: Admiralty Court vs. Common Law: infringement on liberties?
05-20-2003, 11:23 AM
I'm no lawyer so I don't know. But I understand that there is a big difference and that the courts have turned to Admiralty law as designated by a gold fringe on the flag instead of the constitutional, (unfringed), flag. Any lawyers out there?
Evil government henchman
05-20-2003, 12:00 PM
So...because the courts use a flag with a gold fringe you think they have switched to admiralty law and have abandoned the Constitution?
Do you also believe we live under martial law?
And that the government engages is a military action every 2 years to maintain martial law?
If so, I recommend you take the tinfoil cap off your head and do some research. By performing an elementary google search I found LOTS of information about this matter and it will put your mind at ease. Please, please do not believe everything you have been told by that strange man who lives in a cabin in the woods among his stockpile of AK-47's and ten tons of baked beans.
Here are a few links:
05-20-2003, 12:42 PM
Like I said, I don't know. Thats why I ask for the opinion of a lawyer. Thats what this forum is for. It would appear from the over-reacting context of your post that you have quite the agenda yourself.
In fairness, you said "you understand" this to be true. I think the message is, lawyer or no lawyer, no rational person capable of even the most basic research could possibly understand that to be true. It would be interesting to know where that understanding came from because someone of ignorance or ill motive or both would seem to be the source. By the way, that's not what this forum is for, but with a lot of the junk that get's tossed around I can see why you would think that --- look what we have caused!
05-20-2003, 06:03 PM
I asked an expert on flags once what the gold fringe on around a flag meant because all of our courts except the very few common law courts that still exist have a gold fringed flag. He said that indeed the gold fringe on a flag was a designation of admiralty or a sign of military invasion. There is also another interesting thing about common law courts. They have no "bar". There is no gate you pass through to enter the actual court. Where did you first hear this theory?
05-20-2003, 08:10 PM
I first heard about it on a radio program. Don't know which one I tuned in a bit late and was'nt listening real close. But I did catch something about an Admiralty Court and that it was'nt the same as Common Law. I did a search and came up with this, http://www.barefootsworld.net/admiralty.html There are some others that are similar as well as the more traditional descriptions of admiralty law which applies to sea and sea commerce.
Evil government henchman
05-21-2003, 05:56 AM
I have a few questions:
1. Who was this flag "expert"? I want to know EXACTLY who he or she was and/or his or her EXACT credentials.
2. You really believe that because there is no hand rail in a court that the government is now practicing martial law?
3. If all this is true, why did OJ go free?
4. If all this is true, who is behind it? What huge worldwide consortium is trying to steal your 1/4 acre of Idaho land?
5. Why don't they just make the grab now? I mean really, what is holding them back? You and your shotgun? I doubt it, we just saw the capabilities of the US military in graphic detail, why go through the subterfuge of admiralty courts if they can take anything they want by force now?
Evil government henchman
05-21-2003, 06:12 AM
1. I have no agenda other than trying to get people to stop worrying about the paranoid fantasies of the conspiracy theorists.
2. Any chance you remember what radio show it was? The reason I ask is there is a show here in Cincinnati that is all about this stuff by a guy named Bill Boshears. He also believes Oregano will cure virtually any disease from asbestosis to SARS.
3. There are more or less three types of law: Common law, admiralty law and statutory law. Common law is basically tort law relating to one party injuring another. Admiralty law is a bit more complicated and deals with maritime endeavours. Admiralty law applies to both foreign and domestic ships and captains. Basically, the captain is the supreme law on the ship. And statutory law is the law passed by the government.
All three come from the English legal system which was more or less adopted in full (minus that monarchy part) by the fledgling United States in the Constitution and in the Judicial Act of the late 1700's (1789?).
05-21-2003, 08:16 AM
No, I can't get any Cincinatti radio stations, way to far away. I don't believe we're under martial law. I'm not homesteading in Idaho. And no I don't believe that the New England Vexology Association, as you suggested, is the epitome of verificaton. It sounds like a flat earth society type thing. Nor do I own a shotgun or any other type of firearm. I do find it interesting that all this rubs your nerves so. Your altruistic, and disingenious, response that your only interested in my welfare I don't believe for a second. So, come on know, be a big boy and tell us. What is your real aganda? Liberal? Animal rights? Militia buster? Any or all of the above? Come on, its all right, you can be honest here. We won't laugh-at least not for long.
Evil government henchman
05-21-2003, 09:57 AM
Well although vexillology may sound like the Flat-earth society it is not.
Again some basic research skills would lead you to enlightenment:
One entry found for vexillology.
Main Entry: vex·il·lol·o·gy
Etymology: Latin vexillum
: the study of flags
- vex·il·lo·log·ic /(")vek-"si-l&-'lä-jik/ or vex·il·lo·log·i·cal /-'lä-ji-k&l/ adjective
- vex·il·lol·o·gist /"vek-s&-'lä-l&-jist/ noun
So they may actually know what they are talking about....
