Time: Mon Nov 24 21:28:20 1997
by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id VAA21694
for [address in tool bar]; Mon, 24 Nov 1997 21:20:14 -0700 (MST)
by smtp01.primenet.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id OAA21468;
Mon, 24 Nov 1997 14:14:51 -0700 (MST)
via SMTP by smtp01.primenet.com, id smtpd021414; Mon Nov 24 14:14:40 1997
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 21:00:14 -0800
To: report@webtv.net (Shane)
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: SLS: Open Letter to Yuriy Kirienko. "WE THE PEOPLE".... (fwd)
I believe Chief Justice Taney was incorrect
when he constructed the term "We the People"
to mean the Citizens of the several states,
in Dred Scott v. Sandford, S.Ct. (1856).
The Preamble mentions both the "United States"
and the "United States of America." It is
now painfully clear that these two terms have
very different meanings. The Preamble begins
with the terminology "We the People of
the United States ...." It does NOT begin
with the terminology "We the People of
the United States of America ...."
Read it, and compare!!
The "United States" existed as a separate
entity under the Articles of Confederation,
which were in effect when the Constitution
for the United States of America was being
drafted. Therefore, I believe the Framers
knew what they were writing, when they
penned the current Preamble.
The term "Citizen of the United States" has
been properly constructed by Judge Pablo
de la Guerra, in People v. De la Guerra.
It means "Citizen of ONE OF the States United",
because the Northwest Ordinance, drafted at
approximately the same time as the U.S.
Constitution, also uses the terminology
"citizen of one of the United States"
in the qualifications for serving in the
legislature for the Northwest Territory.
Thus, we join the Qualifications Clauses in
the U.S. Constitution, to the Qualifications
Clauses in the Northwest Ordinance, and
produce a truly amazing result.
Prior to the 1866 Civil Right Act, there was
no citizenship other than citizenship in
ONE OF the several states of the Union.
The addition of "one of" clarifies the raging
controversy considerably, and definitively.
See "The Federal Zone: Cracking the Code of
Internal Revenue," for a complete discourse
on this question.
/s/ Paul Mitchell
http://supremelaw.com
At 07:25 PM 11/24/97 -0700, you wrote:
>fyi.....................................................8)
>
>Sea "Eternal Vigilance is the price of Liberty"
>Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 20:21:20 -0700
>To: "72113.1673"<72113.1673@compuserve.com>
>From: EAGLEFLT <eagleflt@thumb.net>
>Subject: Open Letter to Yuriy Kirienko. "WE THE PEOPLE"....
>
>>From: BTiraspols@aol.com
>>Date: Mon, 24 Nov 1997 17:42:39 -0500 (EST)
>>To: yk@jps.net, eagleflt@thumb.net, msmith01@csos.eds.com,
>> C.Puckett@internetmci.com, ler@odessaoffice.com, chuck@teleport.com
>>Subject: Open Letter to Yuriy Kirienko. "WE THE PEOPLE"....
>>
>>Dear Yuriy,
>>
>>You asked me to respond publicly to your letter. Here is my response.
>>
>>The original meaning "WE THE PEOPLE" refers, as you know, to the Founding
>>Fathers of the United States of America. In 210 years after the signing of
>>the Constitution by 39 "WE THE PEOPLE" Founding Fathers, we witness a deep
>>degradation occurred to the System that originally intended to be the
>>Republic. In 210 years the System is ruled almost entirely by Bureaucracy.
>> That is why in 210 years "WE THE PEOPLE" to my view, refers only to an
>>individual or a group of individuals of certain moral and ethical strength
>>that could be generally described by the following words: Honesty, Kindness,
>>Devotion and Bravery in serving the Nation . It also means that any action
>>of the above mention Characters is based on the Family Values, Common Sense
>>and The Word and the Spirit of the Constitution of the great country of
>>ours.
>>
>>By saying "I AM THE PEOPLE" I vow to the Family Values (I love
America, my
>>Family is the People, and you, Yuriy, are my Family), I vow to Common Sense
>>(Security, Sanity and Consent in my Family), I vow to the every word of the
>>Eternal Text of the Constitution, the supreme Law of the Land that must
>>become the Context or the circumstances surrounding my every day life . I do
>>know and clear see that the Word of the Constitution and the Real Life
around
>>me is not One, but they must become One in the unity of my Responsibility.
