Turk182

It is not an admiralty f**g, it is a military f**g.

You may want to read: LAW OF ARMED CONFLICT DESK BOOK, because we are under military rule.

Semper Fi

Smedley_buzkill

An opposing viewpoint, with which I am not agreeing or disagreeing.
https://www.theamericanview.com/is-there-a-significance-of-the-gold-fringe-on-the-american-f**g/


The American View
Is there a significance of the gold fringe on the American f**g?Home More Commentary Pastor David Whitney Is there a significance of the gold fringe on the American f**g?

There are a variety of ideas put out regarding the meaning of the fringe on the f**g. The most important one from a constitutional perspective is the claim that that f**g with fringe is a f**g that indicates admiralty law is in effect wherever that f**g is displayed, such as in a court room. If true that would mean that courts which have a fringed f**g (which is almost all courts in the land) are not Constitutional courts (Article Three Courts) but Admiralty Courts where Constitutional provisions do not apply but rather Admiralty law prevails. Now take that idea and put it together with the clear reality that most of our courts are not following the Constitution as ratified by our founders, but some other form of unconstitutional law such as international law, and you can see why this idea has gained legs in the patriot community. Thus this theory would help us understand the other wise infuriating and treasonous actions of the judicial branch. So the theory claims we are under martial rule and admiralty law, some would date that from The War to Prevent Southern Independence, others from World War I or World War II; it matters not according to this theory because the end result is that today we are no longer under the Constitution but under martial law and the fringed f**g is but one demonstration of that reality.
But such a theory has one gigantic problem, there has been no legal suspension of the U.S. Constitution, it is still the supreme law of the land. Even though it is violated daily in Washington D.C. and all across this land, it still is the law and can and must still be enforced by all those who take an oath to uphold it – whether military folk or politicians. So even if the above theory were true, and the quote below I believe dispels that idea, the Constitution is still the supreme law of the land even when grossly violated as it is in our day. And our duty as citizens is to educate an ever widening circle of Americans on the true meaning of our Constitution so that we can restore the Republic. I think the Admiralty law theory brings despair and hopelessness to patriots who are told we have no way to restore America.
Some researchers have concluded,

There is no record of an Act of Congress or Executive Order which either prescribes or prohibits the addition of fringe, nor is there any indication that any symbolism was ever associated with it. The use of fringe is optional with the person or organization displaying the f**g.

This additional quote is from the book “So Proudly We Hail, The History of the United States F**g” Smithsonian Institute Press 1981, by Wiliam R. Furlong and Byron McCandless.

The placing of a fringe on Our F**g is optional with the person or organization, and no Act of Congress or Executive Order either prohibits the practice, according to the Institute of Hearaldry.

Fringe is used on indoor f**gs only, as fringe on f**gs on outdoor f**gs would deteriorate rapidly. The fringe on a F**g is considered an ‘honorable enrichment only’, and its official use by the US Army dates from 1895. A 1925 Attorney General’s Opinion (34 Op. Atty. Gen 483) states:

the fringe does not appear to be regarded as an integral part of the F**g, and its presence cannot be said to constitute an unauthorized addition to the design prescribed by statute. An external fringe is to be distinguished from letters, words, or emblematic designs printed or superimposed upon the body of the f**g itself. Under law, such additions might be open to objection as unauthorized; but the same is not necessarily true of the fringe.

So it appears the gold trim is generally used on ceremonial indoor f**gs that are used for special services and is believed to have been first used in a military setting. It has no specific significance and its use, from what I understand, is in compliance with applicable f**g codes and laws. To conclude, gold fringe is used on the f**g as an honorable enrichment only. It is not regarded as an integral part of the f**g and its use does not constitute an unauthorized addition to the design prescribed by statutes.

badbob85037

No place in the Constitution does it set up a traffic court. I have heard asking the judge if you are in a military court he will answer yes, When ask to cope a plea you will stand mute as you are not in the military. He will plea for you not guilty and you won your case. Of course that is only what the Constitution says and everyone knows judges do what they want to who ever they want to do it to.

Turk182

That is the problem that everyone passes around what they think or what they have been taught.
Watch and listen: https://t-rohshow.com/2018/12/02/the-104th-broadcast-of-the-t-roh-show/

It is hard to teach on old dog a new trick.

Semper Fi

RoyinNC

Thank you very much for your logical and reasoned post. For at least 2-3 decades, I've heard argument that the fringe signified a fundamental change in the nature of our country and suspension of our Constitution. I've never found this to be compelling but didn't know enough to fully get beyond those arguments. Thanks!

Smedley_buzkill

Judges have far too much leeway. They are pretty much a law unto themselves. Part of the misunderstanding probably comes from that.

Turk182

Where did the judges, police officers, sheriffs, prosecutors get the order to do what they do? Show me the order. They can't.

We are under military rule.

The sheriff do not have the power to take, confiscate or sell property.

Always check the oath of officers, (judges, (sheriffs, police who write tickets)). They probable don't have an oath or it is not lawful.

Watch the video below and learn.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lyiOmwloszo&t=269s

Semper Fi

RoyinNC

You have a point, worthy of consideration and discussion. You are referring to what we know as "asset forfeiture", I think. I don't believe it has anything to do with fringe on
our f**g, or any kind of change
in our constitutional governance,
but has everything to do with
courts and judges allowing the
"Bill of Rights" being subverted
because it was against "bad
guys", never mind that it affected, in some cases, honest
citizens, folks who weren't aware that they could be caught up and adversely affected, in it.
The blame is ultimately on "we the people" for not being vigilant
enough and holding our govt. accountable!

Turk182

"The blame is ultimately on "we the people" for not being vigilant
enough and holding our govt. accountable!"

The government taught the people what they wanted them to know, in (the school of fools).

We are under military rule, BUT, what does the constitution say? Art. 4, Sec. 3, # I. Section. 3.
New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress.

So is your (State of wh**ever) lawfull? Lets say you are from Ohio, hold up a map of the Northern Continent and point to the "State of Ohio".
It is not there. That is Ohio. Where is the state of Ohio? The "State of Ohio" is a fiction, you can not put it on a stand, you can not question it.
So, who made the state of Ohio. Attorneys with a Title of Nobility made the "State of Ohio".

There are no lawful states after the original 13 colonies. Why? Because they were all made by people with a "Title of Nobility", that means attorneys who belong to the BAR, which is a franchise from the British BAR.

What does Art. I sec. 9,m #8 say?

It says: No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind wh**ever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

There are no judges, attorneys, or prosecutors that have the consent of Congress. Did we the people give congress the power to give the consent to attorneys, judges, prosecutors, OR the military? Hell NO.

Now, who gave the military power in "The Law of Armed Conflict"? Congress did. What is in Congress? Attorneys. SO, are they lawful? Sorry but they are not lawful, because of the attorneys with a "Title of Nobility" that are in congress.

Are we at war? No. Who swore in Harry S. Truman? Chief Justice (attorney) of the United States Harlan Fiske Stone administered the p**********l oath of office.

Who was President during 9/11? Obama. Obama was an attorney. Enough said?

So what are these people with a "Title of Nobility" , (attorneys) doing in Congress, because they were BAR members before they got into Congress?


Congress blows smoke and makes laws that they do not follow, OR even make sure they are lawful, because they taught the public in their school of fools what they wanted them to know.

Watch this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lyiOmwloszo&t=269s


Semper Fi