Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 1,591 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 804,853
Pageviews Today: 993,433Threads Today: 166Posts Today: 3,509
08:03 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

The 13th Amendment forbids Titles of Nobility - Why is DR. Ron Paul silently challending this hidden amendment?

 
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 311948
United States
10/20/2007 12:53 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The 13th Amendment forbids Titles of Nobility - Why is DR. Ron Paul silently challending this hidden amendment?
bump
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 311948
United States
10/20/2007 03:01 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The 13th Amendment forbids Titles of Nobility - Why is DR. Ron Paul silently challending this hidden amendment?
(Reply)
----- Original Message -----
From: AM
To: "Bellringer"
Sent: Friday, October 19, 2007 5:51 PM
Subject: i understand
Patrick,
I understand now. I was not aware of the Titles of Nobility Amendment (the original 13th) in which supposedly has never been officially rattified. a good link is here: [link to en.wikipedia.org]
Thank you for putting up with my long letters.
Why is Paul playing around with this? What is his reason if obviously he is aware of it and claims to live by the constitution?
Is it because it was not rattified by all states required that he doesn't consider it to be constitutional? Amendments must be approved before they can be passed.
Is it set in stone? I mean, is it too late for Paul to recognize this and make note of it to his supporters? This is crazy. I'm definitely curious why he would do this knowing of this "hidden" 13th amendment. Many possibilities come off of this.
Any thoughts are appreciated. Again, thank you for your time.
Love,
AM
(Response)
FROM: Patrick H. Bellringer
TO: AM
DATE: Oct. 20, 2007
SUBJECT: Reply
Dear AM:
Again, thank you for your questions. You are quite wrong in saying the original thirteen Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, called the Titles of Nobility Amendment, was never ratified. Secondly, Wikipedia is not a good source for correct information about this amendment. For your edification I am including three sources at the end of this letter of more accurate information concerning the original Thirteenth Amendment.
This amendment was lawfully ratified by thirteen of the then seventeen existing states, the last being Virginia on March 12, 1819. It is interesting that the War of 1812 was fought at least partially due to this Constitutional Amendment. By restricting the British foreign agent lawyers from holding public office in the United States of America, Britain would lose control of America. History records that the British Army burned both the White House and the Library of Congress in 1814, destroying the government records of the past thirty-eight years, including the original Thirteenth Amendment.
You also asked about Ron Paul's position regarding this amendment. I believe that everyone holding a congressional seat in our Corporate U.S. Congress today is compromised. One does not hold such a position without bowing to the demands of the Secret Agenda of the Secret Government. Ron Paul is allowed certain leeway into the "gray area" in his out-spokenness, but he is careful not to step over the line. He is considered harmless and having no power by the present Congress, so they let him spout off for now.
With NESARA and a sweeping away of the present administration and Congress, the Constitution of the Republic will be re-established, including the original Thirteen Amendment. Will Ron Paul be allowed to participate in the new Government of the Republic? Will he give up his title of nobility? There are many titles of Nobility, such as King, (Sire), Queen(Madam), Knight (Sir), squire, esquire, doctor, reverend, etc. Paul holds the title of doctor. Has his past proven him to be untrustworthy to the people? I do not know.
My friend, Truth is seeping out all over, and the Darkside is frantic. Watch carefully and act in wisdom, as this "play" proceeds to its very end.
In Love and Light,
Patrick H. Bellringer
P.S. Sources:
1. Title Of Nobility Or Honour
autarchic.tripod.com/files/nobility.html
POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
1. Article VI of the Articles of Confederation (1777) prohibited any "titles of nobility."
In the original organic Constitution for the United States of America, Article 1, Section 9 (1788) prohibited any "title of nobility."
Therefore, in 1789 an additional "title of nobility" amendment to the Constitution for the United States of America was proposed, and, again, in 1810. It was finally ratified in 1819. This was the true and positive Thirteenth Amendment to the Bill of Rights of the Constitution for the United States of America.
Clearly the Founding Fathers saw such a serious threat in "titles of nobility" and "honours" that anyone receiving them would lose their citizenship, as was clearly stated in the ratified 13th Amendment, to wit:
"If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive, or retain any TITLE OF NOBILITY OR HONOUR, or shall, without the consent of Congress, accept and retain any present, pension, office, or emolument of any kind whatsoever, from any emperor, king, prince, or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of them." (Emphasis added)
Since this was written in the original Articles of Confederation, the original Constitution, and again in an Amendment to the Constitution, the Founding Fathers must have meant more than just a petty post-revolution stab at the British monarchy.
