry Goldwater. By using this Barack is not qualified because of where his mother’s legs were spread or womb was cut junk, then Barry Goldwater would not have been either. He was not birthed in the USA. It doesn’t matter that Arizona, later became a state. Go back and read the rules. There is no exception for being born in a soon to be state. Last for this posting -- natural born and native born are two very different words, especially when part of contract language.
Let’s elect the best electors we can vote for and let them do their job. I am tired of this donkey and elephant circus. I am out of it. It was much more enjoyable to watch Siegfried and Roy perform their show.
Your question indicate you and I think differently about the law of this land and how it is suppose to be set up. To say I consider your questions way off point, and indicating a lack of understanding, at least from my view point, is a very mild way of saying --- one of us needs to do a lot more thinking on the law of this land.
I claim ownership of the Declaration of Independence (DoI) and also the subordinate accepted United States Constitution (USC) (as I accept-not as the world talks about). I have signed the contacts and filed as a matter of record and told various and assorted persons of my position/status. My status is -- a making owner of both the DoI and subordinate USC. I am a Citizen of the United States. Both the DoI and USC are contracts. By signing on as a making owner, I hold by contract status, the position of a created judicial power of the USC’s supreme Court. I am one among many and by claiming I have a part in/of the contracts, I have standing. What gives you standing?
That said: I now go the words of the USC:
“”[[Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.
(The Electors shall meet in their respective States, and vote by Ballot for two persons, of whom one at least shall not lie an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves. And they shall make a List of all the Persons voted for, and of the Number of Votes for each; which List they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the Seat of the Government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate. The President of the Senate shall, in the Presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the Certificates, and the Votes shall then be counted. The Person having the greatest Number of Votes shall be the President, if such Number be a Majority of the whole Number of Electors appointed; and if there be more than one who have such Majority, and have an equal Number of Votes, then the House of Representatives shall immediately chuse by Ballot one of them for President; and if no Person have a Majority, then from the five highest on the List the said House shall in like Manner chuse the President. But in chusing the President, the Votes shall be taken by States, the Representation from each State having one Vote; a quorum for this Purpose shall consist of a Member or Members from two-thirds of the States, and a Majority of all the States shall be necessary to a Choice. In every Case, after the Choice of the President, the Person having the greatest Number of Votes of the Electors shall be the Vice President. But if there should remain two or more who have equal Votes, the Senate shall chuse from them by Ballot the Vice-President.) The Congress may determine the Time of chusing the Electors, and the Day on which they shall give their Votes; which Day shall be the same throughout the United States.
No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.]]””
Read it and understand:: The contract is set up for us to choose electors who should then find a good man and vote for him. The contract implies strongly that once we choose electors, on a local scale, they then have the job of finding and voting for a presidential candidate. That means all this crap the from various parties and talk for popular vote or election of the president, is simply a Roman bread and circus show and is not according to the contract law of this land. Hope, you seem to have bought into this dog and pony show.
Please note the contract words are person and Native born. This part of the contract has nothing to with the birth of an individual via the birth canal or even by cesarean. I suspect it may take you a while to mull over the real intended time limit requirements, and qualifiers for this part of the contract language.
The governor of California Arnold S. can be president, and is contract suitable. For your info, remember Barry Goldwater. By using this Barack is not qualified because of where his mother’s legs were spread or womb was cut junk, then Barry Goldwater would not have been either. He was not birthed in the USA. It doesn’t matter that Arizona, later became a state. Go back and read the rules. There is no exception for being born in a soon to be state. Last for this posting -- natural born and native born are two very different words, especially when part of contract language.
Let’s elect the best electors we can vote for and let them do their job. I am tired of this donkey and elephant circus. I am out of it. It was much more enjoyable to watch Siegfried and Roy perform their show.
Sunday, May 18, 2008
Unalienable Rights -- congress a type Rev Wright?