I will say this, I could care less about your personal welfare. What I care about is having to wade through the utter nonsense that people prop up as conspiracy theories. Note, I did not say YOU are spreading it, I realize you were looking for information. the interesting part is that you have more or less cast aside the information I passed along from Cornell Law and a society devoted to studying flags and instead chose to believe a website from barefoot.com. A website which on other pages argues that the 13th and 14th amendments are unconstitutional and should be struck down. Because I know not everyone knows what those are...they are the amendments abolishing slavery and granting citizenship to anyone born in the US. Additionally he appears to believe that George W. Bush is the modern-day equivalent of Hitler and that 9/11 was carried out by the US.
I seriously have no agenda. I am social liberal and economic conservative. I believe the NRA has gone off course and so has the ACLU. I believe Bush is right about Iraq and wrong about the tax cut. I believe the ATF should have waited out Waco and Ruby Ridge, but I also believe anyone who shoots a Federal agent deserves to die.
I fish for walleye, bass, crappie, bluegill and catfish. I eat some of them, I return most of them. I own 4 guns and hunt with them all. Last year I killed 30 squirrels and 10 rabbits (poor hunting down here lol), a coyote and tried like ##### to kill a deer. Last night I had venison for dinner. Tonight I am having bluegill.
I could care less if a bunch of 40 year old men want to go play guns in upper Michigan until one of them blows up 200+ Americans in Oklahoma City.
Finally, depending on where you are you probably can actually get a Cincinnati radio station. 700 wlw cranks up to 50,000 watts after dark and is heard in 38 states and 3 countries. Just so happens that it is the same station Boshears is on from 9 p.m. - 12:00 a.m. Sat and Sun nights.
05-21-2003, 10:37 AM
Thats better. See how easy it is? When you start out with attack and insult you automatically give cause for speculation as to your motives and agenda. I'm not overly impressed with the conspiracy/patriot types. Their harmless. Sure you have the lunatic fringe types from both ends of the political spectrum from McVeigh to Theodore Kaczynski, the Unabomber. But the talk radio hosts that you seem to be so concerned about are not going to blow you up. Those who blow things up listen to their own voices not the radio. Theodore Kaczynski did'nt even have electricity with which to listen to a radio. The liberal reaction to purported right wing conspiracies is hilarious. Sorry, but thats the first word that comes to mind. Wow! You sure flew off the handle. Just who or what did you think I was? Afterall, an innocuous inquiry about an unfringed flag and you became unglued. Haha. Chill out man. Lifes to short. In spite of what Sidney Blumenthal and Hillary Clinton insist, there is no vast right wing conspiracy.
Evil government henchman
05-21-2003, 11:13 AM
My point is this:
They ARE NOT HARMLESS. Unfortunately, the conspiracy theorists get their ideas into people like McVeigh's head and they blow up a building, or they talk people like the Unabomber into hating corporate America and he blows up innocent people. The lunatic fringe killed 200+ Americans in Ok. City and 3000+ in NYC. The lunatic fringe blew up numerous corporate bigwigs through mail bombs. The lunatic fringe did this because someone talked them into buying their load of bull. The list of left-wingers is as long as the list of right wingers, add ELF, ALF, Earth First and The Sea Shepherd Society to the list that includes the violent militias, KKK and other right wing hate groups.
Judging by your responses I will go out on a limb and say you would consider yourself to be a conservative. You should be aware that the same people who railed for years about Clinton and his abuses, real and perceived, are now saying the same things about the Bush II (and they did about Bush I also). Their agenda is this, they are ticked that they have no power and they will lash out at any who do with any means necessary, up to and including physical violence.
As for the talk show host thing, I only mentioned Bill Boshears because this is something he has discussed many times, he can hardly be called a conservative because he hates republicans as much as democrats. As far as people like Rush and Hannity and the like, well I think for the most part they are completely harmless. In fact, I think it is hilarious that so many people listen to Rush, a man who has been married 3 times, dropped out of college and dodged the draft, preach the Republican doctrine. Hannity on the other hand comes off as intelligent and a powerful debater but in actuallity excels at shouting down those who do not agree and asking closed ended questions which allow no acceptable answer, then demanding an answer. More power to them, they hit the market at exactly the right time and have made millions doing so.
Sorry if you took my response the wrong way but I was attempting some humor as well as education. The fact of the matter is that most "liberals" would throw me out the door because of the things I believe.
The reaction to conspiracies is not nearly as funny as most conspiracies themselves.
As for flying off the handle, chalk that up to an attempt to bury the arguement with overwhelming evidence. These ideas need to be relegated to where they belong, a roll of toilet paper in a Canadian fly-in outhouse.
Actually there is a vast right wing conspiracy, the same as the left wing conspiracy. Buy into their crap and advance their cause. So...in the interest of responding to the initial post in a more acceptable manner, please replace my first response with this one:
Nah, this is a load of bull. Here are some links I found which discuss this matter. Feel free to peruse them and make up your own mind:
(insert links from first response here)
This site talks about the fringe. Doesn't seem to be anything more than "honorable enrichment". I don't think it has significant meaning. The idea that it represents something sounds like water cooler talk gone bad.
