1 Attachment(s)
Understanding The System of American Government
Of all the explanations I've read and considered about how our system of government is set up here in the United States, this one by Lee Brobst seems to be the easiest to digest as well as the most honest and historically accurate description of how we ended up where we are today. In a nutshell, he sums up our predicament in one of the first few paragraphs you will read in his piece, USA the Republic Is The House That No One Lives In:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Brobst
Few are aware today that their political choice has been made for them, and it is a political choice
that has taken away their absolute rights under the Constitution and its first ten Amendments, the
Bill of Rights. They are unaware that they were given at birth an economic privilege of an
alternative political domain - allowed by the Constitution, but operating outside of it. An
alternative domain that operates with the same Divine Right of Kings as did the King of
England. Thus, the Constitution is operating in an economic capacity rather than a political one.
If you were to read one piece which summed up the circumstance we find ourselves in here in America, this would be the piece I would recommend.
While you may not agree with everything he says, if you're still trying to make heads and tails of the legal system and how it has evolved over the years, his take on this phenomena may surprise you with insight that you hadn't considered before. Once you know the how and the why of the way the game is played, you have a leg up on all those who don't bother to figure out why things happen in court the way they do. And, what is more important, you have the knowledge you need in order to prevail in any court action that may confront you.
Of particular importance to understand is the difference between private law and public municipal law. Private law was never meant to operate in the public sector as a basis for controlling public policy. And yet this is exactly what has gradually occurred over the decades here in America. And it is why people have difficulty reconciling how government can get away with abusing and downright ignoring the document that the people view as their protections from government: the organic Constitution.
Public municipal law is supposed to be an expression of the people limiting government for their own personal benefit and liberty. And yet, it is this very public municipal law that legislative government has taken over into the private realm and conned people into believing that they must obey under the aegis of private contract law. Private law operates outside of the Constitution under the rights of private contract as stipulated in Article I, Section 10. And this is how they are able to get away with flaunting and ignoring the Constitution.
Of course, the devil is always in the details. And while Lee's piece does supply some of those details, it doesn't begin to touch all of the details one needs to become aware of in order to preserve their own liberty. However, it does help one to put into perspective those important foundational details that one must keep in the foremost part of one's mind when confronting the usurpation of personal liberty that much of present-day government represents.
You can read Lee's piece in its original here: http://freedom-school.com/history/usa.html
Or download this PDF -- Attachment 869 -- that I've formatted for easy offline reference. This PDF has had important sections highlighted. However, the highlighting can be easily removed or replaced in this document by simply clicking on the highlighted area, and from the drop-down box that follows, clicking "delete." This will delete the highlighting, but not the text. You have to have the latest version of Adobe Reader to use this feature. If you want to highlight text, simply select the text to be highlighted and click on the "Comment" button in the tool bar, and a drop down button will allow you to highlight that text.
Enjoy.
Understanding The System of American Government
This piece has helped me to put together the foundational material needed to be known behind being able develop winning process in court. It's really been a great breakthrough for me. It's not all that different from what many of us have been learning along the way (i.e. challenge jurisdiction through R4C etcetera and so forth), yet it helps to be able to see this challenge from the opposition's side in order to correct errors in one's process. Also the historical material regarding how these changes in the way that the law works and how this came about over the years was very helpful to know and understand.
Ignorance of how the law works is what has been holding many of us back. You have to establish the fact of your choice of political jurisdiction (non-fiction as opposed to fiction) and challenge the presumption in order to gain entry to the venue you want to adjudicate the action. There are many ways that this can be done aside from R4C, although R4C can remain a central part of any process. Being able to competently challenge the presumption of the court in a way that the judge has no say in the matter is at root the heart of what I've learned.
Hopefully, this will help others to begin to see how they, too, can develop lawful process that prevails.
This additional PDF by Lee Brobst The Law, The Money, and Your Choice should also help with some understanding.
Lee's really got a good handle on being able to put all the pieces of the puzzle together for others. There are some real gems to become aware of within this PDF, things that will help you to realize how to accomplish some important and tax saving steps toward removing yourself from the system. Read carefully, with your "eureka" alert button on. Some of these insights can be very subtle to see.
What follows is a sample of the quotations you should be highlighting in your search for knowledge:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lee Brobst
Despite current public policy, Congress cannot override an American's right to maintain a private policy under the common law principles as they are expressed in the first ten amendments to the Bill of Rights of the Constitution. However, because the gold is the "Standard" substance of the law, and law follows the "Standard" substance of money, when Congress, acting under public policy, suspended the "Standard" gold substance in "Payment" of debt, a shift away from the common law transpired by what is called "operation of law." The shift occurred because everyone was given a quasi corporate privilege under HJR 192 of NOT paying their debts even though it is demanded under the common law of each state in the Union according to Article I Section 10 of the Constitution.
Lee can be a bit weird...
I've been reading more of Lee's writing and commentary from his website, and though he does seem to have a good handle on explaining how to differentiate between which laws are being applied when (and this is a good thing because we need to be aware of these things), some of his other commentary seems to be tinged with some of his own paranoia and "belief system" about what this all means and how to become disencumbered of it. It's the paranoia which creeps in that turned me off; other than that, I like the way he explains the history of how we got to where we are today. That part makes a lot of sense, because he uses case citings and quotes from the law to back up his points.
His idea that only by expatriation can a person become disentangled from the system is a bit extreme, and in my opinion totally unnecessary, not to mention that it buys into the idea that government can, by mere presumption, define the identity of flesh and blood people. Fictional actors within government have NO AUTHORITY to redefine, by mere fiat, who anyone is in reality without the admission coming from the person himself. And anyone who buys into this fiction needs to reexamine their own mind and how much delusion they've accepted as true.
In other words, by undergoing the process of expatriation the way Lee describes it, the person first has to admit, on the record, that he considered himself a 14th amendment citizen at some point in time. If you never considered yourself a 14th amendment citizen at any time, why go to the trouble of admitting in a court action that you ever were? If you never made a conscious, knowledgeable choice to make such a consideration, but rather were compelled, under duress and through ignorance, into signing documents that put forth such a presumption then the mere fact that such documents were signed under coercion and without full knowledge invalidates them as evidence of such fact. Maintain the stance that the mistake was solely the government's, and get on with the business of rebutting their claim. In other words, make them prove their claim with sworn affidavits, which they cannot do.
In one of his PDFs he makes the statement: "What was United States Notes have become Federal Reserve Notes that are not redeemable in gold but are backed by gold that is in Fort Knox. That gold in Fort Knox is the common law of the states in the Union."
One, even though FRNs were at one time backed by gold, they no longer are. He should know that. And someone unfamiliar with this fact may mistakenly believe that FRNs are backed by gold, just based on his statement.
Two, it would be nice if he could provide some objective evidence that there is any gold in Fort Knox. Many people seem to think its been long gone for many years now. That it's in the hands of the banksters. Yet, he seems to write with certainty about this. It might improve his credibility if he weren't so certain since a public, transparent accounting of Fort Knox has not been made in years.
All this is by way of saying that while I value Lee's scholarship on being able to unpack and put into context much of the history underlying how the country progressed from its beginning to the present day, it's when some of his personal opinions enter his writing that I'm not convinced by his reasoning of their relevance.
Lee can be a bit weird...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
David Merrill
Among the brain trust rambles a new slogan...
Remedy is between your ears.
I'm not finding a THUMBS UP emoticon here.
At any rate: THUMBS UP on that comment!
This was my point about pointing out that "Lee can be a bit weird..."
Do your own due diligence and reasoning. Study the law and find out what is possible. Then design your process to take care of whatever your needs may be. It is up to your opponent to rebut or refute your findings.
A must read: Pied Pipers of Babylon
Sorry if I seem late to the show with this and others are well familiar with it, but I just discovered this golden nugget hidden in another thread posted recently. And it goes well with the information that Lee has provided (as well as crediting Brobst with adding to the knowledge of this author's own work). It picks up where Lee leaves off, and then some, with more important details that help outline and set up explanations of the premises in law.
Pied Pipers of Babylon was first published in 1985 by Verl K. Speer. This is a large file (16 MB), but well worth downloading and reading carefully. Toward the end of the book, there is an Exhibit section that is worth reading and digesting all on it's own as it encapsulates many of the ideas expressed at more length in the book. There's a brief interview that is transcribed that took place between Dr. George Hill (of Universal Life University's Common Law program) and the editor of the Duck Club News Digest in Stockton, California. As the introduction describes, the "article was subsequently copied and distributed in large quantities by the Populist Party and, thereby, initiated a correspondence series between Congressman Ron Paul/Joe Cobb, Assistant to the congressman for Banking Legislation, and George Hill/Verl Speer."
The series of letters, circa 1984-85, were sent back and forth between the author and his partner (Verl Speer and George Hill) and the office of Ron Paul and his legislative assistant Joe Cobb, who writes in Paul's stead. Apparently, Mr. Cobb thinks that the hand bill of the interview that was circulated (of which Mr. Paul's office received a copy) made "several frightening and untrue claims about P.L. 95-147 and Sec. 16 of the Federal Reserve Act." The exchange that goes back and forth between these two is an education in itself. Hill and Speer hold their own against the Congressman's assistant, who seems not to always know what he's talking about in addition to being condescending and casting irrelevant as well as inaccurate aspersions on their scholarship.
As the prologue to the book suggests, this work endeavors to answer important questions that each of us need to know and understand about how government works in the United States of America:
"Governments owe their existence to the laws they observe, which in turn, determines the form or system of any particular government.
"This raises other questions of logic we may ask ourselves: What laws does our government observe? What is the jurisdiction imposed in order to enforce these laws? How is this jurisdiction acquired over an artificial person? How is this jurisdiction acquired over a natural born person?
"First, the answers require an understanding of the systems of law and their fundamental differences; and second, an understanding of the forms of government that can exist within these systems of law."
The foregoing gives a brief but accurate introduction to what this book is all about. For anyone trying to figure out how to approach their own common law process, this is indispensable material. Well worth spending some time with.
