[rentiap]

(Quote)Hi Group -

Several members of my group have asked me to define and post my
understanding of the term, "political jurisdiction", which I have
done herein below. This explanation is based on an application of
the term "political jurisdiction" as applied to and in the United
States and might have some modification if applied in other countries
but the fundamental basis would still be the same.

Simply put, "political jurisdiction" is the authority attained and
exercised by a fictitious political entity (government), over those
persons who have knowingly, willingly and intentionally, being fully
informed of the consequences thereof, freely volunteered themselves
to be subject to the jurisdiction thereof. (14th Amd., Sect. 1), "All
persons born ... in the United States, and subject to the
jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States...", and,
having so volunteered, are to (14th Amd., Sect. 4), "SHUT UP and PAY
UP!!" - slightly paraphrased but intent not misconstrued nor
misstated).

In more detail, "political jurisdiction" is similar to personal
jurisdiction in regard to a fictitious person (e.g., U.S. citizen),
except that in the case of a fictitious person, a personal
jurisdictional challenge merely challenges the jurisdiction of the
fictitious political entity over the fictitious person in that
particular situation, while at the same time recognizing generally,
the political jurisdiction of the political fiction over the
fictitious person. A fictitious person can only challenge personal
jurisdiction of the fictitious political entity based on the rules of
the fictitious political entity.

A political jurisdictional challenge is similar to a personal
jurisdictional challenge except that political jurisdiction bases the
challenge on the issue of the basic origin of the purported
jurisdiction of the fictitious political entity over the Sovereign
person because of the political status of the Sovereign person (e.g.,
a flesh and blood human entity), while at the same time recognizing
the existence of the political fiction but not submitting to the
authority of the political fiction, ever.

A Sovereign person challenges political jurisdiction of the
fictitious political entity based on the political status of the
Sovereign person and on the basic fictitious nature of the political
fictional entity and not on the rules of the fictitious political
entity; such rules have no application whatsoever to the Sovereign
person!!

A challenge of political jurisdiction raises the issue to the very
existence of the political fiction in relation to the Sovereign
person.

************************************************** *******

Thought for today:

Certain men ("monied politicians"), having no proper natural
authority to do so, create a fictional political entity which the
monied politicians impose on the common persons; making rules thereof
setting up a societal situation in which it is literally impossible
for any common person to survive without the common persons violating
the rules mandated and enforced by the monied politicians; then the
monied politicians write up a fancy amendment proclaiming that
involuntary servitude shall not exist in their fictitious political
domain and then the monied politicians claim that all common persons
volunteered into servitude to the monied politicians political
fiction based on what the common persons do when the common persons
go about their lives engaging in activities merely doing that which
is necessary to survive; and the monied politicians tax and fine and
mortgage the common persons to a point where the common persons are
reduced to a condition which can only be candidly described as total
abject economic and political slavery and the common persons just
meekly comply??

Please tell me that it isn''t so.

Cheers,

I'm Eric WhoRU (Quote)