The American Bar Association

[Admin]

The American BAR Association (and its State alter-egos) has, for all intents and purposes, taken over our entire federal, state, and local governments.† The legislative branch follows the advice of their BAR member advisors in the constructing of statutes.† The executive branch does the same in the enforcement of those statutes.† The judicial branch is literally a closed union shop in that regard.† You canít be a judge unless you are BAR member and you canít practice in their courts unless you are a BAR member.


The term ìBARî is an acronym for British Accredited Registry.† These snakes are in fact working for the Crown of England.† And that is why the gold fringed flags are in the courtrooms.† It signifies admiralty jurisdiction* [maritime law], which is another way of saying British jurisdiction [England is a maritime nation].† When you cross the bar in a courtroom, you are entering a British colonial forum.

Click on the article link to read the rest of the article.

There are over 30 grievances listed against the King of England in the Declaration of Independence (1776).† Nearly all of them are applicable today against the Crown of England via the BAR Association.† If you donít have a copy, get one and read it.† Each grievance therein begins with ìHeî (in reference to the King).† As you read through the grievances, mentally supplant ìHeî with ìBAR Association, on behalf of the Crown of Englandî and youíll see exactly what I mean.


The root for the term ìattorneyî originates in Sanskrit (the oldest known language) and its original meaning was ìto turn or to twistî.† That meaning carried forward largely unaltered into the English language.† The letter ìaî, when used as a word, is defined as ìan indefinite articleî and when used as a prefix it equates with the word ìoneî (indefinite article) which modifies the base word (torn) accordinglyóas does the suffix ìeyî.


The extra ìtî is added to separate the two vowels for proper pronunciation in accordance with the rules of English grammar.† Thus, ìa-(t)torn-eyî quite literally means ìone who turnsî (something).


This takes on added meaning when you understand that the legal profession in England has a number of titles (job descriptions), such as Esquire, Barrister, Solicitor, Counselor, Attorney, etc.† And each one has a very specific function within that monarchial system.† An English attorneyís function is to see that all titles and estates properly turn over to the legitimate heirs.† The closest equivalent to that function in this country would be an attorney who specializes in probate law.


It is no accident that the generic term used to describe a practitioner of law in this country is ìattorneyî.† As agents for the Crown of England, their function is to turn the sovereignty and wealth of this country back over to the Crown of England.† And they have just about succeeded.


ADDITIONAL COMMENTS:


The American Bar Association (ABA) was first organized in 1878.† Its purposes were "to promote the administration of justice, to advance jurisprudence, to uphold professional honor, and to encourage social intercourse among lawyers."† Jerold S. Auerbach, Unequal Justice: Lawyers and Social Change in Modern America (1976).† The "Federal Bar Association" was officially incorporated by Congress in 1954, Public Law 662, Chapter 911.

I have not yet been able to verify with certainty that BAR is indeed an acronym for British Accredited Registry.† According to Augustus Blackstone, the tie-in to the American Bar Association is the ìInns of Courtî.† "The [American] Revolution swept away a `bar' in the English sense of an upper branch of the profession, possessing certain special privileges by virtue of its connection with the Inns of Court."† [PRESENT-DAY LAW SCHOOLS IN THE UNITED STATES, 1928, by Alfred Reed.]† However, the British Inns of Court eventually planted its roots on American soil.† The following quote was taken from the American Inns of Court web site:† ìÖthe American Inns of Court adopted the traditional English model of legal apprenticeship and modified it to fit the particular needs of the American legal system.î

So just what is the ìEnglish modelî today?† Here is how Blackís Law Dictionary (6th ed.) defines ìInns of Courtî.† ìThese are certain private unincorporated associations, in the nature of collegiate houses, located in London, and invested with the exclusive privilege of calling people to the bar, that is, conferring the rank or degree of a barrister.† They were founded probably about the beginning of the fourteenth century.† The principal inns of court are the Inner Temple, Middle Temple, Lincolnís Inn, and Grayís Inn.† The two former originally belonged to the Knights Templar.î

The key question that Mr. Blackstone asks regarding the Inns of Court is:† Whose court is it?† The answer he gives is, of course, the Crown of England.