Unalienable Rights –congress a type of Rev Wright
The Supreme Law of this land is the contract law known as the Declaration of Independence and it states in writing, in part from a long held basic human concept, that each and every individual is endowed by their Creator with certain Unalienable Rights, and among these (not limited to only my listing) Life, Liberty (no one over), and pursuit of Happiness (absolute property ownership). I do not know why folks have such a problem with this simple law? Why it was only a few short years ago that even if I wanted to I could not go to school with or marry a sub-human who GOD made to be inferior. Since some Folks say God has now made these folks equal to white, browns and yellow, he has now reserved per some “so-called book” that Christians can be killed for not believing in Allah and his designated writer/s, and per “another so-called book” killed or beaten for wanting to marry a like individual. I believe that the words that the California Supreme Court used was the state has no business trying to say that civil unions were equal to state supported marriage union. The used words of logic were the same one they used when ruling that separate but equal was a farce under the USC contract when it concerned black schools and taxes. The problem being that the inferior courts and congress are still trying to avoid saying that for years they have been crapping on the law made by the People of this land. Congress wants to be a king and king mob slaver over the People. Congress wishes to be a type Democratic King and be over you, not serve you via the contract you hired them to work by. Why I do believe I have heard many say (and I think Hillary Clinton also) that to listen to anyone such as Rev. Wright and not walk out is a sure sign of evil. Why? When Rev. Wright might read and think that any just God would think blacks were just as equal as whites, and had all the same unalienable Rights as endowed (given) freely and forever a gift from the Creator. The error I see in Rev. Wright expressed views, is that the Rev did not mention that all the whites of the body politics were also facing the same problem. The congress is playing as a king and using force to try to run whatever game rules congress is going by. I cut some slack for Obama (because he is a first term federal congress person). Hillary, McCain, and Paul all want me to vote for them to lead me. I have not heard a one of them say they wish to serve me per the USC contract. Nor have I hears a one of them say they will respect and honor my unalienable rights and keep their stealing hands out of my pockets.
Some of us (9 by state count) have moved to define the accepted and in-place USC contract. The contract does not call for a king (congress or president or bank) over We the People. The USC service contract also called for minted metal coins to be the money (not non-redeemable serial numbered paper) used within the states. It further has requirements for where the various congresspersons must or must not come from. It does not have a valid requirement to pick a President and vice-president from the same majority vote of the “electors”. Is the change that people want of which Obama is speaking of but not saying that he, Obama, is going to serve We the People per the contracts? The contracts are designed and written to best secure our (yours and mine) unalienable Rights from Creator. I for one would like and support that change. Why I bet even Rev Wright would support such a change.
Promoting a contractual peaceful resolution to the long unflawed but not properly followed contracts, much study and thinking on has been done, as well as the principles of law and justice. To that end, nine states (TN, CO, WY, IO, AL, MD, MO, CA, and NE) have been signed on and we the signers consider the contracts as given by us nine to be in full force and effect. If folks from other states wish a valid law, then consider signing on for your state. It is your choice. If you wish to learn more about the law as we are reading the contracts, please contact Mary Severance ---- severanceme@yahoo.com . There is nothing to buy, only read and think on. If you reach the conclusion we have a lawful point, or at least call the contract used question up for your use, then sign papers of your choice and mail to US Sec. of State for filing to affected persons. We suggest using priority mail with a confirmation of delivery, which makes your cost to post office under 6 bucks.
1. We the nine have made a claim of being, by our adoption, making owners of both the Declaration of Independence (DoI) and the subordinate accepted United States Constitution (USC).
2. We hold both the DoI and the USC are contracts. Some folks use long dead folks and claim the dead actually were meaning to claim by writing or actions of long ago what the dead actually meant. The folks then use dead hear say to back their view. We use our sense of right and wrong in any contract that We take part in, especially as We claim to be one of the makers.
3. We hold the view (belief) that all contracts are civil in nature because to take part of the contract is to agree of ones own freewill to be bound by the contract terms. We have done so, as We read and understand the terms. Force is not a part of the contract equation for either of us or the hired help.
4. By the same token, since (if I understood your logic correctly) "inalienable --- means not subject to a being part of a contract" then for use the word has to be unalienable. If not; then, the hired help are equal to us the hiring masters. How could We contract for a house builder, if the builder could not accept that our wishes concerning the house were greater than his? That is why unalienable means the individual has to pick up the burden and place the burden (duty) on his own shoulders. To serve me, the hired hand has to; of the hired hand’s own free will accept that contractual duty. That duty is by the contract.
5. Since only the makers can change the contract and the 9 makers who accepted for their states long ago are dead, 9 of us present day makers have stepped forward and signed on as makers of the original and hence current USC contract and the so called first 10 amendments.
6. The signatory states makers are from CO, NE, TN, WY, IO, MD, AL, MO, and CA. If other individuals want their state to be covered by this contact, then they have to sign on of their own freewill, as we 9 did. What changes it will make, I have not a clue. We are trying to follow the contract terms as we read and understand. All 9 owners' letters have been sent to the Sec of State for her to notify the appropriate persons. I think there would be quakes to follow one law in 9 states and another law in the other 41. We shall see.
7. If you have no part of a contract, then any action against you via said contract has no jurisdiction to involve you. If by faulty presumption, others are going to claim contract covers you, then sign on and claim the contract makers' roles and the makers' superior status.
