The Scheme & the System
"The few who understand the
system will either be so interested from it's
profits or so dependent on it's favors that there will be no opposition from
that class." -- Rothschild Brothers of London, 1863
The unconstitutional System is
the Scheme!
A great video posted on http://video.google.com. If the
following does not open then do a search on http://video.google.com.
The Gig Is Up: Money, the Federal Reserve and
You.
Populist lawyer, Gary Fielder, presents “The Gig Is Up: Money,
the Federal Reserve and You. Live from Wolfe Hall at The University of
Colorado School of Law, on December 4, 2008, Mr. Fielder, a criminal and
constitutional lawyer from Denver, Colorado, presents a power point and
video presentation on the creation of money with an historical analysis of
our current banking system. With quotes from Ben Franklin, Thomas
Jefferson, Abe Lincoln, Ron Paul, Dennis Kucinich and many others, Fielder
makes his case to abolish the Federal Reserve and return to a sound and
honest money system. Fractional Reserve Banking. Currency. Amero. World
Government. International Banking. www.gigisup.net Produced by
Jack Creamer, Side 3 Studios, Denver, Colorado. Video edits by Jonathan
Ellinoff. Technical Assistant, Rye Miller. This video is for educational
purposes only. Admission was not charged, nor will any effort be made to
profit from its production or sale.
Correcting the Money Problem will have to include
correcting the System that was created by a Scheme by the
Rothschild Brothers of London, 1863
The following list of web pages that will
help document the Scheme of the Conspiracy that John F. Kennedy
talks about in a speech where he calls it a "monolithic and
ruthless conspiracy" posted on this web site:
http://www.citizensforaconstitutionalrepublic.com/Pattison_You_Be_The_Judge.html .
In no way are all the facts presented
here!
Email me with any questions. Understanding what
really is going on in our Country is vital and it will make you feel
better! It can be corrected once enough people understand
the following:
There is no question that the sovereign people of this nation have been victimized by a silent economic war through most of the twentieth century. In the last four decades, institutionalized aggression has become increasingly bolder. If the de facto system continues unabated, only a small political and financial privileged class will enjoy prosperity and liberty -- not liberty ordinary people seek, but what amounts to license for plunder. (The balance of this section is very enlighten.)
Governments of the United States, the Union of several States, and possessions of the United States are embroiled in a scheme known as Cooperative Federalism, sometimes identified simply as Federalism. The nonconstitutional scheme presumes that each of the several States is an instrumentality of the United States on a par with insular possessions of the United States1, rather than semi-independent State republics, (1) restricted only by constitutional prohibitions and mandates, and (2) subject only to constitutionally-enumerated powers of the United States.
This scheme was made possible by emergence of a second government.
One of the important points found within this section of the document is:
Proper enforcement of law has the potential of averting disaster. Cooperative Federalism is imposed through fraud and illusion -- perpetrators operate in a de facto manner without lawful authority, so they are subject to criminal prosecution and civil remedies in lawful State and Federal courts. The problem is forcing those appointed or elected to judicial offices to convene constitutionally-authorized courts, or removing them from office so successors will.
In another section of the document you will find:
If and when government exceeds constitutionally delegated powers, those responsible, regardless of how righteous-sounding the cause, are engaged in rebellion against the sovereign people, disdaining the constitutional republic. The first transgression is worst as if successful, it invariably leads to further encroachment and eventually to institutionalized tyranny. That's precisely what we're addressing -- government out of control. So far as the essence of authority and the necessity of preserving constitutional integrity are concerned, former Chief Justice John Marshall addressed the matter as eloquently as anyone in Marbury v. Madison (1803), 5 U.S. 137, 2 L.Ed. 60:
The question, whether an act, repugnant to the constitution, can become the law of the land, is a question deeply interesting to the United States; but, happily, not of an intricacy proportioned to its interest. It seems only necessary to recognize certain principles, supposed to have been long and well established, to decide it.
