Can a lawyer be honest? If you are looking for an honest attorney, there is somethfing you should know: There is no such thing. It is prohibited for a bar attorney to promote your best interest.
There are no honest lawyers
The root word of barbarism is bar. Nothing has changed. The U.S. Supreme Court in 1793 told us that the bar was formed from a league with rude and degrading barbarism.
And we also have more recent confessions from people who would know:
U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren Burger said that 50% of American Trial Lawyers are too incompetent to represent anyone. TIME Magazine April 10, 1978 quotes Chief Justice Warren Burger warning:
“We may well be on our way to a society overrun by hordes of lawyers, hungry as locusts, and brigades of judges in numbers never before contemplated.”
The same TIME article also tells us:
“Chesterfield Smith, a former president of the American Bar Association, said that he would not trust 20% to 25% of all lawyers”
And there have been warnings throughout the ages:
“To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions is a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy.. ”
— Thomas Jefferson, 1821. This was long after Marbury v. Madison (1805), which today’s lawyers insist is the authority for judges to arbitrate constitutional questions.
And there have been warnings in the Bible.
::::: ===== :::::
ATTORNEYS MUST ATTORN.
An attorney is one who entraps slaves for his master. An attorney has the duty to turn your allegiance over to his lord. The word attorney comes from the word “attornment” which means to twist — no surprise here — or to turn over. This refers to the transfer of feudal land where the attorney is hired to make sure that all serfs turn over to the new owner with the land sale, such that none were freed. This is the same today. Again: Ownership of slaves remains with us today. Later, I will prove that you have already been turned over to the creditors of the federal government. Unfortunately for you, the U.S. is the worlds largest debtor.
Oxford English Dictionary 1999, ATTORN:
Webster’s 1828 Dictionary: ATTORNMENT:
“The act of a feudatory, vassal or tenant, by which he consents, upon the alienation of an estate, to receive a new lord or superior, and transfers to him his homage and service.”
Now go to a Law Dictionary and lookup Villenage:
“A feudal tenure whereby the tenant was bound to do all such services as the lord commanded”
Yes, you are bound to do all that your new lord commands. Even a passport application is proof that you have allegiance and the U.S. citizenship automatically requires unlimited labor. For proof read my essay on Real ID.
Welcome to your Novus Ordo Seclorum. Secular New World Order, same as the old world order. Involuntary servitude is prohibited by the 13th Amendment. Voluntary servitude is entirely Constitutional.
That’s right! Only after public schools established the 10th plank of the Communist Manifesto, and after the 16th amendment established the second plank of the Communist Manifesto, and after the 17th Amendment removed the only chance of state control over the federal government, and after the Federal Reserve Act established the fifth plank of the Communist Manifesto, and after your National Anthem changed to one that did not mention God, and after the private bar associations became agencies of the states, and after your gold coins were seized — did allegiance become American.
::::: ===== :::::
Still enforcing pagan Roman law
Bar attorneys enforce pagan Roman law where duress is lawful.
ATTORNEYS’ ROMAN ROOTS
You might have noticed that the U.S. Constitution contains Latin phrases and The motto of the U.S. is Latin and your dollar bill contains several Latin phrases. Many maxims of law are Latin. These all come from the Attorneys’ pagan Rome. They still use the law that killed Christ.
Black’s Law Dictionary definition of the Latin word Patronus:
“In Roman Law. A denomination applied by Romulus to the first senators of Rome, and which they always afterwards bore. A person who stood in the relation of protector to another who was called his “client.” One who advised his client in matters of law, and advocated his causes in court.”
Notice that Attorneys “stand in the relation of protector to another”. By seeking a protector you confessed that you cannot manage yourself. Once you are too incompetent to manage yourself, the laws of nature allow others to step in and manage your life.
In other words, there is nothing you can do about it. There is no remedy for those who are damaged by their agent. Procurationem adversus nulla est praescriptio. There is no prescription (cure) for procuration. Your submission is a complete submission. You were created equal until you voluntarily submitted yourself. Even forced submission is legal for them — as discussed later.
Lawyers brag that they use Latin because it is a dead language that doesn’t change. Although it is true that traditional moral values don’t change — They want to suggest that there will always be equal protection of the law. They lie. Biblical values are foreign to Roman Law. History proves it, from the earliest Christians through the reformation, and into American law where the Supreme Court confessed that the bar was formed in league with barbarism
Their laws always change, and “equal protection of the laws” seldom applies. It only applies when Law Dictionary terms are the same as English Dictionary terms.
By the way, their Law Dictionary terms are frequently redefined with each new addition.
