Power Independence Home 
Home Search search Menu menu Not logged in - Login | Register

 Moderated by: Joe Kelley
New Topic Reply Printer Friendly
Sheriffs  Rate Topic 
AuthorPost
 Posted: Tue Jan 14th, 2014 04:29 am
  PM Quote Reply
1st Post
Joe Kelley
Administrator
 

Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6398
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
It may be a good idea to find out which side anyone is on.

Sheriffs with a working conscience?

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Sat Jan 25th, 2014 07:01 pm
  PM Quote Reply
2nd Post
Doug555
Guest
 

Joined: 
Location:  
Posts: 
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
Joe Kelley wrote:
It may be a good idea to find out which side anyone is on.

Sheriffs with a working conscience?


This article raises a similar issue:
http://www.sheriffbrigadesofpenn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/National-Liberty-Alliance-Exposed.pdf

Does Sheriff Mack really reject NLA totally?

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Sat Jan 25th, 2014 11:55 pm
  PM Quote Reply
3rd Post
Joe Kelley
Administrator
 

Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6398
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
Doug,

If it pleases you, please consider my offer as answers to the questions raised in the document you have linked in this Topic on this nearly vacant Forum.

1. Where is the law that supports the NLA "Plan"?

That question is unanswerable because it is ambiguous to a point of meaning anything one minute and another opposite thing the next minute. That question is typically offered by an individual who is not seeking an answer; rather the individual is dictating a dictatorial opinion to be obeyed without question.

Suppose that the so called NLA plan is as simple as I think it is, and the suppose that there is an offer offered by each moral individual to each other moral individual to act morally in the face of ongoing crimes perpetrated by criminals who hide their crimes behind false authority.

Now suppose that the offer offered in this NLA plan is specific to a point of offering step by step actions that can be accomplished by individual volunteers who care enough to work toward the defense of the innocent victims who are currently being injured by specific criminals who are hiding their crimes behind false authority.

Now suppose that more than a few people in this country agree with the offer offered and these people follow those steps to a point at which a number of people are going to investigate and begin to challenge the specific criminals who have been discovered as being criminals because there are specific victims who have been discovered as being victims of crimes perpetrated by those specific criminals who are hiding their crimes behind false authority.

Now suppose that an ancient method of due process is reused in the form of a writ of mandamus whereby the names of the criminals are names, their crimes are named, and the victims are named, and this ancient method of due process in the form of a writ of mandamus is offered as evidence of the ongoing crime that continues so long as no one anywhere steps up and defends the victims who continue to be victimized unless someone, somewhere, will do something to defend those innocent victims from further victimization by those specific criminals who are perpetrating crimes behind false authority.

1. Where is the law that supports the NLA "Plan"?

Common sense human conscience.

The law governing defense of the weakest innocent child from the worst criminals that ever disgraced the human gene pool is the human moral conscience that still exists in each human being born with one.

If the writ of mandamus is factual, and if instead of the named criminal perpetrating the named crime upon the named innocent victim being the specific judge in that mandamus written in Greene County New York was more clearly a case of wanton plunder by a criminal mind upon a helpless innocent, such as the very discoverable child sex slave organization discovered during the Franklin Case, then no one with any working human conscience could stand one minute in the light of moral conscience claiming that a working method of defending those innocent children from those evil criminals would be in any way invalid.

Why do people with a working conscience allow such things to continue in any case anywhere on this planet Earth?

Word magic?

Because someone claims to be an authority they can get away with burning CHURCHES full of people for their exclusive entertainment; and/or monetary profit?


2.a
How are the Jurors, their families and their property going to be protected"if the Juror takes any action?

If I could face down the criminals who are currently doing their worst to helpless innocent victims I'd do it, or I'd die of shame soon enough. I can't find a way to do so on my own. Numbers of people must face down the criminals who are currently doing their worst to helpless innocent victims and one of many competitive ways that many people can do so is this so called NLA plan. Too many former victims and not enough die hard criminals means, in mathematical physical terms, a shift of power from Legalized crime by a few die hard criminals who had the power to perpetrate the worst crimes possible, from that power equation, to a power equation whereby the few remaining die hard criminals could not exist another minute openly perpetrating those specific crimes upon those specific victims. Which case is the first test case, and if it fails, which case is the first successful case? Once the first successful case is the first successful case; what happens next?


