Clasical Education 08-16-22
About Thomas Hobbes (1588 - 1679)
About John Locke (b. 1632, d. 1704)
About George Berkeley (b 1685, d 1753)
About David Hume (b 1711, d 1776)
About Sir Isaac Newton (b 1642, d 1766
- The Young American 1842
- The Roosevelt Doctrine
- The Republic - Plato
- The Law
- THE FIRST CONTINENTAL CONGRESS
- Reid - An Inquiry into the Human Mind
- Machiavelli - The Prince
- Locke - Toleration
- Locke - Human Understanding Book 4
- Locke - Human Understanding Book 3
- Locke - Human Understanding Book 2
- Locke - Human Understanding Book 1
- Locke - Early Modern Philosophy
- Koffler Common Law handbook
- Jonathan Edwards - Freedom of the Will
- Hume - Treatise of Human Nature Book I
- Hume - Treatise of Human Nature Book 3
- Hume - Treatise of Human Nature Book 2
- Hume - Four Essays
- Hume - Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals
- Hume - Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion
- Hume - An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding
- House Philip Dru Administrator
- Francis Bacon - The New Organon
- Euclids Elements
- Constant - The Liberty of the Ancients Compared with that of the Moderns
- Common Sense-Mag
- Common Sense
- CC2009 Articles of Freedom
- Butler - Three episodes from the Analogy of Religion
- Butler - Exchange of letters with Joseph Clarke
- Butler - A Preface and Three Sermons
- Boviers Law 1856
- Blackstone vol 2
- Blackstone vol 1
- Blacks Law Second Edition
- Berkeley - Three Dialogues between Hylas and Philonous
- Berkeley - Principles of Human Knowledge
- Berkeley - Alciphron
- Atlas Shrugged
- Adam Smith - The Theory of Moral Sentiments
- A_treatise_on_the_principles_of_pleading by Stephen
Please support our endeavor, help keep NLA on the web,
Donate $5.00 or more a month, and become a Premier Member, Thank you.
The 5000 Year Leap
Did I read somewhere that this is also available on the site somewhere as a pdf?
Regarding court costs
I have been faced with this situation as well.. commetns are welcome and appreciated!:
Federal Rules of Evidence 201(d) that Plaintiff has a lawful right to proceed without cost, based upon the following law: The U.S. Suprme Court has ruled that a natural individual entitled to reliefis entitled to free access to it's judicial tribunals and Public Offices in every state of the Union (2 Black 620, see also Crandall v. Nevada, 6 Wall 35).
Would this federal statute apply to State Administrative proceedings? The State has been obsrtucting justice on these matter, and will not proceed, unless I provide all finanical disclosures. The only problem with this scenario, is that once the state hase the information, they will use that information to exploit the father, and allege that I waived all my constitutional rights! This is the GEORGIA STATUTE they use: OCGA 19-11-9.3 I personally believe that its a 5th AMENDMENT violation, that exploits the ,protection against SELF INCRIMINATION.
Hale vs. Henkel
Does Hale vs. Henkel apply in cases were the state is asking for full disclosure of private information? Is imputed income, a unlawfully compelled contract to pay a civil debt that does not exist? Is imputing income CONSTITUTIONAL?
Administrative courts are charging a $100 dollar non-refundable fee,regarding modification of child support. They are using an application process and denying redress unless the father submits to all the private discloures they are requesting.! The State of Georgia is using OCGA 19-6-33 as a means to generate revenue for the state! Is purchase for justice legal? Where does it state that we have to pay for justice, yet every aspect of the court is PAY TO PLAY and Fathers are placed into situtions were the outcome is based on STAY OR PAY!
Re Administrative Courts
Check the Georgia Constitution. Typically there is a provision in a section titled "Bill of Rights" or "Declaration of Rights" stating that right and justice shall be adminstereed without sale or similar wording.
re re admistrative Court Costs
A similar provision exists in Article First (Declaration of Rights) Section X of the Connecticut Constitution.
Thanks for the response!!
Bill or Writ of ATTAINDER
Can someone explain the Writ or Bill of attainder? It is being stated that CHILD SUPPORT is a BILL Of ATTAINDER, yet, Judges are using civil contempt as a means to jail fathers, without charging anyone with a crime!
Re Bill of Attainder
A Bill of Attainder is a legislative Act that finds a Person guilty and imposes a punishment without a trial or a conviction. It typically is used for the crime of Treason. The Cousin to the Bill of Attainder is called a Bill of Pains and Penalties. It refers to lesser Crimes. Both are unconstitutional per Article I Section IX Clause III and Article I Section X CLause I of the U.S. Constituion.
Thanks for reply
It is confusing, in that, fathers are going into court in GEORGIA and they are being jailed and forced to pay debts, at the same time, without being charged with a crime!
