When people first came to America to escape
the crown, they settled into colonies. These people established their
communities (assemblies), counties then states. These people resided on the
land and assembled to self govern. This is how America was built. The crown
tried to control and tax these people and wars were fought to reject the crown.
The crown could not win with force, so the crown changed their strategy and
infiltrated our government with their agents under stealth. These agents slowly
transformed
the government
causing We THE People to be 14th Amendment citizens (slaves) residing on the land in a Federal fictional location.
Because this fictional U.S. can not claim/own any land they could not use the
laws of the land therefore admiralty law = maritime/merchant
law was brought on to the land by the Supreme Court in Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64, 58 S. Ct. 817, 82 L. Ed. 1188 (1938).
The land was unknowingly abandoned as all the people became 14th Amendment citizens by
registering into
this federal corporation through adhesion contracts via
licenses, social security numbers, birth certificates, voter registrations, and
other adhesion contracts. Federal
fictional addresses and zip codes replaced the abandoned rural mail routes,
Federal Reserve Debt Notes replaced the gold and silver as our lawfull money/currency,
therefore abandoning the law of the land completely and falling under the
laws of the sea.
There is an internationally recognized and treaty upheld right of the people to
self-govern/determination.
We have the right to reclaim and re-inhabit the abandoned governmental seats and the land
through re-assembly
and settling it. Many people in Michigan have done this and have
held elections to re-occupy the abandoned seats of the De Jure Constitutional
form of republic governance over the last several years and filing public notice(s) along the way from We the People lawfully in assembly to do so.
There are other people in many states that are duplicating what the people
residing on Michigan have done. This is creating nothing new, only repeating
history and following the footsteps of the founders. This is how a true
republic is/was
formed. The people self-governing under the venue of common law = the law of
the land.
There are many fake republics appearing that
are trapping people that do not have the knowledge of history and are starving
for their liberty=freedom
and unknowingly get involved with any movement that looks like it will lead to liberty=freedom
with very little research. Most of these "groups" have filed nothing in the way
of legitimate
public notice to establish any kind of standing. Some of these
"groups" have actually committed trespass upon the fictional
corporation by attempting to alter and interfere with its internal functions. People must simply
abandon the federal corporation and re-inhabit the land. The key to this is to
research everything. Research
how your state came to be a state from its beginning and find the
incorporation date. Go back to the time just before
incorporation and claim the abandoned land at that time and bring it forward to
now. That will revoke=cancel
the franchise fictional state by reclaiming the land. this requires
at least 2/3 of the counties to be settled. Develop your state seal, your new
state flag by
removing all symbols that puts the federal government in prominence over your
state, and sign on to the new declaration of Independence that has
been written and defined and noticed. You can view it here on nesaranews. I
just re-posted it last week.
~Freewill
Ps. This does NOT represent RUSA, NLA or any other illigitimate republic headed up by any general!
~Freewill
Ps. This does NOT represent RUSA, NLA or any other illigitimate republic headed up by any general!
21 comments:
It says that there are six comments. What happened to them?
Please post the link to the NEW DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE.
http://nesaranews.blogspot.com/2015/05/repost-new-decelaration-of.html
"Where did the comments go Freewill? Afraid to face the truth? This is all wrong."
Dude.. we will finish that in an email.. Stop plugging up the comments!
Appears this may be from http://www.republicoftheunitedstates.org/ , which people have done amazing historic work to reconstitute our de jure Republic of which one can be a part. i suggest one listen to recent audios & review Executive Summary & Mission Statement to become educated. One makes best choices with full knowledge, right? Another grassroots we the people movement gaining momentum with a conference call this eve. 6pm pdt featured topic "Mandamus to Sheriff" - www.NationalLibertyAlliance.org Blessings 2 all Liberty-Lovers BEing & DOing same in myriad manners 4 good of ALL!! :D freeMom7
You are full of crap! I wrote this!! Michigan gave RUSA the boot 5 years ago! And what the hell does "reconstitute" mean???? Will you comment with the definition?? I ask you to put my finger on it!
Freewill, i perceive U may be replying to my 7:04 post. No offense intended. i did say "may", did i not? Seeing only a portion of the left side of the doc here was not full disclosure or clear as to source of same. RE-inhabit, as in vacated seats, is a better word than "reconstitute"- please pardon me 4 my poor word choice. As author, appears U have created what may be considered a great Declaration (once one can read the entire doc), but now i am confused. Are there TWO groups claiming to have restored the republic, one being RUSA & another separate one U are affiliated with originating from Michigan? freeMom7
Michigan.. yes
Michigan is the only one recognized by the international community and the Hague.
Why do we need a new Declaration of Independence? Our original is all we need to enforce our right to restore our Republic. The "group" that kicked out RUSA in Michigan was as corrupt as the RUSA group if not more for what they did to deceive the people in Michigan that trusted them.
The Assembly is an assembly, A group is a group. The Michigan assembly is not a group.
The new one reflects the original. The new one is defined in depth where the old one was open to wordcrafting.
A group assembles and an assembly is a group... if the new reflects the original then it is as bad as the original and is open to depth of definition by wordcrafting. My question wasn't answered, why do we need a new Declaration of Independence
1st Amendment right to assemble. Is there a 1st Amendment right to group? Groups can be labeled and deemed terrorist groups by the criminals in charge. Ever hear the terms "terrorist assembly"?