They change the definition of marriage to a definition that had never existed. They use their perversion to seize your family and create family law. More…
They change the definition of license. Now they license unalienable rights that governments are instituted among men to secure. More…
They can even cancel license without a court hearing. Then, POOF. No more unalienable rights for you.
The Law of Obligations
You might think that a forced signature is invalid just because lawyers say so. But these pagans insist that coerced obligations are nevertheless consensual. Here are their statements about the law of obligations:
1. “the jus civile [civil law] did not provide a satisfactory solution to the problem”
2. “there is no general rule declaring transactions concluded under the influence of duress or coercion invalid.”
Here is proof:
- Every Law Dictionary will tell you “The civil laws reduce an ungrateful freedman to his original slavery” Libertinum ingratum leges civiles in pristinam servitutem redigunt.
Every Law Dictionary will tell you that there are only two categories for you. Omnes hominess aut liberi sunt aut servi. All men are freemen or slaves.
Don’t claim to live in a free country if you have never seen freedom.
::::: ===== :::::
Roman Law is contrary to the Common Law and the Laws of Nature
Notice in the Civil Law definition that Roman Law is used in contradistinction to the laws of England and those of the respective states. The common law of England is the received-law-of-the-land in America.
Example: the State of Hawaii, our 50th State, thought the Common law of England was so important, that they made it their first law in Hawaii Revised Statute 1.1-1. Link
According to the first sentence in the Declaration of Independence, The Laws of Nature entitled us to create a government based on the divine revealed laws of the Bible. The Laws of Nature require “We The People” to control the government they created. Civil Servants are to be the servants, Society was to be the masters who created their offices. The Society that created their government had a duty to control what they created. You inherited this duty but you didn’t want it.
(Ignore for the moment that it was We-The-States that created the federal government, not the people. They would use the 17th Amendment to guarantee that states could not control the federal government).
The Constitution delegated the 19 things the federal government was authorized to do. The civil servants can only receive authority that was delegated by the society that created their office. The powers not delegated by the Constitution are reserved to the people.
::::: ===== :::::
The root word of barbarism is the word bar. The bar association did not exist in America until 1878, after their barbarism was protected.
The former American colonies had to suffer abuse by the British bar association. The barbaric origins of the British bar association was mentioned by The US Supreme Court. In their 1793 case Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 US 419 at the top of page 449. While comparing different justice systems, they said that in ancient Greek tribunals, law and liberty were “in strict and graceful union” before the justice system was corrupted by the Romans. The high court explained:
“The rude and degrading league between the bar and feudal barbarism was not yet formed.”
That’s right. The Supreme Court acknowledged that a rude league had formed between the Bar and barbarism.
Under the Laws of Nature that entitle the United States to exist, We-The-People must control the government we inherited. The Attorneys’ barbaric Roman Law apparently now protects them from being controlled. How do they do this? They do this by getting you to waive your rights with legalities that you don’t understand. (We have a moral duty to avoid deception — Eve in the garden was sentenced to death for being deceived). You were like Esau who, by asking for benefits, willingly gave up your birthright for a bowl of “government” benefits. I put “government” in quotes because it is not a government function. The benefits come from elsewhere but your forced labor is collateral for the national debt payments.
Rights only come with responsibilities. If you cannot manage your own affairs then you have no right to manage your servants. “For what compact can be made with a man that is not master of his own life?” as John Locke said in his 1690 Second Treatise of Government. Since rights only come with responsibilities, you waived your right to manage your government civil servants. Government welfare is only available (officially) to those who are near death and totally destitute — read my essay on welfare.
If you cannot manage yourself, then you have no right to manage your servants. “For what compact can be made with a man that is not master of his own life?” as John Locke said in his 1690 Second Treatise of Government. Since rights only come with responsibilities, you waived your right to manage your government servants.
Attorneys have every right to Attorn those who cannot manage their own affairs. They attorn you over to their masters, which makes you a ward of their masters.
All men are created equal. You remained equal until you consent to be governed. You surrendered your thousands of unalienable rights in exchange for the six rights they give you.
The Roman Empire, whose Latin laws lawyers are perpetuating, expanded by brutally taking what was not theirs. Castles were built to defend towns against a Roman law system of violence, war and plunder. Pilgrims separated from this system in 1620, and established the American way. But domestic terrorists overthrew the American way in 1878 when the ABA was established as a daughter of the British Bar Association. They restored their old barbaric ways.
People of that era were well aware of the threat of bar lawyers. They knew that bar lawyers in the U.S. belonged to the British bar. In 1861 a Constitutional Amendment was proposed to keep these vermin out of the legislature. In the Second session of the Eleventh Congress, the Congress proposed the following article of amendment to the Constitution relating to acceptance by citizens of the United States of titles of nobility from any foreign government. The proposed amendment, which was allegedly not ratified by three-fourths of the States, is as follows:
“If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive or retain any title of nobility or honour, or shall, without the consent of Congress, accept and retain any present, pension, office or emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of them.”
