The Two United States and the Law

 

wtop_logo_MEDOur forefathers,  weary of  the  oppressive  measures  that  King George III’s  government forced  upon them,  in  common  declared their independence  from England in 1776.  They were not expected to be  successful in  that resistance.   The  moneyed people  had backed England  for two  major reasons.   First,  our forefathers wanted a  rigid, written  Constitution “set  in concrete.”   They were familiar  with the  so-called Constitution  of England which consisted  largely   of  customs,   precedents,  traditions,  and understandings, often vague and always flexible.

They wanted the principle of English common law, that an act done by any official person or  law-making body beyond his or its legal competence was simply void.   Second,  the thirteen  little colonies  desired to base their  union on substance (gold and silver)  —  real money. They well  knew how  the  despotic  governments  of  Europe  were mortgaged to the hilt  —  lock, stock, and barrel, the land, the people, everything  —  to certain wealthy men who controlled the banks, the  currency, and all credit, who lent credit but did not loan gold and silver!

The United  States of  America was  made up of a union of what is now  fifty   sovereign  States,   a  three-branch   (legislative, executive, and  judicial) Republic  known as The United States of America, or  as termed  in this  article, the  Continental United States.   Its citizenry  live in one of the fifty States, and its laws are based on the Constitution, which is based on Common Law. Less than  one hundred years after we became a nation, a loophole was discovered  in the  Constitution by cunning lawyers in league with the  international bankers.   They  realized that a separate nation existed,  by the  same name,  that Congress had created in Article I,  Section 8,  Clause 17.

This  “United States”  is  a Legislative Democracy  within the Constitutional Republic, and is known as  the Federal United States.  It has exclusive, unlimited rule over  its  citizenry,  the  residents  of  the  District  of Columbia, the  territories and  enclaves (Guam,  Midway  Islands, Wake Island,  Puerto Rico,  etc.), and anyone who is a citizen by way of the 14th Amendment (naturalized citizens). Both United  States have  the same  Congress that  rules in  both nations.   One “United States,” the Republic of fifty States, has the “stars  and stripes”  as its  flag, but without any fringe on it. The Federal  United States’  flag is  the stars and stripes with a  yellow fringe, seen in all the courts.  The abbreviations of the  States of  the Continental  United States  are,  with  or without the  zip codes, Ala., Alas., Ariz., Ark., Cal., etc.  The abbreviations of the States under the jurisdiction of the Federal United States, the Legislative Democracy, are AL, AK, AZ, AR, CA, etc. (without any periods).

Under the  Constitution, based on Common Law, the Republic of the Continental United  States provides  for legal cases

(1) at Law,

(2) in Equity, and  (3) in Admiralty:

(1)  Law is  the collective  organization of the individual right  to lawful  defense.   It is  the will  of the  majority, the organization of  the natural right of lawful defense.  It is the substitution of a common force for individual forces, to do only what the individual forces have a natural and lawful right to do:  to protect persons, liberties, and properties; to maintain the right of each, and to cause justice to reign over us  all.  Since an individual cannot lawfully use force against  the   person,  liberty,  or property  of  another  individual, then  the common  force  —  for the same reason —   cannot lawfully be used to destroy the person, liberty, or property  of individuals or groups.  Law allows you to do anything you want to, as long as you don’t infringe upon the life, liberty  or property  of anyone  else.   Law does  not compel performance.   Today’s  so-called  laws  (ordinances, statutes, acts,  regulations, orders,  precepts,  etc.)  are often  erroneously   perceived  as  law,  but  just  because something is  called a  “law” does not necessarily make it law.   [There is  a difference between “legal” and “lawful.” Anything the  government does  is legal,  but it  may not be  lawful.]

(2)  Equity is the jurisdiction of compelled performance (for any contract you are a party to) and is based on what is fair in a particular  situation.   The  term  “equity”  denotes  thi spirit and  habit of  fairness, justness,  and right dealing which would  regulate the  intercourse of men with men.  You have  no  rights  other  than  what  is  specified  in  your contract.  Equity has no criminal aspects to it.

