one supreme Court, and more...
- View SourcePeople asked about "one supreme Court" and I referenced James Alan Daum.
It seems that there are more than one who make sense of this. I know it
takes one with an individual mindset to comprehend how one American
might take advantage of all three branches of the Republic
simultaneously at all times. I was motivated to post this message by
the following quote from a message on another list. The list is
Constitution_Debate@yahoogroups.com, and the writer was Siegfried
Caruthers <sjcaruthers@...>. My only comment for now follows this
"Many have called me names or implied my thinking is silly. It still is
the same in most details, but I have filled in more of the details of
how the One supreme Court of the owners (Law givers---Legislatures) (of
which I am one by adoption)should operate. Please note I have given
paper work and notice that I am filling the position of Chief Justice of
the supreme Court. Until that notice is acted on, then each and every
owner hold a superior position as his own judge in any matter with a
created person or entity. I hope the bosses have fun.
[FF sez:] Here he refers to a specific notice, but whenever any
necessary requirement for fulfillment of a condition goes unfulfilled,
that condition never obtains, such as the office that attains after one
takes and files oath and bond. In such a condition, "then each and
every owner hold a superior position as his own [judge - or "officer"]
in any matter with a created person or entity." Do you see the
importance of the "created person or entity"? WHOM DO YOU permit to
speak TO YOU while claiming to represent a created (imaginary) person or
entity?? Hmmm? I say that any such human has to be either an officer or
an attorney holding designated power of attorney. Can anyone please
correct me there if I am wrong? Now back to Siegfried:
Some side notes:
One needs a place to start an impeachment by filing it with the Chief
Justice of the supreme Court. If an owner get screwed now, that owner
has to figure out how to get it done.
I notice that some hit on the ONE and go silly. Those seem to forget
the use of our one supreme Court fall in the same language class as the
one catholic (universal) church. So it has a pope (we have a Chief
Justice), but all the church buildings still are the same catholic
I do note for this post that some have tried to claim that the county
court is the supreme Court of record, and that just does not fly with
me. Nor does their many claims that sheriff is highest ranking person
in nation. That title fall to the owners, who are are also the LAW
GIVERS. Both of the Declaration of Independence (DoI) and the
subordinate United States Constitution (USC).
Note: This makes the owners the judges who set as the judicial power in
this land. That power is carried out properly when the system is
functioning by trials before juries of owners who hear and rule on the
matter. Until that happens, each owner is the judge of his own matters.
The Chief Justice is mostly a head clerk of the supreme Court system.
It is only in the case impeachment of the president that he get to be a
judge and that only concerns a job. Plus it makes the action where the
event occurs a open court and the congress persons can be held libel for
their open court answers. To order the president to void the USC by an
act of congress, could be called treason and the death penalty given.
From the DoI:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,
that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,
that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That
to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving
their just powers from the consent of the governed,
Many it is who say I did not write this or they didn't sign or agree
with or want any part of.. The same give short shift to my being an
owner by adoption and they really freak when I say what part I consider
valid. I have had many say there is no way any are above the law. I do
uphold the law as I gave it or adopted. Some of the USC is crap that
has not been properly made by the owners. Until we get an open supreme
Court and another owner has a matter with the jurisdiction for the
court to hear the matter at a supreme Court trial, then I go with my
decision. Boyd, if you are a owner, then suggest you do to.
I also feel sorry for those who are ruled by the dead hands of the long
ago writers, and have this law crammed down their throat. Such is not
the purpose or intent of this law. Any who say so or that it is by this
law we are attacking you are liers. Get rid of them if you can, you have
my permission. I do not need that type libel concerning my DoI or the
USC. If you do not consent, then it has to be crammed down your throat.
Such is outside any law I adopted.
To constitute Tribunals inferior to the supreme Court;
Now why can't folks understand that congress was given no power to
estabish any court other than inferior tribunals (courts). It makes
logical sense to me. The created persons and entities are the owners
creations (children). One does not put the kids over the parents, or
even the other kids. That is why the serious matters are reserved for
the bosses to decide. All the created have a path to get bosses to
decide if the rules are being done as the bosses gave the rules. Have
any read the kids' story of the farm animals trying to take over and run
the farm. If not that one, how about Adam and Eve being kicked out of
the garden for trying to take over the owners judging. That is what the
tree of knowledge of good and evil and trying to take over the owner's
judging duties was about in the bible.