Yet many today brag of their title Esquire.
Frederic Bastiat, Economic Sophisms, Second Series, Chapter 1, The Physiology of Plunder, 1845:
“When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in a society, they create for themselves in the course of time, a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it.”
Swearing oaths, or saluting someone both prove allegiance to others. They both do the same thing.
- One only swears oaths to superiors, just like it said in Hebrews 6:16. Government officers swear oaths-of-office to be our subordinates.
- A salute is the assuming of a body position initiated by the inferior toward the superior. In the Bible Christ was offered authority over all kingdoms if he would bow down to Satan. (Matthew 4:9). A simple body position is sufficient to relinquish your “created equal” status. The same pecking-order continues today.
- You agreed to be subordinate.
“We The People” created government where no one needed a notarized signature in order to secure the blessings of liberty to their posterity. The posterity now need to beg for Roman notaries or Roman Attorneys to attest to your swearing, which allows them to attorn you to their masters. Warning: Swearing is worship — an oath is always a religious ceremony.
Swearing oaths is contrary to Christ’s command to never swear (Matthew 5:34). See my articles on Allegiance, Idolatry and my book on Oaths. James 5:12 tells us how important it is to never swear oaths. Saluting, bowing, affirming, and signing documents under penalty of perjury are all the same.
Non compliance is not sufficient to resist their barbarism. They use a maxim of law “Those who refuse to fight must lose” (Although not Roman, this Shetar law worked itself into our laws).
With their local enforcers of Roman Law, they no longer need to risk death besieging castles or dueling with their adversaries. Now all that is needed to seize someone’s land, wealth, or family was to touch (serve) their victims with a piece of paper. The world was made safe for the bar association’s barbarism. They now take your family, savings, wages and liberty by touching you with a piece of paper — you are reduced to a submissive wimp, incapable of defending yourself. Let’s find out why. Perhaps there are legalities that you should try to understand.
You now have a country that is only 4% of the world’s population but has 25% of the world’s prisoners, 70% of the world’s lawyers and 94% of the world’s lawsuits.
What could possibly go wrong?
The court system IS NOT ABOUT justice. Perhaps there is a reason. America’s Lost Liberty is my essay is about the injustice of activist judges.
::::: ===== :::::
LAWYERS MADE THE WORLD SAFE FOR THEIR TERRORISTS.
Here is the Federal Criminal Law (Title 18, section 2331) that defines “domestic terrorism”:
5) the term ”domestic terrorism” means activities that –
(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation
of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
(B) appear to be intended –
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.
According to the above quoted 18 USC 2331(5)(A) Crimes of terrorism must “involve acts dangerous to human life”. This involvement need not be direct involvement. Dangerous need not be deadly. And, as for the element of “acts” (as, for example, in Supreme Court decisions determining the crime of treason) “Acts” need not be overt criminal acts.
Terrorism as defined above has an element “a violation of the criminal laws”
- Is it a criminal violation to put innocent people in prison? Every month we read about exonerated innocents who are freed after decades in prison.
- Is it a criminal violation to coerce a guilty plea?
- How about a lawyer waiving your speedy trail right by repeatedly continuing the trial until you lost your friends, your savings, your house and your family? Then he drops you when you can no longer borrow any money to pay him. Are there criminal violations for: lawyer’s lies, fraud, misrepresentation, official misconduct, threats, etc.
Yes, Threats are criminal violations
Here is a law that defines threat, your State may be different:
“Threat” means to communicate, directly or indirectly the intent:
(a) To cause bodily injury in the future to the person threatened or to any other person; or
(b) To cause physical damage to the property of a person other than the actor; or
(c) To subject the person threatened or any other person to physical confinement or restraint; or
(d) To accuse any person of a crime or cause criminal charges to be instituted against any person; or
(e) To expose a secret or publicize an asserted fact, whether true or false, tending to subject any person to hatred, contempt, or ridicule; or
(f) To reveal any information sought to be concealed by the person threatened; or
(g) To testify or provide information or withhold testimony or information with respect to another’s legal claim or defense; or
(h) To take wrongful action as an official against anyone or anything, or wrongfully withhold official action, or cause such action or withholding; or
(j) To do any other act which is intended to harm substantially the person threatened or another with respect to his or her health, safety, business, financial condition, or personal relationships;
Another element of the crime of domestic terrorism in 18 USC 2331(5), is that the crime “appear to be intended” to influence a policy of government or that it “appear to be intended” to intimidate a civilian population.
