A message to those who fought our perspective for years and after carefully studying it for decades, came to agree with the perspective on this website
US:
It’s kind of sad, you know: Now that we are 100% convergence, there is nothing left to debate!
Debate and Discovery, FTSIG
https://ftsig.org/category/digging-deeper/debate-and-discovery
It’s also sad that our mind wasn’t changed about anything substantial all that time (15 years) either.
But thanks to you, we do have a much more informed audience and tools to bring them up to speed and to the point you are now.
So it was all worth the effort, my friend. You taught us how to teach people just like you.
THEM:
Time to spread the word. Unfortunately, because of 26 U.S.C. § 7421 and 28 U.S.C. § 2201, we literally cannot litigate anything—even a bank’s CIP.
US:
We can’t litigate under statutes, but common law still applies.
Trespass and trover common law actions limit what they can do.
THEM:
False reporting will continue….
I do want to learn how to litigate in that way.
US:
Now do you understand why I have always said that:
- Their laws ONLY protect them and never you.
- When you fight with their rules, you will always lose.
- The common law and the Bill of Rights are all you need.
- They are a mafia, because that’s what mafias do: Protect themselves and never you. You have to bribe them to leave you alone with “taxes”, but they never protect you from anyone ELSE or anyone PRIVATE.
Your Irresponsible, Lawless, Anarchist Beast Government, Form #05.054
https://sedm.org/Forms/05-MemLaw/YourIrresponsibleLawlessGov.pdf
You had to make a huge round trip over decades to fully appreciate the wisdom of the above. That round trip would have been much shorter if you had paid much closer attention to what was on our site, unfortunately. You fought us all the way, and you didn’t need to fight because we were precisely on target. And we were frustrated and peevish at times and bruised your ego occasionally during debates mainly because we KNEW you were wasting your time because you didn’t understand a much bigger picture we were trying to describe, one bite of the elephant at a time.
But being right wasn’t EVER our object. LEARNING and teaching and empowering others was our object.
“Would you rather be HAPPY? Or would you rather be RIGHT?. You can’t be both.”
[SEDM]
There is a whole field based on this concept: Apologetics. It depends on being a good “devil’s advocate”. And you’re the BEST at it. All glory be to the Lord and not either of us for the output of that growing process.
Nevertheless, our readers are blessed by the resources produced during your fight so it wasn’t in vain.
“Problems are just opportunities in work clothes.”
[SEDM]“Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God and keep His commandments, For this is man’s all.”
[Ecc. 12:13, Bible, NKJV]
What part of “ALL” do dispensational christian anarchists NOT understand?
Charismatic Confusion, Form #17.106
https://sedm.org/Forms/17-Theology/CharismaticConfusion.pdf
THEM:
Are you aware of any litigation under common law with a published result after 1937?
US:
The Bill of Rights IS the national common law:
“It would be a very curious and unsatisfactory result, if, in construing a provision of constitutional law, always understood to have been adopted for protection and security to the rights of the individual as against the government, and which has received the commendation of jurists, statesmen, and commentators, as placing the just principles of the common law on that subject beyond the power of ordinary legislation to change or control them, it shall be held that, if the government refrains from the absolute conversion of real property to the uses of the public, it can destroy its value entirely, can inflict irreparable and permanent injury to any extent, can, in effect, subject it to total destruction without making any compensation, because, in the narrowest sense of the word, it is not taken for the public use. Such a construction would pervert the constitutional provision into a restriction on the rights of the citizen, as those rights stood at the common law, instead of the government, and make it an authority for invasion of private right under the pretext of the public good, which had no warrant in the laws or practices of our ancestors.”
[Munn v. Illinois, 94 U.S. 113, 144 (1877);
SOURCE: https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6419197193322400931]
Since the Bill of Rights is litigated to this day, then the common law still prevails. There are only TWO approaches to the Bill of Rights:
1. Proprietorial power
The rights documented in the Bill of Rights are absolute and government needs your consent.
2. Sovereign power
The Bill of Rights is whatever is LEFT OVER AFTER the government takes WHATEVER THE HELL IT WANTS. Thus, it is an EQUITABLE rather than ABSOLUTE or PRIVATE right. In this case, you are a slave and state property. In that case GOVERNMENT becomes a “sovereign citizen” literally and GOD theologically. See:
2.1. What is a “Slave”?, SEDM
https://sedm.org/what-is-a-slave
2.2. Government Corruption Opposition Movement (aka Sovereign Citizen Movement in government circles), Form #08.033-calls GOVERNMENT the real “sovereign citizen”
https://sedm.org/Forms/08-PolicyDocs/SovereignCitizenMovement.pdf
2.3. Socialism: The New American Civil Religion, Form #05.016
https://sedm.org/Forms/05-MemLaw/SocialismCivilReligion.pdf
US:
Why 1937?
THEM:
That’s when they went to the civil system.
US:
1.Congress CANNOT by legislation, repeal the common law. Its in the constitution.
2. They can’t impair the Bill of Rights through legislation. All legislation is subordinate to the constitution/Bill of Rights.
“Congress cannot by any definition it may adopt conclude the matter, since it cannot by legislation alter the Constitution, from which alone it derives its power to legislate, and within whose limitations alone that power can be lawfully exercised.”
[Eisner v. Macomber, 252 U.S. 189, 206 (1920); SOURCE: https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6666969430777270424]
The implication of the above is that Congress can’t define terms or meaning of the constitution through legislation. The creation cannot be greater than its Creator, the Sovereign People.
Court rules only apply to the statutory system. Common law can’t be regulated. See:
Rebutted False Arguments About the Common Law, Form #08.025
https://sedm.org/Forms/08-PolicyDocs/RebuttedFalseArgumentsAboutCommonLaw.pdf
The most courts or the covetous legal system can try to do is merely try to IGNORE the common law, but they do so in defiance of the Constitution. Here’s an example of attempts to do that:
Microsoft Copilot: Judicial conspiracy to censor or interfere with common law/private/foreign rights, FTSIG
https://ftsig.org/microsoft-copilot-judicial-conspiracy-to-censor-or-interfere-with-common-law-private-foreign-rights/