(3)  Admiralty is  compelled performance plus a criminal penalty, a civil contract with a criminal penalty. By 1938  the gradual  merger procedurally  between law and equity actions (i.e.,  the  same  court  has  jurisdiction  over  legal, equitable, and admiralty matters) was recognized.  The nation was bankrupt and  was  owned  by  its  creditors  (the  international bankers) who  now  owned  everything    —    the  Congress,  the Executive, the  courts, all the States and their legislatures and executives, all  the land,  and all  the people.   Everything was mortgaged  in  the  national  debt.    We  had  gone  from  being sovereigns over  government to subjects under government, through the use  of negotiable  instruments to  discharge our  debts with limited liability, instead of paying our debts at common law with gold or silver coin. The remainder  of this  article explains how this happened, where we are  today, and  what remedy we have to protect ourselves from this system.

Our Present Commercial System of “Law” and the REMEDY Provided for Our Protection The present  commercial system  of “law” has replaced the old and familiar Common  Law upon  which our  nation was  founded.   The following is  the legal  thread which  brought us from sovereigns over government  to subjects under government, through the use of negotiable instruments  (Federal Reserve  Notes) to discharge our debts with  limited liability  instead of  paying  our  debts  at common law with gold or silver coin. The change  in our  system of  law from  public  law  to  private commercial law  was recognized by the Supreme Court of the United States in  the Erie  Railroad vs.  Thompkins case  of 1938, after which case,  in  the  same  year,  the  procedures  of  Law  were officially blended with the procedures of Equity.

Prior to 1938, all U.S.  Supreme Court  decisions were based upon public law  — or that  system of  law that  was  controlled  by  Constitutional limitation.   Since 1938,  all U.S.  Supreme Court  decisions are based upon what is termed public policy. Public policy  concerns commercial  transactions made  under  the Negotiable  Instrument’s   Law,  which   is  a   branch  of   the international Law  Merchant.  This has been codified into what is now known as the Uniform Commercial Code, which system of law was made uniform  throughout the  fifty States through the cunning of the Congress  of the United States (which “United States” has its origin in Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution, as distinguished from the “United States,” which is the Union of thefifty States).

In offering  grants of  negotiable paper  (Federal Reserve Notes) which the  Congress gave  to the  fifty States  of the  Union for education, highways,  health, and  other purposes, Congress bound all the  States of the Union into a commercial agreement with the Federal United  States (as  distinguished  from  the  Continental United States).  The fifty States accepted the “benefits” offered by the Federal United States as the consideration of a commercial agreement between  the Federal  United States  and  each  of  the corporate States.   The  corporate States  were then obligated to obey the Congress of the Federal United States and also to assume their portion of the equitable debts of the Federal United States to the  international banking houses, for the credit loaned.  The credit which  each State received, in the form of federal grants, was predicated upon equitable paper.

This system  of negotiable  paper binds all corporate entities of government together in a vast system of commercial agreements and is what  has altered  our court  system from one under the Common Law to  a Legislative  Article I  Court, or  Tribunal, system  of commercial law.  Those persons brought before this court are heldto the  letter of  every statute  of government  on the  federal, state, county, or municipal levels unless they have exercised the REMEDY provided  for them  within that  system of  Commercial Law whereby, when  forced to  use a  so-called “benefit”  offered, or available, to  them, from  government,  they  may  reserve  their former right,  under the  Common Law guarantee of same, not to be bound by any contract, or commercial agreement, that they did not enter knowingly, voluntarily, and intentionally.

This is  exactly how the corporate entities of state, county, and municipal  governments   got  entangled   with  the   Legislative Democracy, created  by Article  I, Section  8, Clause  17 of  the Constitution, and  called here  The  Federal  United  States,  to distinguish it  from the  Continental United States, whose origin was in the Union of the Sovereign States. The same  national Congress  rules the  Continental United States pursuant to  Constitutional limits  upon its  authority, while it enjoys exclusive  rule, with no Constitutional limitations, as it legislates for the Federal United States.