2.b
If they don't take any action, what is the point of the NLA Plan?

The reason why I tell everyone I meet in this Alliance that we must practice our intended actions until we know precisely what we are doing while we do what we will do until such time as there are many of us set to proceed as one group acting in unison at the same time in many places, is, the reason I say this is, that under those conditions there will be no violence because the criminals hiding behind false authority will have no cover, no hiding place, and they will have no victims to plunder at that point, because the power shift will be real at that point in time.

The NLA Plan, so called, of John Darash is much bolder than my version offered to anyone here in California. Will his test case succeed? If it does, then what does that mean as an answer to any challenges as to supposed authority or validity?

What happens after the first case succeeds?

What happens after the first named victim (or victims) defended successfully is in the past?

These well trained liars, or Union Lawyers, think in terms of who can lie the best, they don't think in terms of defending the innocent from those who can lie the best? Note the question mark: call that question a conspiracy theory?


3. How are the Common Law Grand Jury’s "presentments" and/or "indictments" going to be enforced?

When the goal is to defend the innocent lawfully then there is no need to resort to lies, there is no need to resort to threats of violence, and there is no need to resort to aggressive violence. If the named criminals lie, then those lies become inculpatory evidence compounding the crimes already documented. If the named criminals resort to threats of violence then the named criminals again compound the evidence proving, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the named criminal is a criminal. If the named criminal resorts to aggressive violence as a means of avoiding the accurate accounting of the crimes perpetrated by the named criminal, then again more inculpatory evidence compounds the crimes in progress.

Why does anyone ever need to be physically restrained from further criminal acts perpetrated upon innocent victims in any case any time and anywhere?
Again if the crime in question were a criminal perpetrating the crime of burning a baby alive while employed as a defender of the innocent, would any reasonable human being do nothing to stop the criminal from burning the innocent baby alive WHEN something reasonable can be done to stop the criminal from burning the innocent baby alive?

Why do human beings defend the criminals who burn babies alive when faced with reasonable challenges contending with such obvious false authority?

Word magic? Insanity?

4. What actually is the "Common Law" in Pennsylvania? In the other States? In the territories of the United States?  And in the United States of America?
Note the use of quotation marks and capital letters on "Common Law," as if the dictatorial decision is already dictated into being valid, and authorized, by the dictator who nullifies common law.

The words common law are English words. The ancient due process known as trial by jury existed before English was a language and that is why Latin and other languages are commonly used in common law, such as the use of the words writ and mandamus or writ and quo warrento.

Common law, or common human moral sense employed in EFFECTIVE defense of the innocent from harm by criminals hiding behind false authority, in Pennsylvania, is not absent, not AWOL, it is like a sleeping GIANT. The Union Criminals don't want that GIANT woken up? Don't look at human history because the step by step methods that did work may be found, and moral human beings may adapt those steps to present realities in defense of the innocent from harm by criminals who include the criminals who help HIDE the criminals behind false authority?


5. What is the lawful Common Law procedures, filings, etc.


In each successful case the procedure, filing, etc. that worked to defend the named innocent victim from further injury by the named criminal perpetrating the named crime under the color of law is the common law procedure, filings, etc. that effective defends the innocent from harm by the criminals who are being hidden by stupid people, insane people, or people with a vested interest in perpetuating the crimes hidden behind false authority?

Writ of mandamus in quo warrento? Lists of names naming the victims, naming the criminals, naming the crimes being perpetrated, naming the actual written laws being broken, naming the time of the crime, naming the place of the crime, for all to see and judge for their on benefit of their own moral conscience?


5. Why is, according John Darash, a Citizen a slave?

I can't speak for John Darash, nor would I even try to since he is more than capable of speaking for himself. My understanding of the crime in progress is such that a Birth Certificate is employed by the criminals to finance Legalized Borrowing from that human being so as to then sell that Legalized Debt in that form of a Birth Certificate, such as would be done with an Annuity, whereby bundled financial instruments are sold by those few who create this National Debt Ponzi Scheme, and the buyers of those Annuities or Fraud Notes are then Secured with a rate of Interest into their Bank Accounts from that Fraudulent Debt Note based upon that supposed Good Faith and Credit of The American People.