That the people have an original right to establish, for their future government, such principles as, in their opinion, shall most conduce to their happiness, is the basis on which the whole American fabric has been erected. The exercise of this original right is a very great exertion; nor can it nor ought it to be frequently repeated. The principles, therefore, so established are deemed fundamental. And as the authority, from which they proceed, is supreme, and can seldom act, they are designed to be permanent.
This original and supreme will organizes the government, and assigns to different departments their respective powers. It may either stop here; or establish certain limits not to be transcended by those departments.
The government of the United States is of the latter description. The powers of the legislature are defined and limited; and those limits may not be mistaken or forgotten, the constitution is written. To what purpose are powers limited, and to what purpose is that limitation committed to writing; if these limits may, at any time, be passed by those intended to be restrained? The distinction between a government with limited and unlimited powers is abolished, if those limits do not confine the persons on whom they are imposed, and if acts prohibited and acts allowed are of equal obligation. It is a proposition too plain to be contested, that the constitution controls any legislative act repugnant to it; or, that the legislature may alter the constitution by an ordinary act.
Between these alternatives there is no middle ground. The constitution is either a superior, paramount law, unchangeable by ordinary means, or it is on a level with ordinary legislative acts, and like other acts, is alterable when the legislature shall please to alter it.
If the former part of the alternative be true, then a legislative act contrary to the constitution is not law; if the latter part be true, then written constitutions are absurd attempts, on the part of the people, to limit a power in its own nature illimitable.
Certainly all those who have framed written constitutions contemplate them as forming the fundamental and paramount law of the nation, and consequently the theory of every such government must be, that an act of the legislature repugnant to the constitution is void.
Source
Roots of
Cooperative Federalism
by Dan Meador
The following Declaration of Intergovernmental
Dependence was signed in Washington, D.C., by representatives of
State and local governments on January 22, 1937. It is published on
pages 143 & 144 in The Book of the States, 1937 edition, Volume II. This
Declaration of Intergovernmental Dependence, along with versions signed in
1935 and 1976, laid the institutional foundation for what today is formally
known as Cooperative Federalism (New York vs. United States, et al (1992)
505 U.S. __, 120 L.Ed.2d 120, 112 S.Ct. 2408), a
system that employs a third, hidden government tier
as the vehicle by which public servants of all stripes operate outside and
beyond powers enumerated in applicable constitutions:
http://www.sweetliberty.org/staterights2.htm
Senate testimony on May 11,
1955
Former
American Bar Assoc. President, Carl B. Rix, in Senate testimony on May
11, 1955 summarized the destruction of our Constitution thusly;
Congress is no longer bound by its Constitutional system of delegated
power. Its only test is under the obligatory power to promote human
rights (not the inalienable rights secured for us by our Constitution) in
these fields of endeavor. Civil, political, economic, social and cultural.
These powers are found in Articles 55 and 56 of the Charter of the United
Nations. Congress may now legislate as an uninhibited body with no shackles
of delegated powers under the Constitution.
http://www.citizensforaconstitutionalrepublic.com/landry4-2-04.html .html
Important point:
"If it
isn't established by law enacted in compliance with the constitutionally
prescribed legislative process, an agency doesn't legitimately exist. It
has no lawful authority. Whatever it undertakes is de facto -- it may do one
thing or another in fact, but all acts are without lawful
authority."
Money, Credit & Banking Memorandum
Contrary to
prohibitions in Article I § 10 of the Constitution of the United States, the
defendants, as officers of the court and otherwise, charge fees, impose
fines, sanctions and other penalties, make monetary awards, and accommodate
federally chartered and/or regulated financial institutions in mediums other
than gold and silver coin of the United States. They thereby defy the law
of the land, and in so doing, compromise sovereignty and solvency of the
People of Kay County and Oklahoma. Collectively, these acts
constitute perjury, as defined by Article XV §2 of the Constitution of
the State of Oklahoma, and otherwise constitute criminal
acts.
Article I § 8,
clauses 5 & 6 of the U.S. Constitution impose duties on Congress: "[The
Congress shall have Power] To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of
foreign Coin.., [and] To provide for the Punishment of counterfeiting the
Securities and current Coin of the United States."
