Statutory "Rule of Law" is NOT "Law"

NOTE:  This commentary was sent to me (2002) on a public e-mail list by Pamela Gaston, patriot extraordinaire and pioneer in the sui juris movement.

As I understand it, tragically, Pamela died of an illness for which she was unable to afford to get medical care, as the feds had driven her into financial destitution.  (I can relate to that, as the same is happening to me. With my health in a state of gradual decline, over a period of years, unable to get the medical care I desperately need, and with no one to care, no one I can rely on, my health grows more fragile by the day.)

This commentary was a response to one Leonard Henderson, of whom I must state for the public record: He is (or was, in 2002, anyway) a government stooge; as he was in collusion with one Charles Bruce Stewart, a malicious liar and defender/supporter of several government shills, most notably fed snitch and psycho stalker, Timothy Patrick White; and also including Shirley Anderson (White's one-time girlfriend), and Larry Lawson, of Indiana, another fed snitch who made a deal, as did White (in White's case, drug  trafficking), for charges to be dropped for "felony threatening of the president (George W. Bush.)

Leonard Henderson, according to Charles Bruce Stewart, was assisting these government shills/stooges in "exposing CIA Judas Goat and false patriot, Barbara Hartwell."

But this does not reflect in the slightest on Pamela Gaston.  She supported my work; I published her letters to the editor on my website, and in this case, she was only answering a question, and I find her commentary worth publishing.

There are, unfortunately,  all too many idiots out there who don't know the difference between "civil rights" and "God-given rights", as protected and guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.

Even worse, some of these idiots are shooting off their mouths in public commentaries about a topic of which they know nothing,  all in their efforts at seeking attention and approval.

One such idiot is James F. Marino, a belligerent ignoramus who has been writing his foolish commentaries about "civil rights" for years; who has (unsuccessfully) tried to imitate the work of legitimate expositors and whistleblowers (including Geral Sosbee and Barbara Hartwell); and (again, unsuccessfully), to ride our coattails; and who has viciously and unjustly  attacked Barbara Hartwell simply for exposing him as the gate-crasher, name-dropper and government stooge he so obviously is.

Nothing new there, all the government stooges have done exactly the same thing!

Typically, Marino began to parrot (and publish) the outrageous lies of his fellow stooges, as well as fabricating his own malicious lies about Barbara Hartwell.

After being exposed (2007), Marino began reversing his position, suddenly parroting the statements of others (including Barbara Hartwell), about "The Rule of Law", etc., apparently hoping that no one would notice the sudden switch.

But Marino also mocks God (in Whom he is not a believer); and also promotes and supports the usurper "president", communist and Muslim, Barack Hussein Obama, whom Marino claims offers "new hope" for Americans.

Marino also supports, defends and promotes other government stooges, including the aforementioned Tim White, along with accomplices Ken Adachi, Todd Brendan Fahey, Aaron James and "Xena Carpenter", under which name Todd Fahey and Tim White write libelous pseudo reports about Barbara Hartwell and others, which Marino has lately taken to promoting on his website.

Consider all this, should you have the misfortune of stumbling onto Marino's moronic website; or the websites run by/promoting these other morons, shills and stooges, all of whom are driven by an obsessive, white-hot hatred for Barbara Hartwell.

Why mention these lowlife characters? Because, I never let an oppportunity go by for exposing liars and evildoers. These loathsome slugs do tremendous damage to decent, legtimate people, and they richly deserve to be exposed. 

Avoid them like the plague!

By their fruits shall you know them.

Barbara Hartwell Percival

February 25, 2010

Statutory "Rule of Law" is NOT "Law" Re: Civil Rights question

By Pamela Gaston

What is the difference between civil rights and constitutional rights?

The difference is similar to "legal rights" as opposed to "Inherent Rights".

Also the difference between "legal" and "lawful".  Statute "rule of law" is NOT constitutional "law". 

Statute  'law" is created by a legislature and is an overlay being enforced OVER our constitutional foundation, which it has usurped.   The constitution has been changed so much that it violates the Bill of Rights in  its own langauge.  We are going back now to the CONCEPT of Sui Juris and the Bill of RIGHTS AS IT WAS INTENDED, AS REASONABLE PEOPLE TRUST IT TO MEAN.  Not some word game in a court and our rights violated and our property and children seized without regard to the Bill of Rights, in REAL LIFE.

Inherent Rights as opposed to "civil rights", which are "legal" "statutory" and NOT constitutional.  Inherent Rights, Sui Juris is about what is REAL - the human flesh and blood and children, not a corporate fiction "entity" that is "represented" in that courtroom, proceeding as though MONEY has rights.  They actually do that.  I have personally seen "civil" actions by the state where an amount of money was the "defendant" and the "dept of revenue" was the "claimant".......  

ONLY HUMANS CAN CONTRACT.... ONLY HUMANS CAN MAKE CLAIMS OR HAVE INHERENT RIGHTS...... see how different it is?????

