Two notes: 1. The local library blocked your link to Chuck's page. Strange. 2. He quotes the 4th and 14th amendments.
Please take note that the Bill of Rights contained the words "people" in those which had to do with men (the words woman, women and her are not in the founding documents). "Person" or "persons" were used, but in relation to the Greek and common law reference as the "persona". The 14th Amendment was the first document to define a FEDERAL and STATE corporate citizenship, and jurisdiction, and did NOT use the word "people" (or man or woman), but PERSON. A 14th Amendment "person" (which includes all people subject to other countries' laws, i.e. the case of Yick Wo v Hopkins, as well as "persons" formerly subject to African tribal law) would now be subject to Congress' and the States' statutes, whereas the people in the states were subject ONLY to the common law, as MEN and WOMEN, up to this point. IF people gave up their natural rights and subjected themselves to the corporate Federal or federalized State jurisdiction, and went into court under admiralty or maritime terms, rather than going into court under natural or common law terms, and accepted representation of an ATTORNEY, then they were giving up the rights protected by the Constitution and the original Bill of Rights.
This is what people are going to have to re-learn - their true status before the law, and WHICH law they should be availing themselves of. If people are going to allow themselves to continue being abused under admiralty/maritime law, then they will lose their recourse to any remedies under any law at all. Soon there won't be any use for the protections of the Bill of Rights and the U.S. Supreme Court will declare that for all intents and purposes, the first 10 amendments are null and void (as I've heard one person report that a Supreme Court Justice has already said back in the 80's). -MM
Two notes:
ReplyDelete1. The local library blocked your link to Chuck's page. Strange.
2. He quotes the 4th and 14th amendments.
Please take note that the Bill of Rights contained the words "people" in those which had to do with men (the words woman, women and her are not in the founding documents). "Person" or "persons" were used, but in relation to the Greek and common law reference as the "persona". The 14th Amendment was the first document to define a FEDERAL and STATE corporate citizenship, and jurisdiction, and did NOT use the word "people" (or man or woman), but PERSON. A 14th Amendment "person" (which includes all people subject to other countries' laws, i.e. the case of Yick Wo v Hopkins, as well as "persons" formerly subject to African tribal law) would now be subject to Congress' and the States' statutes, whereas the people in the states were subject ONLY to the common law, as MEN and WOMEN, up to this point. IF people gave up their natural rights and subjected themselves to the corporate Federal or federalized State jurisdiction, and went into court under admiralty or maritime terms, rather than going into court under natural or common law terms, and accepted representation of an ATTORNEY, then they were giving up the rights protected by the Constitution and the original Bill of Rights.
This is what people are going to have to re-learn - their true status before the law, and WHICH law they should be availing themselves of. If people are going to allow themselves to continue being abused under admiralty/maritime law, then they will lose their recourse to any remedies under any law at all. Soon there won't be any use for the protections of the Bill of Rights and the U.S. Supreme Court will declare that for all intents and purposes, the first 10 amendments are null and void (as I've heard one person report that a Supreme Court Justice has already said back in the 80's).
-MM
I guess the remaining question is: how high of a body count do they wish for?
ReplyDeleteWhat privileges and immunities do you enjoy recognition of that the rest of us do not?
ReplyDelete