Sunday, September 16, 2012

[Victims of Court Corruption] A Problem in the Wording of the J.A.I.L. Initiative - Brian Cregger

A Problem in the
Wording of the J.A.I.L. Initiative

Dear Brian Cregger:

Greetings, dear one. First I wish to commend you for your praise of the wording of the J.A.I.L. Initiative. I sense in your email a spirit of sincerity.

Now with that said, I wish to address your concern regarding the phrase, "citizen of the United States." As you have stated in you suspection, yes, you are very correct, I am well aware of your argument and concern
. You are not alone in this view.

Many patriots, legal minds, and attorneys have poured over this wording over many years. Please be advised that it was our desire to correctly phrase the wording, where appropriate, after that of our Founding Fathers in their wording of the Constitution.

In Article I of the Constitution there is stated an age qualification for both Representatives and Senators. The particular phrase in question here is a quote taken directly from Article I, Sec. 3, Clause 3, to wit, "No person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the age of thirty years, and have been nine years a citizen of the United States..." These words were penned in our Constitution in 1790. We found that this exact wording, as used by our Founding Fathers, could hardly be found objectionable, especially so since our entire Union of States are based thereupon these very words with all states ratifying this language.

What we did is merely adopt the specified qualifications over to the electorate, i.e., the People. After all, all Representatives and Senators must come from among our ranks. If "We the People of the United States," the very ones who ordained the Constitution, are not qualified to be our own Representatives, then there would be absolutely no way we could have a government of the People.

I would like to point out to you that if JAIL4Judges were passed within any of the fifty states, then an "Institutioner of Government," as you prefer the entity to be called, could challenge the language, and make your argument in the name of whatsoever title you chose to be recognized as.

We feed very comfortable with the existing wording, but acknowledge the right for anyone to seek amendment of the Constitution, including the wording of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Again, thank you for your praise of our Initiative.

Ron Branson

*   *   *

corpushasoverthrowngov wrote:


I woud first like to commend you on your tireless efforts for Justice.  I don't know you but the work you are doing seems to be in line with the efforts I have been doing in my own way regarding the systemic corruption from the failing American Government.  I simply want to point out one distinct problem I see in the language of your proposed constituional amendment.  The words " and have been nine years a citizen of the United States" present an irreconsible problem for me. 

I am sure a man of your efforts is aware of the arguments that surround the US Citizen vs US citizen vs Citizen of one of the several States.  I am not going to get into that here but I know there is a lot of confusion around this subject but I do want to address the problems with the words in your absolutely beautifully constructed and wise amendment that I fully support with the exception of those identified words. 

The distinction that I want to point out is that in its most proper term Citizen or citizen is a legal capacity of a man or woman employed by a state/State/Federal Government with the boundment of Constitutional Oath contract and stabds under applicable code to their capacity as a Citizen.  In the founding of the US it was well known the difference between a Citizen and a Commoner. 

A Citizen was one who was under the active capacity of the Government where a Commoner was a Sovereign who was fully liable for their own actions and not under contract as a Citizen but existed only as a full liability man who's only duties in party to the Organic Laws of the United States is to institute government to secure the rights of life liberty and the pursuit of happiness and to alter or abolish government that becomes destructive to the end of securing these rights. 

In the most accurate terms the citizen of the United States was not applied to commoners until it was unlawfully placed into the US Constitution as the 14th amendment.  Upon proper historical review of the record the 14th amendment was ratified only through means of corrupt men using coercion and extortion to make everyone under constant capacity of employment to the United States.  This is THE moment that we lost our freedom as the full liability man or woman because where we had no capacity before because we stood fully liability to face an accuser with a valid cause of action under common law for any court action.  After the 14th amendment we then and now became under capacity of a Citizen/citizen with code meant for employees of government now being applied to the people. 

This was THE failure and still is.  In the case of the Jury, technically when reviewing the proper historical and lawful role of a citizen, a member of the Jury would not be under the capacity of a Jury until actually under oath and on the Jury.  The Jury is made up of Men and Women through selection of relevant people not of Relevant citizens.  If you make a Jury that has to have been Citizens for nine years then under the intent and understanding of what a citizen actually is that person would have to have been employed to the Constitutional Contractual Oath for nine years as a government employee of the People. 

A better way to put it would be "and understand the Rule of the Natural Common Law application as an institutioner of Government".  This would properly severe the need for it to be an employee of the government and source it is only as the people.  I would also argue that it should probably explicit prohibit men and women employed by government altogether in order to maintain is true independence and supreme power of the People.  It should probably also make sure that government issued identity is not required.

There is one other most serious implication that tells me this has been overlooked.  I noticed you have video links posted on to videos regarding the institutionalized kidnapping of the children in this country  In one video they pointed out how the kid is like a pot of money for the bureaucrats who get Federal Money from taking children. 

First of all we don't use money we use currency and this currency is based on the future profit earning potential of the birth certificate of the "citizen of the United States".  In fact, the citizen of the United States is the capacity that has given up their sovereignty and traded it for citizenship through the registry of the birth.  The government sends the birth certificate to the IMF who then creates the corporate persons identity and calculates the future profit earning potential of the person, now made into a citizen, which is the projected tax revenues they will pay to the IRS over their lifetimes. 

This is also the point at which we Sovereign men and women become debt slaves through the State Identity.  The bankers have already stated their plan to use identification as the means in which they will implement their control over the individual.  They are building their own database and independent identity networks so that the tyrannical brainwashed cops will source the identification and criminal information from the bankers records of the "citizen of the United States". 

This will give the bankers the power to use brainwashed psychopaths reading a computer screen of identity sourced from their database to systematically cull the population of undesirables.  Identity is the very source of the battle and we must end their ability to access our private information.   We the People with Sovereign authority instituted government to secure every man's and woman's rights within our jurisdictional borders and mandated that we have privacy not for citizen's but for We the People.  Citizen's are the one's in duty to serve us under these contractual terms and Men and Women are the owners of that capacity and therefore owner of the time that the citizen gets paid for. 

Privacy of the identity is exactly what impedes the banker's agenda for control and the identity is sourced from all persons born in United States and made citizens of the United States.  If you make your amendment as it stands it will deepen our problem associated with this primary source of confusion.  I sincerely recommend you thoroughly reevaluate your thinking on that particular line and keep in mind that those who seek to destroy seek to use our identity as their means of dominance.  If they own our identity and source all data associated with that ID then they will make dissenters wanted for any crime the choose because it will simply be a database entry. 

This is why I believe judicial council watcher is failing also.  He does not realize that identity and database is the key as to why California is working to implement new software and purge the systems of those who are smart and good enough to figure out what they are doing.  JCW doesn't realize this either but if he knew the history and their own words he would see clearly why this is all happening.

Brian Cregger
La Jolla CA


Post a Comment

<< Home