2 votes

The Origins of Sovereign Citizens

The Origin of Sovereign Citizens,
By: The People's Awareness Coalition.

Good to know.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I originated one this morning

while sitting on the john

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

Take back our courts from corrupt judges-People's Common Law Gra

People's Common Law Grand Jury. Demand to be heard in a PCLGJ. Never retain a lawyer. Learn the law...the REAL law: no injury, no damage, no crime. Motion to dismiss!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AeplTS49eKg Dean Clifford - Courtroom Procedure & Jurisdiction – Full
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XnVqSNV3Aw&feature=youtu.be "Good jurors nullify bad laws" - Campaign to promote jury nullification
http://fija.org/ Fully Informed Jury Association
"Reaffirmation of Oath of Office, by (original author unknown) revised by Gregory Allan (4K)
Hold Public Servants to their oath, or make them pay the price. It basically asks them to sign a contract to make you one of the people to whom they have sworn an oath. No one will ever sign this, but showing it to them and asking them to sign it becomes evidence they have been put on notice."
"Grand Juries are the highest and most supreme power...So, if all political power resides within the People, and the People, sitting as Grand Jurors, have the ultimate control over all criminal matters and are free to indict whomsoever they will, including public officials, why propose Recalls of public officials?..e one and only way we will ever recover our country, and that is through our inherent power to establish Special Grand Juries." has the power to enforce law and remove people from office.

Like, "So Over the Reins', on

Like, "So Over the Reins", on a horse. You're your own horse.

Not sure I get what you are

Not sure I get what you are saying.

~ Engage in the war of attrition: http://pacalliance.us/redamendment/

Knowing who you are under the

Knowing who you are under the law, and having the evidence to prove it is the only solution. Well, that and working together in unison under the proper jurisdiction. That helps too.

~ Engage in the war of attrition: http://pacalliance.us/redamendment/

After the corporate constitution is gone

what other legitimate jurisdiction is there besides the original republic?

If it is true there is no other jurisdiction, how does the evidence secure an individual as a citizen of that republic?

Can we stop doing all the things we are doing that we do not want to do while still doing what we need to do?

The issue is that it is still

The issue is that it is still there and in forcen but there are very few people who have the standing of "the people" to claim it. What we have is two systems of government that opperate side by side. So which side you are on depends up on your state, or status, with respect to the government. One is the de facto marxist one established during reconstruction that makes the state political federal subdivisions. The other is the the one based on the organic law upon which the Constitution is founded.

~ Engage in the war of attrition: http://pacalliance.us/redamendment/

Okay, the default is what people are automatically included in

and the other is only occupied if the individual status is adjusted by a "claim" properly made.

We need to make the old republic the default because it is doubtful that enough people will make the claim, and corporations dominate under the 1871 corporate are destroying everything of value.

The concept of Article V under preparatory amendment is that citizens make a collective claim upon the principles of the old republic in the political system of the default reconstructionist government and refuse to have anything to do with any candidate or initiative it puts forth.

After preparatory amendment, particularly the ending of the abridging of free speech, it all changes, radically.

Can we stop doing all the things we are doing that we do not want to do while still doing what we need to do?

I see where you are coming

I see where you are coming from. Where can I learn more about the process you are talking about with references to law?

If you get the Red Amendment from the link below, you can read, with far greater detail than I could possibly provide, about how these two systems work side by side and individuals and families can choose for themselves to which system (read jurisdiction) they wish to pledge allegiance. It's a nationality thing. Sitings and references document this research thorougly.

Cheers :-)

~ Engage in the war of attrition: http://pacalliance.us/redamendment/

Yes-your info may be requisite status

for those who would fill offices in the old republic.

Here is a site dedicated to revival of the old republic.


Our info is definitely working together. This site seems to be the most focused on functional action.


If you do a google site search for article v, you will find lots of people interested. If you do a site search for "principal party" you will find my thread on strategy, which has a very good narrational summary of the transition from the old republic to the corporate.

Can we stop doing all the things we are doing that we do not want to do while still doing what we need to do?

The link in this post may be

The link in this post may be of further assistance to you. http://www.dailypaul.com/305082/citizen-of-the-unted-states-...