05-21-2003, 11:24 AM
I inadvertently mis-spoke. I understand that most courts have switched to the Admiralty flag. Whether or not this meant an Admiralty court is what I was wanting to find out. Apparantly either no one knows or they refuse to verify their credentials if they do. This switch to a fringed flag does appear to be a relatively recent and virtuallly universal phenomena and I'm curious as to the significance, if any exists.
05-21-2003, 03:44 PM
Groups variously known as "constitutionalists," "freemen," "sovereign citizens," "posse comitatis," "militias," etc., claim a gold fringe on the flag makes the court an admiralty court which only has jurisdiction over the high seas, i.e. it's an excuse to disobey the court's orders. These people also claim you don't have to pay taxes, have license, plates on your vehicle, etc. Try it and see what happens to you.
There are people who promote this nonsense as a money-making business. They want you to buy their forms, books, magazines, tapes, seminars, etc. The information they put out is false and their "legal strategies" (such as the flag fringe argument) don't work. I dealt with this stuff all the time as a lawyer for a government agency. Don't be a sucker or fall for it.
For more information, read a web site called "Militia Watchdog."
05-21-2003, 04:07 PM
I'm a lawyer and a sailor and a fisherman and I got an A+ in my Admiralty Law class at a top 15 law school. Unfortunately that was 9 years ago and I have not practiced a single piece of Admiralty law since. However, I remember enough of it to tell you a few things:
1. The flag that's displayed in a court has got nothing, nada, to do with the jurisdiction of that court. The court has whatever jurisdiction that is granted to the court by the Constitution and by the statutes enacted by Congress and the states. The court has this jurisdiction regardless of what flag it displays or if it displays no flag at all.
2. Admiralty law is mostly Federal law, that is, if you have an admiralty matter you will be in Federal court not state court. There is common (judge-made) admiralty law (based on the results of prior cases) and there is statutory admiralty law.
3. Admiralty law has to do with things which happen on ships, on the high seas, and sometimes on aircraft which are over the high seas. Things which happen on your walleye boat on an inland lake or the Great Lakes may not, in some cases, even be subject to admiralty law. Admiralty law is mostly civil law, not criminal law. It has to do with who pays for what, not who goes to jail for what.
4. If there is a law which the people don't like, whether it's an admiralty law, or other law, whether common law or statutory law, the people can change it through their elected representatives. And, the law is enforced by your elected representatives, so if you don't like they way they are enforcing it, you can vote them out.
In short, unless you are a merchant mariner or own a salvage company, admiralty law is nothing to worry about and probably will never affect you in any direct way.
05-21-2003, 05:57 PM
Glad to hear you don't have an agenda.
05-21-2003, 06:02 PM
Thanks for the informative and positive response. You must wear tin cans on your head as you don't seem to be worried about goblins.
05-21-2003, 06:04 PM
Man, July sure got here quick. Catch any muskies yet? What did you catch them on?
05-23-2003, 10:06 AM
Russ Porisky won his tax case in B.C. by refusing to cross the bar in an Admiralty court. He determined that by crossing that bar you enter a new jurisdiction. It is believed that admiralty type power is being used in our courts of statute law. This case lends creedence to that theory. Russ was tried in a common law court with no bar and was aquitted. Don't ask me to explain further. Instead ,try to tell me why he won.
P.S. He did not win on a technicality. This was a straight forward "failure to file"case.
05-23-2003, 02:14 PM
Went to a native ethnic dancing establishment in Canada. (strip club)
The gal had a gold fringe on her thong and she asked me "Been in port long sailer?"
It must have been an Admiralty thing cause I had to give here alot of dollars.;)
"As far as people like Rush and Hannity and the like, well I think for the most part they are completely harmless. In fact, I think it is hilarious that so many people listen to Rush, a man who has been married 3 times, dropped out of college and dodged the draft, preach the Republican doctrine."
Reference Limbaugh, I assume from your statement that you feel anyone divorced that did not finish college and got out of military service due to being over weight is not worht listening to?
And then I ask, why listen to you? You are an elitest and a person who is so judgemental that any opinion other than your own is not acceptable. You claim no agenda then rant a huge agenda, just like Limbaugh. And educated or not, people run this country, not exclusive educational sorority members. And at that how many of them have been divorced? The number of times means nothing. You can blame him exclusively or not, but YOU don't know! And what if his first marraige was because they were too young for the responsibility, and the second because she felt she was second to his work. And finally if he ends up divorced yet again, does that make his opinion any less valuable? He has in fact been very accurate on numerous issues and is widely held responsible for the 1994 Republican surge back to power in Washington.
As for President Bush, the near future will demonstrate the tax cuts will stimulate the economy and the increased business will generate jobs that in the long run will pay the deficit back down. It has happened before and this country is still here.
The fringe is simply decorative and more "formal" of an appearance though officially means nothing.