Look here:
National Debt Clock Real Time

Look here:
The Formation of the Ponzi Scheme

"But Hamilton wanted to go farther than debt assumption. He believed a funded national debt would assist in establishing public credit. By funding national debt, Hamilton envisioned the Congress setting aside a portion of tax revenues to pay each year's interest without an annual appropriation. Redemption of the principal would be left to the government's discretion. At the time Hamilton gave his Report on Public Credit, the national debt was $80 million. Though such a large figure shocked many Republicans who saw debt as a menace to be avoided, Hamilton perceived debt's benefits. "In countries in which the national debt is properly funded, and the object of established confidence," explained Hamilton, "it assumes most of the purposes of money." Federal stock would be issued in exchange for state and national debt certificates, with interest on the stock running about 4.5 percent. To Republicans the debt proposals were heresy. The farmers and planters of the South, who were predominantly Republican, owed enormous sums to British creditors and thus had firsthand knowledge of the misery wrought by debt. Debt, as Hamilton himself noted, must be paid or credit is ruined. High levels of taxation, Republicans prognosticated, would be necessary just to pay the interest on the perpetual debt. Believing that this tax burden would fall on the yeoman farmers and eventually rise to European levels, Republicans opposed Hamilton's debt program.

"To help pay the interest on the debt, Hamilton convinced the Congress to pass an excise on whiskey. In Federalist N. 12, Hamilton noted that because "[t]he genius of the people will ill brook the inquisitive and peremptory spirit of excise law," such taxes would be little used by the national government. In power, the Secretary of the Treasury soon changed his mind and the tax on the production of whiskey rankled Americans living on the frontier. Cash was scarce in the West and the Frontiersmen used whiskey as an item of barter."
From:
Reclaiming Revolution

Why is, according John Darash, a Citizen a slave?

Why ask John Darash when anyone can check their own Federal Income Tax Extortion Payment Record to know precisely how much slavery is their own human existence in their own case?

Why ask stupid questions? Stupid is what stupid does? Just plain ignorance? World magic?



7. What are the true holdings and results of: United States v. Williams, 504U.S.36 (1992)?

I am ignorant concerning this question; therefore unqualified to answer it with any authority or validity.


8. What makes you think that Article I, Section 2 of the Constitution of Pennsylvania allows 25 "Common Law Grand Jurors" to do anything that makes those in a Township, County, State or United States do anything or not do anything?
The goal is not to make anyone do anything in a voluntary association or free market government. When volunteers volunteer to defend the innocent there may be a criminal who may resort to lies, threats, and violence as a means of avoiding accountability. What does common moral sense suggest as a competitive, effective, adaptive, means by which defense of the innocent from criminal acts can proceed in due course that is due any innocent victims anywhere in this country?
Ask a well paid liar for the valid answer?

Discover who is the victim. Discover who is the criminal. Write that down. Proceed to the next obvious, moral, next step?


9. How in the world can any one swallow the pitch that a "Common Law Grand Jury" or "Juries" can correct or accomplish "in 30 days or less" all of the things that John Darash list on the third video presented during the "election" meeting (and on the NLA website) as "powers of the Common Law Grand Jury”?
When dictators pretend to ask questions?

What do they really intend to accomplish?
When the first defense of the first victim occurs in time and place while the defenders are employing common law grand jury due process in this country, then defense of other victims can be effective accomplished likewise.

There is only one victim currently being victimized by criminals perpetrating crimes under the color of law? When word gets around, and words travel fast now, the National Debt Crime Spree, and all that goes with it, including World War III on their Schedule, ends.

How fast?
How powerful are lies?
How powerful are accurate moral accounts of effective defenses of the innocent from harm by criminals with false badges?
I have my guesses, based upon my own studies.


It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.



















Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Sun Jan 26th, 2014 02:33 am
  PM Quote Reply
4th Post
Doug555
Guest
 

Joined: 
Location:  
Posts: 
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
Thanks Joe... very insightful and encouraging!