- “appear to be intended” is the only standard mentioned in this law. Contrary to “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard for most criminal convictions.
- The jury determines what appears or does not appear to be intended. (But what chance will you have of a lawyer requesting a jury trial, when he can get a bar judge to rule on his crimes?)
- Does a prosecutor appear to be intended to intimidate a civilian population when he tries to get someone to waive their rights? Rights which government was created to protect.
- For ample examples of how courts have influenced a policy of government and intimidated a civilian population, read my essay Lost Liberty.
- DO lawyers in the legislature “appear to be intended” to influence a policy of government by intimidation or coercion — that are also dangerous to human life?
When earlier Roman civil law prevailed we built castles to protect us from those who would seek to take our property and our families and put us into perpetual slavery*. The aggressors had to risk death to enslave us or take our property. Lawyers tell us that we are now more civilized. Now they can enslave us without risking death, by serving us with a piece of paper. Their laws have reduced us to submissive wimps incapable of defending ourselves (contrary to the reason we created a government in the first place).
Criminals have the right to “assistance of counsel” according to the Fifth Amendment, and similar state constitutionally guaranteed right. This is an acknowledgment that the right to defend self is beyond any restrictions of the limited government that “We The People” created. DO NOT BE FOOLED. The words “assistance of counsel” mean what the authors intended it to mean. It cannot refer to bar association attorneys because they did not exist in America when those words were written.
And furthermore, bar attorneys have always been associated with feudal barbarism. The U.S. Supreme Court told us that the bar was associated with rude and degrading barbarism. Did the creators of your government intend to force you to be represented by rude and degrading attorneys? The bar association did not exist in America until 1878, after their terrorism was protected.
There was a 22 year period when lawyers were banished from America. Paul Harvey’s The Rest Of The Story series once explained it in a story called VERMIN.
You were created equal. Your birth did not submit yourself to such a form of government.
Yes, Perpetual Slavery. They have a duty to attorn you over to their masters. Just like in the days of old.
In the year 1320 the Scots made the Declaration of Arbraoath, which was a plea to the Pope to replace the British King. They understood who had complete power over all the kingdoms of the world. So soon we forget.
In 1452, Pope Nicholas the fifth, issued a Papal Bull called the Doctrine of Discovery
“… to capture, vanquish and subdue the Sarccens, pagans and other enemies of Christ to take all their possessions and property and to put them into perpetual slavery.”
(he left unstated that those who would swear oaths to foreigners are enemies of Christ. And indeed a perjury oath signature is an oath). Welcome to your Novus Ordo Seclorum New World Order.
Spain’s King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella were Catholic monarchs who financed Columbus. Christopher Columbus went forth to declare lands and inhabitants of the New World as property of the Catholic Church. I repeat again: “… to take all their possessions and property and to put them into perpetual slavery.”
On May 3, 1493 upon confirming the discovery of the New World, Pope Alexander the sixth, issued the Intercetera Bull:
“The Catholic faith … be everywhere increased and spread and barbarous Nations be overthrown and brought to the faith…”
In Papal Bull of September 26, 1493 entitled “Dudum Siquidem” Pope Alexander VI extended Spain’s rights to the New World. Spain’s rights come from the Pope (if the Pope did indeed have legitimate right to Spain). Columbus’ Book of Privileges written in 1502 before his final voyage, a copy of which is in the U.S. National Archives, has a transcription of this Papal Bull.
If true, then the Pope has a legitimate claim on America. Both from the Spanish and British roots.
Watch out for the British Bar Associations’ daughter American Bar Association. Their attorneys are required to attorn your allegiance over to their masters.
The Pope claims to own the entire planet through the laws of conquest and discovery. [Papal Bulls of 1455 and 1493] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romanus_Pontifex
::::: ===== :::::
Corrupt from the beginning
Back before the Constitution was written everyone knew that attorneys owed allegiance to their masters’ feudal barbarism. Their system has been corrupt from the beginning.
Paid attorneys were banned from America for 22 years. Advocating for a fee was a crime in early America. Back then, it was your neighborly duty to voluntarily help those who could not defend themselves — which, after all, is the reason we created a government.
The damned lawyers snaked their way back into the paradise we had secured to ourselves and our posterity. They would later, in 1878, create the American bar association, as a branch of the British bar association. Attorneys still use the Title of Esquire — but the Constitution prohibits titles of nobility.
The brutal pagan Roman Law that killed Christ has been handed down through the ages. The American Civil Law is today’s Roman Law.
Equity is defined today as “the quality of being fair or impartial; fairness; impartiality”. It is an earlier version of the “social justice” plague that we have today — except that it is insidious and forced on us by the attorneys just-us system.
