Fake oaths of office

This is the required oath of office in georgia for superior court judges:
15-6-6.

'I swear that I will administer justice without respect to person and do equal rights to the poor and the rich and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent on me as judge of the superior courts of this state, according to the best of my ability and understanding, and agreeably to the laws and Constitution of this state and the Constitution of the United States. So help me God.'

This the one they sign, notice the capitalization.


'I do further swear that I will administer justice without respect to person and do equal rights to the poor and the rich and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent on me as JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURTS this State, according to the best of my ability and understanding, and agreeably to the laws and Constitution of this State and the Constitution of the United States. So help me God.

Further tool for vacating a void judgment.

[Judge Roy Bean]

Originally Posted by kgod999

Further tool for vacating a void judgment.

Right. Just keep believing it and it will come true.

kgod999,

I hope you know I have the utmost respect for your fight for freedom, but, unless your location is different than mine, the courts don't give a rats ass about any oath of office.

The Clerk here, has to take a certain oath. The "Clerk" has not taken that oath. Period. The Clerk took another oath, but the statutes clearly say there is a county oath that the Clerk, as a county office must take. Courts pulled out the old smoke and mirrors on that argument every time.

They simply don't give a damn about the truth.

Sad but true.

The scum of the earth sit in black robes on the Banc.

Just my opinion.

Henry Franklin

no, no, no. im NOT saying they are gonna honor your statement that they have a fraudulent oath. What im saying is, this in just ANOTHER fact that you can use to default them under common law. (produce a CORRECT copy of your signed oath or you default). look, people like judge roy full of beans want you to think that if you use THEIR statutory system correctly, you will win, bullcrap, thats why we have to use common law remedy and contract.

Understood.

I am clear now.

Henry Franklin

Greetings..

still the (really) new kid on the block ( Stayed tuned:tap dance coupled to milli vanilli sing-along to follow)

Have to agree with both of you..as i may have mentioned afore.. there is a wanton disregard for many many pseudo-officials occupying in costume a particular colour of office..& of those that do, as Ddog pointed out.. they "alter" it from the specificity of what by act was proscribed.

There are quite a few friends nigh to me, that keep butting heads (as i initially did) & getting absolutely no where..Won't even begin to "entertain" this most vital issue. It is , i fervently believe, the cornerstone....

Now i agree, with the pursuit of Administrative remedies..& equally as it appertains to contract law. It is a matter of consideration. An offer was tendered, whether elected or appointed, & acceptance of that offer, complete with its inherent terms, requires a pre-requisite performance consideration in ordere to make that contract valid.

having said that, & aside from amongst these two worthy pursuits, i believe there is yet another route that needs to be actively pursued. Having documented the "so-called" normal channels, to establish the issue, a writ of mandamus shouldst be sought, whereby a court of superior jurisdiction commands the performance of a "inferior venue" a particular act as specified &/or purely ministerial duty imposed by law.

If this is refused.. well i believe it only strengthens the measure of default, & the failure to recognize contract law. Moreover it serves to further expose the masquerade, the costume parade, the well-orchestrated constitutionally-themed charade,that doubles as our matrix.

Having said that.. ahh. i really don't believe if it is well-conceived, that a writ of mandamus wouldn't ultimately succeed..& having done so, such shouldst be followed up by a motion to void their previous acts, as clearly, they have now acknowledged by authenticating that heretofore, they had not performed as require to assume that office.

As i said afore, i believe this issue is the cornerstone to all other issues we are (oft forced) to undertake. It is goes to the very heart of the matter..Why is "ones oath" such an issue, & why do those that are in "position" so quickly dismiss(hypertechnical) &/or otherwise trivialize an official oath? To me, it may well be treasonous for them to do so. What is treason, if not aiding & abetting the enemy.. & as things continue to unfold.. who really is the enemy anyways?

Once i finish my §1692 (which i thought wouldst be completed by now.. but as i keep digging it just gets deeper & deeper; new deadline monday!) & review my civil rights case which has its own deadline approaching quickly, i do believe this is something i need focus upon. Any thoughts on this matter, pro,con or otherwise is always welcomed.

my apologies for the long rant..for purpose herein. i need to focus on concise & succinct.

peace be with ye :-)

[Gannon White]

As I'm very new to this it is beyond my scope but apparently there is a simple explanation as to why these oaths don't apply. It has something to do with the fact that all political power in the U.S. is derived from the War Measures Act (that is why U.S. always has to be at WAR). Apparently these offices don't in fact exist anymore (well they exist but no ones in them) and have been replaced with "agencies". Dessie Andrews has done an in depth (and I mean in depth) study of this. Although the website is crappy some clues might be derived there, the address is:

http://www.petitionforpeace.net/pfphome.htm

She used to be on RBN Live on Thursday evenings but I contacted her today as she hasn't been there and apparently she's moved and is on the internet radio every Tuesday 5 to 7 with Joyce Rosenwalt. www.republicradio.com on the republic stream. As I haven't had a chance to listen yet (it being Monday) I have no idea what topics they cover but Dessie used to cover the exact subject matter of this thread. On the old show she used to take all calls so it might be worth a listen.

Another interesting website for this type of research is:

www.jusbelli.com

He's really good at "use of force continuum" and how to handle police.

Hope someone finds these of interest.

[weishaupt1776]

http://www.avoiceforchildren.com/doc...s/vultures.htm