Users Online Now:
GLP Poker Rooms
Donate To GLP
Back to Forum
Back to Thread
REPLY TO THREAD
Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?
Ms Sans Serif
In accordance with industry accepted best practices we ask that users limit their copy / paste of copyrighted material to the relevant portions of the article you wish to discuss and no more than 50% of the source material, provide a link back to the original article and provide your original comments / criticism in your post with the article.
[quote:Anonymous Coward 31297288:MV8yMTM3ODI1XzM2MTAwNzc3X0NGMzExMTcy] [quote:Anonymous Coward 20179835:MV8yMTM3ODI1XzM2MTAwNjc3X0NFRjM3QjQ1] [quote:Anonymous Coward 24760791:MV8yMTM3ODI1XzM2MDk3MDI5X0IyQTU3RDg=] The Constitution is a contract with the people and the federal government. If the federal government breaks the contract, then the contract is void. It is as simple as that. [/quote] Since none of u seem to know what the h-ll u are talking about ill chime in. First the Constitution is not a contract it is a trust arrangement written by “We the People” making the government trustees. (Read the Preamble) [b]“[/b]As expressed otherwise, the powers delegated to a public officer are held in trust for the people and are to be exercised in behalf of the government or of all citizens who may need the intervention of the officer.  Furthermore, the view has been expressed that all public officers, within whatever branch and whatever level of government, and whatever be their private vocations, are trustees of the people, and accordingly labor under every disability and prohibition imposed by law upon trustees relative to the making of personal financial gain from a discharge of their trusts.  That is, a public officer occupies a fiduciary relationship to the political entity on whose behalf he or she serves.  and owes a fiduciary duty to the public.  It has been said that the fiduciary responsibilities of a public officer cannot be less than those of a private individual.  Furthermore, it has been stated that any enterprise undertaken by the public official which tends to weaken public confidence and undermine the sense of security for individual rights is against public policy.[6[b]]” 63C Am.Jur.2d, Public Officers and Employees, §247[/b] Second most do not realize that is basic understanding in law that the people are self governing just like the US GOV. ( a federal corporation) is self governing 28 USC § 3002 - DEFINITIONS (15)“United States” means— (A)a Federal corporation; http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/3002 The people are self governing by the common law, grand juries, indictments, jury trials. The gov. is self governed by rules, regulation, codes, statutes, and administrative courts (this is what most are referring to when they talk about maritime law.) [b]Statutes only apply to government[/b] There are two worlds going on at the same time. The question then is what world were u in at the time of any compliant. [b]“[/b]The idea prevails with some, indeed it has expression in arguments at the bar, that we have in this country substantially two national governments; one to be maintained under the Constitution, with all its restrictions; the other to be maintained by Congress outside and independently of that instrument, by exercising such powers as other nations of the earth are accustomed to... I take leave to say that, if the principles thus announced should ever receive the sanction of a majority of this court, a radical and mischievous change in our system will result. We will, in that event, pass from the era of constitutional liberty guarded and protected by a written constitution into an era of legislative absolutism... It will be an evil day for American Liberty if the theory of a government outside the Supreme Law of the Land finds lodgment in our Constitutional Jurisprudence. No higher duty rests upon this court than to exert its full authority to prevent all violation of the principles of the Constitution.” [b]DOWNES v. BIDWELL, 182 U.S. 244 (1901)[/b] If the constitution is the supreme law of the land and only applies to government, what makes u think that anything below that applies to anything but the government? There are no such things as constitutional rights, ur rights come from god so read your bible, the constitution merely recognizes what is already known to be true. [b]“[/b]The restrictions that the Constitution places upon the government in its capacity as lawmaker, i.e., as the regulator of private conduct, are not the same as the restrictions that it places upon the government in its capacity as employer. We have recognized this in many contexts, with respect to many different constitutional guarantees. Private citizens perhaps cannot be prevented from wearing long hair, but policemen can. Kelley v. Johnson, 425 U.S. 238, 247 (1976). Private citizens cannot have their property searched without probable cause, but in many circumstances government