Even today in England admission to an Inn is required before registration on the Bar Vocational Course.† The Knights Templar is a secret society; they were the first international bankers.† Today the Knights Templar is also part of another secret society, Freemasonry.† Notice the use of the word ìdegreeî in the Inns of Court definition above.† The word ìdegreeî is a secret society term which refers to the level to which the initiate has risen.†

The initiate must take ìblood oathsî in order to progress to higher levels of initiation.† A friend of mine who was a 32 degree ìShrinerî Freemason left the secret society because the blood oaths became unconscionable and repulsive to him.† The blood oaths themselves imply or state that the initiate will suffer a most horrible death if he reveals the secrets of the lodge.† Some men have reported being required to drink blood from a skull as part of a Masonic initiation.† Many judges and lawyers are Freemasons.† In fact, a very large number of civil servants, from judges to presidents, are members of secret societies such as Skull & Bones, Knights of Malta and Freemasonry.

Can we trust judges and lawyers who are Freemasons?† According to the HANDBOOK OF MASONRY by Ronanyne, page 183:† ìYou must conceal all the crimes of your brother MasonÖ.and should you be summoned as a witness against a brother Mason be always sure to shield him.† It may be perjury to do this, it is true, but youíre keeping your obligations.î

The following is the blood oath that ìShrinersî take:† ìIn willful violation whereof may I incur the fearful penalty of having my eyeballs pierced to thru center with a three edged blade, my feet flayed and forced to walk the hot sands upon the sterile shores of the red sea until the flaming Sun shall strike with a livid plague, and my Allah the god of Arab, Moslem and Mohammedan, the god of our fathers, support me to the entire fulfillment of the same.î

Augustus Blackstone suggests that the sovereignty and wealth of America is† being turned back to the Crown of England through Admiralty Jurisdiction.† This is not so far fetched as it may sound.† In the early 50s Norman Dodd was the Director of Research for a Congressional investigation into the tax-exempt Rockefeller, Ford and Carnegie foundations. †What he discovered was that these foundations were working together to control the educational system of America so that Americans would be indoctrinated into the principles of collectivism as opposed to the principles in the original united Statesí Constitution and Declaration of Independence.†

Furthermore, here is what Mr. Dodd stated about Mr. Carnegie:† ìHis publicly declared and steadfast interest was to counteract the departure of the colonies from Great Britain.† He was devoted just to putting the pieces back together again.î† Mr. Dodd indicated that it was the bankers and lawyers who were making this possible.

Today the courts in America do in fact display a gold-fringed Admiralty flag.† However, the judges and prosecutors of the Bar Association always refuse to reveal the jurisdiction when asked.† The jurisdiction is a secret that they do not want people to know about.† This means that the Bar Association is, in fact, a secret society.†

On a few occasions judges have lied about their secret jurisdiction by stating that the court was under "statutory" jurisdiction.† [Read the Washington State Bar Association article or the Whitman County Corruption article for details.]† The imposition of Admiralty jurisdiction on land was one of the primary grievances that the colonists had against King George.† The first paragraph of the DECLARATION AND RESOLVES OF THE FIRST CONTINENTAL CONGRESS OF OCTOBER 14, 1774 sums it up:†

"Whereas, since the close of the last war, the British parliament, claiming a power, of right, to bind the people of America by statutes in all cases whatsoever, hath, in some acts, expressly imposed taxes on them, and in others, under various pretences, but in fact for the purpose of raising a revenue, hath imposed rates and duties payable in these colonies, established a board of commissioners, with unconstitutional powers, and extended the jurisdiction of courts of admiralty, not only for collecting the said duties, but for the trial of causes merely arising within the body of a county."