It appears that others of conscience are taking a stand to protect the real genocide of some children of our Canadian brethren. See link below:

http://itccs.org/what-is-the-international-common-law-court-of-justice/

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Sun Jan 26th, 2014 02:29 pm
  PM Quote Reply
5th Post
Joe Kelley
Administrator
 

Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6398
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
Here is a direct link to the Youtube video:

Common Law example?

I am just now viewing that information. Thanks.

I stopped the video presentation when finding very contentious words spoken.

Canada cannot be found guilty of a criminal act upon a victim or victims.

Canada is a Legal Fiction.

The Church cannot be guilty of any thought or action.

The Church is, at most, a list of names of people who think and act in ways that are common to each other and thereby those people having those common thoughts and actions constitute their belonging in that group called a Church.

I've read and heard information on this ITCCS group and I like the idea; but there is a very serious error infecting many human brains (in my opinion) whereby THINGS are held responsible for the individual thoughts and actions of individual human beings.

When I read, or hear, words that sound like someone holding a THING accountable for the actions of individual people, then I hold the speaker, or the writer, accountable for those thoughts and actions.

Does that make sense?

Doug,

The concept of moral people defending the innocent is self explanatory.

The concept of holding "Church and State" responsible/accountable is a falsehood that ought to be refuted well enough to no longer be infecting the thinking of moral people.

I cannot get past this measure of that information while I listened to that YouTube video. I'd much rather offer thoughts on why I think that this particular falsehood is so damaging to human life on this planet.

To me it is that type of thinking that convinces victims of the need to enforce payments of earnings into an INVOLUNTARY FUND of enforced collections of earnings, or PURCHASING POWER, which is then a FUND used by people to keep filling up that FUND.

I may be wrong, and I'd like to know that I am wrong, but my guess is that the speaker in the YouTube video, if asked, would answer the following question with the following answer:

Question:
Are involuntary taxes necessary in order to protect the innocent from harm by criminals?

Answer:
Yes.

That type of thinking (a yes answer to that question) goes hand in hand with blaming THINGS for the actions of people - in my limited experience.

That type of thinking is expressed well in the introduction to my copy of The Prince by Nicoli Machiavelli:

Machiavelli's outlook was darkly pessimistic; the one element of St Augustine's thought which he wholeheartedly endorsed was the idea of original sin. As he puts it starkly in the same chapter 18 of The Prince, men are bad. This means that to deal with them as if they were good, honourable or trustworthy is to court disaster. In the Discourses (I,3) the point is repeated: 'all men are bad and are ever ready to display their malignity'. This must be the initial premise of those who play to found a republic. The business of politics is to try and salvage something positive from this unpromising conglomerate, and the aim of the state is to check those anarchic drives which are a constant threat to the common good. This is where The Prince fits into the spectrum of his wider thought: while a republic may be his preferred form of social organization, the crucial business of founding or restoring a state can only be performed by one exceptional individual.
In other words the thinking, as far as I can tell, goes like this:

We (meaning me) must force them (meaning everyone but me) to pay us (meaning me) so as to keep them (meaning me) from perpetrating horrible violence upon the innocent.

Blame the innocent for being innocent as the person doing the blaming is willfully doing horrible things to the innocent, because there must be a method by which the criminal explains his or her actions to his or her self.

These are derivatives of Might makes Right doctrine, which are falsehoods, and they are obvious falsehoods as the thoughts driving the actions prove out to be thoughts that contradict actions.

Such as: Torture and murdering the children so as to save the children from torture and murder.

Pay your involuntary taxes so as to defend the payee from abject slavery?

Again, I could be wrong, as the person speaking may not answer the question about the supposed necessity of Involuntary Taxes with a yes answer.

Why am I so sure that the answer would be yes from that speaker?

I can as you, Doug, the same question. I can ask you and I can expect no answer.

I can hope, and I can even trust, that you will answer, and that you will answer honestly.

Question:
Are involuntary taxes necessary in order to protect the innocent from harm by criminals?

 


 

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Mon Jan 27th, 2014 12:03 am
  PM Quote Reply
6th Post
Doug555
Guest
 

Joined: 
Location:  
Posts: 
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
why be so specific in such a question?

Why not ask if force is ever justified?

OR

Is violation of FREE WILL CHOICE ever justified?