employees can. O'Connor v. Ortega, 480 U.S. 709, 723 (1987) (plurality opinion); id., at 732 (SCALIA, J., concurring in judgment). Private citizens cannot be punished for refusing to provide the government information that may incriminate them, but government employees can be dismissed when the incriminating information that they refuse to provide relates to the performance of their job. Gardner v. Broderick, [497 U.S. 62, 95] 392 U.S. 273, 277 -278 (1968). With regard to freedom of speech in particular: Private citizens cannot be punished for speech of merely private concern, but government employees can be fired for that reason. Connick v. Myers, 461 U.S. 138, 147 (1983). Private citizens cannot be punished for partisan political activity, but federal and state employees can be dismissed and otherwise punished for that reason. Public Workers v. Mitchell, 330 U.S. 75, 101 (1947); Civil Service Comm'n v. Letter Carriers, 413 U.S. 548, 556 (1973); Broadrick v. Oklahoma, 413 U.S. 601, 616 -617 (1973).” [b]RUTAN v. REPUBLICAN PARTY OF ILLINOIS, 497 U.S. 62 (1990[/b]) Public trustees (government employees) are not protected by the constitution which is why constitution arguments cannot be made in administrative courts. The TPTB learned a long time ago that forcing people into slavery didn’t work well, so they made the people free(sovereign) and used the masses stupidly against them to get them to contract themselves back into slavery. I’ll finish with what sovereign actually means. -Blacks Law 2nd Edition Sovereign- a chief ruler with supreme power, a king or other ruler with limited power “Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law; but in our system, while sovereign powers are delegated to the agencies of government, sovereignty itself remains with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts” [b]YICK WO v. HOPKINS, 118 U.S. 356 (1886)[/b] "at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people, and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects (unless the African slaves among us may be so called), and have none to govern but themselves; the citizens of America are equal as fellow citizens, and as joint tenants in the sovereignty." [b]Chisholm v. Georgia - 2 U.S. 419 (1793)[/b] Resources for further study: -sedm.org -1215.org -teamlaw.org -Rob Menard -Dean Clifford (who is currently being held in jail as a political prisoner) [/quote] Nobody knows what they are talking about on this thread? Speak for yourself. Dean Clifford is in jail and has been numerous times because he is still endorsing the private credit of international bankers. Same with Rob, teamlaw and 1215. You endorse their debt system and do not play by their rules, you are sunk. ONLY (and I do mean ONLY) the suitors who are redeeming lawful money are consistently winning against the IRS, local courts and more importantly, avoiding them all together. If you are not demanding your redemption as spelled out in 12 USC 411 and try what others are doing, you will be in the same place as Dean Clifford, Ted Turner and all the rest of the "trust" "sovereign" gurus. http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1304915/pg1 [/quote]
I really don't know much about this subject. Is this a genuine description of these people of just the M.S.M. demonizing them?
From Kfor TV out of Oklahoma:
"Law enforcement is paying special attention to a re-surging group of individual extremists; sovereign citizens.
They are anti-government Americans who believe the U.S. government has no authority".
"The world-wide web has been a handy tool in sovereign circles, spreading tactics of their particular flavor of lawlessness.
Sovereign citizens usually represent themselves in court, filing nonsensical paperwork on their own behalf.
Many sovereigns document their struggles to be taken seriously, then post them online.
They rarely have much success."
“What I understand people in some of these cases are doing is making the argument that the original constitutional order left people free from the authority of the federal government and maybe from laws at the state level as well,” Blitz said. “So (they say) ‘You can’t apply these laws to me.’ Not surprisingly, the judges have said, ‘Yes we can.’”
Full article with video:
link to kfor.com
I just want to thank everyone who contributed to this thread. You've all given me a bit of a crash education on this subject and directed me to some great sources for learning even more. It's bed time for me but I'm looking forward to reading any new post when I get up.
Once again, thank you!
Pictures (click to insert)
Big Round Smilies
Aliens and Space
Friendship & Love
Misc Small Smilies
View All Categories
Next Page >>
Disclaimer / Copyright Info
with questions or comments about this site.
"Godlike Productions" & "GLP" are registered trademarks of Zero Point Ltd. Godlike™
Website Design Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Godlikeproductions.com
Page generated in 0.006s (5 queries)