Lawyers, historians, anybody with a brain? (Don't need answer fast)

The following was posted by a recognized doofus in a discussion that started out being about business registration and taxes, that sort of thing. I know it’s pretty far out there, but I thought I’d throw it out here, in case anybody had some thoughts or actual facts to contribute. It’s curiosity as much as anything, but I’m shaking my head here.
The Bar attorneys in the United States owe their allegiance and pledge their oaths to the Crown. All Bar Associations throughout the world are signatories and franchises to the International Bar Association located at the Inns of Court of the Crown Temple.

The Inner Temple holds the legal system franchise by license that bleeds Canada and Great Britain white, while the Middle Temple has license to steal from America. To have the Declaration of Independence recognized internationally, Middle Templar King George III agreed in the Treaty of Paris of 1783 to establish the legal Crown entity of the incorporated United States, referred to internally as the Crown Temple States (Colonies). States spelled with a capital letter ‘S,’ denotes a legal entity of the Crown.
At least five Templar Bar Attorneys under solemn oath to the Crown, signed the American Declaration of Independence. This means that both parties were agents of the Crown. There is no lawful effect when a party signs as both the first and second parties. The Declaration was simply an internal memo circulating among private members of the Crown. Most Americans believe that they own their own land, but they have merely purchased real estate by contract. Upon fulfillment of the contract, control of the land is transferred by Warranty Deed. The Warranty Deed is only a ‘color of title.’ Color of Title is a semblance or appearance of title, but not title in fact or in law. The Warranty Deed cannot stand against the Land Patent.

Oh, why spoil such a great achievement with any taint of fact?

This is obviously the right answer.

But, for a start, I have no clue what a “Bar attorney” is. You become an attorney by meeting a state’s education requirements, passing their exam(s), and being admitted to the practice of law in a particular state. When you get admitted, you swear an oath to uphold the US Constitution and faithfully execute the duties of your office, before a court of your state.

I promise that at no time does an attorney in New York State pledge allegiance to anyone, living or dead, British or American. :smiley: I do not believe that any attorney’s oath of office in a US state swears allegiance to any person, and the text of the oath used by the Federal government is:
*I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God
*

Source of above text, with history of the Federal oath of office:

The doofus may have the tiniest bit of funhouse-mirror logic in claiming that the Declaration of Independence didn’t magically make the U.S. independent (we had to fight a war to do that) but he obviously has never actually read the Treaty of Paris.

That’s for your benefit, not his. Facts will not help him.

I’m not sure what “both parties” is supposed to mean. It wasn’t a contract between two parties, it was a unilateral statement by one party, or, rather, 13 parties working together.

I’m kind of curious which five signers are supposed to have been either sleeper agents of the Crown or simply lawyers authorized to argue in Crown courts. I’m pretty sure that authorization would have been revoked because of that whole rebellion thing.

I haven’t taken the time to sort through it, and this is all for my own fun anyway, since as you’ve said, nothing will get through to her (at least that’s the persona), but weren’t John Adams and Thomas Jefferson lawyers? I’d bet they’re two of the five, since they would have been practicing in official courts. It’s a whole interesting mindset, really.

Would you believe this is actually part of a vaccine discussion page? Somebody went so far as to question the qualifications or legality of a person who advertises products and seminars about the dangers of vaccines. Doofus claims to be a Brit.

Do you mind if I borrow this some time? It’s so perfect for the occasion.

I would not only believe it, I would expect it.

I am shocked. SHOCKED!

The quote in the OP is a masterpiece of paranoid flibberty gibbet that should not be messed with, lest it mess with you.

You’re dealing with a sovereign citizen here. This is one variant of the pseudo-law that they toss out. It’s
meaningless drivel.

Google “missing 13th amendment” for more of the same, if you’re a glutton for punishment.

Well, she also claims not to pay taxes. I don’t know how much of those sorts of movements vary between the US and the UK.

I have to admit she’s a real treat to deal with.

Jefferson attended The College of William & Mary in Virginia; he studied law under prominent virginia citizen and law professor, George Wythe.
John Adams went to Harvard and was a 5th-generation American descended from puritan immigrants. He studied law under a Boston attorney.

Then as now, individual states had the power to license attorneys. There is no evidence that either was licensed to practice law outside their respective states, or that either had ever been to England before the Revolution, much less admitted to practice there.

While we’re playing this amusing game, Hamilton attended Columbia (then King’s College) after his proposal for a course of accelerated study was rejected by Princeton.

I suspect that courts worldwide tend to have a similar approach when faced with people stating they don’t have to pay taxes for some spurious reason or another.

Are those mutually exclusive choices?

Hey!

Howye, J.D., B.A. History AND Anthropology

:smiley:

Here is the only oath I have sworn as an attorney. Nothing about a crown here.

I, ____________________, hereby (swear or affirm) that I will support the Constitution and the laws of the United States and the Constitution and the laws of Ohio, and I will abide by the Ohio Rules of Professional Conduct.
In my capacity as an attorney and officer of the Court, I will conduct myself with dignity and civility and show respect toward judges, court staff, clients, fellow professionals, and all other persons.
I will honestly, faithfully, and competently discharge the duties of an attorney at law. (So help me God.)

Here’s a thread that touches on this issue from several years ago: Use of “Esquire” illegal?. It got a bit side-tracked for some reason, but it’s an interesting read. (Some of the links no longer work.)

They really weren’t meant to be. I guess I should know better around Dopers, right? Somebody will catch it every time.

Wow, now someone is arguing that all U.S. lawyers are actually secret agents of Her Majesty? That’s a new one to me (and I’ve seen all kinds of bullshit arguments by tax protester/sovereign American citizen/Freemen types). How utterly delightful! My favorite quotation for use in these situations:

“Some people believe with great fervor preposterous things that just happen to coincide with their self-interest.” Coleman v. CIR (7th Cir. 1986), 791 F.2d 68, 69.

It’s been around for a while. Elendil’s Heir. It’s touched on in that old thread.

If a US lawyer ever includes “it was bluebell time in Kent” in his or her argument, then we’ll know for sure.

See Hinz v. Berry [1970] 2 QB 40 at 42.

:smiley: