US Constitution - Private Charter

Printable View

04-21-12, 02:19 PM
David Merrill

US Constitution - Private Charter

Quote:

Originally Posted by shikamaru

Most people are ignorant of what they are doing when they finance a given res. If one is financing a home, car, etc. you are converting the property into a registered security in which others can profit through their interest in the security.

The trillion dollar lien issue owned by foreigners is not entirely accurate. The majority of debt owned by the U.S. government is still owned primarily by Americans.

A ruling class empire with landless peasants (proletariat) is what you always had throughout history. Nothing has changed for a majority of people.
The difference today is that people get up and work hard to place themselves in some form of voluntary servitude.

People just bought the kool-aid sold by the Framers through their private charter, the U.S. Constitution.

This is an interesting perspective. My adjustment is that in Article VI (Clause 3) an allowance was made for the production of Public Trusts like the Federal Reserve System.

Quote:

Oath to support constitution. The senators and representatives beforementioned, and the members of the several legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several states, shall be bound, by oath or affirmation, to support this constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.
04-21-12, 03:37 PM
shikamaru

This is my theory, but there are loads of support for it :) ....

Government of the United States is a (public) corporation [Respublica v. Sweers (1779)].
Its charter is the U.S. Constitution. This charter is an international treaty between independent nations which you know as the several States.

You could tell it was/is a private charter. Vast majorities of people were not covered i.e. African-Americans, Native Americans, Asians, landless people, etc.

"The People of the United States" (mere title) is an association. No charters or grants are needed to form an association.
The association is the principal. Government is the agent.

As to public trusts, I need to do way more research on those. I wish Trust Guy would show up :).

The FRB may be a public trust, but the registering as property as security is a business process. The registration alone, in my opinion, signals intent to conduct commerce. Commerce is regulatory particularly when it affects a public interest.
04-21-12, 10:42 PM
allodial

..........

Quote:

Originally Posted by shikamaru

This is my theory, but there are loads of support for it :) ....

Government of the United States is a (public) corporation [Respublica v. Sweers (1779)].
Its charter is the U.S. Constitution. This charter is an international treaty between independent nations which you know as the several States.
The charter may go back to an earlier charter for the United Colonies and/or to the Artticles of Association of 1774 and/or to a charter done at the Palace at Windsor. There may have also been another come 1871. The Constitution for the United States of America formed a confederacy specifically named "The United States of America".

You could tell it was/is a private charter. Vast majorities of people were not covered i.e. African-Americans, Native Americans, Asians, landless people, etc.

What contract exists that isn't private unless you are a party to it? Re: "African-American" or "Asians" or "Native Americans" these are 'terms of art'. The verbiage 'negroes (slaves) of the African race" was used in the Dredd Scott case ..and lets you know that there were negroes who weren't of the 'African races'. If one digs a bit further, one might find that there isn't really such a thing as any "African race" or "European race". Slaves and foreign subjects were prohibited from political participation because they were not viewed as being able to enter into 'the forum' on equal footing with those who were freeborn or highborn. It is clear that Africa (as opposed to say Scotland or England) is a continent rather than a political organization. They knew this.

Also there are a few ample sources that tend to point to the original meaning of 'white person' meaning someone Christian (shining/spiritually clean). This was alleged to have been obscured after the alleged Romanization of the United States after the Civil War.

"The People of the United States" (mere title) is an association. No charters or grants are needed to form an association.
The association is the principal. Government is the agent.

Perhaps nations (groups of people) form states and nations themselves are in turn comprised of people. AFAIK there was no single 'genetic nation' involved in establishing the United States. It was purely political and quite diverse: brown-skinned to fair skinned bodied.

.... .
Also, perhaps the term 'public' is meaningless without a context. It means 'common' or 'shared' within a framework, no?
04-21-12, 10:46 PM
shikamaru

I always appreciate your perspective on varied issues, allodial :)
04-21-12, 11:14 PM
allodial

Also in a strict and technical geographic sense Europe would be the western part of Asia.
04-22-12, 02:02 AM
Treefarmer

Allodial said:
"Also there are a few ample sources that tend to point to the original meaning of 'white person' meaning someone Christian (shining/spiritually clean). This was alleged to have been obscured after the Romanization of the United States after the Civil War."

That's news to me.
Would you provide some sources please?
Especially in the context of " the Romanization of the United States after the Civil War".

Thank you.
04-22-12, 02:13 AM
allodial
Quote:

Originally Posted by Treefarmer

Allodial said:
"Also there are a few ample sources that tend to point to the original meaning of 'white person' meaning someone Christian (shining/spiritually clean). This was alleged to have been obscured after the Romanization of the United States after the Civil War."

That's news to me.
Would you provide some sources please?
Especially in the context of " the Romanization of the United States after the Civil War".

Thank you.

> Frustrating network are causing trouble with posting.