8. That way, one's claim of unalienable rights and the primary intent of the subordinate USC contract is to best secure those rights, gives you the logical lawful high road.
Yours for Unalienable Rights from the Creator
The Supreme Law of this land is the contract law known as the Declaration of Independence and it states in writing, in part from a long held basic human concept, that each and every individual is endowed by their Creator with certain Unalienable Rights, and among these (not limited to only my listing) Life, Liberty (no one over), and pursuit of Happiness (absolute property ownership). I do not know why folks have such a problem with this simple law? Why it was only a few short years ago that even if I wanted to I could not go to school with or marry a sub-human who GOD made to be inferior. Since some Folks say God has now made these folks equal to white, browns and yellow, he has now reserved per some “so-called book” that Christians can be killed for not believing in Allah and his designated writer/s, and per “another so-called book” killed or beaten for wanting to marry a like individual. I believe that the words that the California Supreme Court used was the state has no business trying to say that civil unions were equal to state supported marriage union. The used words of logic were the same one they used when ruling that separate but equal was a farce under the USC contract when it concerned black schools and taxes. The problem being that the inferior courts and congress are still trying to avoid saying that for years they have been crapping on the law made by the People of this land. Congress wants to be a king and king mob slaver over the People. Congress wishes to be a type Democratic King and be over you, not serve you via the contract you hired them to work by. Why I do believe I have heard many say (and I think Hillary Clinton also) that to listen to anyone such as Rev. Wright and not walk out is a sure sign of evil. Why? When Rev. Wright might read and think that any just God would think blacks were just as equal as whites, and had all the same unalienable Rights as endowed (given) freely and forever a gift from the Creator. The error I see in Rev. Wright expressed views, is that the Rev did not mention that all the whites of the body politics were also facing the same problem. The congress is playing as a king and using force to try to run whatever game rules congress is going by. I cut some slack for Obama (because he is a first term federal congress person). Hillary, McCain, and Paul all want me to vote for them to lead me. I have not heard a one of them say they wish to serve me per the USC contract. Nor have I hears a one of them say they will respect and honor my unalienable rights and keep their stealing hands out of my pockets.
Some of us (9 by state count) have moved to define the accepted and in-place USC contract. The contract does not call for a king (congress or president or bank) over We the People. The USC service contract also called for minted metal coins to be the money (not non-redeemable serial numbered paper) used within the states. It further has requirements for where the various congresspersons must or must not come from. It does not have a valid requirement to pick a President and vice-president from the same majority vote of the “electors”. Is the change that people want of which Obama is speaking of but not saying that he, Obama, is going to serve We the People per the contracts? The contracts are designed and written to best secure our (yours and mine) unalienable Rights from Creator. I for one would like and support that change. Why I bet even Rev Wright would support such a change.
Promoting a contractual peaceful resolution to the long unflawed but not properly followed contracts, much study and thinking on has been done, as well as the principles of law and justice. To that end, nine states (TN, CO, WY, IO, AL, MD, MO, CA, and NE) have been signed on and we the signers consider the contracts as given by us nine to be in full force and effect. If folks from other states wish a valid law, then consider signing on for your state. It is your choice. If you wish to learn more about the law as we are reading the contracts, please contact Mary Severance ---- severanceme@yahoo.com . There is nothing to buy, only read and think on. If you reach the conclusion we have a lawful point, or at least call the contract used question up for your use, then sign papers of your choice and mail to US Sec. of State for filing to affected persons. We suggest using priority mail with a confirmation of delivery, which makes your cost to post office under 6 bucks.
1. We the nine have made a claim of being, by our adoption, making owners of both the Declaration of Independence (DoI) and the subordinate accepted United States Constitution (USC).
2. We hold both the DoI and the USC are contracts. Some folks use long dead folks and claim the dead actually were meaning to claim by writing or actions of long ago what the dead actually meant. The folks then use dead hear say to back their view. We use our sense of right and wrong in any contract that We take part in, especially as We claim to be one of the makers.
3. We hold the view (belief) that all contracts are civil in nature because to take part of the contract is to agree of ones own freewill to be bound by the contract terms. We have done so, as We read and understand the terms. Force is not a part of the contract equation for either of us or the hired help.
4. By the same token, since (if I understood your logic correctly) "inalienable --- means not subject to a being part of a contract" then for use the word has to be unalienable. If not; then, the hired help are equal to us the hiring masters. How could We contract for a house builder, if the builder could not accept that our wishes concerning the house were greater than his? That is why unalienable means the individual has to pick up the burden and place the burden (duty) on his own shoulders. To serve me, the hired hand has to; of the hired hand’s own free will accept that contractual duty. That duty is by the contract.
