PENHALLOW V. DOAN'S SUPREME COURT RULING

PENHALLOW V. DOAN'S SUPREME COURT RULING

Postby wanabfree » Fri Apr 08, 2011 1:47 pm

PENHALLOW V. DOAN'S SUPREME COURT RULING

Here is veronica's words reading from an alleged court ruling at the liverpool meeting, given from a US supreme court ruling, here is a link

http://supreme.justia.com/us/3/54/case.html


“In as much as every government is an artificial person, an abstraction and a creature of the mind only, a government can interface only with other artificial persons, the imaginary

Having neither actuality nor substance is foreclosed from creating and attaining parody with the tangible,

The legal manifestation of this is that no government, as well as any law, agency, aspect, court etc can concern itself with anything other than corporate artificial persons, and the contracts between them.

They must give you to be your name, because if they don’t they cannot’ interact with you”.


So my question this were in this ruling does it say this, I can’t find it,veronica has made a very bold statement on this saying the peope doing business as the supreme court are of the opinion,humans are in fact artifictial persons when in court,because this is all they can interact with.

We need this clarified.
wanabfree
 
Posts: 270
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2011 4:07 am

Re: PENHALLOW V. DOAN'S SUPREME COURT RULING

Postby Prajna » Fri Apr 08, 2011 2:04 pm

a. "Inasmuch as every government is an artificial person, an abstraction,
and a creature of the mind only, a government can interface only with other
artificial persons. The imaginary, having neither actuality nor substance,
is foreclosed from creating and attaining parity with the tangible. The
legal manifestation of this is that no government, as well as any law,
agency, aspect, court, etc. can concern itself with anything other than
corporate, artificial persons and the contracts between them."* S.C.R.
1795, **Penhallow v. Doane’s Administrators 3 U.S. 54; 1 L.Ed. 57; 3 Dall.
54;* and,

b. "the contracts between them" involve U.S. citizens, which are deemed as
Corporate Entities:

c. "Therefore, the U.S. citizens residing in one of the states of the union,
are classified as property and franchises of the federal government as an
"individual entity"",* Wheeling Steel Corp. v. Fox, 298 U.S. 193, 80 L.Ed.
1143, 56 S.Ct. 773
FREEDOM Best Before: 11 Sept 2001
http://tomboy-pink.co.uk/ and http://DeclarePeace.org.uk/
User avatar
Prajna
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 627
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 2:51 pm
Location: UK

Re: PENHALLOW V. DOAN'S SUPREME COURT RULING

Postby wanabfree » Fri Apr 08, 2011 2:59 pm

Prajna wrote:a. "Inasmuch as every government is an artificial person, an abstraction,
and a creature of the mind only, a government can interface only with other
artificial persons. The imaginary, having neither actuality nor substance,
is foreclosed from creating and attaining parity with the tangible. The
legal manifestation of this is that no government, as well as any law,
agency, aspect, court, etc. can concern itself with anything other than
corporate, artificial persons and the contracts between them."* S.C.R.
1795, **Penhallow v. Doane’s Administrators 3 U.S. 54; 1 L.Ed. 57; 3 Dall.
54;* and,

b. "the contracts between them" involve U.S. citizens, which are deemed as
Corporate Entities:

c. "Therefore, the U.S. citizens residing in one of the states of the union,
are classified as property and franchises of the federal government as an
"individual entity"",* Wheeling Steel Corp. v. Fox, 298 U.S. 193, 80 L.Ed.
1143, 56 S.Ct. 773



thanks for that,but i have read through the link claiming to be the full text of the case, i still can't find were this is specifcally written, could you give me the page number or section. maybe the site i have read this on isn't the best place to start, if you have a better example i would be gratfull.
wanabfree
 
Posts: 270
Joined: Wed Mar 23, 2011 4:07 am

Re: PENHALLOW V. DOAN'S SUPREME COURT RULING

Postby Colin Grainger » Fri Apr 08, 2011 4:08 pm

Colin Grainger
 
Posts: 156
Joined: Sun Apr 26, 2009 3:14 pm

Re: PENHALLOW V. DOAN'S SUPREME COURT RULING

Postby knightron » Fri Apr 08, 2011 4:39 pm

Colin's Link..VVVVV
While a person may still voluntarily decide to contractually rent himself, just as today he may voluntarily decide to contractually sell himself, in a society where "the principle behind every trial" is consistently applied, neither contract would be legally enforceable, and the rented/sold individual would maintain at all times de jure responsibility for her/his actions, including legal claim to the fruits of their labor.


That seems very straight forward to me..what the Government is doing in my eyes is forcing people to Work to live, which by its very definition is slavery..! :shake:
ʎɐqǝ uo pɹɐoqʎǝʞ ɐ ʎnq ı ǝɯıʇ ʇsɐן ǝɥʇ sı sıɥʇ
User avatar
knightron
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 319
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 12:51 pm

Re: PENHALLOW V. DOAN'S SUPREME COURT RULING

Postby lucifer » Sun Apr 10, 2011 9:20 pm

a government can interface only with other artificial persons,

http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?search=interface&searchmode=none

I would suggest the word "interface" didn't even exist in 1795 so the quote could not have been in the transcript in the way it is claimed.
lucifer
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Sun Apr 10, 2011 8:12 pm

Re: PENHALLOW V. DOAN'S SUPREME COURT RULING

Postby stbrides » Mon Sep 01, 2014 11:29 am

i have been going through the audio of Karl Lentz.
He cited a case which i struggled to hear.
i find Karl difficult to make out a lot of the time but i eventually worked out it was Trinsey v. Pagliaro.
http://freedom-school.com/law/with-regards-to-trinsey-v-pagliaro.html

On that page you will see S.C.R. 1795, Penhallow v. Doane's Administraters (3 U.S. 54; 1 L.Ed. 57; 3 Dall. 54)
"Inasmuch as every government is an artificial person, an abstraction, and a creature of the mind only, a government can interface only with other artificial persons....."

What a find i think to myself. All the stuff about the legal person and the corporate entities in one paragraph.
So i decided to look further.
i came here and other places - i found the write up of the case. i word searched it.
There was no paragraph as quoted here and on other websites.

This is a very important paragraph if it exists. i see plenty in the early ruling where they say the courts are maritime from the States and state but i will say this paragraph is an invention.
It does not exist.

Please someone prove me wrong.

Edit
The quote is a fake
http://www.suijurisforum.com/artificial-persons-t1208.html
stbrides
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: PENHALLOW V. DOAN'S SUPREME COURT RULING

Postby Farmer » Mon Sep 29, 2014 7:42 am

It's all about whether a court can show that you are a US Citizen. They have to prove it, not you; and they can't.
If you're scared of 'them' poisoning 'us' with some shit then maybe you haven't noticed the shit they are already poisoning us with.
- prajna - fmotl.co.uk forum 2011
User avatar
Farmer
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1989
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 9:07 am

Re: PENHALLOW V. DOAN'S SUPREME COURT RULING

Postby MikeThomas » Tue Sep 30, 2014 12:12 pm

Great to hear from you Farmer :shake:
We are the people our parents told us NOT TO PLAY WITH
User avatar
MikeThomas
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 1623
Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 1:17 pm
Location: Llanharan, South Wales


Return to General Freeman related questions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests