ECCLESIASTIC COMMONWEALTH COMMUNITY
ECCLESIASTIC COMMONWEALTH COMMUNITY
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Members | Search | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 The Roman World
 The Common Law
 "saving to suitors" clause of 1789
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly
Previous Page | Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 10

Lewish
Advanced Member

uSA
496 Posts

Posted - 18 Jan 2004 :  18:18:40  Show Profile
Alisa,

Do you deny that there is a differnce between the common law united States of America and the British corporation of 1867 The United States of America?

Would you have us accept the above, just because it was on some website?

Just wondering,

Lewis
Go to Top of Page

Robert-James
Advanced Member

uSA
353 Posts

Posted - 18 Jan 2004 :  19:13:20  Show Profile
Paul mentioned citizenship being in the Commonwealth of Israel. Jefferson's quotable statement on hearing George Washington passed away, "Israel has lost a good man today". "who is so blind as My servants"? {Isaiah, 700's b.c.} The blindness is still with us, but for the elect's sake...
Paul wrote a fantastic epistle to the Roman's. Hello? He was addressing his message to the lost sheep of the House of Israel, living within Rome. {gentiles= nations...people...specifically ammi-My People}
Some of us are sending His message to the lost sheep of the Commonwealth of Israel, living in revived Rome...UNITED STATES.
I surmise that American's can lose their birthright by accepting the benefits of citizenship within the corporate {dead body} of the U.S.
Easu sought repentance carefully, with tears, but to no avail!
Because of the blood covenant by Yahushuah, who Stands surety, {surety even in the legal sense} we can still enter into the covenants provided for us by Abraham, Issac, and Yacob/Israel. {the promised Land, is the entire earth}[and the Promised Land, is also a state of Being}.
The Constitution was man's best attempt at self-government.
Father's Plan is still a work in progress.
Ben Franklin used the phrase, "united States of North America" Canadians are my racial kinsmen...by and large.
am-eriy-can...three ancient hebrew words.
Go to Top of Page

David Merrill
Advanced Member

USA
1147 Posts

Posted - 26 Jan 2004 :  09:05:02  Show Profile
[Dear Ecclesia; Lewish requested some replacement images that were missing so I gather people are still here reading and learning. That is good. I have other projects and suitors I am helping one-on-one besides. So this project is complete. I have covered all the bases and to elaborate would in my opinion give you the impression this is really complicated and it is not.

I had written a lengthy treatise on Genesis 49:10 and the “scepter” in the history of banking. Also the order in which to read the verses in the Worthless Shepard prophecy of Zechariah 10-13 that makes it more understandable to the Western mind. But Livefree represents a certain amount of you who cling to government conspiracy to be at blame. It becomes offensive to the point of injury, the truth. So I deleted that back when I stopped reading these Replys.

But in writing this ‘reminder’ to the suitors who already have remedy cured through default judgment it occurred that it may be useful to you who wish to understand here in the Ecclesia forum.

Some of these suitors are asking me if it is ok to comment by Reply here in Ecclesia.org. I pretty well just laugh and wonder why they are asking me. So do not be surprised if you hear some first hand testimony soon.]


Dear Suitors;

There have been incidents where some of you have inadvertently or intentionally set hearings within the forum of banking practice. The tenet below is of antiquity and always applies, to your court as well as anyone's:

"Every direction of a court or judge, made or entered in writing, and not included in a judgment, is denominated an order. An application for an order is a motion."

This is where your absolute right of avoidance arises; from the mail in the U.S. Courthouse "last known address" (F.R.C.P.) - expeditious process being motions before your court of competent jurisdiction that you bring into your court from the mailbox. You may open it and refuse to grant the motion R4C timely. Since the State and United States are bereft of authority (bankrupt) the authority for the de facto forum to proceed must be coming from somewhere, right? It is coming from your court and social compact you sign by moving "their" court. It being "their" court is an illusion. Government does not exist without a Grantor, you.

Of three (recent) UCC Redemption suitors. Meaning the traditional motions were failing to protect their homes, one attended an FED (Forcible Entry and Detainer) hearing scheduled by the de facto forum and was easily convinced that the FED was for real. It is beyond me that he suspected the hearing would have turned out any other way. So why attend? Let the plaintiffs inform you in writing so you can R4C! Another suitor who was (is) issuing UCC Redemption process had so many people coming and going with bright ideas and great free advice that they convinced him to file for an injunctive relief hearing in the de facto forum. The attorneys for the finance company of course used the hearing to notify of the "move out" date set with the sheriff. So the suitor has packed and moved out. Nothing in writing to refuse for cause. This case is disturbing to me. The CIVIL COVER SHEET in the Article III forum demanded for relief $$ "injunctive relief" and that case was won, settled res judicata!

In these UCC cases where for whatever reason the suitor completely refuses to enter motions in other courts and even to entertain motions in the court of competent jurisdiction beyond refusal for cause, things are fine. Once the attorneys realize they are throwing away postage and process server fees, they let up. Some of you have noticed an annoying amount of certified mail from the State or Federal DOR (IRS). This is proof what I am saying is true! These collection agencies for the Bank and Fund are simply more persistent. They remind me of a tennis instructor with a bucket of tennis balls, serving ball after ball, hoping for you to miss one.

A suitor (and spouse) spoke to me on the phone a couple days ago. The State has sent its "already been tried" letter explaining that these Patriot/Tax Protester arguments had already been defeated in the "courts". I thought that a little strange because the right of avoidance is sound and beyond dispute. Then almost so I missed it, I was informed that an offer to pay the debt had been thrown in with the last refusal for cause. I caught it though. Make no mistake, this "conditional acceptance for value" is a motion in the de facto forum!! If you are going to be a court of competent jurisdiction, quit nodding your tribute to bankruptcy. That is what the State was saying, "This "acceptance for value" process has already been proven bogus time after time." The State was not addressing the refusal for cause in the same envelope.

Regards,

David Merrill.

Go to Top of Page

Robert-James
Advanced Member

uSA
353 Posts

Posted - 28 Jan 2004 :  00:41:46  Show Profile
Greetings All,
"When a king enters into commercial activity, his Status descends to the same level as that of the merchants". Queen Elizabeth the 1st. financed a ship, whose cargo was negro slaves. The ships name; JESUS. Since Peter received the revelation 1900+ years ago that 'we' are a nation of kings and priests, now, how does a king loose his Status of being king? By bowing to mammon. So simple.
The Sermon on the Mountain Top {Zion} is the construction of the Kingdom principals. And so few are willing to enter.
I enjoy reading history and would care to pass on that in the Ebla tablets, written in paleo-hebrew, about 800 years before Moses, the word-name DaViD was in use. The name means; Captain. Strongs concordance has DaViD as meaning, beloved. How about, beloved Captain...DaViD's son. Nathan, the prophet of YHWH, pronounced a name upon DaViD's son, and it was not Sol-Om-On. Yahushuah laid no claim to being DaViD's son. So where is "He". ahhh, when Shiloh comes. [sorry about the V confusional letter].
Beluah land, Christians have spoken and sung about for centuries. Most all scripture is about a National salvation. Is a suitor one who is in Love, and wants to marry?
Matthew 7:6; Give not that which is set-apart unto the dogs, neither cast your pearls {interruptations-old concordance} before swine, lest they trample them under THEIR feet, and turn again and rend You. {hear Yahushuah, calls many dogs and pigs}.
The Beauty...verse seven; "ask, and it will be given You, seek, and ye shall find; knock, and 'it' shall be opened unto You"
By the Way, the STRAWMAN is a juristic personality, i.e. a FICTION, which man's Courts can talk with. Brother DaViD is showing a {W}ay in which even the dead shall hear His Voice.
Praise Him who breathed His breath into a lump of clay {ADaM} and made 'him' a living being. Praise Him with all thy being, in all thy ways...and He will direct thy paths.
Go to Top of Page

DanielJacob
Advanced Member

USA
138 Posts

Posted - 28 Jan 2004 :  09:36:51  Show Profile  Visit DanielJacob's Homepage
Amen, brother.

