The Republic for the united States of America
From the Desk of the Chief of Security
Thursday, April 14, 2011
RuSA Security ID #: RP208703080RuSA - Crosscheck Security ID against press section of
RepublicfortheunitedStates.org
Dear Fellow Americans,
Threats of legal lunacy, and confusion of law. One of the most dangerous threats to
our security is that state of mind which involves ignorance and flawed thinking. Regarding
our Republic, which is especially true concerning what is legal or lawful, and what is not.
What wrongly affects the mind then wrongly affects the will and then the deeds on the part
of the affected, thereby undermining our security and increasing our division and weakness.
Our security requires knowledge, legal soundness of mind, clarity regarding law, and proper
distinction of law jurisdiction and form and related procedure.
A very clear example of what I believe is legal lunacy (Unsoundness of legal mind)
and of confusion of law has been provided by Jim Wright of Pennsylvania. See the
attachment.
Our President has been on assembly and other calls in an effort to warn people
entertaining the notions that Jim Wright and his doctrine and followers promote. I have
heard him explain his reasons regarding his assessment that Jim Wright does not know what
he is talking about regarding law and the true state of things regarding the Republic and its
lawful nature and its right standing in international law. Identifying the most fundamental
flaw, the President has stated that Jim Wright confuses legal with lawful and blurs
jurisdiction and law form (e.g. de facto vs. de jure, or common law vs. other law, etc.); and,
based on my diligence regarding law, I agree.
The most blatant fallacy evidenced on the face of the attachment, herein also notice, is
the notion of a common law FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) request. In this regard,
consider the following premises and conclusion—logic/reasoning.
[Fact/Premise 1] Though positive law of a de jure state/republic may involve common
law principles, common law is non-statutory law and typically unwritten law, its
principles often made apparent by custom or by common law court decisions or maxims;
[Fact/Premise 2] The Freedom of Information Act is statutory law of the de facto
corporation (UNITED STATES), not positive law of any de jure state/republic, and is
written law;
[Conclusion] Therefore, FOIA (The Freedom of Information Act) is not common
law; and common law is no correct adjective/description of FOIA. 1 of 3
JamesTimothyTurner
President
CharlesEugeneWright
Vice President
WadeButler
Secretary of State
JamesBuchananGeiger
Senate Pro Tem
MarkLounsbury
Speaker of the House
Press Office Number:
(269) 978-5630
press@RepublicoftheunitedStates.org
Regarding the subject notice, do you see the blurring/mixing and confusion of
jurisdiction (common law, admiralty, corporation statutes and regulations, etc.) and law
form? What kind of legal mind does that? Is it knowing, or ignorant? Is it a mind
employing soundness of thinking, or unsoundness of thinking? Do you know that such
evidence as that of the subject notice is the very thing that courts/COURTS use to rightly
deny the process and/or claimed state/status/standing of
plaintiffs/defendants/claimants/libellants/respondents/etc? Such evidence makes it very
clear to the court/COURT that it is dealing with, in a manner of speaking, a legal lunatic
who confuses law: an incompetent of unsound mind; and the court/COURT has a legal
and lawful and moral obligation to rule as it sees fit to prevent such person(s) from
harming themselves or others, perhaps even by making such legal lunatics wards of the
COURT/STATE. Often, such delusional persons who believe that which is false to be true
and that which is unsound to be sound sit in their cells and wring their hands and scratch
their heads and accuse the court/COURT or system/SYSTEM of injustice, doing so
without realizing that they likely are worse enemies of themselves than the
courts/COURTS. Also, their deluded friends and compatriots likewise are perplexed and
accusing, sometimes having the unrighteous urge to commit physical violence.
I thank Jim Wright for what I will call his self-repudiation/nullification; and I
thank our Creator for enlightening and saving those who otherwise might have been
deceived, led astray, and destroyed by nonsense and flawed doctrine.
Furthermore, I understand that Jim Wright’s doctrine and thinking present
notions that the Republic does not exist and that it never existed. Upon examination, do
not such notions (mere faulty conclusions?) directly contradict his very own
activities/behavior? By special and temporary appointment, he functioned within the
scope of a Republic (nation-wide) Grand Jury meeting that occurred in Atlanta, Georgia,
which meeting was arranged by Nathan Peachey, Chief Justice of the one Supreme Court
of the Republic. If the Republic has never existed and does not now exist (it is impossible
to re-inhabit that which never existed), how could Jim Wright have any authority (of any
capacity) by any/special appointment made/agreed/consented by Republic (national)
officials and regarding any process operated/conducted by Republic (national) officials?
How could Jim Wright have any authority regarding any process engaged and
operated/conducted by any non-existent officer(s) (if no Republic, there can be no
officer thereof or authority of appointment thereof, or authority of assembly thereof, or
related agreement of either state or union of states)? By the doctrine that the Republic
was never properly established and does not exist, does it not follow that Jim Wright has
repudiated his own involvement and rendered the process involving him null and void?
Does such contradictory doctrine and behavior evidence good faith or bad faith (fraud);
and if neither, what other?
2 of 3
Know that there is a movement and agenda that attack the security of our
Republic by attempting to deny the lawful nature of the Republic: the union of the
several States of America in republic, and to undo the security of the union and of the
people by whose authority the union of states and its law and organs are established.
Any attempt to undo the constitutional union, including the de jure national organs of
that union involving even the congress of every one of the several states, is an attack
against our security, even our very lives, in the Republic that the Creator has seen fit to
restore and to advance for the good of man, of all nations. I strongly suggest that you do
not listen to Jim Wright, or to anyone advancing the notion of the states becoming
independent nations and not part of the union. United we stand; divided we fall.
We are so close to the greater manifestation of our victory that the enemy is
desperate and would have ignorant people destroy what we have re-inhabited and are
building to endure. Internationally and locally, we are gaining ground. Dead and diseased
wood are being discovered and pruned. Do not be deceived. Do not be in legal lunacy.
Do not be in confusion of law. Secure your faith and minds, and stay the course. Preserve
your free states, and the union thereof that we call the Republic for the united States of
America.
In faith, hope and love,
TimothyCoyPledger
Chief of Security
The Republic for the united States of America
No comments:
Post a Comment