Article I § 10 ¶ 1
then establishes prohibitions against the States:
Section 10. No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or
Confederation … coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold
and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of
Debts…
http://www.svpvril.com/dm_MCBM.html
Nationwide Banking
Fraud
(half way down the page you will
find the following all about money and is great
information and well documented):
Actually, the
State common law court is created by the judicial portion of your State
constitution. In the Oklahoma constitution, it's Article VII. The
"statutory" court, a/k/a "private" court, is convened in the framework of
the Uniform Commercial Code; the UCC proceeds "in the course of the civil
law" where your constitutional State court, in law, proceeds "in the course
of the common law."
http://www.svpvril.com/Money.html
Agents of a Foreign Government:
One significant proof we had was that
there are no implementing regulations for section 7621 of the Internal
Revenue Code, which authorizes the President to establish revenue
districts. Consequently,
there are no revenue districts in States of the Union.
[break]
In his article, Cooper cited the Federal
Register and the Internal Revenue Manual acknowledgement that Congress never
created a Bureau of Internal Revenue. We have since located a decision
where Supreme Court justices acknowledged that Congress never created a
Bureau of Internal Revenue or Internal Revenue Service. Consequently,
IRS has no lawful authority to enforce anything in the Union as Congress
is charged with responsibility for establishing any government department or
agency that the Constitution itself does not establish. If it isn't established by law
enacted in compliance with the constitutionally prescribed legislative
process, an agency doesn't legitimately exist. It has no lawful authority.
Whatever it undertakes is de facto -- it may do one thing or another in
fact, but all acts are without lawful authority.
http://www.svpvril.com/irs_dm_bc.html
How did "THEY" do all
of this? By creating a corporation known by the same name and
operating as a 'government de facto'. Defined in
Black Law Dictionary here: http://www.citizensforaconstitutionalrepublic.com/Which_Dictionary_should_we_use.html
The following is just
part of what is written in Black's Law Dictionary and there
for all to see:
"There are several degrees of what is
called "de facto government." Such a government, in its highest
degree, assumes a character very closely resembling that of a lawful
government. This is when the usurping government expels the
regular authorities from their customary seats and functions, and
establishes itself in their place, and so becomes the actual government of a
country. The distinguishing characteristic of such a government is
that adherents to it in war against the government de jure do not incur
the penalties of treason; and, under certain limitations, obligations
assumed by it in behalf of the country or otherwise will, in general, be
respected by the government de jure when restored."
There's
more! How did 'THEY' do what it says here - "...
expels the regular authorities from their customary
seats'? Why didn't we all learn this in State Run
Schools! The story goes that they walked out of congress but
the States of 'Union of several States' did not expel anyone from their
customary seats! Or did 'THEY' and it was never published in any
history books! We may never know for
sure! Was there a
"war against the government de jure"? Weren’t "We the
People" the victor in all the wars? What is written in
'Black's Law Dictionary' is misleading because it is a law dictionary
for the 'Government De facto'! But there is always some truth
within and here is the part that goes along with what we need
to talk about, "government de jure when restored"! It says lawful
government can be restored but when is the question! I
believe because most all of the documents to restore the lawful government
are there, we just have to understand which documents are de jure and which
are de facto! If it is part of the System
that takes away the People's Rights then it is 'de facto'. If it
is for the good of the People within the sovereign union
states then it is 'de jure'!
Samuel J. Tilden was the 19th President of the United
States
The following is printed in a book
titled, "The Presidents of the United States" by John and Alice
Durant published 1977:
"The country had something to be cynical
about in the 1876 election. On the morning after Election Day the
newspapers announced the results: Tilden, seemingly the winner,
4,284,020 popular votes and 184 undisputed electoral votes to Hayes’
4,036,572 and 165. Apparently a Democratic victory, but the
Republicans would not concede. They claimed that in the three southern
states Tilden carried (Louisiana, South Carolina and Florida), Negroes had
been unlawfully kept from going to the polls. Had they been allowed to
vote, electors favoring Hayes would have been elected. Republican
leaders and Southern Democrats met and made a deal: The three states
(plus Oregon) would throw their electoral votes to Hayes, thereby giving him
the elections 185 to 184, provided that federal troops would be
withdrawn, and the states would be allowed to control their own
affairs. The bargain made, it was kept. An Electoral
Commission created by Congress decided in favor of Hayes on March 2, 1877,
just fifty-six hours before the inauguration."
