The decline and fall of the English system of finance by Thomas Paine

[Gavilan]

https://books.google.com/books?id=OCVcAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA14&dq=failure+of+english+finance&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjJiN_-l-XOAhWOsh4KHWDJDn8Q6AEIHDAA#v=onepage&q=failure%20of%20english%20finance&f=false

Thomas Paine did a much excellent exposition of the English system of finance and how the fraud is carried out in the above linked book.

For those students of money and credit, it's a much needed reference material.

[David Merrill]

https://books.google.com/books?id=OC...inance&f=false

Thomas Paine did a much excellent exposition of the English system of finance and how the fraud is carried out in the above linked book.

For those students of money and credit, it's a much needed reference material.

Thank you Gavilan;

That kind of post is really what makes time here worthwhile.

What strikes my resonance is the idea of decadence in the Torrens System of registeration.

[allodial]

Coincidentally, around the time of the start of the U.S. Civil War, the stronger emergence of Scottish Rite Freemasonry in the USA, stronger break with orthodox Christianity in America, the Papacy's loss of its Papal States (1870) in Europe (Italy), federation of Canada (1867), Bishop Strossmayer's speech (1870) we see the emergence of the Torrens system in Australia and Canada. The Domesday (Doomsday?) Book (1066).

Though Thomas Paine might be correct in some regards on finances, I would not suggest his ideas to have been of primary embrace by those who fought the American Revolution. Also, the evidence tends to show that the decline in England truly took hold around 1665: that is what paved way for what followed. Many started to escape to the Americas then and even more by Thomas Paine's time of authorship of the above mentioned work.

[David Merrill]

Coincidentally, around the time of the start of the U.S. Civil War, the stronger emergence of Scottish Rite Freemasonry in the USA, stronger break with orthodox Christianity in America, the Papacy's loss of its Papal States (1870) in Europe (Italy), federation of Canada (1867), Bishop Strossmayer's speech (1870) we see the emergence of the Torrens system in Australia and Canada. The Domesday (Doomsday?) Book (1066).

Though Thomas Paine might be correct in some regards on finances, I would not suggest his ideas to have been of primary embrace by those who fought the American Revolution. Also, the evidence tends to show that the decline in England truly took hold around 1665.

My point in the link is that even when the judge is real, one would reverse the transaction; not just declare a proper sale to have never happened.

[allodial]

My point in the link is that even when the judge is real, one would reverse the transaction...

That gets the the purpose of true, organic government: [1] to protect the innocent; [2] to keep the poor and the widow safe from oppression; [3] to promote or uphold equity; [4] to protect the upright from the base, low, and degenerate (same as #1). Anything too far from that and you might just be dealing with organized crime posing as lawful government (relevantly: The Dangers of Municipal Trading; Racketeering).

...not just declare a proper sale to have never happened.

Reversing the transaction would at the least promote equity and restore parties to their original condition. To declare a proper sale to never have transpired: more robbery under the guise of officialdom. If a judge is using the court to enrich his revenue base, whether in collusion with others or not, he is biased and should be recused.

[David Merrill]

In the case I am thinking of, the "judge" was running a vacant office by fraudulently signing a deviant oath of office.

Click Here.

[allodial]

In the case I am thinking of, the "judge" was running a vacant office by fraudulently signing a deviant oath of office.

Click Here.

When a territorial, U.N., executive agreement and private law toting person is posing as a de jure official and knows it, he fudges the oath of office. They're doing the same thing in Australia. Perhaps the proper response of a sovereign people would be to assert or enforce the establishment and perpetuation of lawful government.



Basically, Walsh was right. The territorial jurisdiction of the United States is very limited. Even the formation of the National Guard system tends to make the National Guard Article I, Section 8, Clause 12 (re: "standing armies in time of peace...") rather than de jure militia (note: the term militia encompasses law enforcement, fire fighting, emergency responders as well as military defense of a county or state). On a similar note: Hitler is (ironically) lauded as a 'savior of Germany' even though he sought expertise in bypassing the German constitution and destroying the nation. He didn't even want them producing good weapons so he blocked production of the assault weapon (one might suspect that he knew the fate he planned for Germans and didn't want them to be able to defend themselves that well). Like his modern counterparts, Hitler hated the assault rifle. He probably didn't want those millions of Germans they sent off to Russian prison camps to be able to defend themselves that well.

[David Merrill]

What is a recused judge to do?

If a judge is using the court to enrich his revenue base, whether in collusion with others or not, he is biased and should be recused.