5. Since only the makers can change the contract and the 9 makers who accepted for their states long ago are dead, 9 of us present day makers have stepped forward and signed on as makers of the original and hence current USC contract and the so called first 10 amendments.
6. The signatory states makers are from CO, NE, TN, WY, IO, MD, AL, MO, and CA. If other individuals want their state to be covered by this contact, then they have to sign on of their own freewill, as we 9 did. What changes it will make, I have not a clue. We are trying to follow the contract terms as we read and understand. All 9 owners' letters have been sent to the Sec of State for her to notify the appropriate persons. I think there would be quakes to follow one law in 9 states and another law in the other 41. We shall see.
7. If you have no part of a contract, then any action against you via said contract has no jurisdiction to involve you. If by faulty presumption, others are going to claim contract covers you, then sign on and claim the contract makers' roles and the makers' superior status.
8. That way, one's claim of unalienable rights and the primary intent of the subordinate USC contract is to best secure those rights, gives you the logical lawful high road.
Yours for Unalienable Rights from the Creator
Monday, April 28, 2008
Unalienable Rights & sandbox explanation 4-1-08
Unalienable Rights & Sandbox Explanation 4-1-08
Thanks to Larken Rose for the below link, which I am posting again. It is a simple sandbox explanation that makes the rules given in the Declaration of Independence (DoI) self evident to even a 3rd grader. If you watch and don’t understand, get a kid in a sand box to tell you what it means to him.
http://www.isil.org/resources/introduction.swf
The link is on the order of an old movie theater Saturday double feature “short subject”. Enjoy.
May your unalienable Rights from the Creator be here for all: now and forever!
Thanks to Larken Rose for the below link, which I am posting again. It is a simple sandbox explanation that makes the rules given in the Declaration of Independence (DoI) self evident to even a 3rd grader. If you watch and don’t understand, get a kid in a sand box to tell you what it means to him.
http://www.isil.org/resources/introduction.swf
The link is on the order of an old movie theater Saturday double feature “short subject”. Enjoy.
May your unalienable Rights from the Creator be here for all: now and forever!
Sunday, April 27, 2008
unalienable Rights & project 9
Unalienable Rights – Project 9 kick-off - 4-27-08
If Sherry Peel Jackson has no unalienable rights ((see Declaration of Independence (DoI)) or the subordinate United States Constitution (USC) is not honored, then the hired help of the DOJ and the Congress appointed and controlled inferior courts (federal and state) are using legal water boarding to attacked us; and not one can say they are free or have unalienable rights from Creator. I provided the best Habeas Corpus for Sherry to consider signing along with copies of filed DoI and the accepted subordinate USC to send the package up to the head inferior 9 persons of justice, for the USSC, appointed and controlled by congress. The 9 are only the single point contact and mouth pieces for the congressional member. If the nine persons will not correct or support unalienable rights, then such lays with the wishes of doing “what congress wants”. I can not say with 100% certainty what Sherry sent up or if she even sent it to the USSC, but I suspect she did. It should have been honored and Sherry out now; so, if Sherry does not have unalienable rights from the Creator and as a making owner of the subordinate USC can not have the law honored for her, then things suck. Each of you will have to decide which of the king congressperson to lick the boots and be a good serf or slave to. If you can not see the position of drawing a 20 inch vacuum on a king congressperson is different than being a thinking responsible making owner of the subordinate USC, may your kids and grandkids not curse you, even while they struggle for their birthright bowl of porridge you sold from your table.
This forum is being used to inform any reader that as of tomorrow 4-27-08 I have been informed a signing individual will sign for the ninth state and send both the signed public filed documents to the Sec. of State. We hold it is Sec of State’s duty to notify the states and the federal departments and any agencies of our contract actions. We 9 folks from various nine state having taking ownership of the accepted USC contract, have signed our name, hold we are true first class voters, Citizens of the US, and as such claim and hold that the USC is subordinate to the DoI and its primary purpose is to best secure our and your unalienable right. If you do not have part in a contract, you have no standing to have it apply to you. There is a fixed condition per my read of the USC contract that after any change; People in at least nine states must sign on, for it to become a valid active contract. The ninth is due (I am told) to be signed tomorrow and sent to Sec of State. It should arrive there by at least Thursday.