Historically, the British peerage system referred to knights as "Squires" and to those who bore the knight's shields as "Esquires." As lances, shields and physical violence gave way to more civilized means of theft, the pen grew mightier than the sword (and far more profitable), and the clever wielders of those pens (bankers and lawyers) came to hold the titles of nobility. The most common title was "Esquire" (used even today by lawyers).
In Colonial America, attorneys trained attorneys, but most held no "title of nobility" or "honor." There was no requirement that one be a lawyer to hold the position of district attorney, attorney general, or judge; a citizen's "counsel of choice" was not restricted to a lawyer; there were no state bar associations. The only organization that certified lawyers was the International Bar Association (IBA), chartered by the King of England, headquartered in London, and closely associated with the international banking system. Lawyers admitted to the IBA received the rank "Esquire" - a "title of nobility."
"Esquire" was the principal title of nobility which the 13th Amendment sought to prohibit from the United States. Why? Because the loyalty of "Esquire" lawyers was suspect. Bankers and lawyers with an "Esquire" behind their names were agents of the monarchy, members of an organization whose principal purposes were political, not economic, and regarded with the same wariness that some people today reserve for members of the KGB, CIA, FBI, BATF, and IRS.
Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution for the United States of America sought to prohibit the International Bar Association (or other agency that granted titles of nobility) from operating in America. But the Constitution neglected to specify a penalty, so prohibition was ignored, and agents of the monarchy continued to infiltrate and influence the government (as in the Jay Treaty and the US Bank Charter). Therefore, a "title of nobility" Amendment that specified a penalty (loss of citizenship) was proposed in 1789 and again in 1810. The meaning of the amendment is seen in its intent to prohibit persons having titles of nobility and loyalties to foreign governments and bankers from voting, holding public office, or using their skills to subvert the government.
The missing Amendment is referred to as the "title of nobility" Amendment, but the second prohibition against "honour" (honor) may be more significant. The archaic definition of "honor" (as used in the 13th Amendment) meant anyone "obtaining or having an advantage or privilege over another." A contemporary examination of an "honor" granted to only a few Americans (who have become ex-patriots) is the privilege of being a judge: Lawyers can be judges and exercise the attendant privileges and powers; non-lawyers cannot.
By prohibiting "honours" the missing Amendment prohibits any advantage or privilege that would grant to some citizens an unequal opportunity to achieve or exercise political power. Therefore, the second meaning (intent) of the 13th Amendment is to ensure political equality among all American citizens, by prohibiting anyone EVEN GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS from claiming or exercising a special privilege or power (an "honor") over other citizens.
While "titles of nobility" are no longer readily recognized in today's political system, the concept of "honor" remains relevant. For example, anyone who had a specific "immunity" from lawsuits which were not afforded to all citizens would be enjoying a separate privilege or "honor" and would, therefore, forfeit his right to vote or hold public office (such as the doctrine of "judicial immunity.") Without their current "honor" of immunity, judges would be unable to abuse constitutionally guaranteed rights with impunity.
Government would be forced to conduct itself according to the same standards of decency, respect, law and liability as the rest of the Nation. Can you imagine? A government truly "OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE AND FOR THE PEOPLE. A government accountable to the people, a government which could not systematically exploit it's own people, and steal their livelihood through "breach of contract" quasi-crimes for which the right to trial by one's peers has been unlawfully and arbitrarily removed.
There were seventeen states when the 13th Amendment was proposed in 1810. This would require 13 states to support the Amendment for it to be ratified. The states that ratified the Amendment are:
Maryland, Dec. 25, 1810
Kentucky, Jan. 31, 1811
Ohio, Jan. 31, 1811
Delaware, Feb. 2, 1911
Pennsylvania, Feb. 6, 1811
New Jersey, Feb. 13, 1811
Vermont, Oct. 24, 1811
Tennessee, Nov. 21, 1811
Georgia, Dec. 13, 1811
North Carolina, Dec. 23, 1811
Massachusetts, Feb. 27, 1812
New Hampshire, Dec. 10, 1812
Virginia, March 10, 1819
This Amendment was published in many of the States official publications of the Constitution for the United States of America, up through and including the year 1867, when it mysteriously disappeared from almost every state's publications of the Constitution for the United States of America. It appeared, in 1867 Colorado Territory edition, on the same page as the currently listed 13th Amendment freeing the slaves, and the current 13th Amendment was listed as the 14th Amendment in that edition.
Since it was ratified, and is POSITIVE LAW, then it must stand that all lawyers are foreigners, having expatriated themselves by taking a position of honor or title of nobility, in violation of their oath of office, and in contradistinction to the intent and meaning of the 13th Amendment.
