Universal Postal Union - UPU

[doug-again]

Readers should note that i have started this thread in the SuiJurisClub Throwback Forum. Indeed, it is a throwback. The attached UPUdoc was downloaded there, by me, and is included here for reference, your edification & posterity's sake. The decision to place this here, in the Jurisdiction thread, was tough. If you take the time to read the attached article titled, "Saving the Post Office," you'll understand why. It has mostly to do with Banking.

Allow me to explain why i'm posting here...
An SJC poster named kingdolan claimed to get remedy/ satisfaction (on a traffic ticket if memory serves) by affixing a postage stamp to the charging instrument. He appeared generally, and claimed to win a dismissal therewith. He seemed to think that the magistrate was savvy enough to interpret the stamp on his paperwork as a get outta jail free card. i fancy, rather, that it communicated to the mag., "i'm a patriot. i'm gotta waste alotta yer time!" ...or something like that - and so he dismissed.

For lack of evidence, i never believed 'dolan, particularly after reading through the Constitution of the UPU. i never found anything to substantiate claims of Jurisdiction that would supersede any control that a domestic court, or governing authority, might claim. So what if they're in bed with the UN? Yet, the UN factor is, what seems to this reader, what gives the UPU teeth.

Fast forward to October of last year, and our own KnowLaw claims over here that

this matter is out of any State court's jurisdiction and is within the UPU's (Universal Postal Union) jurisdiction.

i can see how this could be accomplished by defaulting the adversary [i.e. making a claim, giving 30 days to respond, then defaulting it], but that certainly can't, and shouldn't, be construed as validating the claim in a general sense... just because some confused, overworked or lazy-butt bureaucrat didn't care enough to respond in time.

Has anyone proven the claims that the UPU.doc makes?

the Post-Office is still solvent and operational, ready to fulfill its duty to help the people in their communications; to set a new government should a complete break down of the existing governmental structures occur in the United States.

&

by placing the postage stamp on our admiralty paperwork and endorsement on the back of the first page, is using the authority of the sovereignty of the longest surviving, solvent, governmental authority in the United States

These seem baseless to me. Of course, these are just 2, out of a whole laundry list. They are 2, however, which the attached article addresses.

On the contrary, the existing governmental structures are completely breaking down the PO.
Is the PO so solvent? C'mon.

In 1999, it employed nearly a million people; and today, it employs over 600,000.

Solvent at whose expense?
i think time is proving this UPU doc errant, or at least in major need of updating.
Did not Congress pass a bill that forced the USPS to do something? Referring to the attached article,

Congress passed the Postal Accountability Enhancement Act (PAEA), which forced the USPS to put aside billions of dollars to pay for the health benefits of employees, many of whom hadn’t even been hired yet.*

Where did the sovereignty of the USPS go?
Or, did it ever exist?

So maybe you see, that i am using that article here to question jurisdiction.
Elsewhere, i'd love to read a thread about Post Office Banking, if someone wants to start one.