Consider:
- The requiring of baptism and religious tests to hold office.
- The inference of being born again and freed from bondage through Jesus Christ (washed 'white as snow')
- One had to be Christian to hold office (citizen is an office) in New Hampshire until 1877, Maryland 1826, North Carolina 1868.
- Roman Catholics could not hold office in North Carolina until 1835 or in New Jersey until 1844 (what exactly did 'white person' mean then?)
- In England Roman Catholics could not keep and bear arms but a brown-skinned, Christian British subject could.
- Only the freeborn could be a Freemason.
Point being: High school level propaganda vs the details buried and obscured. Point is toward a higher level of research and study rather than controversy.

Re Sundry Moors:

Quote:

Mr. Edwd. Rutledge reported from the Committee to whom was referred the petition of the Free Moors, which he read in his place and afterwards delivered it in at the Clerks Table where it was again read for information.

Ordered That it be taken into immediate Consideration which being read through was agreed to and is as follows Viz.

Report That they have Considered the same and are of opinion that no Law of this State can in its Construction or Operation apply to them, and that persons who were Subjects of the Emperor of Morocco being Free in this State are not triable by the Law for the better Ordering and Governing of Negroes and other Slaves.
04-22-12, 01:17 PM
David Merrill

Quote:

The requiring of baptism and religious tests to hold office.

Initiate in the Order of Archelaus. [John the Baptist; Archelaus was Herod Antipas' brother.] Article VI, Clause 3 then opened up the Lodge.

I wonder if it is better to consider in the order of things that the Declaration of Independence is an internal memorandum within the Crown between the American Bar and the British Bar?

http://friends-n-family-research.inf...leSociety1.doc
http://friends-n-family-research.inf...leSociety1.mp3
http://friends-n-family-research.inf...leSociety2.doc
http://friends-n-family-research.inf...leSociety2.mp3
http://friends-n-family-research.inf...leSociety3.doc
http://friends-n-family-research.inf...leSociety3.mp3

http://img825.imageshack.us/img825/4...ersionpool.jpg
04-22-12, 06:31 PM
Neo1

What do you think of the time line?

There are 15 sections. The Bottom Line: when you speak about these private foreign corporations remember that is what they are and stop calling them government.?
http://teamlaw.net/HistoryOutline.htm
How corporatism replaced the Republic. Thru the Federal Reserve Banking System
Historical Outline The bottom links have added info.
1st: Martial Law is declared by President Lincoln on April 24th, 1863, with General Orders No. 100; under martial law authority, Congress and President Lincoln institute continuous martial law by ordering the states (people) either conscribe troops and or provide money in support of the North or be recognized as enemies of the nation; this martial law Act of Congress is still in effect today. This martial law authority gives the President (with or without Congress) the dictatorial authority to do anything that can be done by government in accord with the Constitution of the United States of America. This conscription act remains in effect to this very day and is the foundation of Presidential Executive Orders authority; it was magnified in 1917 with The Trading with the Enemy Act (Public Law 65-91, 65th Congress, Session I, Chapters 105, 106, October 6, 1917). and again in 1933 with the Emergency War Powers Act, which is ratified and enhanced almost every year to this date by Congress. Today these Acts address the people of the United States themselves as their enemy.
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/fo...sage986249/pg1
http://www.nesaranews.blogspot.com/2...ng-system.html
http://www.nesaranews.blogspot.com/2...ng-system.html
04-22-12, 06:41 PM
allodial

2 Attachment(s)

Not to mention the masses looking forward to "end times" that may have occurred come 70 A.D. (Josephus Flavius; Eusebius). One makes one wonder that there isn't some esoteric doctrine of "creator-created" or "trustor-trustee" (*ahem* feudal law *ahem*) being applied with respect to all "man-made governments". Consider what kind of meaning the term "the Creator" takes on within the framework of a man-made State.

Quote:

Most people are ignorant of what they are doing when they finance a given res. If one is financing a home, car, etc. you are converting the property into a registered security in which others can profit through their interest in the security.
When has full knowledge about money ever been widely known?

A ruling class empire with landless peasants (proletariat) is what you always had throughout history. Nothing has changed for a majority of people.
The difference today is that people get up and work hard to place themselves in some form of voluntary servitude.
Lack of knowledge. If someone can't tell the difference between that which is real and that which is imaginary perhaps the 'care for insane persons' statutes comes into play.

People just bought the kool-aid sold by the Framers through their private charter, the U.S. Constitution.
Isn't it interesting how you get "Farmers" if you switch a couple letters around?

Attachment 832

To see what I'm getting at regarding lack of knowledge, who with half a brain doesn't realize that you cannot be land-less on the planet called Earth unless you choose to be by accepting the belief that you are land-less? One of my relatives 13-ish year old child totally gets that he/she has inherited the landmasses called North America (6,050,697,738 acres). Perhaps it is the 'legal fiction' that is land-less and if you think that you are it and you agree to be it then..well you likely get the idea you might be land-less by contract?

Quote:

"Let he who would be deceived, be deceived. (qui vult decipi decipiatur)” A Roman "Cult" Maxim found in Bouiver's 1856.

Attachment 831

And then you have modern day folks who would retort: "Am I my brother's keeper?" if questioned about the exploitive, criminal and/or deceptive practices that they might engage in on a daily basis.