DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**Alexeryy** · 07-12-2012, 02:09 PM

Well in the video they swear allegience to the constitution of the United States. I thought we should be looking for the constitution of the United States of America. I'm pretty sure there is a difference. Did they get the right one?

Lots of controversy on this issue. Judging from facts derived from the constitution that is being executed there is nobody executing their office under the organic constitution. That begs the question "Which constitution are they executing?" Personally it is not an issue with me. I know that whatever government is in power in the United States is operating ultra vires of the document that I consider to be the main fiduciary agreement, a combination of the Articles of Confederation, the constitution for the United States, the Northwest ordinance and the Declaration of Independence. In addition the United States has engaged in several treaties that I believe they still honor.

The 14th amendment supersedes the organic constitution when the status of United States citizen is elected. Constitutional rights do not exist for these people. Instead civil rights are substituted. Fortunately there are options to being a U.S. citizen. One might be an autochthon instead with rights protected by treaty (Louisiana Purchase, Treaty of Guadeloupe Hidalgo, Articles of Confederation).

Congress writes rules for U.S. citizens. The several States writes rules for U.S. citizens. Nobody writes rules for inhabitants/autochthons. The operating constitution is for U.S. citizens. Your status is determined by YOU and nobody else. Learn what that status is and avoid controversy. [I understand you are down under but the same approach works for U.K. people as well].

07-12-2012, 02:09 PM	#7
Alexeryy Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 504 Senior Member	Well in the video they swear allegience to the constitution of the United States. I thought we should be looking for the constitution of the United States of America. I'm pretty sure there is a difference. Did they get the right one? Lots of controversy on this issue. Judging from facts derived from the constitution that is being executed there is nobody executing their office under the organic constitution. That begs the question "Which constitution are they executing?" Personally it is not an issue with me. I know that whatever government is in power in the United States is operating ultra vires of the document that I consider to be the main fiduciary agreement, a combination of the Articles of Confederation, the constitution for the United States, the Northwest ordinance and the Declaration of Independence. In addition the United States has engaged in several treaties that I believe they still honor. The 14th amendment supersedes the organic constitution when the status of United States citizen is elected. Constitutional rights do not exist for these people. Instead civil rights are substituted. Fortunately there are options to being a U.S. citizen. One might be an autochthon instead with rights protected by treaty (Louisiana Purchase, Treaty of Guadeloupe Hidalgo, Articles of Confederation). Congress writes rules for U.S. citizens. The several States writes rules for U.S. citizens. Nobody writes rules for inhabitants/autochthons. The operating constitution is for U.S. citizens. Your status is determined by YOU and nobody else. Learn what that status is and avoid controversy. [I understand you are down under but the same approach works for U.K. people as well].
	Quote