-
Strawman counterarguments to Penhallow v. Doane's Admin & Cruden v Neale
The following are often cited by Mark as part of the strawman argument-
“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.”
Penhallow v. Doane’s Administrators, 3 U.S. 54, 3 Dall. 54, 1 L. Ed. 507 (1795)“There, every man is independent of all laws, except those prescribed by nature. He is not bound
by any institutions formed by his fellowmen without his consent.”Cruden v Neale 2 N.C. 338 (N.C. Super. 1796)
—-
There is a discussion by Freeman Delusion that would seem to invalidate the use of both of these ‘judgments’.
https://freemandelusion.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/Penhallow-and-Cruden.pdf
—-
Would like to see Mark remove these from modules/webinar discussions, unless there is a counterargument to this counterargument?
-
2 Replies
-
I guess the bottom line in relation to the quotes etc is this, if the court claims to have jurisdiction over man and that there is no diversity between man and person, then it is up to the court to prove it! Equity prevails
-
At a glance, it would seem the courts use the word ‘citizen’ when rebutting the attorneys “Quote”,
The principal still stands regarding MAN
Citizen: “Members of a political community who, in their associated capacity, have established or submitted themselves to the dominion of a government”. (Blacks 5th Ed)
Acquiring your source document? Or,
A notarised, witnessed Declaration of your status?
To be clear, the court establishes jurisdiction when you don’t rebut their assumption.