Since I am not sure how or what this current bunch of elected congress persons is using to do as they are doing, I can not tell you or even guess what this will accomplish. It will at least call the question of what they are attacking under to the fore front. It gives us a known law in which to hang our defense of self’s and others on. It will be interesting to see if it makes any changes, and if so how they explain it to the states who have not signed on – hence would maybe have a different law. The educated Chinese I am told have a strange curse for their enemies. It is: “Ah, may you live in interesting time”. Just remember, us 9 are here with you, even if we 9 are trying our best to have change. That change is to have the law as written and we have accepted followed. Since we are not trying to hide our actions or purpose from you but give you an opportunity to consider and maybe join us and add your state to the law, I will give you my email address. If you wish to write and request, I will send you the compete set of papers. Email sjcaruthers@yahoo.com and request the Project 9 paper work set. I will email when my schedule permits.
Yours for unalienable Rights from Creator – may they be here soon.
If Sherry Peel Jackson has no unalienable rights ((see Declaration of Independence (DoI)) or the subordinate United States Constitution (USC) is not honored, then the hired help of the DOJ and the Congress appointed and controlled inferior courts (federal and state) are using legal water boarding to attacked us; and not one can say they are free or have unalienable rights from Creator. I provided the best Habeas Corpus for Sherry to consider signing along with copies of filed DoI and the accepted subordinate USC to send the package up to the head inferior 9 persons of justice, for the USSC, appointed and controlled by congress. The 9 are only the single point contact and mouth pieces for the congressional member. If the nine persons will not correct or support unalienable rights, then such lays with the wishes of doing “what congress wants”. I can not say with 100% certainty what Sherry sent up or if she even sent it to the USSC, but I suspect she did. It should have been honored and Sherry out now; so, if Sherry does not have unalienable rights from the Creator and as a making owner of the subordinate USC can not have the law honored for her, then things suck. Each of you will have to decide which of the king congressperson to lick the boots and be a good serf or slave to. If you can not see the position of drawing a 20 inch vacuum on a king congressperson is different than being a thinking responsible making owner of the subordinate USC, may your kids and grandkids not curse you, even while they struggle for their birthright bowl of porridge you sold from your table.
This forum is being used to inform any reader that as of tomorrow 4-27-08 I have been informed a signing individual will sign for the ninth state and send both the signed public filed documents to the Sec. of State. We hold it is Sec of State’s duty to notify the states and the federal departments and any agencies of our contract actions. We 9 folks from various nine state having taking ownership of the accepted USC contract, have signed our name, hold we are true first class voters, Citizens of the US, and as such claim and hold that the USC is subordinate to the DoI and its primary purpose is to best secure our and your unalienable right. If you do not have part in a contract, you have no standing to have it apply to you. There is a fixed condition per my read of the USC contract that after any change; People in at least nine states must sign on, for it to become a valid active contract. The ninth is due (I am told) to be signed tomorrow and sent to Sec of State. It should arrive there by at least Thursday.
Since I am not sure how or what this current bunch of elected congress persons is using to do as they are doing, I can not tell you or even guess what this will accomplish. It will at least call the question of what they are attacking under to the fore front. It gives us a known law in which to hang our defense of self’s and others on. It will be interesting to see if it makes any changes, and if so how they explain it to the states who have not signed on – hence would maybe have a different law. The educated Chinese I am told have a strange curse for their enemies. It is: “Ah, may you live in interesting time”. Just remember, us 9 are here with you, even if we 9 are trying our best to have change. That change is to have the law as written and we have accepted followed. Since we are not trying to hide our actions or purpose from you but give you an opportunity to consider and maybe join us and add your state to the law, I will give you my email address. If you wish to write and request, I will send you the compete set of papers. Email sjcaruthers@yahoo.com and request the Project 9 paper work set. I will email when my schedule permits.
Yours for unalienable Rights from Creator – may they be here soon.
Sunday, March 9, 2008
unalienable Rights, born, & judicial power
I am going to postpone for now the listing of the criminal wrongs which have been done in not giving/honoring several of the previously listed individuals their unalienable Rights from Creator. I hold to attack them because they were only standing on their unalienable rights is no different than a hate crime against a gay. Are the attackers (congress, DOJ, President, congress created black robed inferior court system) using the very false reasoning on the 14th Amendment that until they are born, they have no civil rights. If so then it would mean that the individual was being considered, unborn because they had not said they claimed as making owners, the unalienable Rights of the Declaration of Independence (DoI) and making owner of the subordinate United States Constitution (USC). A group of attackers, who do not give the true reason and exact law for the attack, ranks no higher in my mine than a pedophile.