FOLLOW THE MONEY:† The Rothschilds and the Bank of England along with the London Banking houses ultimately control the Federal Reserve Banks in America through their stockholdings of bank stock and their subsidiary firms in New York.† As Alan Greenspan stated in London on September 25, 2002:† "The tie between the Bank of England and the Federal Reserve was cemented during the 1920s."† Actually, that "tie" was formed even before the Federal Reserve Act was fraudulently passed in 1913.

It is also interesting to note that former President George Bush (Sr) was knighted by the Queen of England.† The founding fathers prohibited such ìtitles of nobilityî.† The question remains:† Who was George Bush actually serving when he was PresidentóWe the People or the British Empire?

It was George Bush (Sr) who first publicly coined the expression ìNew World ORDERî.† Both George Bush, Jr. and George Bush, Sr. are members of the infamous ìSkull & bonesî secret society, aka "The ORDER", which originally came from Germany.† Adolph Hitler wrote "My New ORDER" after writing "Mein Kampf".† George Bush's father, Prescott Bush, was also a Skull & Bones member along with Percy Rockefeller and Bush family business partners, the Harrimans.† Their symbol is, in fact, a skull and crossbonesóthe symbol for drugs, poison, piracy, death and the Nazi's "Death's Head" battalion.†

According to Dr. Leonard Horowitz, Prescott Bush joined John D. Rockefeller and the British Royal Family in sponsoring the eugenics initiatives that gave rise to Hitlerís racial hygiene programs.† Prescott Bush was found guilty of trading with the enemy (the Nazis) during WWII. †According to court records, the Rockefeller family and their Standard Oil Company supported Hitler more than they did the allies during WWII.† In fact one judge declared Mr. Rockefeller guilty of treason.† Dr. Gary Glum has also documented the insidious eugenics programs to create a "superior race", which were initially sponsored not by Adolph Hitler, but by the American elite (i.e., the Rockefeller, Carnegie, Harriman, Morgan, DuPont, Kellogg and Bush families).†

The Rockefeller family, along with their lawyer friends John and Allen Dulles, created the United Nations for the purpose of establishing a world government.† Allen Dulles became head of the CIA as did George Bush.† George Bush (Sr) is an active participant in the CIA's MKUltra mind control programs.

On February 1, 1992 George Bush (Sr) addressed the General Assembly of the United Nations and stated:† ìIt is the sacred principles enshrined in the United Nations charter to which the American people will henceforth pledge their allegiance.î† Patriotic Americans view Bush's statement as treasonous.† George Bush also stood before the United States Congress and stated that the ìNew World Orderî is the ìrule of lawî.† Perhaps what he meant to say was† ìrule of lawyersî because it is the lawyers and judges in America who are in fact implementing the "New World Order" through fraud.† However, not all lawyers are aware of the ultimate plan of the global elite.

[The information given above are just tidbits to inspire the reader to conduct his or her own research into global elitist families and their insidious plans for a totalitarian world government and creation of a "superior race".]

[weishaupt1776]

The Informer has done tons of research on The American Bar

[David Merrill]

This article brings so many things to mind. World Book Encyclopedia - United Nations tells us that David Rockefeller donated 18 acres on Manhattan Island for the United Nations Plaza.

I don't care how rich you are, unless the process of representation is followed, you can't just go giving away American soil and making it "international soil".


Regards,

David Merrill.

P.S. A lot of people might not notice such subtle cultural statements. Patricia Kelly is wife of Patrick Kelly the former county clerk and recorder who put up the placards in the lobby. See images below. Patricia Kelly is making a ruling for the City/METRO like she is a judge ... but then, all the judges are attorneys! Therefore Patricia just failed to put on a black dress when she said what she said.

[Lawyerdude]

Nothing in the article is substantiated.
The author is an anonymous coward.
So is "The Informer".
This is the type of trash that
makes Sui Juris the laughing stock
of the internet.

[David Merrill]

Originally Posted by Lawyerdude

Nothing in the article is substantiated.
The author is an anonymous coward.
So is "The Informer".
This is the type of trash that
makes Sui Juris the laughing stock
of the internet.