With the  above information,  we may  ask:  “How did we, the free Preamble citizenry  of the  Sovereign States, lose our guaranteed unalienable rights and be forced into acceptance of the equitable debt obligations  of the  Federal United  States, and also become subject to  that entity  of government,  and  divorced  from  our Sovereign  States  in  the  Republic,  which  we  call  here  the Continental United  States?”   We do  not reside,  work, or  have income from  any territory  subject to the direct jurisdiction of the Federal  United  States.    These  are  questions  that  have troubled sincere,  patriotic Americans  for many years.  Our lack of knowledge  concerning the  cunning of  the legal profession is the  cause  of  that  divorce,  but  a  knowledge  of  the  truth concerning the  legal thread,  which caught  us in  its net, will restore our  former status  as a  free Preamble  citizen  of  the Republic.  The answer follows:

Our national  Congress works  for two  nations  foreign  to  each other, and  by legal  cunning both  are called The United States. One is  the Union  of Sovereign  States, under  the Constitution, termed in  this article the Continental United States.  The other is a  Legislative Democracy  which has  its origin  in Article I, Section 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution, here termed the Federal United States.  Very few people, when they see some “law” passed by Congress,  ask themselves,  “Which nation was Congress working for when  it passed  this or  that so-called  law?”  Or, few ask, “Does this  particular law  apply to the Continental citizenry of the Republic, or does this particular law apply only to residents of  the  District  of  Columbia  and  other  named  enclaves,  or territories, of the Democracy called the Federal United States?” Since  these   questions  are  seldom  asked  by  the  uninformed citizenry  of  the  Republic,  it  was  an  open  invitation  for “cunning” political  leadership to  seek more power and authority over the  entire citizenry  of the Republic through the medium of “legalese.”

Congress deliberately failed in its duty to provide a medium  of exchange  for the  citizenry  of  the  Republic,  in harmony with  its Constitutional mandate.  Instead, it created an abundance  of   commercial  credit   money  for  the  Legislative Democracy, where  it was not bound by Constitutional limitations. Then,  after   having  created  an  emergency  situation,  and  a tremendous  depression   in  the   Republic,  Congress  used  its emergency authority  to remove  the remaining substance (gold and silver) from  the medium  of exchange  belonging to the Republic, and made  the negotiable  instrument  paper  of  the  Legislative Democracy (Federal  United States) a legal tender for Continental United States citizenry to use in the discharge of debts.

At the  same time,  Congress granted  the entire citizenry of the two nations  the “benefit”  of limited liability in the discharge of all  debts by  telling the  citizenry that the gold and silver coins of  the Republic  were out  of date  and cumbersome.    Thecitizens were  told that gold and silver (substance) was no loner needed to  pay their  debts, that  they were  now “privileged” to discharge debt  with this  more “convenient”  currency, issued by the Federal  United States.  Consequently, everyone was forced to “go modern,”  and to  turn in  their gold as a patriotic gesture. The entire  news media  complex went  along  with  the  scam  and declared it  to be  a forward  step for  our democracy, no longer referring to America as a Republic.

From that  time on,  it was  a falling  light for the Republic of 1776, and  a rising  light  for  Franklin  Roosevelt’s  New  Deal Democracy, which  overcame the  depression, which was caused by a created shortage  of real  money.  There was created an abundance of debt  paper money,  so-called, in the form of interest-bearing negotiable instrument  paper called  Federal Reserve  Notes,  and other forms of paperwork credit instruments.

Since all  contracts since  Roosevelt’s time  have the  colorable consideration of  Federal Reserve  Notes, instead  of  a  genuine consideration  of   silver  and  gold  coin,  all  contracts  are colorable contracts,  and not  genuine contracts.   [According to Black’s Law  Dictionary (1990), colorable means “That which is in appearance only,  and not  in reality,  what it  purports to  be, hence counterfeit, feigned, having the appearance of truth.”] Consequently, a  new colorable  jurisdiction, called  a statutory jurisdiction, had  to be  created to enforce the contracts.  Soon the term  colorable contract  was changed  to the term commercial agreement to fit circumstances of the new statutory jurisdiction, which is  legislative, rather  than judicial,  in nature.    This jurisdiction enforces commercial agreements upon implied consent, rather than  full knowledge,  as it  is with  the enforcement  of contracts under the Common Law.