Please note - "provided that federal
troops would be withdrawn, and the states would be allowed to control their
own affairs."
A web page that states:
March 3, 1877 - On this day in History -
America Swore in the Wrong
President
2. Another ‘United States of
America.’
In January, 1997, Dan Meador and Tim
McCrory "tracked down the illusive "United States of America" named
principal in all current Federal civil and criminal prosecution. The new
entity is a coalition of Federal territories and insular possessions, it
is not [s]tates of the [u]nion." (Internet email-list communication, "Who
are IRS & the USA?" of June 15, 2000, by Dan Meador.) They demonstrate
the use by the federal government, itself, of the term of art ‘the
United States of America.’ If proof were not so
incontrovertible—you can look up for yourself—one would dismiss this as a
fantastical notion, or a meaningless slip.
"According to retired
Judge J. J. Boesel, America's participation in the United Nations is
unconstitutional because it violates many clauses of the U.S. Constitution
and violates the rights of the individual states of the Union under the Tenth
Amendment. http://www.devvy.com/pdf/boesel.pdf
Why does this continue? There is
only one answer. Judge J. J. Bosesel may not understand that we
are within a government de facto or he knows and wants us to fight the UN
instead of who really is our problem, the System!
This bill as introduced
in the New Hampshire General Court (state legislature) and as of this
posting was reported as being in committee. http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2009/HCR0006.html
Status
of the bill HR6 can be checked on this site - http://www.gencourt.state.nhus/ns/ Most
likely because all the current state governments are de facto, this bill like
all the others will never be passed and if if they did get passed all the state
government de facto are still under the National de facto government as
explain in this document.
U.S. Congressman Ron
Paul said:
"Under liberty, we
built the greatest, freest, most prosperous, most decent country on
earth. It's no coincidence that the monstrous growth of the
federal government has been accompanied by a sickening decline in living
standards and moral standards. The feds want us to be hamsters on a
treadmill--working hard, all day long, to pay high taxes, but otherwise
entirely docile and controlled. The huge, expensive, and out-of-control
leviathan that we call the federal government wants to run every single
aspect of our lives. Well, I'm sorry, but that's not
America. It's not what the Founders gave us.
It's not the country you believe in. It's not the country I believe
in." -
Full story: http://www.angelfire.com/az/sthurston/ronpaulspeech.html
Are you going to be part of the problem or part of the
solution?
Civil liberties. Personal, natural
rights guaranteed and protected by Constitution; e.g. freedom of
speech, press, freedom from discrimination, etc. A body of law dealing with
natural liberties, shorn of excesses which invade equal rights of others.
Constitutionally they are restraints on government. State law may
recognize liberty interests more extensive than those independently
protected by the Federal Constitution.
Oath to Foreign
Government By Dan
Meador
This memorandum
was constructed for a judicial pleading. In Oklahoma, state and local
officers are required to take a constitutional oath, then they take a
"Loyalty Oath" prescribed by statute. The second oath is to a foreign
government known as the "United States of America". This second decoy
governmental entity is a key player in the Federalism scheme. The memorandum
is therefore important for anyone who is interested in correcting usurpation
of power. http://www.svpvril.com/dm_OTFG.html
It is the same in all
the Union States!
There is so much more
to the fraud that can be proven. The first fraud is that there was no
declared war by a de jure congress. Another would be that all the
elected or appointed officials then or now are in violation of their oath of
office to the government de jure! Which is Sedition against the
People! (SEDITION,
crimes. The raising commotions or disturbances in the state; it is a revolt
against legitimate authority, Ersk. Princ. Laws, Scotl. b. 4, t. 4, s. 14;
Dig. Lib. 49, t. 16, 1. 3, §19.) or maybe even treason - 2. The
distinction between sedition and treason consists in this, that though its
ultimate object is a violation of the public peace, or at least such a
course of measures as evidently engenders it, yet it does not aim at direct
and open violence against the laws, or the subversion of the constitution.