Yeah! Right, Lawyerdude. Just because these things are out in the light, obvious to all you say they are unsubstantiated. The gold fringes around the flag, the Thirteenth Amendment found in the Laws of Colorado 1861 for the Territory, the placards on the wall where we publish the common law of the land...

You barely know how to read, Lawyerdude. And as far as the Insultinator at Quatloos goes, the cut-and-paste spin is prima facie evidence we have hit paydirt here on suijuris.net. Besides you are inaccurate to say we are the laughingstock of the Internet. We are the laughingstock of people in denial, escapism, dissociation with reality and a general protectionism of the status quo, which was originally designed by the way (1215/1913) to implode.


Regards,

David Merrill.

[Shoonra]

I wonder if anyone can demonstrate the existence of an organization (or office or agency or institution) called "the British Accreditation Registry (or something similar with the same initials).

I'd figure of this "B.A.R." actually existed, it would have a street address, and probably a phone number.

[Admin]

I have to agree with Shoonra on this one. This is an old article that I reposted from another website as a test of the new article system and I overlooked the statements regarding the BAR. As far as I know, no one as ever been able to back up this claim with any credible evidence. I could be wrong of course. If you have any supporting items please post them here.

[Admin]

Well, I've gotten alot of response regarding the facts from this article. Here's something our member Hardtoremember sent me via PM:


See the bottom of this message for the contact information requested.


During the middle 1600's, the Crown of England established a formal registry in London where barristers were ordered by the Crown to be accredited. The establishment of this first International Bar Association allowed barrister-lawyers from all nations to be formally recognized and accredited by the only recognized accreditation society. From this, the acronym BAR was established denoting (informally) the British Accredited Registry, whose members became a powerful and integral force within the International Bar Association (IBA). Although this has been denied repeatedly as to its existence, the acronym BAR stood for the British barrister-lawyers who were members of the larger IBA.

When America was still a chartered group of British colonies under patent - established in what was formally named the British Crown territory of New England - the first British Accredited Registry (BAR) was established in Boston during 1761 to attempt to allow only accredited barrister-lawyers access to the British courts of New England. This was the first attempt to control who could represent defendants in the court at or within the bar in America.

Today, each corporate STATE in America has it's own BAR Association, i.e. The Florida Bar or the California Bar, that licenses government officer attorneys, NOT lawyers. In reality, the U.S. courts only allow their officer attorneys to freely enter within the bar while prohibiting those learned of the law - lawyers - to do so. They prevent advocates, lawyers, counselors, barristers and solicitors from entering through the outer bar. Only licensed BAR Attorneys are permitted to freely enter within the bar separating the people from the bench because all BAR Attorneys are officers of the court itself. Does that tell you anything?

Here's where the whole word game gets really tricky. In each State, every licensed BAR Attorney calls himself an Attorney at Law. Look at the definitions above and see for yourself that an Attorney at Law is nothing more than an attorney - one who transfers allegiance and property to the ruling land owner.

Another name game they use is "of counsel," which means absolutely nothing more than an offer of advice. Surely, the mechanic down the street can do that! Advice is one thing; lawful representation is another.

A BAR licensed Attorney is not an advocate, so how can he do anything other than what his real purpose is? He can't plead on your behalf because that would be a conflict of interest. He can't represent the crown (ruling government) as an official officer at the same time he is allegedly representing a defendant. His sworn duty as a BAR Attorney is to transfer your ownership, rights, titles, and allegiance to the land owner. When you hire a BAR Attorney to represent you in their courts, you have hired an officer of that court whose sole purpose and occupation is to transfer what you have to the creator and authority of that court. A more appropriate phrase would be legal plunder.


The IBA can be contacted at the following address as from 17th January 2005:

10th Floor
1 Stephen St
London, W1T 1AT
United Kingdom

Tel: +44 (0)20 7691 6868
Fax: +44 (0)20 7691 6544

The IBA offices are open from 09:00 until 17:30 UK time, from Monday to Friday.
Enquiries will be responded to as promptly as possible.