The original Constitutions of several states thunderingly forbid lawyers from holding any office in any branch of government, and some went as far as to demand that any lawyer representing a person accused of a crime must swear before the court that they did so for free, as to charge for the defense of a person was reprehensible beyond words. How far we have come. Now, it seems, you are innocent until you run out of funds, and your attorney drops you like a hot potato.
There is ample evidence which proves that lawyers had a great deal to do with the removal and loss of the true 13th Amendment, so that they could remain in the positions of "Nobility" and "Honor" which they hold, to our detriment.
To create the present oligarchy (rule by lawyers) which all people now endure, the lawyers first had to remove the 13th "titles of nobility" Amendment that might otherwise have kept them in check. In fact, it was not until after the Civil War and after the disappearance of the 13th Amendment that the newly developing bar associations began working diligently to create a system wherein lawyers took on a title of privilege and nobility as "Esquire" and received the "honor" of offices and positions (like district attorney and judge) that ONLY lawyers may now hold. By virtue of these titles and honors, and special privileges, lawyers have assumed political and economic advantages over the majority of citizens. Where a majority may vote, but only a minority (lawyers) may run for political office.
Since the Amendment was never lawfully nullified, IT IS STILL IN FULL FORCE AND EFFECT AND IS THE LAW OF THE LAND.
In George Washington's farewell address, he warned of:
"...change by usurpation; for through this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed."
In 1788 Thomas Jefferson proposed that we have a Declaration of Rights similar to Virginia's, including freedom of commerce against monopolies. The "legal profession" has become the singly largest monopoly in the United States, written into legislation by lawyers, lobbied by lawyers, passed by lawyers in the Congress and Senate, enforced by lawyers who have become chiefs of police and sheriffs, and litigated and upheld by lawyers, and judges who are lawyers. Since all lawyers are officers of the judicial branch of government, then it is a blatant conflict of interest for any lawyer to become a legislator or be in the executive branch of government. However, the vast majority of our legislature, both state and United States is now lawyers.
A classic example of the power of lawyers was witnessed in Waco, Texas in 1993, when the top lawyer of the United States, the Attorney General, ordered the slaughter of 86 innocent people, mostly women and children, "for the good of the children."
The authority to create monopolies was judge-made by Supreme Court Justice John Marshall, et al, in the early 1800's; Judges and lawyers granted to themselves the power to declare the acts of the People "Un-Constitutional," waited until their decisions were grandfathered, then granted themselves a monopoly by creating the Bar Associations. What happened to the "This Constitution... is the Supreme Law of the land, and the judges in every State shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding?" Thomas Jefferson foresaw this very thing when he stated:
"Our rulers will become corrupt, our people careless... the time for fixing every essential right on a legal basis is now while our rulers are honest, and ourselves united. From the conclusion of this war we shall be going downhill. It will not then be necessary to resort every moment to the people for support. They will be forgotten, therefore, and their rights disregarded. They will forget themselves, but in the sole faculty of making money and will never think of uniting to effect a due respect for their rights. The shackles, therefore, which shall not be knocked off at the conclusion of this war, will remain on us long, will be made heavier and heavier, till our rights shall revive or expire in a convulsion."
Since all members of the American Bar Association, which was formed in Washington, D.C., become citizens of Washington, D.C., which is neither a state nor a territory within the meaning of the laws, and therefore must register in any state they choose to do business in as a resident alien, foreign agent or agency.
It is interesting to note that most states contain laws which require all professions and businesses to obtain a business license to do business in the state, EXCEPT LAWYERS. Doctors, Dentists, Car Dealers, etc., all must get a license from the state. NO lawyer ever gets a business license. They get a certificate to practice law, issued from their private fraternal organization known as the bar association, and it is signed by the clerk of the Supreme Court of the State (probably a lawyer). When did the judicial branch of government obtain power to issue licenses?
THEREFORE, based upon the above, POSITIVE LAW, the prosecuting attorney is a foreign, resident alien, having expatriated himself from the United States, and has no lawful standing before a court.
FURTHERMORE, the judge, a lawyer, having expatriated himself by becoming a lawyer, has further expatriated himself by sitting in a position of honour (Note we are expected to address the judge as "your honor,") and has no authority to sit in judgment of this or any other case, being a resident alien and having proved his loyalty is not "for the people." He has claimed the judicial (lawyer made) doctrine of immunity from lawsuits, he has accepted the position of honor and the title of honor and of nobility voluntarily, knowingly and intentionally, with intent to set himself above the laws and the Constitution for the United States of America.
WHEREFORE, there is no person who may act as prosecution in ANY case, and no judge to try ANY case.
**********************************