Inherent Rights come from God, legal "rights" are bestowed by a legislature "in the interest of the person" which means "money off the people"  anyway, as I understand it, "civil rights" were what came in with the fraudulent Fourteenth Amendment.

What happened was Lincoln and others "rewrote the laws" (familiar theme) to "give rights" to the slaves, black, Irish, Chinese predominantly, and to provide "licenses" to control miscegenation of races and the children born of  those unions.  SO - what really happened was that we all "volunteered" to be "US CITIZENS' with priveleges instead of Inherent rights, and these are what are called "civil rights" and "civil courts".

These are progressions on the way.  The Late Robert Wangrud said "the ink was not dry on the Bill of Rights before the money priests were after ways to attach the "freeman in the state" with his new sovereignty guaranteed unalienable (as in cannot lein against) RIGHTS.  They created OVERLAYS called "districts", "regions", "zones", "municipalities", "jurisdictions", "areas", all kinds of names, to make new lines that cross through states and combine many states, and then they enforce another set of "laws" OVER these "regions" or whatever.  

ALL THIS DOES NOT APPLY TO A FREEBORN SOVEREIGN. 

The feds are supposed to prosecute TWO crimes with the people...... murder and treason.  And in order to "attach" to you, or send you a letter, or come to your home, or ask your name, they have to have probable cause to do so, and come into the state and THROUGH the state offices to come to you.  This is your protections of state rights against "foreign and unknown jurisdictions" which are unconstitutional.  No different than a guerilla army takes over your town and you are to be protected from that agression by your county sheriffs.

So the Fourteenth amendment created  a "new class" of the people and stripped their Inherent Rights and started the licensing for marriage, taxes and every other licensing program ever since....  these are NOT constitutional.......

We are learning to say it right because it really means something different.  SUI JURIS is the way to say it in a court that you are NOT a corporation and you are NOT in any represented status - you are living, flesh and blood and speaking your truth.  THAT concept is the main thing that EVERYONE needs to learn right now as fast as they can grasp it and tell everyone they know as they  learn it.......

In the past the issues of the day were cultural, race based or religious, as in the civil war and the suffagettes movement, two examples.  THIS time we are into the CORE of the fraud, whereas previously it was all peripheral..... as HUGE as those issues were, they NEVER addressed in a court room  the systemic fraud of the money priests.  The rich and corporate interests have been controllling everything for ever practically, through corrupted people for profit.  Nothing new under the sun.

But today the People have opened up areas not previously opened, in that the BAR association are the operators of the money machine, and now it is a global agenda.  The other side we see is that  it has become so fetid, so unaccountable that there are perverts and pedophiles in the offices of trust, and that is why it has opened up now like a long cancerous wound.......

So learning the difference between "civil rights" , "legal rights" and  "Inherent Rights" is critical ...... there are no "constitutional rights".  

THE CONSTITUTION RESTRICTS GOVERNMENT, IT DOES NOT GIVE ANYONE ANY RIGHTS. 

These concepts cannot be repeated often enough......  The way to think of it and say it is "constitutionally protected inherent rights".....

The other trick word with legal is Lawful ........ you say "lawfully and unlawfully" whereas they say "legal" and "illegal".......  "Legal" is statutory, "Lawful" has to do with your real body, your rights, your children, and  that being violated by the state in particular, There are so many word deceptions!  

Humpty Dumpty is the egghead with the "attractive cravat"..... the man of words who is above accountability...... but now that we are learning the difference it is like magic tricks and it doesnt work anymore ...... and we see slimy liars and "maggots that smile and fart" as our friend Michael Sieradzki said recently about the level of corruption here in Oregon.  Unbelievable but true, and thank God we are learning..... hopefully quickly enough to head it off.....

Pamela Gaston

PS - Your friend needs to file her paperwork with FACTS - that is the main thing.  Not to let them intimidate you with this form or this timeline or that it has to be some "correct" process..... that is  all charade, as we see them do ANYTHING they want to in a courtroom when the state is the one doing it.  So don't be diverted by that crap and just state your facts of fraud they have committed and that they cannot dispute.  That is ALL it has to be, and support it with documents if possible or necessary...... but the whole court process is you ask a question and you state a fact, they have to answer and they have to dispute...... NOW you are off and running building your case in the permanent record of their fraud.

-----Original Message-----
From: Leonard Henderson

To:  A Voice  for Children

Date: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 2:54 PM
Subject: Fw: Civil Rights question 

"Hey Pamela, can you answer this question?  I don't have enough brain power today to remember my own name.

Leonard"

----- Original Message -----

Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 2:21 PM

To: Leonard Henderson

From; Diane Hamilton

Subject: Re: Civil Rights question

"I thought "Civil Rights" were the liberties given to us by the 'Constitution and its subsequent amendments! What's the difference?

This "Dept of Social Services -  Civil Rights Bureau" is an agency within the California government, apparently."