I am not communicating I guess. We are not likely to find anthing in the weitten oath recorded or in the constitution that differs. That is why they are not affraid of this. The corporate state and sovereeign state may often be spelled the same way. Below is how we apporach it in Court and maybe you can see what we are driving at.
Your honor, the demeanor of the Court causes question: Has the Court sworn by its oath recorded to uphold our rights under the Constitution of the sovereign state of [Pennsylvania], a certified copy is of record in this case,
or is it to the corporate State of the same name subchartered under the District of Columbia incorporated as the UNITED STATES, INC. with all federal territories and possessions in 1871,which exists only in federal law where these protections are not a right, but a privilege granted by the incorporated state??
[[--objection by opposing attorney�]]
[[[ Your honor, The United States supreme Court has ruled in Hooven & Allison Co. vs Evatt, 324 U.S. 652 (1945) the term United States means any one of three different things. We are entitled to know which legal entity the Court has sworn its allegiance to. ]]]
Your honor, We are entitled to know the Court is properly sitting in its elected office under its oath to uphold the peoples� Constitution of the sovereign United States and of this sovereign state and my rights under them before it makes any ruling against me representing the authority of this state.
[[ --equivocation--]]
[Put another way your honor,][ so I must ask the Court] has the Court intended by its oath recorded to uphold this constitution of the sovereign state of Mississippi a certified copy of which is of record before the Court in this case, and this constitution of the United States, also of record before the Court, and is it this sovereign government created by this constitution whose constitution you have sworn to uphold?
--equivocation--
Under Article XIII Section 1 of the New York constitution
all judicial officers, shall, , solemnly swear (or affirm) to support the constitution of the United States, and the constitution of the State of New York, before they enter on the duties of their respective offices....And under ARTICLE 3 Section 30 its office is vacant upon its refusal of the oath or neglect to file it or its undertaking.
Your honor the oath the Court was to take recorded in Article XIII Section 1 of the state Constitution, before taking office has the Court swear to support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the State of New York.
That �s this constitution of the actual sovereign state of New York that is a part of the union of states created by this Constitution that the Court was to swear to faithfully perform all the duties incumbent upon it �.agreeably to.
before taking office.
If it is not these constitutions the Court has sworn to uphold, and this oath the Court, has taken, then according to the state constitution it is not lawfully in its office and by state law the Court, can not exercise its office or position or perform any act therein.
The Court has failed or refused to swear to perform their duties agreeably to the US Constitution and that of the sovereign state of Mississippi required of such officer by law, And its office is vacant upon its refusal and is subject to removal from office.
Its very serious question your honor.
The Court would not be properly sitting under its oaths [and bonds] of office as required by law to carry the authority and power of the state in its rulings, It has no jurisdiction to conduct any business, these proceedings would be moot and the Court would have to [[void its judgments and]] dismiss itself from the case and we would so move.]]
So we would ask the Court again, has the Court sworn its oath to uphold this constitution of the sovereign state of New York, and this constitution of the United States, also of record before the Court, and is it this sovereign government created by this constitution whose constitution you have sworn to uphold? ]]]]]]]]]]
--Court refuses to answer oath -equivocates--
Your honor, if this Court has not sworn its oath to the people�s constitution of the sovereign state of Mississippi [its office is vacant] [it is a pretender to its office].
It has no Constitutionally acquired authority carrying the power of the state to do anything,
and we respectfully demand the Court declare itself now who and what its oath is to, or [vacate its orders]
[adjourn these proceedings]and recuse itself from this case.
If more clarification is needed I will be glad to talk to anyone about it. I am at --- --- ----, Dr. Weatherly
----- Original Message -----
From: Dr. K
To:
uccredemption@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2006 8:04 AM
Subject: Re: [uccredemption] Oath of office
Dr. Weatherly,
Sir, your comments and suggestions are always welcomed by me. If you would, just explain to me a little bit clelarer what you meant below so that I can grasp the meaning. As you and I both know, he may never get certified copies of oaths of offices or will be delayed for quite some time. In the meantime, he should send an acceptance of oath of office by registered mail return receipt to the clerk of court to be filed into the record and then, if need be, say it on the record in open court and hand them another original to be placed in the evidence file. So take me from there Dr. Weatherly if you would be so kind sir.
Also, file the Affidavit of Mistake into the court via the clerk so that it becomes law. If you are nervous about walking into the court to file, this is why you can do it registered mail (international law) and stay at harm's length. Your documents should proceed you.
T
You wrote:
While you wait to get the certified copies of those oaths of office, why not simply accept their oaths of office "on the record" the next time you are invited into their chambers?
I have said repeatedly, if you accept their oath before they are forced to declare who it is to, they can consider their oath to whomever of that same name they want to consider it to and you have accepted it, whether it is to a constittution that giarnatees you rights or not. Dr. Weatherly