why is paul doing this if he obviously knows about the amendment because he's "the champion of the constitution."??

we also need more info in regards to him getting his title of DR of medicine from the queen.
any info on this, please post.
someone on the first page said paul has addressed the 13th amendment issue in the past - i have not seen this - can anyone help locate this?
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 311948
United States
10/20/2007 03:47 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The 13th Amendment forbids Titles of Nobility - Why is DR. Ron Paul silently challending this hidden amendment?
bump
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 315007
United States
10/20/2007 04:31 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The 13th Amendment forbids Titles of Nobility - Why is DR. Ron Paul silently challending this hidden amendment?
Titles Of Nobility only mean what it says, nothing more...you people are reading tooooo much into it...
See anything pertaining to Kings, Queens, Nobility etc. from the definition below???

I rest my case.
DOCTOR:

1. health services somebody medically qualified: somebody qualified and licensed to give people medical treatment


2. health services dentist, veterinarian, or osteopath: a title used before the names of health professionals such as dentists, veterinarians, and osteopaths


3. education somebody with highest university degree: a title given to somebody who has been awarded a doctorate, the highest level of degree awarded by a university


4. somebody who can fix things: a skilled practitioner of something, especially fixing or improving something
a play doctor


5. christianity Roman Catholic theologian: in the earlier history of the Roman Catholic Church, an eminent and influential theologian


6. education teacher or scholar: a teacher or somebody very knowledgeable ( archaic )
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 293826
United States
10/20/2007 04:46 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The 13th Amendment forbids Titles of Nobility - Why is DR. Ron Paul silently challending this hidden amendment?
No you read again.

exactly which King, Emperor, Prince, or whomever bestowed upon Paul the title of M.D.?
 Quoting: von Doom 314711


Right on. OP - you realllllllllllly need to let this go.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 244644
United Kingdom
10/20/2007 05:33 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The 13th Amendment forbids Titles of Nobility - Why is DR. Ron Paul silently challending this hidden amendment?
"Citizens of countries which do not have the Queen as their head of state sometimes have honours conferred upon them, in which case the awards are "honorary". In the case of knighthoods, the holders are entitled to place initials behind their name but not style themselves "Sir". Examples of foreigners with honorary knighthoods are Riley Bechtel, Bill Gates, Bob Geldof, Bono, and Rudolph Giuliani, while Arsène Wenger and Gérard Houllier are honorary OBEs. Honorary knighthoods arise from Orders of Chivalry rather than as Knights Bachelor as the latter confers no postnominal letters.

