quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

you are still untutored, incorrect and impudent, common law is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law 

While not as verbose, Blacks Law Dictionary defines it about the same way.

Statute staple is english law and hasn't a fucking thing to do with this whatsoever.  We would not try commodities moving from english town to english town in the US.

(see (you will never understand):  jurisdiction)

Im not at all confused, you are just an idiot as defined by Blacks Law Dictionary.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

Even attorneys have no clue whats going on.

If people want change they must educate themselves and get out in the public and educate others so they learn how to get their rights back.

.......Go ahead call a list of 10 attorneys and you will be lucky if even one knows what you are talking about.  (ask them about allodial)   Seriously try it LOL

quote:

ORIGINAL: kinkbound

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

People put everything into voting and it is meaningless in a corrupt tyrannical system.

What makes a difference is activisim.   Get out pass out jury rights to juries before they go to trial, "the jury IS THE COURT" not the priest in the blkack robe.

Teach people their 5th and 7th amendment rights, the right to common law juries and grand juries that the no court created under the united states has jurisdiction to review.

Its about education and getting involved.   voting is just a ticket for more of the same.  You cannot get the education you need at a young enough age to do anything about it from the school system.

Even attorneys have no clue whats going on.

If people want change they must educate themselves and get out in the public and educate others so they learn how to get their rights back.

People have contracted their rights away and they have no clue that is what they did.

Its why they can tazer you and get away with it!

I had a long discussion with one of the state staff attorneys and he admitted straight up that the legislatures DO NOT have to pass laws in conformance with the constitution....  read that again!

People dont know what is going on, all they get is the media propaganda and accept it as gospel.

Go ahead call a list of 10 attorneys and you will be lucky if even one knows what you are talking about.  (ask them about allodial)   Seriously try it LOL

I agree that education is key.

If we stop voting though, wouldn't that make it all the more easier for the tyrants install their cronies into office?

This example is not an electoral vote, but still an example of the people coming together with their votes to defeat tyranny. Though the entire documentary is good, please scroll to 39:35 and watch until 46:50 to illustrate my point:

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

if you cant figure that out, then you are in possession of less intellect than an amoeba.

But enough about this frenzied asswipe fantasy of your pretending understanding of even basic legal concepts.

Hows that 140 year old Quantum Syntax philosopher doing that you personally know?  Fact Check Much?

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

you are still untutored, incorrect and impudent, common law is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law 

While not as verbose, Blacks Law Dictionary defines it about the same way.

Statute staple is english law and hasn't a fucking thing to do with this whatsoever.  We would not try commodities moving from english town to english town in the US.

(see (you will never understand):  jurisdiction)

Im not at all confused, you are just an idiot as defined by Blacks Law Dictionary.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

I made the fucking point.  I am completely correct in what I said regarding the constitution, the juries, the jurisdiction and gave citations in plain english refuting you.  of course you are! You pretend that these words mean different than they mean, and are equivalent to old english law around the magna carta, and further about the standard weight between towns in england (statute staple) and they arent.  You then go on to say that I am confused because I am talking about staple statute and not common law, when I clearly and with credible and contextual citation show you that you are talking out of your insane ass.   yeh you posted a link well so did I that refutes your link mine is a law book You then ellide the argument to something it is not.  You do not give complete and credible citations, and you call fucking wiki credible?  damn!  of anything but the meanderings of a madman, and when you do 'proclaim' a cite, you underline and take out of context sentence fragments yeh we talk about your fragments below and say that they in and of themselves without reason 'prove' your blatherings.  you dont even know what the fuck it is and you wont by a quick wiki read either!

You also claim that this or that happened but the entire Government of the United
States was so fucking scared and astounded by your secret wizardry (which you cannot explain in english) that they actually defy the common law and make the record of your exploits disappear.   Additonally, you claim to know someone personally who I have proved beyond a reasonable doubt would need to be over 140 years of age to have done what you list as his curriculum vitae.  Again, and from the old days, you once told me you were a welder and had done it for over 10 years, but did not know what dross was or recognize it in a picture.  Furthermore, you reported that some 50 governors were to be unseated over a piece of paper that was fucked up (much like the birthers) which never happened, yet you assured us of this being absolutely inevitable.

Now, so to take your simpletonian arguments tack, I shall demonstrate the following under Quantum Syntax which is irrevokable under your imbicilic law.

:Real0ne: meaning:

Re (regis is the base as is retard)
al (alloidall or always)
0 zero, nothing non compis mentes.
ne (never nebbish)

Therefore, a king of  retards, nothing of a nebbish, whom is never correct.


Prove me wrong, you cannot, the law (as I define it) is correct.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

U.S. Constitution: Seventh Amendment
In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.


and by rules of common law that is a common law grand jury OF 25!