Therefore we assemble. We do not group.
An explanation for your readers why it is better to use the term assembly in place of group thank you. You still haven't answered the question: Why do we need a NEW Declaration of Independence?
Perhaps individual people choose to "assemble", but do not necessarily define or "join" a "group"; emphasis on right to assemble, also choosing right to NOT be a group member, particularly to avoid being labeled by same, as each retains individual rights, perspectives & expressions of BEing & DOing. :D
a new Dec. of Independence could express current pertinent issues and solutions.
"... any other illigitimate republic ..." : is it not possible that NLA, RUSA, "general" and Michigan ALL are in deed and Heart legitimate expressions of Liberty-Lovers expressing viable solutions in various productive and positive manners for the good of ALL? and that people supportive of one or more can choose to be more tolerant, appreciative and supportive of others' efforts also?
Freewill, R U also the legitimate republic governor, senator, etc. assisting other states doing same, or is it another U know? Where might one peruse Ur entire 10/21/12 Declaration and or other Michigan efforts to consider assistance in same?
Blessings 2 all Liberty-Lovers BEing & DOing same in myriad manners 4 good of ALL!! :D freeMom7
Freemom7, I do not hold an office. My involvement is mainly county level. I also research.
A couple years ago I occupied an office at state level.
I enjoy local work now.
Did you read it, if you do, you will see why. All words are defined by Webster's 1828 dictionary.
Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins – Case Brief Summary
Summary of Erie Railroad Co. v. Tompkins, 304 U.S. 64, 58 S. Ct. 817, 82 L. Ed. 1188 (1938).
Facts
Tompkins (P) sustained personal injuries when he was struck by an Erie Railroad Company (D) freight train in Pennsylvania while walking on a footpath adjacent to the tracks. Tompkins was a citizen of Pennsylvania and Erie Railroad Company was incorporated in New York.
Tompkins brought this personal injury lawsuit in diversity in federal district court in New York, asserting that he was lawfully on the property as a licensee, and that the accident occurred as a result of Erie Railroad’s negligence in the operation or maintenance of the train. Erie Railroad Company denied liability and asserted that the rule that had been established in the courts of Pennsylvania should apply. Under that rule, persons using pathways adjacent to railways were deemed trespassers and the railroad would not liable for injuries unless its actions were wanton or willful.
Tompkins denied that such a rule had been established by the Pennsylvania courts. He further contended that since no Pennsylvania statute addressed the issue of liability in such cases, the railroad’s duty and liability should be determined according to the rule established in federal court in light of Swift v. Tyson. Under federal common law Tompkins would be regarded as a licensee. Railroads owed a duty of ordinary care to pedestrians and would be liable upon a showing of ordinary negligence.
At trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Tompkins for $30,000. The Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed, holding that in regards to questions of general law that are not covered by state statute, federal courts are free to exercise their judgment as to what the law is. The Circuit Court of Appeals held that railroads owe a duty of ordinary care to those who use permissive pathways adjacent to railroad tracks. The defendant appealed and the Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Issue
• In actions in diversity, except in matters governed by the Constitution or acts of Congress, must federal courts apply state common law in addition to statutory law?
Holding and Rule (Brandeis)
• Yes. In actions in diversity, except in matters governed by the Constitution or acts of Congress, federal courts must apply state common law in addition to statutory law.
In diversity cases, federal courts must apply state law as declared by the highest state court in addition to state statutory law. There is no federal general common law. Congress has no power to declare substantive rules of common law applicable in a State and the Constitution does not confer such a power upon the federal courts.
In disapproving the doctrine of Swift v. Tyson, the Court does not hold section 34 of the Federal Judiciary Act of 1789 unconstitutional. It merely declares that, by applying the doctrine of that case, rights which are reserved by the Constitution to the several States have been invaded.
The ruling in Swift v. Tyson is overruled. It was an unconstitutional assumption of powers by the Courts of the United States. Federal courts do not have the power to create federal common law as this gives federal courts powers not granted in the Constitution. Congress has no power to declare the substantive rules of common law in state actions.
The Swift decision is flawed because it promotes forum shopping. Citizens of one state could move to another state to create diversity and bring suit in federal court to take advantage of a more favorable choice of law. Such a defect is substantial and provides no benefit.
Disposition
Reversed and remanded.
This case is also cited as Erie Railroad v. Tompkins and as Erie v. Tompkins. See Byrd v. Blue Ridge Rural Electric Cooperative, Inc. for a law school civil procedure case brief in which the Supreme Court held that the Seventh Amendment right to trial by jury in civil lawsuits supersedes conflicting state law.
That is what is good about our Declaration of Independence...it is not legalese. It is in language that is easily understood. It is not necessary to create a NEW Declaration of Independence. I am suspect of anyone that suggests our founding documents need to be changed...no they just need to be enforced! There is nothing wrong with the 1828 Dictionary...it has the most honest definitions IMO. Our founding fathers did not want those of nobility(BAR) to have access to the government. Legalese is used to deceive the people. Say what you mean and mean what you say! NO WORD-CRAFTING!
http://www.michiganfreedejurestate.us
www.michigandejure.org
Post a Comment