Recipients of honorary awards who later become subjects of Her Majesty may apply to convert their awards to substantive ones. Examples of this are Marjorie Scardino, American CEO of Pearson PLC, and Yehudi Menuhin, the American-born violinist and conductor. They were granted an honorary damehood and knighthood respectively while still American citizens, and converted them to substantive awards after they assumed British citizenship, becoming Dame Marjorie and Sir Yehudi. Menuhin later accepted a life peerage with the title Lord Menuhin."
[link to en.wikipedia.org]

So there is no 'Sir' Rudi. And a doctorate is not a title of honour.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 279635
United States
10/20/2007 05:38 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The 13th Amendment forbids Titles of Nobility - Why is DR. Ron Paul silently challending this hidden amendment?
Some people are so afraid of Ron Paul that they will try to find anything to stop his message.

Sorry that just don't fly. Whether he has DR or not, it required for the fake medical services supplied in this country. It hasn't been until now that we realize the entire FDA, and medical overseers are full of crap.

I quit the medical group when I found there are ways to heal yourself without useless drugs.

Years ago if you wanted to practice medicine you had to have the DR in you name. I do not fault Dr. Paul for that requirement, as far as the amendment it may be coming to light but Dr Paul is not here to fight hidden battles, there are so many battles in the open that need fighting.

You got to start somewhere and this is not it.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 315007
United States
10/20/2007 06:08 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The 13th Amendment forbids Titles of Nobility - Why is DR. Ron Paul silently challending this hidden amendment?
[link to en.wikipedia.org]

So there is no 'Sir' Rudi. And a doctorate is not a title of honour.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 244644

RIGHT ON, nowhere in the T.O.N.A.
do I see or read about mention of Dr. M.D. or the such...

Like I said, these people are reading too much into it.
NightWisp

User ID: 313622
United States
10/20/2007 06:44 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The 13th Amendment forbids Titles of Nobility - Why is DR. Ron Paul silently challending this hidden amendment?
The missing 13th amendment WAS ratified according to Govrnment documents. The 16th and 17th were NOT. But anyawy.

The term Esquire used by lawyers is one of these titles. Which means.. no lawyers can be elected and hold office. Yet the Congress and Senate is filled with these reptiles.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 315007
United States
10/20/2007 08:44 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The 13th Amendment forbids Titles of Nobility - Why is DR. Ron Paul silently challending this hidden amendment?
More information on this document:
[link to www.amendment-13.org]

Another site was shut down, It had xlint original photo scanned documents...
I last viewed it in 2006.

This site was Shut down:
[link to www.wealth4freedom.com]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 310117
United States
10/20/2007 08:47 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The 13th Amendment forbids Titles of Nobility - Why is DR. Ron Paul silently challending this hidden amendment?
All your Shillio bull in the world ain'tgoing to stop the Ron Paul tide Babe.... Carry on Foolio's....
Anonymous Coward (OP)
User ID: 311948
United States
10/20/2007 08:54 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The 13th Amendment forbids Titles of Nobility - Why is DR. Ron Paul silently challending this hidden amendment?
i sent a message to Paul's myspace page in regards to this and I actually got a response back, which says:

"Ron Paul is a medical doctor. i don't think any Queen gave him the title, he earned it and practices medicine when congress is not in session."

this is from one of his representitives who operates his myspace page.
it is interesting how this person says "I DONT THINK any Queen..."

i'm not making an conclusions yet, i'm just sharing info.

here is a screenshot:
[link to img84.imageshack.us]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 315560
United States
10/21/2007 08:18 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The 13th Amendment forbids Titles of Nobility - Why is DR. Ron Paul silently challending this hidden amendment?
"When someone in the United States becomes a lawyer, he or she often uses the title of "Esquire" (or an abbreviation thereof) to signify his or her status, much as doctors attach "M.D." to their names. "
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Dr. is a title; Esq. isn't. Esq. is appended to the end of the name not in front of the name where titles belong. Esquire is not a title. If you read the definition of Esquire it says Esquire is a knight or boy, not a title.

If you read Article 1 sec. 9 cl. 8 it says:

"No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States. And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the consent of Congress, accept any present, Emolument, Office or Title of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State."


The 13th says basically the same thing except that "Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust" is the "citizen of the United States" in the 13th. The citizen of the United States in the 13th is the Person holding Office or Trust in Article 1. Now, "citizen of the United States" in the 13th can be none other than a elected official because Congress has no authority to tell a Citizen of one of the several states what they can and cannot do. Only elected officials must seek the consent of Congress before accepting any title of nobility or honor.