I don't believe it is... because the Creator is enfocrcing free will choice which is a prerequisite to building character.

But does, or will, the Creator ever use force?

IMO, NOT to remove choice, but to impose penalties that are incurred from wrong choices freely made.

Rev 9:20-21 shows the consequences of wrong choices being enforced, as a matter of eternal principles, much like the law of gravity being enforced if you jump off a building.

Taking away FREE CHOICE of one, in order to give it to another does NOT make sense.

Back To Top PM Quote Reply

 Posted: Mon Jan 27th, 2014 04:06 pm
  PM Quote Reply
7th Post
Joe Kelley
Administrator
 

Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6398
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
Doug offers challenging questions and I may find a competitive answer or two.

why be so specific in such a question?
I am seeking a specific answer that can compete with the answer I have so far found.

Why not ask if force is ever justified?
Because I did not find that question; it is a good one.

But does, or will, the Creator ever use force?
A child may choose to jump out in front of a car; a parent may choose not to stop the child, and I may choose to grab that child before that child is crushed by that car, and I may do so despite the risk of then being found guilty of some nebulous crime.

Taking away FREE CHOICE of one, in order to give it to another does NOT make sense.
Having no specific case to exemplify this case leaves out specific information that may help make sense of it?

Back To Top PM Quote Reply  

 Posted: Sat Feb 8th, 2014 06:42 pm
  PM Quote Reply
8th Post
Joe Kelley
Administrator
 

Joined: Mon Nov 21st, 2005
Location: California USA
Posts: 6398
Status: 
Offline
Mana: 
Document:

Resolution


Pursuant to the powers and duties bestowed upon us by our citizens, the undersigned do hereby resolve that any Federal officer, agent, or employee, regardless of supposed congressional authorization, is required to obey and observe limitations consisting of the enumerated powers as detailed within Article 1 Section 8 of the U S Constitution and the Bill Of Rights. The people of these united States are, and have a right to be, free and independent, and these rights are derived from the “Law of Nature and nature’s God.” As such, they must be free from infringements on the right to keep and bear arms, unreasonable searches and seizures, capricious detainments and every other natural right whether enumerated or not, pursuant to the 9th amendment.
We further reaffirm that “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” (10th amendment)
Furthermore, we maintain that no agency established by the U S Congress can develop its own policies or regulations which supersede the Bill of Rights or the Constitution, nor does the executive branch have the power to make law, overturn law or set aside law.
Therefore, in order to protect the American people, BE IT RESOLVED THAT,
The following abuses will not be allowed or tolerated:
1) Registration of personal firearms under any circumstances.
2) Confiscation of firearms without probable cause, due process, and constitutionally compliant warrants issued by a local or state jurisdiction.
3) Audits or searches of a citizen’s personal affairs or finances without probable cause, and due process, and constitutionally compliant warrants issued by a local or state jurisdiction.
4) Inspections of person or property without probable cause and constitutionally compliant warrants as required by the 4th Amendment and issued by a local or state jurisdiction.
5) The detainment or search of citizens without probable cause and proper due process compliance, or the informed consent of the citizen.
6) Arrests with continued incarcerations without charges and complete due process, including, but not limited to public and speedy jury trials, in a court of state or local jurisdiction.
7) Domestic utilization of our nation’s military or federal agencies operating under power granted under the laws of war against American citizens.
8) Arrest of citizens or seizure of persons or property without first notifying and obtaining the express consent of the local sheriff.
AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,
that the undersigned Sheriffs, Peace Officers, and other Public Servants, do hereby denounce any acts or agencies which promote the aforementioned practices. All actions by the Federal Government and its agents will conform strictly and implicitly with the principles expressed within the United States Constitution, Declaration of Independence, and the Bill of Rights.
There is no greater obligation or responsibility of any government officer than to protect the rights of the people. Thus, any conduct contrary to the United States Constitution, Declaration of Independence, or the Bill of Rights will be dealt with as criminal activity.


Back To Top PM Quote Reply

Current time is 02:05 pm  
Power Independence > National Liberty Alliance > NLA General Discussion > Sheriffs Top




UltraBB 1.17 Copyright © 2007-2008 Data 1 Systems