The UK recognizes Sir William Blackstone and his notorious works relating to the law (commonlaw of england).

Seemingly; CommonLaw is alive and doing well.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.britainusa.com/sections/a...a= 24655&D=10

Common Law Common Bond Text of a speech by the Rt Hon The Lord Goldmith QC, British Attorney General, Philadelphia, 3 July 2002

Introduction

Judge Becker, Mr Harmelin..... Ladies and Gentlemen
You have demonstrated the most delightful disregard for history in inviting me to speak here in Philadelphia on the eve of the Fourth of July. For as you all know, about 200 years or so ago, Britain's normally harmonious relations with this part of the Americas went through a sticky patch because of a slight misunderstanding over taxes. Indeed, Britain's relations with Philadelphia and the American colonies as a whole deteriorated to the point that you declared independence and British troops occupied Philadelphia for a time. So I hope that your kind invitation to speak to you and my presence here today means that all is truly forgiven.

In that hope I can say that I am delighted to be here, as is Lady Goldsmith. We thank you for your generous welcome and hospitality. I thank you above all for the very great honour you do me and the Government in which I am privileged to serve by inviting me to give this address. On this remarkable occasion of the [re-dedication of Magna Carta] I want to take the opportunity to speak of the common roots of the peoples of the United States of America and the United Kingdom in the common law. I will then move to ask how the common law can help us face the challenges of the year 2002. In particular how it can help us balance the needs of liberty of the individual with the needs to protect our society.

No true lawyer could fail to rejoice to be in Philadelphia. For true lawyers must believe in liberty and the rule of law. And Philadelphia is the city of liberty and the rule of law. As the city of William Penn, who after repeated persecution for his religious beliefs sailed here to found a city of liberty and to become, in the words of Thomas Jefferson, "the greatest Law-giver the world has produced". We too in the United Kingdom have thanks to give to William Penn who, on his return to England in 1684, taught King James II the virtue of greater tolerance and persuaded him to release many imprisoned for their religious beliefs. And as the city where Jefferson himself wrote the Declaration of Independence which remains one of the finest expressions of liberty to be found anywhere in history, providing as Archibald McLeish, the poet and librarian of Congress said, "its proposal for the future of a society in which human liberty could flourish."

And for its unbreakable connection with the Declaration of Independence Philadelphia is also a more than fitting place to celebrate Magna Carta, and our great shared legal and political heritage. For McLeish was right to say that the Declaration of Independence was a part of a political and legal tradition that unites British and American peoples. Thomas Jefferson would have agreed. For he described his Declaration as "the Magna Carta of a new continent".

Indeed, the fact that it was in Philadelphia that the Constitutional Convention was held itself reinforces the claim of the City of Brotherly Love to symbolise our common legal heritage. Not because the break with Britain that the Convention heralded was one of the last acts in a constitutionally joined history. But because the very act of rebellion was founded in that common heritage of Magna Carta and the common law. As Justice Anthony Kennedy has wisely noted: "The American Constitutional System was inspired by fundamental confidence in law as a liberating force....When we declared independence, we conceived of our cause, we found our
identity, we justified our rebellion in legal terms."

The law in which the American founding fathers then had confidence was English common law, brought with the settlers as part of their culture and adapted to suit the social and economic conditions of the colonies. English legal texts were for long of great importance because there were few indigenous texts and no published case reports in the colonies until after the Revolution. When Blackstone published his Commentaries on the Laws of England in the 1760's they became a legal best seller in the colonies, where there was a dearth of legal material and great need of what one commentator has termed "a snappy overview of the common law system". History tells us that so popular was the work that Sir William Blackstone made a fortune; something which could be rivalled today in the world of legal writing I suspect only by John Grisham or Scott Thurow.