In the law it has been “called chancery. A system of jurisprudence or a body of doctrines and rules developed in England and followed in the U.S., serving to supplement and remedy the limitations and the inflexibility of the common law. ” according to the Encyclopedia Britannica article quoted later.
Notice that it is a replacement for the common law. The common law is based on the laws of nature and the laws of nature’s God. “… neither could any other law possibly exist for we are all created equal with no other superior than the author of our being” according to Blackstone’s Commentaries On The Law introduction to his four volume law encyclopedia. And yet we are now faced with a system of jurisprudence serving to remedy their perceived limitations of the common law. Apparently attorneys don’t like limits placed on them by the unalienable Creator-endowed rights that governments are instituted among men to secure.
According to Webster’s 1913 Unabridged Dictionary: [By the year 1873 …]
“when rules of equity and of common law, in any particular case, conflict, the rules of equity are to prevail”.
And the Encyclopedia Britannica of 1911 (11th edition, Vol IX, page 727) stated of equity jurisdiction:
“The evils of this double system of judicature…were enforced by the Act of 1873 which consolidated the courts of law and equity, and ordered that law and equity should be administered concurrently.”
That’s right! The Encyclopedia Britannica called your judicial system evil. Why can’t you recognize evil when you see it?
History of infiltration, overthrow, and conquest.
It only took a few decades to vanquish and subdue us. It wasn’t until the 1930’s, that the state bar associations became agencies of the state governments.
That’s right. Only after public schools established the 10th plank of the Communist Manifesto, and after the 16th amendment established the second plank of the Communist Manifesto, and after the 17th Amendment removed the only chance of state control over the federal government, and after the Federal Reserve established the fifth plank of the Communist Manifesto, and after your National Anthem changed to one that did not mention God, and while your gold coins were being seized, did the state bar associations became agencies of the states. Attorneys’ Foreign allegiance to corruption is now in charge of all branches of government. And again I warn you that attorneys must attorn your allegiance over to their masters “… to capture, vanquish and subdue … to take all their possessions and property and to put them into perpetual slavery.”
Welcome to your Novus Ordo Seclorum secular new world order. Same as the old world order
.::::: ===== :::::
Bible Believers beware: By means of the miracles (magic of deception) which they had the authority to do in the sight of the first beast, you incorporated into the second beast. Now the second beast exercises all the authority of the first beast, and causes the earth’s inhabitants to worship the first beast whose wound was healed. And deceives those who dwell on the earth.
::::: ===== :::::
Ignorance of the law is no excuse. Your rights will continue to disappear if you do nothing.
If you don’t learn how to stand up to the beast, you will soon need another mark to buy or sell. This was mentioned by Bill Gates: “So eventually there will be this digital immunity proof that will help facilitate the global reopening up”.
Learn to stand up to the beast before it is too late.
::::: ===== :::::
Proof that attorneys must enslave you.
Here is proof that attorneys must enslave you. And proof that you waive your rights by hiring a lawyer.
Judges have only have two categories to put you. Omnes hominess aut liberi sunt aut servi. All men are freemen or slaves.
If you are dependent on others to defend yourself, then another maxim of law kicks-in “Those who refuse to fight must lose” (Although not Roman, this Shetar law worked itself into our laws). This maxim is intended to enslave Christians. It is contrary to Christians’ duty to not resist evil (Matthew 5:39).
LAWYERS’ DEFINITION OF LAWYER
Here is a partial definition of Lawyer in Black’s Law Dictionaries up until the Fourth Edition 1968 — Never to appear again in later editions:
“Any person who, for a fee or reward, prosecutes or defends causes in courts of record or other judicial tribunals of the United States, or of any of the states, or whose business it is to give legal advice in relation to any cause or matter whatever. Act of July 13, 1866, § 9, (14 St. at Large, 121.)”
Can you spot problems with their lies that they have hidden for five decades?
- The Act of July 13, 1866, § 9, (14 St. at Large, 121.) DOES NOT EXIST. It is phoney. Except for your power of attorney, there is no law that authorizes a lawyer to step into a courtroom.
- The bar association is a private association.
- The bar association was not created by government
- States do not license attorneys. States do not administer bar exams like they administer other license exams. Only the bar association licenses attorneys. States license anything they think is a threat to the rights of 14th Amendment citizens, such as architects, barbers, plumbers, barking dogs, and lemonade stands. But they do not license attorneys who can destroy your life. It is beyond their jurisdiction.
- The bar association became agencies of the several states in the early 1930s right before they took our gold.
::::: ===== :::::
You waive your rights by hiring a lawyer
JOIN ME IN PONDERING THE LEGALITIES THAT HAVE ENSLAVED US.