Alis. Crim. Law of Scotl. 580. (TREASON,
crim. law. This word imports a betraying, treachery, or breach of
allegiance. 4 Bl. Com. 75. 2. The constitution of the United States, art. 3,
s. 3, defines treason against the United States to consist only in levying
war (q. v.) against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid
or comfort. This offence is punished with death. Act of April 30th, 1790, 1
Story's Laws U. S. 83. By the same article of the constitution, no person
shall be convicted of treason, unless on the testimony of two witnesses to
the same overt act, or on confession in open court. Vide, generally, 3 Story
on the Const. ch. 39, p. 667; Serg. on the Const. ch. 30; United States v.
Fries, Pamph.; 1 Tucker's Blackst. Comm. Appen. 275, 276; 3 Wils. Law Lect.
96 to 99; Foster, Disc. I; Burr's Trial; 4 Cranch, R. 126, 469 to 508; 2
Dall. R. 246; 355; 1 Dall. Rep. 35; 3 Wash. C. C. Rep. 234; 1 John. Rep. 553
11 Johns. R. 549; Com. Dig. Justices, K; 1 East, P. C. 37 to 158; 2 Chit.
Crim. Law, 60 to 102; Arch. Cr. Pl. 378 to 387.)
My actions and yours
are not an action of SEDITION, because it is not a revolt against a
legitimate authority. The current government in power is a
'government de facto' and is not a legitimate
authority.
'Government De facto' is a legal
term!
TO THE ALUMNI OF THE LAW
DEPARTMENT OF COLUMBIAN COLLEGE, THIS EDITION OF A WORK,
THE STUDY OF WHICH IS SO WELL FITTED TO SHARPEN AND INVIGORATE THE MIND
OF THE LAWYER AND IMPART TO IT A PRACTICAL FACILITY, IS, WITH THE BEST
WISHES FOR THEIR PROFESSIONAL SUCCESS, Respectfully Suscribed BY SAMUEL
TYLER, LL. D., PROFESSOR IN THE LAW DEPARTMENT OF COLUMBIAN COLLEGE,
WASHINGTON, D. C., AND AUTHOR OF THE MARYLAND SIMPLIFIED PLEADING, ETC.,
ETC.
INTRODUCTION OF THE CIVIL LAW AND THE COMMON
LAW.
There have grown up
in the history of nations only two great systems of law, the civil law of
ancient Rome, and the common law of England. All the most
civilized nations in the world are governed by either of these two great
schemes of justice. Though the civil law and the common law have much in
common, yet in many important particulars they are the opposites of each
other. In the course of his studies, the student of law finds so much
said, in an incidental way, about the civil law, that is calculated to
mislead his judgment in regard to the true character of that scheme of
justice, that it is important, at the outset of his walks over the fields of
the common law, to give him some account of the civil law, and point out in
what it differs essentially from the common law. This is a matter of
much importance to every student who aspires to a comprehensive and
enlightened knowledge of jurisprudence.
[break]
In all the various
revolutions, with their dark and dreary scenes of violence and bloodshed, through which England has passed, the people have clung to their ancient
laws with a devotion almost superstitious.
When our
forefathers established governments in America they laid their foundations
on the common law. And when difficulties grew up
between them and the mother country, they acted as their English ancestors had always
acted in their political troubles -
interposed the common law as the shield against
arbitrary
power. When the
United Colonies met in Congress, in 1774, they claimed the common law of England as a branch of those
"indubitable rights and liberties to which the respective colonies are
entitled." And the common law, like a silent providence is still the
preserver of our liberties.
From the book; A
TREATISE ON THE PRINCIPLES OF PLEADING IN CIVIL ACTIONS: COMPRISING A
SUMMARY VIEW OF THE WHOLE PROCEEDINGS IN A SUIT AT LAW.
