Re: Use the USC?


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Supreme Law Firm Discussion Forum ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Common Right Group at San Diego county on May 23, 1997 at 04:42:26:

In Reply to: Re: Use the USC? posted by Dan on April 30, 1997 at 00:05:31:

: : The men/women of Oath an Affirmation are UNDER the U.S.C..
: : If Citizen In Party makes a special visit upon the court
: : to expose the Knowledge and Neglect of 42 USC 1986 which
: : with others of Oath an Affirmation set up the conspiracy
: : to deprive other Citizens In Party of rights protected
: : per 42 USC 1985, thus causing an injury due to such
: : deprivation of rights under 42 USC 1983 then the Citizen
: : In Party has set his case in stone IF the Complaint
: : contains NONE OF THE FOLLOWING:
: : 1. adjectives
: : 2. adverbs
: : 3. assumptions
: : 4. conclusions
: : 5. presumptions
: : 6. pronouns

: : Remember the following rules of procedure which are NOT taught
: : in law schools:

: : 1. No fact may introduced into evidence.
: : 2. All facts must be:
: : a) Timely
: : b) Highly defined

:
: Thanks for the reply but... I'm still a little
: confused: I think my question was worded badly,
: what I was trying to ask was in all the Affadavits
: of recission, Affadavits of State Citizenship,
: etc..., that people are posting/selling on the
: internet, the authors of these forms use the
: IRC, the USC, and the CFR to bolster and
: substantiate rights and claims of status, and to
: PROTECT THEMSELVES by these federally created
: statutes. Aren't they then "having their cake
: and eating it too?" In other words how can one
: state that you are free of jurisdiction by the
: IRS by using the IRC to bolster that argument.
: and how can one use the UCC or CFR to protect
: oneselft when you are already probably protected
: by the Constitution and Laws that do apply to
: you? (side: why wouldn't one have the right to
: have cake and eat it too, what a dumb saying,
: i'm sorry i used it now.)

We think we agree in part with your question. It's the same on we posed when Right Way Law started promoting "Title 42" actions.
However, what King would allow anything in is dominion that he did not have access to? Doesn't the sovereignty of these united States reside in the People?
Since when did the government have the "right" to license anyone's "Rights?" The government am us and out of us is created. The gov't is our agent, formed to protect our rights to life, liberty and property, and for no other purpose.
Guess someone forgot to tell them in words of one syllable or less. Parliamentary (legislative) superiority is repugnant to the constitutions for/of these united States and the federal Constitution.
We don't know about anyone else, but we think all Rights are the product of our creator, not of our creation. The big problem here is that too many want to claim the creator's rights, but not hold to his statutes (Torah).
Bill Ben Yishra El Ben Elohim.



Follow Ups:



Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comments:

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Supreme Law Firm Discussion Forum ] [ FAQ ]