Thanks to an Alfred Adask DVD on the Declaration of Independence for the following. He got the impression that the different in a Republic where each individual had been given unalienable rights. And this current democracy system operation was the People were still supposed to be Sovereign, but only on a collective base, not on an individual base as in a Republic. I have a few problems with part of what he doesn’t say about contracts and an individual’s status with respect to those contracts. We each have to start some where, and this might be a good start for most. One can purchase the DVD, only my guess, from cptexas.org. My copy was sent to me by a friend.
Let talk about being born in the US to be president as the dummy newspapers and most educators say is required by the USC. That is a flat out lie, by simply dummies or liars. If you bother to check the USC the written words say (one must be Native Born) not natural born. The USC being a contract, the words Native Born have a contract meaning, not a baby’s actual birth of passing out his mother’s womb through the standard birth canal or even a C-section.
Goldwater ran but was not chosen, and he was birthed in the territory of Arizona not the USA, Cain was birthed in Panama Canal Zone, This means Arnold S. who is currently governor of California, could be president this coming term or in the future.
Wonder if the electors want to make Arnold’s day.
______________________________
Author in black.
I am sorry but I cannot make heads or tails out of what your comments are or what they are supposed to mean. It is evident you do not differentiate between the public/political side and the private non-political side of the government. Until we get that "little" item, we can only reason in circles. I think posting my words and your comments will not help the situation, only confuse even more anybody who reads the same.
If you are reading this on an open forum, please know I had requested permission of the author as I have an advantage in commenting on what was a feed-back to about an hour conference call last week between several of us. I think he says some things that my neighbors need to think about. His words above in black were his suggestion that it would just be confusing to you as he and I saw things in a different logic fashion. I have removed his name, but the subject is one I think important. I hope he is mostly wrong and you get some understanding out of this exchange of thoughts.
Lady: I am a private individual endowed by my Creator (not government) with certain unalienable rights. We agree that our rights are unalienable. I hold that the use of the word Creator in the Declaration of Independence (DoI) is a singular usage of the many that hold that view of each one’s rights. Those unalienable rights reside in each and every individual. They do not reside in only a king.
Until the individual wakes up and smell the coffee and get the scales off of his/her eyes as to whom he/she is, the individual will consent to be governed by governments instituted among men deriving their just Power from the consent of the governed.
I agree that until one wakes up and learns they have to be a judicial power for them selves, they will not realize what their power to consent is. I teach/hold that both the DoI and the United States Constitution (USC) are contracts. The primary purpose of the USC is to best secure our unalienable Rights from Creator. At least if you claim to be by adoption, a making owner. As one of the contract makers, your position is above that of the created persona of the persons who chose to service us. Lady likes the term Cui Bono (for our benefit). We owners wrote the USC for our benefit as its primary function.
You can't be sovereign and consent to be governed by government instituted among men, because such government gets its just Power from your consent.
As an owning maker, that contract does not have my consent to have the created hired help be over me or judge me. What fool would do that. If you or they get that read of the contract, then all you are left with is by what right does the created use the barrel of the gun to enforce what they try to claim is the hired man’s right to rule. That logic does not fly with me. I may get beaten, robbed, or killed, but it will not be by law. As to the sovereign part, I agree and teach that I as a making owner of the USC can only deal with that law, via my owner’s status or persona. Since my status as a class one voter, allows me to be my own judicial power for my USC contract matters, I generally choose to be a judicial power of the “one supreme Court”.
The Declaration of Independence contains no law of man; it does however contain principals of law from God. Your statement that the Declaration of Independence is Supreme Law of the Nation might have merit or be correct if you have not consented to be governed by governments instituted among men deriving their just Power from your consent to be governed.
Why would one consent to force being used against one? We chose to read and understand the contract differently.
The 13 former British colonies did send delegates to Pennsylvania to hammer out a new constitution for the federal government that was created in 1777 by certain Articles of Confederation, now styled the United States of America. However, these delegates did not represent State governments; they represented the People in their own conventions and not as State government’s delegates. The State governments had no part in creating the Constitution but it bound the State governments without their consent, by ratification and then on March 4, 1789, by adoption by the federal government.
Ratification means to make you a party to something,
Adoption means to bring under your control.
That is why by adoption as a making owner, I have control of the contract.
The ten amendments were proposed by Congress properly done under Article V which required only the Congress and State votes. The authority to change by amendment has never required all the People of the United States authority. Congress and the States get their authority from the People of the Several States which does not include all the People of the United States.