BY HENRY JOHN
STEPHEN, SERGEANT AT LAW.
http://www.citizensforaconstitutionalrepublic.com/TO_THE_ALUMNI_OF_THE_LAW_DEPARTMENT_OF_COLUMBIAN%20_COLLEGE.pdf
Be it enacted by the General Assembly of
the state of Missouri as follows:
Sec. 1. The common law of England, and all
statutes and acts of parliament made prior to the fourth year of the reign
of James the first, and which are of a general nature, not local to that
kingdom, which common law and statutes are not repugnant to, or inconsistent
with, the constitution of the United States, the constitution of this state,
or the statute laws in force for the time being, shall be the rule of action
and decision in this state, any law, usage or custom, to the contrary
notwithstanding.
Did "THEY" change the
government to control employees and slaves! The best way to look
at what we have today is that we have two parallel government in each union
state and one of them is not. The following is how Missouri became a lawful
state:
In the preamble
for the constitution of the 'State of Missouri ' 1820,' this
preamble states that the people of
Missouri, inhabiting the soil, within a
specified boundary, ordained and
established by the sole and vested authority of the people,
through their lawfully elected representatives, created a free and independent republic by the
name of the 'State of
Missouri'. This is a lawfully created State.
http://www.citizensforaconstitutionalrepublic.com/History_of_the_Constitutions_for_Missouri.html
Did "THEY" cause the
'American War of Independence' and the 'War of 1812' so "THEY"
could get what they wanted? Answer to these question can be found on
this web site: http://www.citizensforaconstitutionalrepublic.com/A_Time_Line_focusing_on_Taxes,_Money_and_War.html
All these people are
dead! All we have left is the
System "THEY" built with a pen and
paper! We have nothing to lose and everything to gain! Who
"THEY" are is explained here: http://www.citizensforaconstitutionalrepublic.com/Pattison_CITIZEN%27S_PERSECTIVE.html and Congress knew about it in 1940 - Congressional Records
states in part:
UNDERMINING AMERICA
"The beginning of the undermining of America
was brought by Cecil Rhodes..." http://www.citizensforaconstitutionalrepublic.com/Cover_Page.html
Also do a search for Norman Dodd's video on http://video.google.com. Norman Dodd
who, in the year 1954, was the staff director of the Congressional Special
Committee to investigate tax-exempt foundations and he speaks on their
'The Hidden Agenda for World Government' and names names! He even talks
about the reason our government was involved in WWW I.
The way
most people believe it should be:
Constructive Notice.
The United States of America (the first
thirteen de jure States united) is a republican form of government
(Art. IV, Sec. 4, for the constitution of the United States
(de jure, the first lawful government) with a Presbytery type of
representation thus constituting a Democratic commonwealth, not a
democracy. All power is vested in, and derived from the people.
The people of the sovereign union states are the principals and
the people who work for the people of the sovereign union states are
the agents or servants of the people. You are either one of the people
with unalienable or natural rights secured by the Constitution of the United
States, de jure and all lawful amendments to the Constitution of
the United States, de jure and the state, de jure in
which you inhabit which are protected by the common law or you are a public
servant bound by Oath or Affirmation to support this Constitution of the
United States, de jure (Art. VI, sec, 3 of the constitution of the
United States, de jure) and the constitution of the State,
de jure in which you work. If you are not one of these two,
then you are either an citizen inhabiting one of our
territories under the jurisdiction of our congress and has no rights to
vote or hold office in our country; an alien; or a foreign
individual involved in espionage and/or terrorist activities against
the people of the United States of America, de jure. Servants of
the people of these several union states are under Constitutional
restrictions to their duties as outlined in the Constitution of the United
States, de jure and in the constitution of the State,
de jure in which they work, and in the statutes of that state,
de jure. Any servant with knowledge and with willful intent
operating outside the Constitutional and statutory restrictions placed upon
them is a violation of their oath. This will be an attack on the
people for whom you serve. If the action is done willingly and with
intent then it is an act of treason and may be considered an act of
war. The damaged individual may seek monetary damages and criminal
prosecution.
The people of these several states are
under the flag of peace of the de jure United States of America, as
there is no known lawful “declaration of war” against the de jure
government or against we the people at this point in time.
There are four jurisdictions outlined in
Article III, Section II of the Constitution of the United States: in law, in
equity, and in admiralty and maritime. In law and in equity is within
the rules of the common law for which judicial power has been granted."
More of the 'Monstrous
Conspiracy'
“The
individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so
monstrous he cannot believe it exists”. J. Edgar Hoover
The 'War and
Emergency Powers'! We are not at war with any country because we
really are not operating under a legitimate authority! The
'government de facto' wants you to believe their story and what is
documented here is why we are all without 'Lawful Rights' because
of the government de facto is in power not the People's
Republic.
Knowledgeable people
could correct this problem but only with the
support of more 'People'! What we have to
do would be very easy and even
less harmful to the people in general then what we have
today! Therefore helping others to understand the
'government de facto' and who controls it
is the important message we have to tell ALL:
"If it isn't established by law
enacted in compliance with the constitutionally prescribed legislative
process, an agency doesn't legitimately exist. It has no lawful
authority. Whatever it undertakes is de facto -- it may do one thing or
another in fact, but all acts are without lawful authority."
When you
read other web pages or the newspaper today, which use legal
terms like government or the title - United States, just remember to
add the word 'de facto' when talking about what we have and 'de jure' when
you want to talk about the way it was. It will make much more sense!
"War and Emergency
Powers"
A Special Report on the
National Emergency in
the United States of America
This page contains
the complete text of the book "War and Emergency Powers" A SPECIAL REPORT
ON THE NATIONAL EMERGENCY IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Researched
and written by: Gene Schroder, Alvin Jenkins, Jerry Russe ll, Ed Petrowsky,
Russell Grieder, Darrell Schroder, Walter Marston, Lynn Bitner, Billy
Schroder, Van Stafford, Fred Peters, Tinker Spain, and Paul
Bailey.
The
Report...
NATIONAL
EMERGENCY: (as defined in
Black's Law Dictionary) A state of national crisis; a situation demanding
immediate and extraordinary national or federal action. Congress has made
little or no distinction between a "state of national emergency" and a
"state of war". Brown v. Bernstein, D.C.Pa., 49 F.Supp. 728, 732.
This report begins
with a series of documents which are representative (Exhibits 1 through 7),
of the documents contained in this Report. We will be quoting from in many
cases, reports, Senate and Congressional reports, hearings before National
Emergency Committees, Presidential Papers, Statutes at Large, and the United
States Code." http://www.real-debt-elimination.com/real_freedom/portal_to_dictatorship/war_and_emergency_power_act.htm
To urge such a
reexamination is not to be "anti-American". It might be anti-Empire, as part
of the positive and healthy goal of a Constitutional Common Law Republic and
therefore is not a action of SEDITION, because it is not a revolt against a
legitimate authority - Erskine, Princ. Laws Scotl. b. 4, t. 4, s, 14; Dig.
Lib. 49, t. 16, l. 3, § 1
He who is void of
virtuous attachments in private life is, or very soon will be, void of all
regard for his country. There is seldom an instance of a man guilty of
betraying his country, who had not before lost the feeling of moral
obligations in his private connections. - Samuel Adams
"Knowledge will
forever govern ignorance: and a People who mean to be their own governours,
must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives."
James Madison
to WT Barry, August 4, 1822.
All Rights
reserved,
/S/ Steven Pattison
in propria persona, sui juris, one of the 'People' of Kansas and
therefore a Citizen of the state of the de jure Kansas, and therefore
one of the 'We the People' of the de jure United States of America. We
are all sovereigns without subjects.
email - StevenPattison@everestkc.net
phone
- (913) 491-0320
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C.
section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit
or payment to those who have expressed prior interest in receiving this
information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For
further information please refer to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
E-MAIL THIS
PAGE TO A FRIEND