>>
>>Here is this well known to you Text of Preamble of the Constitution that
must
>>become the Context or my every day Life, and by that reason the every day
>>Life of anyone who comes to the realization "I AM THE PEOPLE".
>>
>>"WE THE PEOPLE of the United States in Order to form a more perfect Union,
>>establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquillity, provide for the common
>>defense.
>>promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to
ourselves
>>and our Posterity do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United
>>States of America".
>>
>>In order to turn the above mention Eternal Text of the Constitution into the
>>Context or the Reality of our every day life, WE THE PEOPLE are obligated
>> to the best of our ability preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of
>>the United States. This is literally means any appropriate ACTION to
>>preserve, protect and defend ORDER, UNION, JUSTICE, TRANQUILLITY, WELFARE (
>>happiness, well-being or prosperity), BLESSINGS OF LIBERTY (The Bill of
>>Rights) and etc., by you, Yuriy, me, and in that respect anyone who is WE
THE
>>PEOPLE: Honest, Kind, Devoted and Brave American Characters willing to serve
>>the Nation. This is what generally means the RESTORATION of the REPUBLIC
with
>>the Power is back to the hands of WE THE PEOPLE.
>>
>> I would like to repeat my question again: I am the People. Are you the
>>People, Yuriy? If you are it makes TWO of US. It makes us WE THE PEOPLE
again
>>and brings back alive the original Word and the Spirit of the Constitution
>>along with the Family Values and Common Sense..
>>
>>Best Regards,
>>Boris Tiraspolsky
>>CIN-Network, Company by the People of the United States of America
>>
>>In a message dated 97-11-24 03:28:32 EST, you write:
>>
>><< Subj: Re: Revelation by Congressman Barr
>> Date: 97-11-24 03:28:32 EST
>> From: eagleflt@thumb.net (EAGLEFLT)
>> To: 72113.1673@compuserve.com (72113.1673)
>>
>> >Date: Sun, 23 Nov 1997 19:21:35 -0800
>> >To: EAGLEFLT <eagleflt@thumb.net>
>> >From: Yuriy Kirienko <yk@jps.net>
>> >Subject: Re: Revelation by Congressman Barr
>> >
>> >Dear Boris:
>> >
>> >You stated:
>> >
>> >"I am the People. Are you the People, Congressman Barr? If you are it
makes
>> >TWO of US. It makes us WE THE PEOPLE again and brings back alive the
>>original
>> >Word and the Spirit of the Constitution."
>> >
>> >Let me rephrase you:
>> >
>> >"I am the people. Are you the People, Mr. President? If you are it makes
>>TWO
>> >of US. It makes WE THE PEOPLE again and bring back alive the original Word
>> >and the Spirit of the Constitution."
>> >
>> >What you say is totally meaningless for it depends on your will whom to
>> choose
>> >for this question, on the non-binding to anything answer of person of your
>> >choice,
>> >without defining neither the Word nor the Spirit of the Constitution.
>> >
>> >Please, give us a clear cut definition of who are WE THE PEOPLE before you
>> ask
>> >any particular person this question and before he gives you the only
answer
>> >that
>> >you would expect -- "Yes, I am".
>> >
>> >WE THE PEOPLE vs THE BUREAUCRACY is totally meaningless unless you
>> >make crystal clear whom do you include in WE THE PEOPLE by asking this
>> >question or otherwise and WHOM YOU DO EXCLUDE from this notion by not
>> >asking him that. Everyone whom you ask this question would assume that
you
>> >include all the people dwelling on the territory of the USA. Would their
>> >assumption be correct?
>> >
>> >Millions of people were sworn to abide by the Constitution of the US at
the
>> >time
>> >of their naturalization. Millions of people assumed that their
>> >interpretation of the
>> >Constitution is universal and is singularly determined by "common sense".
>> >Reality showed to them that this is not so and judicial interpretation of
>> the
>> >Constitution is very often a direct opposite to their own.