Mr. WOLSKI has been recused and unable to mention anything since February. So he just says it is Unregistered and stipulates that his Order is NOT TO BE PUBLISHED!

Docket Report 8/29/16
Order to Dismiss/Close Case - NOT TO BE PUBLISHED



P.S. I will specify on the R4C clerk instruction - TO BE PUBLISHED. That will learn them good!

[allodial]

Mr. WOLSKI has been recused and unable to mention anything since February. So he just says it is Unregistered and stipulates that his Order is NOT TO BE PUBLISHED!

Docket Report 8/29/16
Order to Dismiss/Close Case - NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

P.S. I will specify on the R4C clerk instruction - TO BE PUBLISHED. That will learn them good!

Hopefully they are capable of learning and coming to a proper understanding. Maybe one day they will perceive the connection between the Christ's lawful assembly and the house of Judah.

[David Merrill]

Hopefully they are capable of learning and coming to a proper understanding. Maybe one day they will perceive the connection between the Christ's lawful assembly and the house of Judah.

This gets better and better! Funny how a little sleep sheds a lot of light. Look at the back side of the Supreme Court document - Page 2. The clerk put the "RECEIVED" stamp there where it might not be noticed!

So this tells me that they understand the Connection you speak of. Or something very similar.

[allodial]

This gets better and better! Funny how a little sleep sheds a lot of light. Look at the back side of the Supreme Court document - Page 2. The clerk put the "RECEIVED" stamp there where it might not be noticed!

So this tells me that they understand the Connection you speak of. Or something very similar.

The term "separate sovereign" is a very interesting piece of art. That verbiage ("separate sovereign") tells me that Comrade WOLSKI may have taken a refresher look at United States v. Cruikshank (1875) in drafting his ORDER. And guess what? That case is a post-Civil War case that is very much pertinent to characteristics of the 'new' post-Civil War Union (stranger container) which seems highly modeled after the Canadian style of federation (in Canada each of the provinces are regarded to be sovereign, each has a Lt. Governor General and there also is a Governor-General).

This does not, however, necessarily imply that the two governments possess powers in common, or bring them into conflict with each other. It is the natural consequence of a citizenship which owes allegiance to two sovereignties, and claims protection from both. The citizen cannot complain, because he has voluntarily submitted himself to such a form of government. He owes allegiance to the two departments, so to speak, and within their respective spheres must pay the penalties which each exacts for disobedience to its laws. In return, he can demand protection from each within its own jurisdiction. United States v. Cruikshank (1875)

In my assessment, even with lack of a principal-agent relationship, if the United States, is facilitating a disturbance or the like, then the matter tends to come under tort law.



He mentions torts later on. If you look closely, he refers to:

1. Colorado ("Colorado is, however, a separate sovereign"--does not specifically refer to "the State of Colorado" there);
2. the State of Colorado;
3. the state of Colorado ("The United States does not have an agency relationship with the state of Colorado or the Colorado judiciary"). {He speaks truth because officers of the Crown aren't necessarily State officers.}

What about District of Colorado?

So this tells me that they understand the Connection you speak of. Or something very similar.

Very likely they do.

[David Merrill]

Furthermore, when used in language how does one distinguish between District of Colorado and the Federal Reserve District where Colorado is found on a map of the Federal Reserve districts?


- Without pointing to a map of the Federal Reserve Districts?

[allodial]

IMHO, all those Colorado, Kansas (pre-Civil War), Oklahoma, Wyoming, Nebraska, etc. FRB-member banks would have their FRB home situs in the Eastern District of Missouri (FRB Kansas). However, it just happens that, generally speaking, if one can sue someone in a U.S. district court, it can be in any one of them (yes, if you so desired you could sue your neighbor through the Southern District of New York even if he lives right next door). However, their members in the Federal Reserve Ban of Kansas City puts that contractual situs in the Eastern District of Missouri. Just like old times (re: Louisiana Purchase), eh?



For what is worth, the old French street signs have returned to downtown St. Louis.



For some reason, the movie Edge of Tomorrow and its persistent reference to the Louvre Pyramid built by Grand Orient socialist, Francois Mitterrand comes to mind.

[David Merrill]

About any law dictionary will tell us that Louisiana never adopted the Uniform Commercial Code. Still under French common law?


Thank you for that about Colorado and its Federal Reserve nexus!

[David Merrill]

It would seem that the clerk believes Mr. WOLSKI is recused in that WOLSKI makes it clear that this ORDER is not to be published, yet it is.

Click Here.