All of our courts today sit as legislative Tribunals, and the so- called “statutes”  of legislative  bodies being enforced in these Legislative  Tribunals   are  not   “statutes”  passed   by   the legislative  branch   of  our   three-branch  Republic,   but  as “commercial obligations”  to the Federal United States for anyone in the  Federal United States or in the Continental United States who has  used the equitable currency of the Federal United States and  who   has  accepted   the  “benefit,”   or  “privilege,”  of discharging  his  debts  with  the  limited  liability  “benefit” offered to  him by the Federal United States … EXCEPT those who availed themselves of the remedy within this commercial system of law, which  remedy is  today found  in  Book  1  of  the  Uniform Commercial Code at Section 207/308.

When used  in conjunction  with one’s  signature, a stamp stating “Without Prejudice U.C.C. 1-308″ is sufficient to indicate to the magistrate of  any of  our present Legislative Tribunals (called “courts”) that the signer of the document has reserved his Common Law right.   He  is not to be bound to the statute, or commercial obligation, of  any commercial  agreement that  he did  not enter knowingly, voluntarily,  and intentionally,  as would be the case in any Common Law contract.

Furthermore,  pursuant   to  U.C.C.  1-103,  the  statute,  being enforced as  a commercial  obligation of  a commercial agreement, must now  be construed  in harmony  with the  old Common  Law  of America, where the tribunal/court must rule that the statute does not apply  to the  individual who  is wise  enough  and  informed enough to exercise the remedy provided in this new system of law. He retains his former status in the Republic and fully enjoys his unalienable rights,  guaranteed to him by the Constitution of the Republic,  while   those  about   him  “curse  the  darkness”  of Commercial Law  government, lacking  the  truth  needed  to  free themselves from  a slave  status under the Federal United States, even while inhabiting territory foreign to its territorial venue.

ADDENDUM

U.C.C. 1-308:4  Sufficiency of reservation. Any expression  indicating any  intention to  preserve rights  is sufficient, such  as “without prejudice,” “under protest,” “underreservation,” or “with reservation of all our rights.”

The  Code   states  an   “explicit”  reservation  must  be  made. “Explicit” undoubtedly  is used in place of “express” to indicate that the  reservation must not only be “express” but it must also be “clear” that such a reservation was intended. The term  “explicit” as used in U.C.C. 1-308 means “that which is so clearly  stated or  distinctively set  forth that  there is no doubt as to its meaning.” …

U.C.C. 1-308:7  Effect of reservation of rights. The making  of a  valid reservation  of rights preserves whatever rights the  person then  possesses and  prevents the loss of such right by application of concepts of waiver or estoppel ….

U.C.C. 1-308:9  Failure to make reservation. When a waivable right or claim is involved, the failure to make a reservation thereof  causes a  loss of  the right  and  bars  its assertion at a later date ….

U.C.C. 1-103:6  Common law.

The Code  is “Complementary”  to the  common law which remains in force except where displaced by the Code ….

A statute  should be  construed in  harmony with  the common  law unless there is a clear legislative intent to abrogate the common law. …   “The  Code cannot  be read  to preclude  a common  law action.”

EXAMPLE

Your Honor,  my use  of “Without  Prejudice UCC  1-308″ above  my signature on  this document  indicates that  I have exercised the “Remedy” provided for me in the Uniform Commercial Code in Book 1 at Section  207/308, whereby I may reserve my Common Law right not to be compelled  to perform under any contract, or agreement, that I have not  entered into knowingly, voluntarily, and intentionally. And, that  reservation  serves  notice  upon  all  administrative agencies of government  —  national, state and local  —  that I do not,  and will  not, accept  the liability associated with the “compelled” benefit of any unrevealed commercial agreement.

~Howard Freeman

http://wetheonepeople.com/

 

 

FacebookTwitterGoogle+Share

You may also like...

Leave a Reply

Or

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>