>> >
>> >To swear like this is tantamount to swearing allegiance of blind obedience
>>to
>> >the free will of a despot. -- A despot not bound by any laws or spirit if
>> >his will is
>> >declared in the name of Constitution, Communism or any other idol from
>> >the elevation of the judicial chair and if he claims himself to be a
judge.
>> >
>> >Please, define with absolute clarity what is your WORD and WHAT is YOUR
>> >DEFINITION OF THE CONSTITUTION. Are they any different from Clinton's,
>> >Stalin's, Brejnev's or anyone else who made use of that word in the past
>>and
>> >if so how do they differ?
>> >
>> >I want to remind you that all crimes and oppression committed after
>> >downfall of
>> >Monarchies were committed in the name of WE THE PEOPLE. Are you enticing
>> >simple hearted people into their own slavery? Please, clear yourself
>> publicly.
>> >
>> >
>> >Yuriy Kirienko
>> >
>> >At 20:30 11-23-1997 -0700, you wrote:
>> >>>From: BTiraspols@aol.com
>> >>>Date: Sun, 23 Nov 1997 10:32:45 -0500 (EST)
>> >>>To: eagleflt@thumb.net, msmith01@csos.eds.com,
C.Puckett@internetmci.com,
>> >>> ler@odessaoffice.com
>> >>>Subject: Revelation by Congressman Barr
>> >>>
>> >>>Congressman Barr says,
>> >>> "What I see here and what I think others see here is
>>a
>> >>>systematic abuse of office, which I think puts it in a category that is
>> far
>> >>>different from Watergate. Watergate was a situation where we had a few
>> >>>people doing illegal acts -- we didn't see a whole system being
>> corrupted."
>> >>>
>> >>>Dear Congressman Barr,
>> >>>
>> >>>WE THE PEOPLE are pleased with your revelation.
>> >>>
>> >>>If according to your view "a whole system being corrupt" let's change
>>the
>> >>>system.
>> >>>The problem with the system is that it is degraded from the system of
>> being
>> >>>once
>> >>>WE THE PEOPLE to the system of being WE BUREAUCRACY.
>> >>>The first system is the Republic. The second one is pure Socialism.
>> >>>WE THE PEOPLE demand RESTORATION OF THE REPUBLIC in great country of
>> ours.
>> >>>
>> >>>I am the People. Are you the People, Congressman Barr? If you are it
>>makes
>> >>>TWO of US. It makes us WE THE PEOPLE again and brings back alive the
>> >original
>> >>>Word and the Spirit of the Constitution.
>> >>>
>> >>>With respect,
>> >>>Boris Tiraspolsky
>> >>>CIN-Network, Company by the People of the United States of America
>>
>>
>>
>Please visit http://www.prospectorsbanqueclub.com
> and http://www.eagleflt.com
>
> To receive posts from this list send an E-MAIL to me with the word
>"subscribe" in the subject box.
> ==================================================================
> EAGLEFLIGHT
> ///, ///
> \ /, / >. David E. Rydel
> \ /, _/ /. *****
> \_ /_/ /. United States Theatre Command
> \__/_ << Voice-248-391-0798
> /<<<<<< \_\_ Fax-248-391-6785
> /,)^>>_._ \ Alt.Fax-248-391-3528
> (/ \\ /\\\ E-MAIL: EAGLEFLT@thumb.net
> // ````
> ==============((`=============================================
> A VOICE OF THE MILITIA IN NORTH AMERICA
>
===========================================================================
Paul Andrew Mitchell, Sui Juris : Counselor at Law, federal witness 01
B.A.: Political Science, UCLA; M.S.: Public Administration, U.C.Irvine 02
tel: (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256: 24-hour/day-night 03
email: [address in tool bar] : using Eudora Pro 3.0.3 on 586 CPU 04
website: http://supremelaw.com : visit the Supreme Law Library now 05
ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech, at its best 06
Tucson, Arizona state : state zone, not the federal zone 07
Postal Zone 85719/tdc : USPS delays first class w/o this 08
_____________________________________: Law is authority in written words 09
As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice. We shall 10
not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns eternal. 11
======================================================================== 12
[This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.] 13
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail