"Common Law vs. Admiralty Law, When will the Transition Begin?" by Carden - 4/14/18

We've all rented property in the past. Most standard lease agreements allow landlords to sell their rental units with and without notifying the tenant. Ever rented a property that was foreclosed on? It happens all the time. While every state has unique laws it can generally be stated that as long as your lease agreement is in force, and no special exception exists for a property sale, you're staying put. When the term of the lease is up you will have to renegotiate your lease with the new owner or move on. Bottom line is it's not an automatic transition. If a contract is in force the tenant has rights.

The same situation is in force for government contractors. Take a look at this example. NCMA, National Contract Management Association boasts 20,000 members. At their annual conference this past December, they honored members from every company, mostly major defense contractors, manufacturers like: Lockheed Martin, BAE, Geico, Amazon, and many more. Here's a link to their exhibitors list in the 2017 World Congress event: http://ncma.webvent.tv/sites/1.+World+Congress/2017+Event+Exhibitors

Every one of these companies are here because they have government contracts, or they are vying for contracts. They are fulfilling government services, federal, state and local.

For instance unemployment benefits in Texas was turned over to General Dynamics Corporation in 1998. I know this because I was involved in a major sale with the Texas Unemplyment Division when all of a sudden I was directed to General Dynamics. All the federal employees were laid off. How many government services are subcontracted out? There's no way to know. My guess is ALL OF THEM.

The question is constantly being asked, when will Common Law become the norm? This is a slow transition, obviously. One answer might be: how long will it be for these goverment contracts to expire? I bet that most of these large defense contractors, like GD in the "Texas Workforce Division", had an "Evergreen" clause in the contract. I know for a fact that General Dynamics did. Translation, without formal notice the contract would automatically continue, ad infinitum. Back in 1998 when General Dynamics won this contract I asked, how did you win this business without a formal bid? "We made a very compelling bid that saved the State of Texas money. It was easily done." As this example demonstrates, coupled with the continuation of these "outsourced services", The Good Ole Boy Network, is still alive and well and thriving.

Could it be that the NPTB don't want to rip the bandaid off too fast or possibly at all? Fact is, if it's true that US Inc was closed for business May 2015, and the sovereign US Republic took charge then how many of these contractors have been given notice that their Admiralty Law based Agreement was ended and the US Inc., no more? How many evergreen contracts have been ended and are floating on a month to month while decisions are made? Wow. It would be nice to know. The budget and details for all of these contractors falls under the OMB. Well, maybe, with a well written request under FOIA we can discover the full extent of these little known facts. Till then we can only watch and learn.

There must be massive, global education. There must be transparency given, more so than ever before. The word, "clandestine" has no place in a healthy, functioning society. We can understand and sympathize with the wage slaves delivering these government services as subcontractors, without federal benefits and salaries; earning less and working more. Been there, done that. We can provide a safety net to catch them when they step out into the light of day. We can meld and morph them into productive, lovely, loving people if given the chance. That's our jobs. It's what we signed up for. There are so, so many unproductive people, hating their jobs and their lives. It has an end in sight and we are IT.

We are RWA... Ready, Willing and Able and reporting for duty.

Big hugs and massive shoulders to carry the world, that's what we have and who we are. RWA.

Carden

"Re: Common Law vs. Admiralty Law" by John



There is a little item in “Contract Law” called “Full Disclosure.” This is explained in “Contract Law 101” that, “Without full disclosure a contract become null and void.” Such a contract is commonly referred to as an “Adhesion Contract.” I point this out because the type of “llaw” that has been practiced for the past one hundred plus years in America has NOT been totally Admiralty Law. It has actually been a combination of several forms of law…one of which is Roman Law. An example of Roman Law being imposed on Americans is in the use of ALL CAPITAL LETTERS for all government issued documents or licenses. Many believe this is merely a means of typing Corporate Documents and, while that may be technically and partially true, the reason for the use of ALL CAPITAL LETTERS is much deeper and more sinister. According to Black’s Law Dictionary, the Latin phrase “Capitis Diminutio” is how it is designated and, comes from Roman Law referring to "the use of capital letters for the purposes of diminishing the status of a citizen in society. It goes on to explain that there are actually three levels of Capitis Diminutio but, that the highest level is "Capitis Diminutio Maxima”, which is the use of all capital letters and, "this occurs when a citizen goes from being a free-man to becoming a slave.” Check out Black’s Law Dictionary 4th Edition Revised 1968. https://thelawdictionary.org/capitis-diminutio/

My reason for bringing that up is, that is a clear indication of “failure to disclose” or, lack of full disclosure and, thereby makes the contract null and void on its face. With that in mind, there is no need to go further into when contract end and new ones begin in many instances, since they for all intents and purposes were null and void from the beginning for lack of full disclosure.

John

https://thelawdictionary.org/capitis-diminutio/

What is CAPITIS DIMINUTIO?

In Roman law, A diminishing or abridgment of personality. Tills was a loss or curtailment of a man’s status or aggregate of legal attributes and qualifications, following upon certain changes in his civil condition. It was of three kinds, enumerated as follows: Capitis diminutio maxima. The highest or most comprehensive loss of status. This occurred when a man’s condition was changed from one of freedom to one of bondage, when he became a slave. It swept away with it all rights of citizenship and all family rights. Capitis diminutio media. A lesser or medium loss of status. This occurred where a man lost his rights of citizenship, but without losing his liberty. It carried away also the family rights. Capitis diminutio minima. Tile lowest or least comprehensive degree of loss of status. This occurred where a man’s family relations alone were changed. It happened upon the arrogation of a person who had been his own master, (sui juris,) or upon the emancipation of one who had been under the patria potestas. It left the rights of liberty and citizenship unaltered. See Inst. 1, 1G, pr.; 1, 2, 3; Dig. 4, 5, 11; Mackeld. Rom. Law.

Gonna have to call BS on this one. First of all, Admiralty law only applies at sea. It is the body of law regarding maritime navigation, contracts, conduct, etc. In the US Admiralty law cases are tried in Federal civil courts. Civil Law covers and individuals rights as well as contracts, torts, property and family law. The USC is an example of this. Common Law is the uncodified body of law that is largely based on precedent. For that reason it is also sometimes called case law. The common laws to be applied to a case are decided by the presiding judge.

As far as capitis diminutio maxima, the writer is mostly correct in the meaning. I'm not sure where they get the all caps bit from. I suppose it is from the Latin word capitis, or capite, meaning by the head. Diminutio is a verb meaning to take away, so capitis diminutio means literally to take away the headship. There are three levels, maxima, the loss of liberty, citizenship, and family, media, the loss of citizenship and family without any forfeiture of personal liberty and minima, ceasing to belong to a particular family, without loss of liberty or citizenship. None are defined by the use of capital letters in whole or in part.

BTW the general use of the word Capitals in that way is actually a misuse. The proper terms are Majuscule and Minuscule if writing by hand, and Uppercase or Lowercase if setting type. Capitalization is the set of rules that governs how you apply the above to words.

Carden needs a clue ...