There would be no 14th Amendment if the 13th had not been removed from the federal constitution, because the 14th made everyone a "citizen of the United States", which is basically everyone under Congress.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 315546
United States
10/21/2007 08:25 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The 13th Amendment forbids Titles of Nobility - Why is DR. Ron Paul silently challending this hidden amendment?
So much bullshit OP, The Supreme Court decided in 1967 and confirmed in subsequent descisions that no one automatically forfeits US citizenship. Period, no ifs, ands or buts about it. So your whole story is bsflag
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 315560
United States
10/21/2007 08:57 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The 13th Amendment forbids Titles of Nobility - Why is DR. Ron Paul silently challending this hidden amendment?
So much bullshit OP, The Supreme Court decided in 1967 and confirmed in subsequent descisions that no one automatically forfeits US citizenship. Period, no ifs, ands or buts about it. So your whole story is bsflag
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 315546


Citizenship is automatically forfeited. It is LOST if any "citizen of the Untied States" (i.e., Elected Officer) fails to get the consent of Congress before accepting presents, emoluments, Office or Title from any King, Prince, foreign State, etc. The 13th amendment is the provides the punishment, which is loss of citizenship.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 315560
United States
10/21/2007 08:57 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The 13th Amendment forbids Titles of Nobility - Why is DR. Ron Paul silently challending this hidden amendment?
I meant, Citizenship is NOT automatically forfeited -
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 315560
United States
10/21/2007 09:01 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The 13th Amendment forbids Titles of Nobility - Why is DR. Ron Paul silently challending this hidden amendment?
So much bullshit OP, The Supreme Court decided in 1967 and confirmed in subsequent descisions that no one automatically forfeits US citizenship. Period, no ifs, ands or buts about it. So your whole story is bsflag
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 315546



Citizenship is NOT automatically forfeited. It is LOST if any "citizen of the Untied States" (i.e., Elected Officer) fails to get the consent of Congress before accepting presents, emoluments, Office or Title etc. The 13th amendment provides the PUNISHMENT, which is loss of citizenship.


Why are people so stupid about the 13th? ESQUIRE is NOT a TITLE OF NOBILITY. The 13th has everything to do with the U.S. Citizenship scam.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 140243
United States
10/21/2007 09:33 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The 13th Amendment forbids Titles of Nobility - Why is DR. Ron Paul silently challending this hidden amendment?
those who stand AGAINST FREEDOM will say or do anything to keep a good man from being in office. I still find it so hard to believe that such people exist.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 315598
United States
10/21/2007 09:44 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The 13th Amendment forbids Titles of Nobility - Why is DR. Ron Paul silently challending this hidden amendment?
It's an observation, not a question. He's part of the game, just well hidden.



the question is: why is he challenging this? if he honestly supports the constitution, then he should be supporting this amendment. But he insists on running for the pres with the title of nobility: DR. Ron Paul.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 311948
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 311362
United States
10/21/2007 09:59 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The 13th Amendment forbids Titles of Nobility - Why is DR. Ron Paul silently challending this hidden amendment?
Doctor is NOT a title of nobility...DUH
who are you trying to fool?

Knighthood IS a title of nobility...DUH
the Queen herself give it to a person

How can a person be working for the Queen be considered trust worthy ?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 315560
United States
10/21/2007 10:19 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The 13th Amendment forbids Titles of Nobility - Why is DR. Ron Paul silently challending this hidden amendment?
Doctor is NOT a title of nobility...DUH
who are you trying to fool?

Knighthood IS a title of nobility...DUH
the Queen herself give it to a person

How can a person be working for the Queen be considered trust worthy ?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 311362


Who are you talking to?

An Esquire NOT Knight. It is in the rank BELOW a Knight.

es·quire (ěs'kwīr', ĭ-skwīr') Pronunciation Key
n.