Go to Top of Page

Owenbrittont
Advanced Member

USA
86 Posts

Posted - 03 Feb 2004 :  13:18:40  Show Profile
I just joined in on this and am slightly overwhelmed. I'm coming in with background education on the Strawman & UCC.. and just figured out through my own studies that any grievance goes to the U.S. Dsitrict Court.
I guess my main question... what (In short) are your main steps in establishing the record in Fed Dis ??
Go to Top of Page

DanielJacob
Advanced Member

USA
138 Posts

Posted - 03 Feb 2004 :  14:13:39  Show Profile  Visit DanielJacob's Homepage
Greetings Owen

Here is my understanding of the process.

1. Prepare the countersuit naming the appropriate foreign agent as respondent and cause for refusal. Refused for cause without dishonor and without recourse to me because your presentment has no Warrant in Law and is not Judicial in Nature, or any other reason that you want to refuse it.

2. Take the process to the county clerk and record the process there.

3. Take the process to the district court and pay $150 to open a suit (I wonder if you could do this forma paupas since there is no money?). You will have to fill in the Civil process cover sheet as indicated by David in his postings.

4. After the twenty days if you have not received an answer, you prepare the default and record it with the county clerk and then take that to the post office, along with the clerk instructions and send to clerk of court.

5. Case is now Res Judicata.

That is my understanding.

God bless...
Go to Top of Page

Owenbrittont
Advanced Member

USA
86 Posts

Posted - 03 Feb 2004 :  21:33:19  Show Profile
Thanks Daniel,
I was rereading a portion and I'm not sure I understand this version of the name game. When you use the family name you might as well be using ALL CAPS. Maybe someone could shed some light ???
I read James Hazel Of Cabbages and Kings.. which brought out the diffferences in names.
The given names are praenomens the family name is a cognomen (under International Law only the family name is corporate not your entire name.
A name fully capitalized is then called an agnomen
Go to Top of Page

Owenbrittont
Advanced Member

USA
86 Posts

Posted - 03 Feb 2004 :  21:37:06  Show Profile
Why are we posting it in the county court ??? I thought everything went through the Federal District Court ???
Go to Top of Page

DanielJacob
Advanced Member

USA
138 Posts

Posted - 03 Feb 2004 :  23:28:01  Show Profile  Visit DanielJacob's Homepage
Owen,

The county clerk (recorder) is your court as guaranteed by the Magna Carta. This is the superior court, the Christ's court. Concerning the name issue, you have a given or Christian name (John, James, Thomas) sometimes with a middle name. In the process it goes something like this: Comes now James Daniel of the Mason family.

Also concerning the District Court. I have been doing some additional study and research on the subject. It seems that there a distinct difference between the district court of the United States and the United States District Court. See Balzac v. People of Porto Rico. Also read 18 U.S.C 1964(a) and 1964(c).

God bless..

Edited by - DanielJacob on 03 Feb 2004 23:44:04
Go to Top of Page

Owenbrittont
Advanced Member

USA
86 Posts

Posted - 04 Feb 2004 :  13:00:26  Show Profile
This is what I have by my studies. Any input appreciated.

Federal District Court Prothonatory
File Security Agreement

Federal District Court Prothonatory
File Complaint

Defendant
Notice to defendant
Complaint and intent of Attachment (Rule 4)
File Affidavit defendant informed of action (Rule C)
Must rebut within 20 days (rebut to who ??? me or court)
Return Receipt

Federal District Court Prothonatory
Praecipe - 10 days to cure default
Motion with proposed order (Entry of Default U.S. D.C. Sec XII)
Memorandum of Law… why they should execute
Order to Court
Verification
Proof of Service to Defendant
(Enclose original copy of info to defendant)
Writ of Execution Appendix H

Local Court
Post in local court
Go to Top of Page

Owenbrittont
Advanced Member

USA
86 Posts

Posted - 04 Feb 2004 :  14:45:59  Show Profile
Reading this again about the third time.... What is the .90 at the post office about.... What stamps are you keeping ???
Go to Top of Page

DanielJacob
Advanced Member

USA
138 Posts

Posted - 04 Feb 2004 :  16:52:01  Show Profile  Visit DanielJacob's Homepage
Owen,

The 90 cents is for certification of mailing. You ask the postal clerk to certify the mailing. He/she uses a round red date stamp on the process. This is for all intent and purposes your court clerk.

