These are the most
important words of the original speeches made during the founding of the Organization of the United Nations. NO MAN IS AN ISLAND. Those of “like-mind” must come together to “secure” their freedoms, to form their ‘state’ and “assume among the powers of the earth their separate and equal station”, and to govern themselves and their ‘state’ in accordance with the dictates of their own conscience. Differences will remain, but contained within certain parameters; peaceful parameters … then those differences are wholesome.
This is what must be respected. The rights to “throw off the OLD-GUARD” and to form a new one, when the old seeks to plunder, pillage, oppress, and bring about the destruction of people. In every case above, where you see the word “me”… that means you. Say “me, myself, and I”…you have the same rights to form your government in order to prevent that destruction that is nipping at our heels and/or trampling on our heads.
There it is again,â€Ś. Form a new Government.
This document is powerful. To assume sovereign rights and responsibility means that One cannot make excuses for any failure on their part to act in the manner that Sovereignty requires. When One ought to act and does not, there is no excuse. When One ought not to commit a wrong act, and still commits a wrong act; then there is no excuse. This is the ultimate responsibility.
Look at the bracketed section. This is what must be respected. My belief is based on what I am seeing and what I see is about self-governance. And, this is what the international community will respect, by contract. They do what they want, pretty much, within their private jurisdictions. But, among “nations” or “states”, the agreements between “The People” (not the “people”) are different. They honor their code, or what in ancient times was called the “Codex”. Internationally, among the society of nations, the private side deals with issues of “honoring the agreements at all times”.
First note: Private International law. Look at: http://www.oas.org/DIL/treaties_and_agreements.htm and at http://www.oas.org/DIL/PrivateIntLaw-HistDevPriLaw-Eng.htm. This is the “key” and the history of what has gone before. [Time to make something new] This is in the Law of Nations, as well. This is about the reasons for “leaving” the “state” in which you were “birthed” and “raised” when you cannot get redress due to lack of standing. In Art. 1, they adopted an agreement to pass “standardized codes” within their separate jurisdictions. I saw the entire book, which must have had 800 or more regulations/codes. You will find these “international codes or regs” throughout the U.S. code and others. For instance, the convention of Private International Law in the Netherlands, adopted a specific treatment or Convention for the handling of Service of Process on Diplomats and Ambassadors of other Jurisdictions, either abroad or within their own borders. The entire convention was put in the Fed Rules of Civil Procedure under the same title: Service of Extra-judicial Process. The rest of the Articles are about how to accept, denounce, disagree, not adopt certain sections, and even how to become a party to the convention even if your “state” did not exist at the time, and was not signature to the original convention. [see Art. 6]
Read Art. 1 -- This is very important information. Then read the other articles and notice how many times the words “International Public Order” is mentioned. If you have not become the Private by declaring to self-govern, and pledging to support that self-governance; then you are “public” and will be kept “in order”. This is important on later pages, as well. Article 8 is about the Rights that a State acquires under the convention, to affect its “codes/laws” extraterritorial when one of its sheep gets off or outside the plantation, and they need to jerk the sheep back to the jurisdiction/State. This is an agreement whereby they can go onto one another’s property/plantation (State) to “re-gather” their property or “citizens”. Without “particulars” that say otherwise, the sheep is shorn.
This quote provides us more on self-governance and what they (States/Nations) respect.
This peaceful settlement of disputes is very important. This is how the world operates. Now men like Saddam Hussein can be enticed or rooked into contracts/treaties, whereby these States create a breach or violation of the agreement; which in turn binds their entire nation. This page is what they claim that they will support, and since very few people appear to support anything. The principle is that this “Right” is all that is required to “stand” on with your own “standard”/ (flag), with other State as a “state” with “status” (state-us). I believe that they do support it because of what I have seen with myself, and others. They told Russell to “contract with his own”, and “you (he) will be okay”. He did not listen, but I did. Arthur Alexander came before me and he listened as well. They told Russell that if he wanted his “state” then he could have it, but that the U.S. was not accepting his language or his “bossing them and their military” around. Russell went into dishonor, committed piracy on the high seas, and violated the Law of Nations when he filed against the U.S. But, they (the U.S.) held out the olive branch and the opportunity. Please note that “level of development” is not the issue. Standing as “a people” is the issue in order to “create the State”.
Article 1; the second paragraph is very important. Also, Article 5 where is states that “diplomatic channels” are to be used; further using the procedure for peaceful settlement of international “conflicts” must be followed. Again, Russell’s problem; … no diplomacy. If one becomes “international” (a private party) by declaring, pledging, and self-governing, then the International Public Order is maintained by the protocol stated above. Follow the International Public order and stay in honor. You win respect by understanding “order”, and not “whining, protesting, and complaining”. Complaining (complaint) is what children do and it is dishonorable. Agreement is what “grown-ups” do and living with honor to it.
The bottom half is the meat. What you have done is proven their duplicity and that they are running a system of forced labor using arbitrary private monopoly powers. This is reason to “move out” or “expatriate”. When in the course of human events, a long train of abuses….. But, you still use protocols of peaceful settlement. This is what I have talked with Arthur about repeatedly. It is firmed up in Article VII, where is states that the individual protected by the state, loses that protection when he “complains” against the “State”. The bigger problem is that the “individual” (complaining) then becomes public enemy #1 of the state. If you complain, you will have become “ stateless” (i.e. equivalent to alien) with no protection… and to maintain the International Public Order, the “stateless” will be governed by the jurisdiction that the “stateless” are found in. The final articles make it clear that nationals, citizens, residents, and aliens; have the same rights; … either limited civil or none. No standing or political rights (i.e. political standing = responsibility among the nations/states.) Aliens must submit, end of story.
This was the ultimate pledge. They were willing to die for â€œeach otherâ€?. They pledge 100% of their fortunes to each other. And, they pledged their honor in support to that which they created. They legislated themselves into existence.
This is how it is done. A model to follow, but not to usurp.
This next one is tough to wrap your mind around… until “you get it”. Now that I “get it”, it makes sense why only 1% win in court. They “don’t get it” and waste their time trying to “state a claim upon which relief can be granted” without being the “state” or a “state” with an “estate”. No standing = no status, no equal station, no “state-ment”, and no “state” through which to “state a claim”. Read above about the Juridical Construct, the “creation” of the State and necessity of “standing/capacity” to aver standing.
Read Fed rule 9a carefully. Specific Negative Averments must be accompanied by the particulars; meaning the “state” separating the jurisdiction. And, it must be extant. And, there must be agreements and also, variations by agreement. These variations by agreement are important between “states”. Just like in the conference convention, if you did not agree or accept, and thereby denounced or rejected something within the convention, then you stipulate that in writing such. This is a variation by agreement. It is in the UCC and Code of Federal Regulations. It is “Treatment by Treaty.
Rebuttal of a nay-sayser. The responses were very good. Especially on the next page.
Published on Feb 3, 2012
Published on Feb 3, 2012
1 2 This is what must be respected. The rights to “throw off the OLD-GUARD” and to form a new one, when the old seeks to plunder, pillage, o...