Procurationem adversus nulla est proæscriptio. There is no prescription (cure) for procuration. If you are represented, then you cannot be damaged by your representative. Your submission must be a complete submission with the full understanding that you cannot be damaged by your representative.
Ignorance of the law is no excuse. Once you give your complete submission, then attorneys know that you have agreed with your status as a feudal serf, and that you owe allegiance to their system.
A law encyclopedia, Corpus Juris Secundum, volume 7 says:
“His first duty is to the courts and the public, not to the client, and wherever the duties to his client conflict with those he owes as an officer of the court in the administration of justice, the former must yield to the latter.”
7CJS — Corpus Juris Secundum — Attorney & Client, §4
In other words, an attorney cannot help you rage against the feudal barbarism that enslaves you. He CANNOT represent your best interest.
Your submission to the attorney chain-of-command is complete submission. He has a duty to ATTORN you over to his unseen masters. That’s right. If you have a lawyer, YOU have no standing in any court to petition government for a redress grievance against their masters.
Here are other some legal maxims to consider:
- “He who consents to an act is not damaged by it.”
- “He who consents cannot receive an injury”
- “To him consenting no injury is done.”
- Qui sentit commodum sentire debet et onus. “He who receives the benefit should also bear the burden.”
- “Volenti non fit injuria ” “That to which a man consents cannot be considered an injury.”
- “a state of dependence will inevitably oblige the inferior to take the will of him, on whom he depends, as the rule of his conduct” according to Blackstone’s Commentary on the Law, Book 1 Introduction.
Again we see that you gave up your right to petition the government for redress of grievances against their system.
Since attorneys cannot help you complain about their system, which YOU chose to use, then one of three things will happen. Either everyone conforms to their system as submissive wimps who are incapable of asserting a meekest attempt at liberty, or we end up in prison. OR we stop using their system and become responsible enough to control the government we inherited. As a last alternative, people take back their government as was suggested by the following authorities.
Take back the government?
What can decent people do to defend society against the vicious perverts who seek to destroy us all? Or all we all doomed?
Abraham Lincoln said in his First Inaugural Address, March 4, 1861 we can take back government when we “grow weary of the existing government”.
California Governor Ronald Reagan said in his First Inaugural Address 1/5/67:
“Freedom is a fragile thing and never more than one generation away from extinction… It is not ours by inheritance. It must be fought for and defended constantly by each generation, for it comes only once to a people. Those who have known freedom and then lost it, have never regained it.”
That’s right. Those who have lost their liberty never get it back.
And John Adams:
“Liberty cannot be preserved without general knowledge among the people. …The jaws of power are always open to devour, and her arm is always stretched out, if possible, to destroy the freedom of thinking, speaking, and writing. ”
— JOHN ADAMS, A Dissertation on the Canon and the Feudal Law, No. 3, printed in Boston Gazette, 30 Sept. 1765
And another famous quote:
“The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he breaks, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime.”
— John Philpot Curran, July 10, 1790
And Thomas Jefferson:
“To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions is a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy.. “
— Thomas Jefferson, 1821 long after Marbury v. Madison (1805), which today’s lawyers insist gave judges the authority to arbitrate constitutional questions.
In the words of President Kennedy in his address to the diplomatic corps on March 13, 1962.
“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.”
Original 13th Amendment
Bar attorneys are officers of the court. Separation of powers prohibits judicial officers from exercising authority under other branches of government. But they somehow get away with it.
The original 13th Amendment has been suppressed. It prohibits lawyers who have the title Esquire from the legislature. Here is the original 13th amendment in an 1843 law textbook:
Yet their law books now say it was not ratified by the required number of states.. Here is their version of history:
The American Bar Association is a daughter of the British Bar. Lawyers get to use the Title of Esquire. Titles of nobility are still prohibited by the Constitution.
::::: ===== :::::
Welcome to your Novus Ordo Seclorum secular new world order. Same as the old world order
.::::: ===== :::::
A bad system perpetuated
The USA has 25% of the world’s prisoners. And 70% of the world’s lawyers.
Systemic barbarism. Systemic tyranny. Systemic oppression. Systemic slavery (forced on us by attorneys’ duty to attorn). Systemic persecution. Denial that we are all created equal. Forced allegiance contrary to Christianity. Denial that governments are instituted among men to secure Creator-endowed unalienable rights. Forced oaths contrary to Christianity. Forced tolerance contrary to Christianity. Forced usury. State ownership of children. Proof of allegiance to get a banking authorization number that allows you to buy or sell. Wage authorization numbers to qualify for a right to contract. What else could possibly go wrong with a system that perpetuates its directive from Pope Nicholas the fifth “… to capture, vanquish and subdue the … enemies of Christ to take all their possessions and property and to put them into perpetual slavery”?
Separation of powers prohibit the Supreme Court from interpreting the Constitution
Judicial Supremacy cannot exist Constitutionally. The Supreme Court can not reinterpret what founders intended or what the legislature intended. Yet attorneys insist that they can.
Jefferson was against judicial supremacy. Thomas Jefferson was there at the beginning and he never believed such a thing.
Well after the 1803 case of Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137, which lawyers insist is the “proof” of judicial supremacy, Thomas Jefferson wrote in a letter to Mr. Jarvis dated September 25, 1820 to refute this emerging dangerous doctrine:
“To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions is a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. … their power the more dangerous as they are in office for life, and not responsible as the other functionaries are, to the selective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that, to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots.”
Lincoln was also against judicial supremacy. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/05/20/lincoln-versus-judicial-supremacy/
Even the Supreme Court said that judges cannot interpret the constitution: Luther v. Borden 48 US 1 at page 52 (in the year 1849):
“But the other disputed points in making constitutions, depending often, as before shown, on policy, inclination, popular resolves, and popular will, and arising not in respect to private rights,-… but in relation to politics, they belong to politics, and they are settled by political tribunals, and are too dear to a people … for them ever to intrust their final decision, when disputed, to a class of men who are so far removed from them as the judiciary; a class, also, who might decide them erroneously as well as right, and if in the former way, the consequences might not be able to be averted except by a revolution, while a wrong decision by a political forum can often be peacefully corrected by new elections or instructions in a single month:”
Now we have a system where one bad lawyer can ruin the future for everyone.
One flawed ruling for or against a bad lawyer or a pro-se litigant will be perpetuated forever.
But once upon a time, the doctrine of stare decisis was often ignored, as Justice William Rehnquist observed,
“[N]o amount of repetition of historical errors can make the errors true.” 105 S.Ct. 2479, 2516 (1985).
BLACK’S LAW DICTIONARY, first edition, 1891:
Today’s corruption is from lying police, lying lawyers, and lying prosecutors. See my article Do Police Lie in Courts?
Perjury exists right here in the USA where the Head of the Harvard Law School, Alan Dershowitz, testifies to Congress that there is overwhelming evidence that police and prosecutors perjure themselves regularly in order to convict the innocent. www.house.gov/judiciary/101308.htm
A trial by a jury of your peers was intended to replace the inherently unfair trial by government. A trial by government does not fulfill the Fifth Amendment guarantee to due process of law. You have a right to a fair trial. Trial by government cannot be fair. Inquisition is trial by government.
Your Constitution was ratified on the reassurance, over and over again, that a jury of your peers would always be 12 people who know you.
In 1969 in US v. Moylan 417 F2d 1002 at page 1006:
“We recognize as appellants urge, the UNDISPUTED power of the jury to acquit, even if the verdict is contrary to the law as given by the judge and contrary to the evidence. … the jury has the power to acquit and the courts must abide by that decision.”
As recently as 1972, in the case U.S. v Dougherty, 473 F 2d 1113, 1139 the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia said that the jury has an “unreviewable and irreversible power… to acquit in disregard of the instructions on the law given by the trial judge.”
Here is further proof that a real trial (by jury) is not a trial by government: The Metropolitan News, a Los Angeles legal newspaper on October 25, 1973 quoted Hon. L. Thaxton Hanson, Justice Court of Appeals, State of California (ret.):
“In ancient times, the right to trial by jury was called `trial per pals’ – that is, trial by country – or by the people, as distinguished from trial by government”
Lord Hale, 18th Century English Jurist was quoted in the U.S. Supreme Court’s case Sparf & Hansen v. U.S., 156 U.S. 51 at page 119 (1895):
“… if the judge’s opinion in matter of law must rule the issue of fact submitted to the jury, the trial by jury would be useless.”
Read that again. IF THE JURY MUST OBEY THE JUDGE’S INSTRUCTIONS ON THE LAW, THEN A TRIAL BY JURY WOULD BE USELESS.
Read my essay: Jury Duty is not what you have been told.
Controlled Grand Juries
Prior to 1906 government attorneys could NOT talk to a grand jury, for fear of influencing them, as for example in U.S. v. Rosenthal 121 Fed 862, and now government attorneys control grand juries.
Injustice for everyone.
Read my essay on injustice. America’s Lost Liberty.
::::: ===== :::::
How do we Respond to the evil system of Attorneys?
I have never met an attorney who did not lie to me with a straight face. They have cost me thousands. It is very irritating.
None of the following work:
- Confrontation, right to their faces
- Refusal to debate
- Educate them
- tolerate them
Get a copy of the Bar Association Rules of Professional Conduct and their Rules for the Prosecutorial Function.