We differ on our read of Article V. The hired help can only suggest We the People consider a change to our rules. The hired hands can’t do it. Such logic would mean the farm animal ran the farmer and the farm. The Created can suggest the owners in the states consider the change, but that is all. Those making owners, who are first class voters, are called by their handle of Legislatures in Article V. Legislatures are law givers. In that light, since we hold whining hired help are much like kids, just because they keep asking per Article 5, after the first census, if the Legislatures don’t vote, then the required approval percentage is not reached. I vote no by going fishing. Not voting does not does imply or mean contract consent per Article 5.
One thing you are right on, "The People are the judicial Power." "They hold Court where they are and are the one supreme Court, justice, clerk, jury, and etc. If this be the case and it is, then sitting of the People's Chief Justice above the present created chief justice John Roberts would also create sovereign and subject, with the people being the subject. Not so the Lady.
I would agree except the contract created person of the Chief Justice is not above the judicial power of the owners. It is mostly a quality assurance clerk’s position and only in and as the single point of contact for filing certain impeachment papers and then the trial of the president is the Chief Justice truly a judge. Even then the Senate does the voting, but it makes it an open court trial with control of the process by the Chief Justice and the Senator speaking and voting in an open court trial where they can be held accountable.
The Federalist Paper #33 by Hamilton also expressed "just bound of its authority." The Declaration of Independence stated, "That to secure these [unalienable] rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just Powers from the consent of the governed." Government gets it just Power from the People's consent.
The Constitution is not a distribution of Powers between the United States and the States but the Constitution is a reservation to the People [as individuals] of all powers not granted. The Constitution however is an Organic Law in which all three sovereign Powers co-exist within the United States must mutually agree upon.
We are guaranteed a Republican Form of Government, in which the Powers of Sovereignty are vested in the People and may be exercised by the People , either directly, or indirectly through delegates (representatives) chosen by the People to whom the People specially delegate their sovereign power to such representative. This special delegation is your consent either by silence or your expressed authority to be governed further than the confines of the Constitution and its Amendments. Government derives its just Power from the consent of the governed, expressed or implied.
We differ on what it takes to say no to the use of force by the hired help. So far I have not found any reason to think any sane individual would agree to be robbed, raped, pillaged, or held by force of arms in a three hots and a cot cage. I simply do not think the USC was ever given that contract law. I know I have never or would have never adopted USC if there was any way in hell that a sane individual could even get close to that logic.
Have a great day.
Thanks to an Alfred Adask DVD on the Declaration of Independence for the following. He got the impression that the different in a Republic where each individual had been given unalienable rights. And this current democracy system operation was the People were still supposed to be Sovereign, but only on a collective base, not on an individual base as in a Republic. I have a few problems with part of what he doesn’t say about contracts and an individual’s status with respect to those contracts. We each have to start some where, and this might be a good start for most. One can purchase the DVD, only my guess, from cptexas.org. My copy was sent to me by a friend.
Let talk about being born in the US to be president as the dummy newspapers and most educators say is required by the USC. That is a flat out lie, by simply dummies or liars. If you bother to check the USC the written words say (one must be Native Born) not natural born. The USC being a contract, the words Native Born have a contract meaning, not a baby’s actual birth of passing out his mother’s womb through the standard birth canal or even a C-section.
Goldwater ran but was not chosen, and he was birthed in the territory of Arizona not the USA, Cain was birthed in Panama Canal Zone, This means Arnold S. who is currently governor of California, could be president this coming term or in the future.
Wonder if the electors want to make Arnold’s day.
______________________________
Author in black.
I am sorry but I cannot make heads or tails out of what your comments are or what they are supposed to mean. It is evident you do not differentiate between the public/political side and the private non-political side of the government. Until we get that "little" item, we can only reason in circles. I think posting my words and your comments will not help the situation, only confuse even more anybody who reads the same.
If you are reading this on an open forum, please know I had requested permission of the author as I have an advantage in commenting on what was a feed-back to about an hour conference call last week between several of us. I think he says some things that my neighbors need to think about. His words above in black were his suggestion that it would just be confusing to you as he and I saw things in a different logic fashion. I have removed his name, but the subject is one I think important. I hope he is mostly wrong and you get some understanding out of this exchange of thoughts.
Lady: I am a private individual endowed by my Creator (not government) with certain unalienable rights. We agree that our rights are unalienable. I hold that the use of the word Creator in the Declaration of Independence (DoI) is a singular usage of the many that hold that view of each one’s rights. Those unalienable rights reside in each and every individual. They do not reside in only a king.
Until the individual wakes up and smell the coffee and get the scales off of his/her eyes as to whom he/she is, the individual will consent to be governed by governments instituted among men deriving their just Power from the consent of the governed.
