Allodial explained what I believe is only part of the picture:

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.

Attachment 4635
Especially lately I am under the impression that proper and even antioxidant-enhanced brain function is a deeply ascending spiritual experience. And by bouncing a ball on lengthy walks, in my left hand I have been growing parallel (female/yin) processing neurology on the right half of my brain where my thought system is not bound into the linear (illusion) that time exists. With that said, I am going to presume the reader understands my heritage in the Dutch East/West Indies Trading Company on Manhattan on both my mother's and my father's side. So I will work that in, without explanation through my Bill of Exchange that cites the 1629 Charter (as found in Attachment G starting at Page 45 of 62).

What I want to focus on is the theft of Colorado as terrain/territory in 1861. Allodial's explanation is great with me until he says:

Q. Why didn't I learn this is public school?
A. Because public schools don't teach about private things.
Looking at my complaint linked there, I have redacted it to five pages of text according to the Rules and so the bulk of it is oaths of office. My contention is Allodial may have figured this out by being highly intelligent, and having a very impressive library and so Allodial is able to say that ignorance of the law (public v private) is no excuse. - Even when explaining it to very intelligent people reading here. My claim is that when these officials pretend to be public, while operating in the private or vice versa and these are reversible according to perspective (district v territory), then that constitutes fraud and vitiates all contracts; a tenet I hold dear.

I have been holding on (on my disk) to the Jubilee of the Constitution for a couple months, but interested because I thought it was a treatise on the constitution of (biblical) jubilee. [I should have thought before naming the file.] I pulled it out and discovered it was written by John Quincy ADAMS fifty years after the ratification of the Constitution. Then again there is John ADAMS who tended more toward the idealism we find (I gather) from the camp of Ed RIVERA.

One fascinating item about pulling up JQA was that I had watched Amistad recently and was really considering the concept of calling on my ancestry; for obvious reasons. The earlier John ADAMS, in later years wrote of the decentralized federal government. But John Quincy ADAMS recites the reality of the last fifty years counting back from 1839 about how a compromise had been struck between state sovereignty and a cohesive federal government. I hope the reader can find time to at least skim what I am saying.

All that to get to the '59'er's in the Central City and Auraria gold fields of Colorado.

Here it would appear BUCHANAN, just before LINCOLN grabbed Colorado for a war chest, to fund something called The Union. This was a project to de-pluralize the States into a singular noun. Abraham LINCOLN was assassinated at that juncture where he was to end the "extraordinary occasion" of July 4, 1861 and bring the nation back to that balance. The Civil War stuck to things right up until the last few weeks when we found the Trading with the Enemy Act "Omitted" from the Bankers' Code. Notice in my Complaint that I Refuse for Cause the proposed SDR system, primarily because China cannot be pledged into BRICS while also a party to DRYEP as I call it, while actually collecting on the national debt as it does so. But as I say expressly, with no judiciary there is no real collections process to be hearing matters - with all the judgments being void anyway!

In closing I remind the readers that Governor GILPIN issued notes without any authority from Washington DC, Congress or the Treasury, to pay Union s oldiers in the malformed Colorado Territory. This set the precedent for the Treasury to honor such capricious notes, develop Greenbacks and US notes and upon collateral shock testing in Canada with the Crown Dominion Notes make way to the Fed Act of 1913 under the penumbra IN GOD WE TRUST (Title 31 USC 5115). So there you have it - that same GIBBERISH SO HELP ME GOD.

The contract is endorsement. Wow! I keep saying...