Bar grievance can work against lawyers, but they will not let on that it affects them.
Criminal complaints will work.
Judicial misconduct charges against corrupt judges.
Christ damned lawyers.
Christ and Paul spoke bluntly. They risked stoning when they confronted those who twist morality. They did not “speak the truth in love” to their opponents. They spoke such things as:
- Woe unto you, You hypocrites! (spoken directly to them 7 times in Matthew 23)
- Ye shall receive the greater damnation. You vipers, how can you escape the damnation of hell? (Matthew 23:33)
- Woe unto you lawyers, for you have taken away the key of knowledge (Luke 11:52)
- Ye are of your father the Devil (John 8:44).
- Agitators should be castrated (Galatians 5:12).
They spoke plain truth. You are to love society by driving out evil. Speaking plain truths means that you understand your Bible. First Timothy 5:20 “Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear.” You have a duty to warn sinners, Ezekiel 3:18-21.
If Christ can call lawyers damned, then so shall I.
Christ spoke bluntly to lawyers, right to their faces.
Christ and the disciples lived under Roman Civil Law, just as we all do today. We should also live by his example. In the Bible, Jesus Christ confronted lawyers with the TRUTH.
Many people insist that Christ was only speaking to religious leaders, but his seven “woe unto you” confrontations were directed to those — just like today’s lawyers — who take widows houses (Matthew 23:14), force others to take oaths* (verse15-22), omit the weightier matters like justice or mercy (verse 23), nit-pick (verse 24), are inwardly filled with corruption (27), hypocrites (28), blood thirsty (30).
- Woe unto you lawyers. Luke 11:46
- Blind guides. Matthew 23 (twice),
- Brood of vipers (also translated as den of snakes), Whitewashed corruption.
- Matthew 12:34 O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.
If speaking bluntly to their faces doesn’t work, try filing a criminal complaint with the prosecutor. If the prosecutor fails to perform a duty he is required to perform, file a criminal complaint against the prosecutor with the grand jury, or with a magistrate, or with the Agent in Charge of the local FBI office. Keep going up the chain of command. Shielding a criminal from prosecution is a crime. Barratry is a crime.
Thomas Jefferson had a good suggestion:
“Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. For ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them.”
–Thomas Jefferson, letter to Francis Adrian Van der Kemp, 30 July, 1816
Don’t waste your life casting pearls before swine.
The Apostle Paul also had a good suggestion in his letter to Ephesians:
have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather expose them.
Every Law Dictionary will tell you that: Contra principia negantem non est disputandum. There can be no debate with one who denies fundamentals.
Many people cannot understand the ways of God.
- Romans 8:7 – Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
- The Almighty Himself gives them over to reprobate minds according to Romans 1:28. Without understanding, arrogant, inventing ways of doing evil, senseless, faithless. And yes, ruthless.
- Second Timothy 3:7 ever learning but never arriving at a knowledge of the truth.
- Proverbs 1:7 (KJV) fools despise wisdom and instruction.
But you have a duty to engage them in some small way. You may be their only inspiration to accept eternal salvation according to Second Timothy 2:23 to 3:7- (NKJV):
“But avoid foolish and ignorant disputes, knowing that they generate strife. And a servant of the Lord must not quarrel but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient, in humility correcting those who are in opposition, if God perhaps will grant them repentance, so that they may know the truth, and that they may come to their senses and escape the snare of the devil, having been taken captive by him to do his will. But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, unloving, unforgiving, slanderers, without self-control, brutal, despisers of good, traitors, headstrong, haughty, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having a form of godliness but denying its power. And from such people turn away! … always learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.”
- For more information on forced oaths read my eBook Oaths: Mandatory or Voluntary.
::::: ===== :::::
You may also be interested in
- my essay on Lost Liberty
- my essay on Legal Lingo
- my brief on Word Definition Deceptions
- my study on ReDefinition of the term License
Ignorance of the law is no excuse. Your rights will continue to disappear if you do nothing.
I recommend a law course for those who do not trust lawyers. If you have a lawyer — understand what he should be doing so you can control him, and know when to fire him. If you don’t have a lawyer — understand what YOU should be doing. All the basic lawyer procedures are explained in “How To Win In Court” self-help course. This is a step-by-step guide on how to win in court. It has Pro-Se tactics, and forms for civil cases.
I will correct any error on this page, just CONTACT ME
[contact-form][contact-field label=’Name’ type=’name’ required=’1’/][contact-field label=’Email’ type=’email’ required=’1’/][contact-field label=’Comment’ type=’textarea’ required=’1’/][/contact-form]