Unless you want to claim the courts are created by russia?
As I said the jury is the COURT not the priest in the black robe AND the jury also has the right to judge the law.  several supreme court decisions on the matter.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

not the sentence fragment you fucking imbicile.

what it says is that if a jury has found this or that, are you sure they dont find that or this? no court in (IN -oops another fuck up) the united states can say, fuck that out of hand, I don't like it, this is bullshit, throw it out.  The only way it can be re-examined by another court in the US is thru rules of evidence, you mean common law case law, you mean blackstone and magna charta? thats case law ya know! LMAO precedent and whether or not it aligns with thise laws. which laws are these laws? you still babbling statutes?  PERIFUCKINOD.  evidence establishes the this or that or was it that or this that the court OF the united states cannot re-examine.  dipshit

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

and by rules of common law that is a common law grand jury OF 25!


BULLSHIT do not conjoin to separate things into one.

So, by a grand jury ---- one indictment or re-indictment.

common law re examination by court---- two.

NOT ONE AND the other ALWAYS.

Ron chill man, dont give yourself a heart attack.  you are babbling aimlessly.  try again man!  take a deep breath and count to 10,000....  well ok 10, no need in making this difficult for you.

Then take the turd out of your mouth and come back and try to say something in a complete sentence.   think you can do that?

Oh and if this is too difficult for you, in a common law tribunal, the jury IS the court LOL....Therefore the united states court cannot IMPOSE its jurisdiction on top, however they can be called in as a court master in an advisory capacity.

there I felt sorry for you and didnt want you to have a heart attack on me.  YOu make such a nice punching bag.





You are a fool. 

Lets deal with concepts you are familiar with in your daily life.

Lets say (as usual) you are sitting in your padded cell playing with your shit.
Along comes your 140 year old neighbor from the next padded cell there at your asylum whom you know personally, as you have told us here and offers you his shit to play with.
Since you haven't much more ability than to play in shit, you readily agree.

So, is your 140 year old neigbors shit your shit, or do you see these as different pieces of shit, because other than 2 other people on this board, I can say without fear of contradiction, everyone else would discern them as two separate pieces of shit.

Because a beginning structure of a law was based upon another well worn structure in no wise makes them equal or equivalent.  If that were the case, Hammurabis Law is what we would be discussing, and you would lose your life as a degenerate for playing in your shit.

Q.E.D.

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy

Slaves must be monetized. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

Oh and if this is too difficult for you, in a common law tribunal, the jury IS the court LOL....

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

Oh and if this is too difficult for you, in a common law tribunal, the jury IS the court LOL....

OK, fuckstick, now we got a common law tribunal....where in the fuck is that in the US constitution?  You change words when your imbicility is exposed but they are still ignorant asswipe in their ever changing incantations.

There is not one goddamn thing that requires a 'common law tribunal' in any of these sections of the constitution.


The magna carta has nothing to do with our laws, nor does staple statute, they are English laws that are historical.  

Your only defense is non compos mentis.  I certainly ain't having a heart attack, I am laughing uproariously watching you fingerpainting with your shit.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Now, so to take your simpletonian arguments tack, I shall demonstrate the following under Quantum Syntax which is irrevokable under your imbicilic law.

:Real0ne: meaning:

Re (regis is the base as is retard)
al (alloidall or always)
0 zero, nothing non compis mentes.
ne (never nebbish)

Therefore, a king of  retards, nothing of a nebbish, whom is never correct.

Prove me wrong, you cannot, the law (as I define it) is correct.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

U.S. Constitution: Seventh Amendment
In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.


and by rules of common law that is a common law grand jury OF 25!

Unless you want to claim the courts are created by russia?
As I said the jury is the COURT not the priest in the black robe AND the jury also has the right to judge the law.  several supreme court decisions on the matter.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

not the sentence fragment you fucking imbicile.

what it says is that if a jury has found this or that, are you sure they dont find that or this? no court in (IN -oops another fuck up) the united states can say, fuck that out of hand, I don't like it, this is bullshit, throw it out.  The only way it can be re-examined by another court in the US is thru rules of evidence, you mean common law case law, you mean blackstone and magna charta? thats case law ya know! LMAO precedent and whether or not it aligns with thise laws. which laws are these laws? you still babbling statutes?  PERIFUCKINOD.  evidence establishes the this or that or was it that or this that the court OF the united states cannot re-examine.  dipshit

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

and by rules of common law that is a common law grand jury OF 25!

BULLSHIT do not conjoin to separate things into one.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne
Oh and if this is too difficult for you, in a common law tribunal, the jury IS the court LOL....

There is not one goddamn thing that requires a 'common law tribunal' in any of these sections of the constitution.