Results 1 to 10 of 20

Thread: Unbaliable Warrant after RFC

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by xparte View Post
    well explain the circus building i am performing in first
    It seems that the respective territorial jurisdictions of Canada, New Zealand, United Kingdom, Democratic Republic of Germany or of the United States are misrepresented as being organic and original jurisdiction. Treaties non-high-contracted and executive agreements are limited to the territorial jurisdiction (the EU's involvement in the UK is likely only territorial but is presented deceptively as organic). When someone approached the UK courts concerning the EU they were told "it is a political question" so the courts didn't want to touch it. I translate it as: it is something that you contract into, it is not organic law it is a presumptive participation in the territorial jurisdiction of the UK which is the only thing a PM could have possibly attached to the EU without the people's authority. So basically, if the banks of the World have a debt being held over the United States, the only thing they have a claim against would be the territorial jurisdiction of the United States. That is, the UN is restricted to the territorial jurisdiction of the United States. Its a political question was to whether or not you have volunteered into that realm.

    The reason Scott Bartle of Australia is finding two governments running in parallel in Australia (one being the Commonwealth of Australian and the other being the Australian Government) is because the territorial (imperial/extra-constitutional) government and the organic government of the states of Australia have two different constitutions. The same may very well apply to THE CANADA. As in perhaps when Canada is exercising its territorial jurisdiction (signified perhaps by ON, BC, PE, AB, etc) it is acting inorganically. As in the territorial government of Canada is a state in and of itself. Immigration in Canada is probably only ever into its territorial jurisdiction. The territorial jurisdiction of the United States is by design external to the members of the confederacy. The U.N. is by law confined to the territorial United States.

    So because someone merged the territories of many countries, it doesn't give them any power outside of the territories. However, a grand deception could work to make it seem so. You have to fall for it ("its a political question").

    Related terms: admiralty jurisdiction, maritime jurisdiction, plenary power, territorial jurisdiction, possession, territory, 'state and territory', district, 'district state', resident, stranger.

    Q. Why didn't I learn this is public school?
    A. Because public schools don't teach about private things.
    In the UK the Roman Civil Law (Civil Law = Admiralty) and the English/Scottish/Irish/Welsh Common and Organic Law systems remain distinct. In Spain, France and other Napoleonic Code and Justinian jurisdictions perhaps not so. With respect to the United states of America, the same remains true. In the District of Columbia established in/on the Potomac there is admiralty, plain, simple--done. In de jure and organic Maryland, different story.

    Name:  Poseidon_Neptune_Greek_God_Art_23.jpg
Views: 737
Size:  170.7 KB
    Last edited by allodial; 10-28-16 at 10:55 PM.
    All rights reserved. Without prejudice. No liability assumed. No value assured.

    "The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane." -- Marcus Aurelius
    "It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter." Proverbs 25:2
    Prove all things; hold fast that which is good. Thess. 5:21.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •