Comment: Please consider accurate language

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: I like that thought of (see in situ)

Please consider accurate language

What is the meaning of "one of the two parties," and what is the meaning of a "third party court?"

I am asking because your question is being asked and answered as a process that is now documenting facts, but the concept of parties does not apply to courts in the current effort to ask and answer the question.

There are Liberty minded people (minds that are free from the corporate contract fraud disguised as government) now creating common law courts in New York as part of a nation wide effort to regain consensual defensive government power in Liberty.

Tonight will be an update meeting on current stumbling blocks where corporate judges and corporate clerks (false or counterfeit versions of defensive government) are working to exclude these people in New York from the common law courts that are within common law for them.

So your question appears to be similar to the current actions being taken in New York, but your question also appears to be written from a perception that the corporate courts are part of a political party process, and therefore it may be your opinion that a common law court is a third party court, and that opinion may not be an accurate one.

Common law courts can be confused with Common Law (tm) courts.

I don't know if that can make sense to you, it makes sense to me.

The United States of America (tm) can be confused with states that are united into a voluntary defensive force knowable as these united states of America, or We the people in these United States of America do this or that, or whatever accurate words convey the intended meaning.

So as to avoid confusing two opposite things:

1.
A Monopoly Power of Aggressive Involuntary Force for the Profit of a few at the expense of many = a fraudulent corporate entity

2.
An ongoing competition among free people to ensure their consensual government remains strictly consensual while retaining the defensive power required to overpower any foreign or domestic armies of criminals

One of the two opposite things is The Problem, while the other of the two opposite things are many competitive solutions to The Problem.

Who does it serve to confuse the two opposite things as if the two opposite things are the same thing?

Who does it serve to confuse the "two partly system" as if it were anything other than a Fraud and Extortion Racket Crime in Progress?

Who does it serve to confuse a "third party" with a competitive methodology of defending victims from criminals?

In my opinion the efforts currently playing out to defend Liberty in New York, whereby people are regaining their power of knowledge concerning ancient customs of trials by juries are being rediscovered and employed by people in New York, and who are still stuck firmly, and unfortunately, in the "party system" DOGMA.

I am trying to help them see the error of their ways while they take each step along the way toward regaining a foothold into a voluntary, defensive, government agreement to USE currently existing court buildings as centers of accurate information transfer, whereby the people intend to efficiently, and accurately, identify specific criminals within the corporate government who are currently perpetrating serious crimes upon many innocent victims.

The fact that individual people acting as agents of corporations are working to exclude people from voluntary government is, IN FACT, demonstrations of crimes in progress along these specific lines of thinking, and acting, in DEFENSE OF LIBERTY.

These events are happening right now.

http://nationallibertyalliance.org/default.html

You may (or may not) want to find within that link information that may be useful in figuring out how consensual government works for you, or, alternatively be subjected to involuntary servitude to criminals who have perfected methods by which their targeted victims are stupefied, excluded, and exploited.

If none of this makes any sense to you, then you can ask questions, and get answers.

Which questions are vital, which answers are accurate?

"I like that thought of multiple courts. But what happens if one of the two parties involved doesn't agree to or recognize a third party court?"

The people intending to defend voluntary association in New York, are encountering agents of corporate government who are attempting to exclude those people from those common law courts.

That is where any claims of authority will be determined as FACT recorded in what is known as a Court of Record.

If you don't recognize the existence of voluntary government, government by the consent of the governed, in the form customarily known as Common Law Grand Juries, then it might be a good idea to realize, for YOU to realize, that the corporate, fraudulent, extorting, involuntary, monopoly, government DOES recognized Common Law Grand Juries in their own fraudulent, legal, records.

If those corporate agents are going to PUSH their efforts to exclude people in New York from those court buildings, then those corporate agents are going to confess that they are no longer following their own corporate laws.

Those corporate agents have been getting away with very serious crimes since 1788 because they have been using the corporate charter know as The Constitution of The United States of America as their claim of authority.

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/constitution_trans...

When the corporate agents perpetrating crimes against innocent people confess that they are no longer making that claim, that they have "NO AUTHORITY" other than criminal authority, then those confessions can be recorded in a common law court of record.

Now the people have the so called Internet, and this specific challenge by specific people in New York, can be recorded and spread far and wide utilizing that Medium of Exchange, as a competitive COURT OF RECORD.

So, as Ron Paul has reminded us (but in different words), an idea (such as common law grand juries and courts of record) is more powerful than those (monopolists) who wish to suppress such competitive ideas.

Where do these vital questions find these accurate answers and will there be a RECORD of such things that is available to all the people in Liberty?

Joe