Why one must always challenge Jurisdiction!
Mr. Kelly is Correct RE: Subject matter Jurisdiction
If you have not had time to follow the Bundy saga out West, this document should get you up to speed pretty much on a number of outstanding issues that until now have NOT been addressed by the court regarding this very issue...as to who had possession of the Refuge at the time of the Occupation. THIS is a good read, as well as a keeper for your own files in matters related. Servants acting in bad behavior must be admonished when they over-step our Constitutional limits upon their lawful authority to do so.
link didn't work maybe this will
really good summary points start at minute 40
Can we get our Chatroom back online and running?
Our Chatroom has been down for weeks now ,, Is there any way we can get it back online and running ?It is very important to have as many communication lines open as we can if we plan to save our republic.
Finding MP3 archives and stuff in shuffling linx !~)> ?
I agree. Really need out own soc media space - We should have video feed to be showing slides etc during the conf calls -- and we should have FOR SURE a running chat text in order to share the links being referenced often / names / contacts ....
I hate to complain and the clunkiness is being worked on , but the site is hard to find stuff and links change incomprehensibly. I still can't find any other audio archives besides the Monday ones. Where are the last month's COS /Sheriff (Thur) calls?
In light of Sheriff David Clarke and many other Sheriff's...
David from Philadelphia:
In light of Sheriff David Clarke and many other Sheriff's being unconstitutional (especially here on the east-coast of the US), the question is what to do if none or too few are non compliant to the Constitution??? Does it come to the point of "We are the militia"??? Because honestly people, without compliance, and the ability to enforce constitutional/common-law, words are useless and "We the People are powerless"!!!
Remedy by the People
Watch this youtube video. We have remedy we must use it and stop sitting on our hands. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oT-zp4WlQw We can organize a legal fighting fund. Everyone has standing and because a crime is a crime because it affects everyone.
David in philthadelphia> Citizens Arrest
Hi David Im in missouri and we do have the right here to do citizens arrest lawfully ..>.Even Though we have it here and 1 person can do it alone.I would want at least 2 or more for witnesses and to detain for safety purposes >militia members would be even better to make the arrest but not necessary> I hope this helps > it is a valid option for sure.The sheriffs are worthless at this point but we will continue to chisel away at their egos and break down their misconceptions about the Law of the land> I believe the citizens arrest is indeed the ticket and it willl show the true power of we the people.Lets get a brainstorm and explore this option together. Here is pennsylvania citizens arrest format and you do have the right as well in penn. as most states do
§ 508. Use of force in law enforcement.
(a) Peace officer's use of force in making arrest.--
(1) A peace officer, or any person whom he has summoned or directed to assist him, need not retreat or desist from efforts to make a lawful arrest because of resistance or threatened resistance to the arrest. He is justified in the use of any force which he believes to be necessary to effect the arrest and of any force which he believes to be necessary to defend himself or another from bodily harm while making the arrest. However, he is justified in using deadly force only when he believes that such force is necessary to prevent death or serious bodily injury to himself or such other person, or when he believes both that:
(i) such force is necessary to prevent the arrest from being defeated by resistance or escape; and
(ii) the person to be arrested has committed or attempted a forcible felony or is attempting to escape and possesses a deadly weapon, or otherwise indicates that he will endanger human life or inflict serious bodily injury unless arrested without delay.
(2) A peace officer making an arrest pursuant to an invalid warrant is justified in the use of any force which he would be justified in using if the warrant were valid, unless he knows that the warrant is invalid.
(b) Private person's use of force in making arrest.--
(1) A private person who makes, or assists another private person in making a lawful arrest is justified in the use of any force which he would be justified in using if he were summoned or directed by a peace officer to make such arrest, except that he is justified in the use of deadly force only when he believes that such force is necessary to prevent death or serious bodily injury to himself or another.
(2) A private person who is summoned or directed by a peace officer to assist in making an arrest which is unlawful, is justified in the use of any force which he would be justified in using if the arrest were lawful, unless he knows that the arrest is unlawful.
(3) A private person who assists another private person in effecting an unlawful arrest, or who, not being summoned, assists a peace officer in effecting an unlawful arrest, is justified in using any force which he would be justified in using if the arrest were lawful, if:
(i) he believes the arrest is lawful; and
(ii) the arrest would be lawful if the facts were as he believes them to be.
(c) Use of force regarding escape.--
(1) A peace officer, corrections officer or other person who has an arrested or convicted person in his custody is justified in the use of such force to prevent the escape of the person from custody as the officer or other person would be justified in using under subsection (a) if the officer or other person were arresting the person.
(2) A peace officer or corrections officer is justified in the use of such force, including deadly force, which the officer believes to be necessary to prevent the escape from a correctional institution of a person whom the officer believes to be lawfully detained in such institution under sentence for an offense or awaiting trial or commitment for an offense.
