Sheriff Clarke: ‘Assault’ on Policing Hasn’t Been Seen Since 60s

[BLBereans]

Who are "the People"?

People are the collective man; male and female created He them.

[shikamaru]

People are the collective man; male and female created He them.

Has this always been the case in these United States throughout its history?

[Michael Joseph]

Has this always been the case in these United States throughout its history?

shikamaru, as you well know, Business Trusts have been formed in the history of mankind and man has chosen to engage himself under the Shade of those trusts for his/her benefit in societal living. I suppose here we go again around the wheel. I wonder when will men learn of the roots that understand the tree instead of looking at its "pretty leaves".

I think it was years ago when you and I went around the wheel to discuss the nature of trusts - it is somewhere here at this site. You strike me as one who is a self starter and while I don't know you I am sure that you own and control your own business affairs. Now consider what a fool would I be to say - this is what you will do tomorrow regarding your business affairs.

And yet, this is what folks do, as you well know. Claiming to be the Settlors when in fact they have no office at all in the trust. In fact at best they are 3rd party beneficiaries thinking themselves to be the People. These TAKE against the Will. Therefore give them the liability they choose.

Psa 69:22 Let their table become a snare before them: and that which should have been for their welfare, let it become a trap.

Psa 69:25 Let their habitation be desolate; and let none dwell in their tents.

Psa 69:28 Let them be blotted out of the book of the living, and not be written with the righteous.

Psa 109:8 Let his days be few; and let another take his office.

------------------

Yep, that looks like civil death to me. How about you? And yet, it is more than that. Surely an enlightened mind would never think to steal. And yet, many seek to take against the will claiming that which is not theirs to claim. I would never claim an interest in the business you built.

Let another take his office - here is your license to marry, to drive, to work.... i'd say that is a pretty desolate habitation when the rulers of the land see the men and women as property [slaves] that must be licensed. Yet when ignorance rules darkness comes. And folks think they are that which they are not.

Yet when one is true to himself and looks at his life one will have to answer the question - do I have a marriage license, a drivers license a business license, etc. And these same will harass another for trying to explain the concept of "the People". These are the same who come running begging for help when their "status quo" violently changes.

Declare Thyself - and God said "let there be Light". Amen.


Shalom,
Michael Joseph

P.S. When money becomes number one, don't expect the policing power to serve the men and women in society. I witnessed a foreclosure on a residential estate years ago whereof the policing power showed up with 14 swat outfitted officers with automatic weaponry. The man sitting inside the house was just there playing his piano. Fear is a double edged sword. It appears the deceivers are being deceived.

[shikamaru]

shikamaru, as you well know, Business Trusts have been formed in the history of mankind and man has chosen to engage himself under the Shade of those trusts for his/her benefit in societal living. I suppose here we go again around the wheel. I wonder when will men learn of the roots that understand the tree instead of looking at its "pretty leaves".

I think it was years ago when you and I went around the wheel to discuss the nature of trusts - it is somewhere here at this site. You strike me as one who is a self starter and while I don't know you I am sure that you own and control your own business affairs. Now consider what a fool would I be to say - this is what you will do tomorrow regarding your business affairs.

And yet, this is what folks do, as you well know. Claiming to be the Settlors when in fact they have no office at all in the trust. In fact at best they are 3rd party beneficiaries thinking themselves to be the People. These TAKE against the Will. Therefore give them the liability they choose.

Psa 69:22 Let their table become a snare before them: and that which should have been for their welfare, let it become a trap.

Psa 69:25 Let their habitation be desolate; and let none dwell in their tents.

Psa 69:28 Let them be blotted out of the book of the living, and not be written with the righteous.

Psa 109:8 Let his days be few; and let another take his office.

------------------

Yep, that looks like civil death to me. How about you? And yet, it is more than that. Surely an enlightened mind would never think to steal. And yet, many seek to take against the will claiming that which is not theirs to claim. I would never claim an interest in the business you built.

Let another take his office - here is your license to marry, to drive, to work.... i'd say that is a pretty desolate habitation when the rulers of the land see the men and women as property [slaves] that must be licensed. Yet when ignorance rules darkness comes. And folks think they are that which they are not.

Yet when one is true to himself and looks at his life one will have to answer the question - do I have a marriage license, a drivers license a business license, etc. And these same will harass another for trying to explain the concept of "the People". These are the same who come running begging for help when their "status quo" violently changes.

Declare Thyself - and God said "let there be Light". Amen.


Shalom,
Michael Joseph

P.S. When money becomes number one, don't expect the policing power to serve the men and women in society. I witnessed a foreclosure on a residential estate years ago whereof the policing power showed up with 14 swat outfitted officers with automatic weaponry. The man sitting inside the house was just there playing his piano. Fear is a double edged sword. It appears the deceivers are being deceived.