Are you familiar with the non-statutory abatement process? If not I would suggest that you read it on the Christ's Lawful Assembly that is linked on the home page here. David has modified that process somewhat to include the district court as a repository for your process. I am still not certain that David has this process down air tight. I have read that the district court in Denver views this process as frivolous, but then again it doesn't surprise me that they do. The ultimate goal of course is to get them to recognize the process as valid under their rules. Even though they make up the rules that doesn't necessarily mean that they are going to play by them.

I'm still trying to digest your previous post.
Go to Top of Page

Owenbrittont
Advanced Member

USA
86 Posts

Posted - 04 Feb 2004 :  18:28:00  Show Profile
Thanks,
I have several Editions of the Book of Hundreds and am somewhat familiar with the non statutory abatement.
The round red stamp is the same stamp that they use for registered or certified mail slips ??? Right ????
The question is what are the stamping ???
Go to Top of Page

True North
Advanced Member

USA
163 Posts

Posted - 04 Feb 2004 :  19:53:35  Show Profile
quote:
The question is what are the stamping
You are remembering that a presentment was mailed to you ... ? RFC in red and the stamp as proof of refusal is the beginning of process.
quote:
This is what I have by my studies. Any input appreciated
I repeat; RFC in red and the stamp is the beginning of process. Using process for presentments. Any other dealing requires that you are the state ... competent in common law ...

TN
Go to Top of Page

Robert-James
Advanced Member

uSA
353 Posts

Posted - 04 Feb 2004 :  20:54:54  Show Profile
Greetings All.
The Crown still has a red fiber in all its stationary, and, a red thread in all its ropes within in Regal navy. The Zarah Line of Yehudah. They await the true inheritors of the promise, and until then, their Septure rules. Now, question is, whose foot is the thread tied upon? No LEGAL FICTIONS need apply.
Go to Top of Page

Lewish
Advanced Member

uSA
496 Posts

Posted - 04 Feb 2004 :  21:16:47  Show Profile
Hello fellow studies,

I have posted the First Judiciary Act on the yahoo site at this address:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/SavingstoSuitor/files/Lewis/The Judiciary Act of 1789.doc

There is some very vital information in it. The whole idea of Refuse For Cause is found in this document. This also where Saving to Suitor is found.

Regards,

Lewis
Go to Top of Page

Robert-James
Advanced Member

uSA
353 Posts

Posted - 04 Feb 2004 :  21:47:28  Show Profile
And this will prevail,[the above mentioned] provided One has Standing at law. i.e. no ss#, among a few other benefits. I quit the IRS in 1983, and all is well. I also, never borrowed at usury since 1983. "Yah bless America, through the night...with Thy Light, from above". [through the NIGHT]. Well, it is Daybreak folks, get with the program!
Go to Top of Page

BatKol
Advanced Member

USA
735 Posts

Posted - 04 Feb 2004 :  22:19:09  Show Profile
RObert-James said: And this will prevail,[the above mentioned] provided One has Standing at law. i.e. no ss#, among a few other benefits.

BatKol: How is using the USUROUS FRN in the right hand for all or our CONSUMER purchases and upon our forehead for measuring our labour OK?
The FRN is backed up by CONTRACTS such as SS, IRS, etc. It's value is totally set by the CORP and is not even close to equal weights and measures. We trade on the souls of men and make use of the CONSUMER UNIT lifestyle when we use FRNS. I am guilty of this. Chances are... so are most of us. Many don't like the illusion of ALL CAPS but have no problem with the illusion of USURY TICKETS.. Why? Mental justiciations.. self-delusion... but most of all convenience.
Go to Top of Page

Servant of All
Regular Member

Israel
41 Posts

Posted - 06 Feb 2004 :  01:41:30  Show Profile
Batkol,

I agree with you about FRN liability. What would be your best solution to "usury ticket" use?

Reconcile with your Creator. May God Almighty bless you richly as you trust and obey Him more today!

In His service,

Philip the least
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 10 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page | Next Page
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
ECCLESIASTIC COMMONWEALTH COMMUNITY © 2003-2020 Ecclesiastic Commonwealth Community Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.2 seconds. Snitz Forums 2000