(3) A corrections officer is justified in the use of such force, which the officer believes to be necessary to defend himself or another from bodily harm during the pursuit of the escaped person. However, the officer is justified in using deadly force only when the officer believes that such force is necessary to prevent death or serious bodily injury to himself or another or when the officer believes that:
(i) such force is necessary to prevent the apprehension from being defeated by resistance; and
(ii) the escaped person has been convicted of committing or attempting to commit a forcible felony, possesses a deadly weapon or otherwise indicates that he will endanger human life or inflict serious bodily injury unless apprehended without delay.
(d) Use of force to prevent suicide or the commission of crime.--
(1) The use of force upon or toward the person of another is justifiable when the actor believes that such force is immediately necessary to prevent such other person from committing suicide, inflicting serious bodily injury upon himself, committing or consummating the commission of a crime involving or threatening bodily injury, damage to or loss of property or a breach of the peace, except that:
(i) Any limitations imposed by the other provisions of this chapter on the justifiable use of force in self-protection, for the protection of others, the protection of property, the effectuation of an arrest or the prevention of an escape from custody shall apply notwithstanding the criminality of the conduct against which such force is used.
(ii) The use of deadly force is not in any event justifiable under this subsection unless:
(A) the actor believes that there is a substantial risk that the person whom he seeks to prevent from committing a crime will cause death or serious bodily injury to another unless the commission or the consummation of the crime is prevented and that the use of such force presents no substantial risk of injury to innocent persons; or
(B) the actor believes that the use of such force is necessary to suppress a riot or mutiny after the rioters or mutineers have been ordered to disperse and warned, in any particular manner that the law may require, that such force will be used if they do not obey.
(2) The justification afforded by this subsection extends to the use of confinement as preventive force only if the actor takes all reasonable measures to terminate the confinement as soon as he knows that he safely can, unless the person confined has been arrested on a charge of crime.
(July 17, 2007, P.L.139, No.41, eff. 60 days)
2007 Amendment. Act 41 amended subsec. (c).
Cross References. Section 508 is referred to in section 8340.2 of Title 42 (Judiciary and Judicial Procedure).
Sherriff David Clarke is 100% UNCONSTITUTIONAL
Here is proof of his Unconstituional acts 150 foreclosures that he supports in his county http://sheriffsales.milwaukeecounty.org/ you can also look at his jail roster and look at all the non - victim crimes like traffic infractions,drug charges and many more he also supports the judicial extortion by holding these people in his jail with no victim.He is not who the people think he is>. Let us hold his feet to the fire so he can be held accountable on these criminal acts that he and his deputies are committing on a daily basis. Bottom line is he is totally ignorant to Due process and the Constitution and Common Law. People in wisconsin should be furious and ringing his phone off the hook and asking for in person meetings with him to discuss his wrongdoings and to educate this poor soul who uses the media to generate fame and revenue like richard mack does who is also 100% UNCONSTITUTIONAL.They are classic dog and pony show goons.Dont take my word for it> do the Factual research and cast aside any theories<< go to his jail site and see for yourself. Here is link to clarkes podcast > go to episode 60 its where he has an unconstituional idea of suspending habeas corpus https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/sheriff-david-clarke/id1003433784?mt=2
As a newbie member, I'm
As a newbie member, I'm finding that "constitutionalist" means far more than I thought it did a year ago... so the path now is for me to keep learning, and for practical purposes not "holding feet to the fire" but more and more REI: reach out, inspire and educate!
Clark a fraud
Wow. I questioned him on a site for not calling out his Posse Comitatus in view of all the rioting in Milwaukee. He's only in the news because he is against O and Hillary.
But, you are right. He is not Constitutional or he would act in accordance with the Constitution and know of the PC, which he obviously doesn't. Thanks for whistle blowing..
Hello, my name is Thomas Higgins took a Paralegal course back in 1993,finished with a Paralegal Certificate and an Associate degree. Do we have any one here in Napa County,California? That I can get a hold of so we can sit down and visit,about what an Individual can do to help out. Thank you. Thomas Higgins.
the 4th Reich?
.... books that have helped me identify the nightmare now...were Shirer's 'The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" Hannah Arendt, "The Origins of Totalitarianism," and more recently (1992?) William Greider's "How Do We Tell the People?...etc"
I want to recommend a book to add to your PDF collection
Thei book, "The Christian Life And Character Of The Civil Institutions Of The United States", is an extremely interesting book. Was written in 1864. 838 pages.
This book is on the website https://archive.org/
This website has many thousands of books, video, photos, audio avalable for FREE DOWNLOAD. All tems cam be ownloaded in many formats. One of the ms worthwhile websies. A treasure trove.