1. A man or boy who is a member of the gentry in England ranking directly below a knight.

2. In medieval times, a candidate for knighthood who served a knight as an attendant and a shield bearer.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 315560
United States
10/21/2007 10:22 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The 13th Amendment forbids Titles of Nobility - Why is DR. Ron Paul silently challending this hidden amendment?
those who stand AGAINST FREEDOM will say or do anything to keep a good man from being in office. I still find it so hard to believe that such people exist.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 140243



It's hard for me to fathom people like exist also - but it seems there are more of them than there are us freedom lovers.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 315546
United States
10/21/2007 10:58 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The 13th Amendment forbids Titles of Nobility - Why is DR. Ron Paul silently challending this hidden amendment?
So much bullshit OP, The Supreme Court decided in 1967 and confirmed in subsequent descisions that no one automatically forfeits US citizenship. Period, no ifs, ands or buts about it. So your whole story is bsflag



Citizenship is NOT automatically forfeited. It is LOST if any "citizen of the Untied States" (i.e., Elected Officer) fails to get the consent of Congress before accepting presents, emoluments, Office or Title etc. The 13th amendment provides the PUNISHMENT, which is loss of citizenship.


Why are people so stupid about the 13th? ESQUIRE is NOT a TITLE OF NOBILITY. The 13th has everything to do with the U.S. Citizenship scam.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 315560


Bullshit. Citizenship must be willfully given up by the individual. There is no automatic loss of US citizenship, whether you try to obvuscate by calling it loss or forfeit or anything else. This is what the Supreme Court decided in 1967 and has reaffirmed in several subsequent descisions. Try doing a little honest research, you crank. The 13th Amendment, the real one, bans involuntary servitude.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 315546
United States
10/21/2007 11:00 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The 13th Amendment forbids Titles of Nobility - Why is DR. Ron Paul silently challending this hidden amendment?
Alomost forgot.

bsflag bsflag bsflag bsflag bsflag bsflag bsflag
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 315819
United States
10/22/2007 10:35 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The 13th Amendment forbids Titles of Nobility - Why is DR. Ron Paul silently challending this hidden amendment?
Bullshit. Citizenship must be willfully given up by the individual. There is no automatic loss of US citizenship, whether you try to obvuscate by calling it loss or forfeit or anything else. This is what the Supreme Court decided in 1967 and has reaffirmed in several subsequent descisions. Try doing a little honest research, you crank. The 13th Amendment, the real one, bans involuntary servitude.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 315546



Citizenship is NOT given up or lost via the 13th Amendment. It is IMPOSED, as a PUNISHMENT, by Congress, if the citizen of the United States, accepts, claims, receives, or retains any title of nobility, without the consent of Congress. He ceases to be a citizen of the United States (elected officer) incapable of holding any office of trust or profit).
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 315819
United States
10/22/2007 11:12 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The 13th Amendment forbids Titles of Nobility - Why is DR. Ron Paul silently challending this hidden amendment?
There was no such thing as "citizenship" back in 1810; there were state citizens (Citizens of the United States) and there were elected officers (citizens of the United States). Note the different c's in citizen..

There would be no 1967 supreme court decision had the original 13th still been in place, you idiot.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 315819
United States
10/22/2007 11:37 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The 13th Amendment forbids Titles of Nobility - Why is DR. Ron Paul silently challending this hidden amendment?
Why don't you take your own advice sometime and try doing a little honest historical research once in a while, you crank.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 315847
United States
10/22/2007 12:41 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The 13th Amendment forbids Titles of Nobility - Why is DR. Ron Paul silently challending this hidden amendment?
The original 13th Amendment did not exist in 1967, so the court's did not take into consideration the amendment's prohibition. The court would not have made the decision it did had the 13th not changed.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 315847
United States
10/22/2007 03:31 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The 13th Amendment forbids Titles of Nobility - Why is DR. Ron Paul silently challending this hidden amendment?
citizen of the United States in the original 13th meant "elected officer." The elected officer ceases to be that elected officer and shall be incapable of holding ANY office of trust or profit, if he fails to get the consent of Congress before accepting any present, emolument, etc.


If there was any citizenship at all back in 1810 it pertained to the citizen of the United States, not to citizens living in the States.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 159268
United States
10/22/2007 03:35 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: The 13th Amendment forbids Titles of Nobility - Why is DR. Ron Paul silently challending this hidden amendment?
If you think this is an issue, you are a goddamn retard.

News