Magna Carta itself played a major role in the development of the constitutional thinking in America. Some 150 years before Blackstone the great jurist and judge - and I might add sometime Attorney General – Sir Edward Coke had effectively rediscovered Magna Carta and praised it as an affirmation of fundamental law and England's "ancient liberty". The idea of written documents protecting individual liberties took early root in Britain's American colonies, such as in the 1606 Charter for Virginia which declared for immigrants to the New World the same rights as they would enjoy in England. And in the years leading up to the Revolution countless pamphlets and resolutions drew support for their claim of rights from Magna Carta.

And just as the Declaration of Independence provided inspiration for the greatest declaration of individual liberty of the last 100 years: the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948, so too does the American Constitution find inspiration in the words of an English Charter of over 500 years before; most notably perhaps in the guarantee of "due process of law" in the 5th Amendment. As eminent legal historians and scholars including Dean Griswold have demonstrated, this most resonant of phrases - "due process de ley" in the Norman French - can be traced directly back to Article 39 of Magna Carta and to the promise that "No free man shall be taken or imprisoned or disseised or outlawed or exiled or in any way ruined, nor will we go or send against him, except by the lawful judgement of his peers or by the law of the land." These last words, 3 in the original Latin: "per legem terrae" have probably exercised, so wrote the distinguished human rights lawyer AH Robertson, a greater influence on the history of human liberties under the common law than any other text.

It is not only in the love of liberty and freedom that we find a common legal heritage (though that is an important topic to which I want to return). In all areas of the law and legal relations we can find our common heritage, from the laws of contract and tort, through property law and relations between family members, in all areas we share a common heritage. True that there developed many differences between our systems in many areas. The common law was adapted to meet the different social and economic needs of the colonies - such as the fact that the abundance of land and size of the country meant that America had a far higher proportion of people owning some land than in England and a greater interest in legal services of the kind that the middle class are used to: deeds and wills, laws of property, mortgages and contracts for debt. And being larger and more decentralized with no central body which could impose a single uniform standard the laws developed in different ways. Many of the developments here were good and would come back, as I shall want to demonstrate, to fertilise the native legal soil of England.

This was not universally true, for example; the legal innovation of the law and practice of slavery was not known to the law of England or the common law.
But though these differences be marked, they should not obscure the unifying principles and features that flow through both our sets of laws: that each has the right to own property and enjoy the fruits of his labour, that contracts made in fair dealing and giving effect to the reasonable expectations of reasonable men should be honoured and, where necessary, enforced; that those who inflict unjustified harm on others or on the commun

Summa Ratio est quae pro Religione facit. If ever the laws of God and man are at variance, the former are to be obeyed in derogation of the latter.

[Shoonra]

Nonsense. The International Bar Association (IBA), which has a website, was established in 1947, not by the monarch but by the legal professional guilds of the UK, the US and some other countries. The IBA does not license lawyers, the applicants for membership are already admitted to the profession in their home jurisdictions. The IBA exists to educate lawyers about certain topics of multinational law and enable them to contact lawyers in foreign countries for facilitating such cases. There are fewer than a thousand American lawyers in the IBA.

You'll notice that this source didn't bother to put a date or any details to the purported creation of this British Accrediting Register or whatever it is called. No historical source is referenced for this. There are plenty of books on the history of the legal profession in England or in America and no such organization or institution is mentioned. Moreover, it is clear that the word "bar" to signify the legal profession was in use before the 16th century, and when it is used there is no indication that it is an acronym or that it ought to be in all-caps or with periods or anything like that. Scholars are unanimous that the bar really was a bar - a wooden railing or barricade that separated on-lookers from the "well" of the courtroom, and only the actual participants in the court process - the judge and the lawyers permitted to practice in that court - were admitted within the bar. Eventually the little architectural gesture was used to identify the profession itself. One more thing, something in the 16th century would more likely be called English than British. Although the monarch might elevate a lawyer to be a judge, it was the Inns of Court who decided who was and wasn't admitted to the legal profession, and there are some instances of the Inns refusing to recognize a monarch's "nominee" to the profession.