I'm curious as to what BLBereans' reply will be to those questions.

You hear many say that "the People" is all people, but I don't think the courts are of that opinion.
This certain wouldn't have been the case historically in these United States.
The people who originally called themselves "the People" acted in their own interests. I think Barron v. City of Baltimore (1833) spelled this out with regard to "The People" of the United States.

In any event, it would seem to me that "the People" today are mere figurehead of the political corporations.

[Michael Joseph]

I'm curious as to what BLBereans' reply will be to those questions.

You hear many say that "the People" is all people, but I don't think the courts are of that opinion.
This certain wouldn't have been the case historically in these United States.
The people who originally called themselves "the People" acted in their own interests. I think Barron v. City of Baltimore (1833) spelled this out with regard to "The People" of the United States.

In any event, it would seem to me that "the People" today are mere figurehead of the political corporations.

I did that work years ago. You are spot on. Thou shall not steal will be enforced. It is Divine Law.


"The Constitution was ordained and established by the people of the United States for themselves, for their own government, and not for the government of individual States. Each State established a constitution for itself, and in that constitution provided such limitations and restrictions on the powers of its particular government as its judgment dictated. The people of the United States framed such a government for the United States as they supposed best adapted to their situation, and best calculated to promote their interests. The powers they conferred on this government were to be exercised by itself, and the limitations on power, if expressed in general terms, are naturally and necessarily applicable to the government created by the instrument. They are limitations of power granted in the instrument itself, not of distinct governments framed by different persons and for different purposes."

[allodial]

I did that work years ago. You are spot on. Thou shall not steal will be enforced. It is Divine Law.


"The Constitution was ordained and established by the people of the United States for themselves, for their own government, and not for the government of individual States. Each State established a constitution for itself, and in that constitution provided such limitations and restrictions on the powers of its particular government as its judgment dictated. The people of the United States framed such a government for the United States as they supposed best adapted to their situation, and best calculated to promote their interests. The powers they conferred on this government were to be exercised by itself, and the limitations on power, if expressed in general terms, are naturally and necessarily applicable to the government created by the instrument. They are limitations of power granted in the instrument itself, not of distinct governments framed by different persons and for different purposes."

Meaning subjects of the United States were allowed to form a government in the Territory of United States which is comprised of those territories ceded to the (singular) United States (a Federal State) by organic non-federal states of America (i.e. Virginia, Georgia, Maryland, New York and so on)? It does seem that the United States (Federal State) was created by several (instead of 'quantity' as in 'sever' -> having a severed nature with respect to each other, not connected, distinct and different from each other, 'different', 'disjoint', 'disconnected', separate as opposed 'united') states of America. (Several as in synonym for 'foreign', 'different').

[BLBereans]

I'm curious as to what BLBereans' reply will be to those questions.

You hear many say that "the People" is all people, but I don't think the courts are of that opinion.
This certain wouldn't have been the case historically in these United States.
The people who originally called themselves "the People" acted in their own interests. I think Barron v. City of Baltimore (1833) spelled this out with regard to "The People" of the United States.

In any event, it would seem to me that "the People" today are mere figurehead of the political corporations.

Why would you be curious as to what "BLBereans'" reply will be?

Can anyone here prove it, with first hand knowledge and testimony, that one was privy to the development, sentiments and intentions behind 'The Declaration' and 'The Constitution'?

[shikamaru]

Why would you be curious as to what "BLBereans'" reply will be?

Can anyone here prove it, with first hand knowledge and testimony, that one was privy to the development, sentiments and intentions behind 'The Declaration' and 'The Constitution'?

You've just contradicted yourself.

You initially stated "the People" were "... the collective man; male and female created He them."

Now, you are stating the above.

Which claim do you stand upon?

[BLBereans]

You've just contradicted yourself.

You initially stated "the People" were "... the collective man; male and female created He them."

Now, you are stating the above.

Which claim do you stand upon?

If you are going to quote me, at least get it right:

"People are the collective man; male and female created He them." is what I wrote.

"The People" is a proper noun; the people is a two-word phrase describing a group of living souls, specified by the original commenter; in this case Sheriff Clarke.

So, I ask again: Can anyone here prove it, with first hand knowledge and testimony, that one was privy to the development, sentiments and intentions behind 'The Declaration' and 'The Constitution'?

In other words, how do you know for 100% certain how 'people' was meant to be interpreted in those documents? Were you there? Do you know what was in their hearts and minds?

Manipulation and capitalization after the fact does not automatically imply or equate to original intent.