I followed the Republic for a long while and know several of others who were involved. I had desperite hope that this was the answer I was looking for, but there were too many red flaggs for me to participate. Everything from approaching the the State's Governors with armed escort and the simplicity of the withdrawl process (which changed during the process) to the "top down" hierarchical political focus of the federal functions before the State and the promise of travel ID's issued not from each State but from the "Republic."

I couldn't help but smell a rat, and now Tim Turner is in Federal prison. Certainly, if what was being said and done by those in charge had been lawful, there would be no one in jail.


The truth as I understand it is that the 14th amendment places all US citizens in rebellion against the true States by voting. Only US citizens can vote after all. But what's even crazier is that those who do get elected really wear two hats: A de facto hat, AND a de jure hat. This is how the 14th Amendment permits the elected to maintain lawful power. It is also the reason why the only way to lawfully change the system is to change your self... in law through correcting the presumption of nationality, and creating evidence to that deed.

~ Engage in the war of attrition: http://pacalliance.us/redamendment/

I as well checked out the old republic years ago

I concluded they had found something real, but didn't know how to deal with it.

I appreciate your summary of non functional efforts to get the republic back it's power.

Such failures do not diminish the relevance. The process of elimination works well, so we know those things have been tried. It seems fairly obvious to me that Article V is the way to reinstate the old republic.

The nature of contracts is that from one, another must be made or re instated. Everyone thinks the gov (corporate) must respect Article V. Chances are the current corp gov will not try and reject Article V when the states start convening delegates of 3/4 of the states, after congress violated the law, their oath and the constitution when the requisite number of states had applied on 1911. 1912, the titanic with 40 of the wealthiest American against the nation leaving the gold standard. 1913 , the federal reserve.

An amendment that requires abandoning any contract superseding under duress related to war when such contract is found to interfere with the original contract or constitution ought to put the corporate constitution out of its misery.

BTW, Turner was convicted of tax fraud, nothing related to the old republic activism. Also, at the constitutionclub, people that have been with the old republic since the beginning, have recognized that Article V maybe the way to revive the old republic.

Can we stop doing all the things we are doing that we do not want to do while still doing what we need to do?

The issue with Turner is

The issue with Turner is that if he had corrected his status properly there wouldn't be any "tax" charges to through at him. But as it is, he remained under federal jurisdiction which is what he was telling everyone they were getting out of.

~ Engage in the war of attrition: http://pacalliance.us/redamendment/

Yep, that's the problem, but not the solution

A picture of the distortion of rights under the 1871 corporate constitution may help.

What will help is understanding that the original republic needs to be re established. Doing that will require Article V. Therein the 14th amendment can be dealt with comprehensively.

Basically, by the people's defining constitutional intent, the old offices of the republic are able to regurgitate, with full authority, the laws made since 1871 and return constitutionality to the laws for each issue they address.

What ends up happening, more or less, is that a ruly upgraded government is hammered out by the people of the states according to the principles stated or implied in the 1787 constitution, and the DOI before it, of and for the people.

Can we stop doing all the things we are doing that we do not want to do while still doing what we need to do?

The Problem is that 14th

The Problem is that 14th Amendment US citizens do not have standing to bring forth such change. Article V is dangerous business. It's the kind of thing that gave us the consolidated power we are struggling with right now.

~ Engage in the war of attrition: http://pacalliance.us/redamendment/

I've always felt that the motives for the civil

war have been misrepresented, or under presented.

I'll just mention that and move onto the massive financing and support England provided to the north.

Take in what appears as an inconsistency of history. Re-payment if the debt by the colonies, of the 1790 war, is cited as part cause. However, why is England paying with one hand and collecting with the other?

BTW, the 5th grade teacher that told me about the English funding to the north told the whole class, he was not supposed to teach that part.

Can we stop doing all the things we are doing that we do not want to do while still doing what we need to do?

If we do not agree on constitutional intent, yes

but if we do agree, we can assemble the masses and make our own authority.

The concept of "Preparatory Amendment" makes Article V safe.

Only 3 amendments are allowed , which increases the people's capacity to be constitutional.

1)End the abridging of free speech
2)Secure the vote
3)Campaign finance reform

Amendments effecting those issues are the only ones allowed until the people can prove to themselves that they can indeed define constitutional intent that is acceptable to a substantial majority.

Can we stop doing all the things we are doing that we do not want to do while still doing what we need to do?