I agree that until one wakes up and learns they have to be a judicial power for them selves, they will not realize what their power to consent is. I teach/hold that both the DoI and the United States Constitution (USC) are contracts. The primary purpose of the USC is to best secure our unalienable Rights from Creator. At least if you claim to be by adoption, a making owner. As one of the contract makers, your position is above that of the created persona of the persons who chose to service us. Lady likes the term Cui Bono (for our benefit). We owners wrote the USC for our benefit as its primary function.
You can't be sovereign and consent to be governed by government instituted among men, because such government gets its just Power from your consent.
As an owning maker, that contract does not have my consent to have the created hired help be over me or judge me. What fool would do that. If you or they get that read of the contract, then all you are left with is by what right does the created use the barrel of the gun to enforce what they try to claim is the hired man’s right to rule. That logic does not fly with me. I may get beaten, robbed, or killed, but it will not be by law. As to the sovereign part, I agree and teach that I as a making owner of the USC can only deal with that law, via my owner’s status or persona. Since my status as a class one voter, allows me to be my own judicial power for my USC contract matters, I generally choose to be a judicial power of the “one supreme Court”.
The Declaration of Independence contains no law of man; it does however contain principals of law from God. Your statement that the Declaration of Independence is Supreme Law of the Nation might have merit or be correct if you have not consented to be governed by governments instituted among men deriving their just Power from your consent to be governed.
Why would one consent to force being used against one? We chose to read and understand the contract differently.
The 13 former British colonies did send delegates to Pennsylvania to hammer out a new constitution for the federal government that was created in 1777 by certain Articles of Confederation, now styled the United States of America. However, these delegates did not represent State governments; they represented the People in their own conventions and not as State government’s delegates. The State governments had no part in creating the Constitution but it bound the State governments without their consent, by ratification and then on March 4, 1789, by adoption by the federal government.
Ratification means to make you a party to something,
Adoption means to bring under your control.
That is why by adoption as a making owner, I have control of the contract.
The ten amendments were proposed by Congress properly done under Article V which required only the Congress and State votes. The authority to change by amendment has never required all the People of the United States authority. Congress and the States get their authority from the People of the Several States which does not include all the People of the United States.
We differ on our read of Article V. The hired help can only suggest We the People consider a change to our rules. The hired hands can’t do it. Such logic would mean the farm animal ran the farmer and the farm. The Created can suggest the owners in the states consider the change, but that is all. Those making owners, who are first class voters, are called by their handle of Legislatures in Article V. Legislatures are law givers. In that light, since we hold whining hired help are much like kids, just because they keep asking per Article 5, after the first census, if the Legislatures don’t vote, then the required approval percentage is not reached. I vote no by going fishing. Not voting does not does imply or mean contract consent per Article 5.
One thing you are right on, "The People are the judicial Power." "They hold Court where they are and are the one supreme Court, justice, clerk, jury, and etc. If this be the case and it is, then sitting of the People's Chief Justice above the present created chief justice John Roberts would also create sovereign and subject, with the people being the subject. Not so the Lady.
I would agree except the contract created person of the Chief Justice is not above the judicial power of the owners. It is mostly a quality assurance clerk’s position and only in and as the single point of contact for filing certain impeachment papers and then the trial of the president is the Chief Justice truly a judge. Even then the Senate does the voting, but it makes it an open court trial with control of the process by the Chief Justice and the Senator speaking and voting in an open court trial where they can be held accountable.
The Federalist Paper #33 by Hamilton also expressed "just bound of its authority." The Declaration of Independence stated, "That to secure these [unalienable] rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just Powers from the consent of the governed." Government gets it just Power from the People's consent.
The Constitution is not a distribution of Powers between the United States and the States but the Constitution is a reservation to the People [as individuals] of all powers not granted. The Constitution however is an Organic Law in which all three sovereign Powers co-exist within the United States must mutually agree upon.
We are guaranteed a Republican Form of Government, in which the Powers of Sovereignty are vested in the People and may be exercised by the People , either directly, or indirectly through delegates (representatives) chosen by the People to whom the People specially delegate their sovereign power to such representative. This special delegation is your consent either by silence or your expressed authority to be governed further than the confines of the Constitution and its Amendments. Government derives its just Power from the consent of the governed, expressed or implied.
We differ on what it takes to say no to the use of force by the hired help. So far I have not found any reason to think any sane individual would agree to be robbed, raped, pillaged, or held by force of arms in a three hots and a cot cage. I simply do not think the USC was ever given that contract law. I know I have never or would have never adopted USC if there was any way in hell that a sane individual could even get close to that logic.
Have a great day.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
