Help support alternative media by visiting our advertisers

ernie-wayne: ter Telgte Released from Jail

Instead of dismissing it outright because he looks a bit different, maybe we should try listening to what he has to say and decide for ourselves.

ernie-wayne: ter Telgte Released from Jail

ernie-wayne: ter Telgte Released from Jail

by Spyder Thompson

I have covered ernie-wayne: ter Telgte’s story on and off for the last year. I do not claim to believe in what Ernie does. However, I do not doubt that Ernie believes it with his whole being. I also believe that there may be some truth in his claims, I just do not have all the information I need to be certain. I am currently working on remedying that situation. What I do know is this:

Before I ever met him, I had seen Ernie in his, now famous, early court appearance in Bozeman, MT, yelling at a judge defiantly during a court proceeding he deemed unfair. Something that most all of us can relate to having a desire to do at some point in their life experience. It struck a chord with me and it was this: there have been many times that the system we live in feels so unfair and rigged against us and it felt good to see someone standing up to that system. Since then, a little over three and a half years ago, as fate would have it, I happened to move into the same remote, rugged, and eccentric corner of North Western MT that Ernie called home. I was introduced to him via a common (also brilliantly eccentric) friend and we became friends and neighbors. In fact, he was actually one of the closest neighbors we had.

When I first met Ernie, I thought he was bat shit crazy with a flair for the dramatic, but I had no doubt what so ever that he was also brilliant in his own ways. As is the way when one lives on the edges where civilization and the wildlands meet, we came to depend on each other for help accomplishing things we could not easily (or at times at all) do on our own. Ernie has helped me to fell trees on the property that I live on that were desperately needed to help keep my family warm in the depths of a high mountain Montana winter. It was literally twenty below zero the day he came over to help and without him we would have run out of fire wood and propane that very night. Not only did he help without question, but he taught me how to do it for myself, so I would not run into the same problem in the future. Later that month Ernie had a close female friend that was in fear for her and her young daughter’s physical safety due to an abusive relationship. Ernie knew that I was a lifelong martial artist and coached young MMA fighters. He asked if I could help teach his friend some basic self-defense techniques and I was happy to return the favor. This has been the nature of our relationship and how I came to know Ernie.

Ernie’s passion in life is political activism and his chosen venue for this activism has been the court systems of Montana. He has had both victories and failures in this arena. His most recent bout was in the town of Eureka where he had been pulled over and charged with operating a vehicle without a valid driver’s license. During his most recent day in court, his jury trial for the charge, he was found in contempt of court and arrested. During the arrest, and in complete “Ernie Style,” he did not go willingly nor easily. He was forcibly removed from the proceedings during which he accrued the additional felony charge of assaulting a police officer. He was then tried in absentia and found guilty. All of this has been covered by Elias Alias, Jon Lamb, and Gavin Seim. Gavin’s video in which he called upon his followers to call city hall, went viral which resulted in the city hall’s switchboard being overloaded.

Ernie was released from jail on his own recognizance late last week. I ran into him that very same day and we decided to do an update for everyone that was interested. Ernie now fears for his life and wants to do his best to get his message out. This video is that update and we are planning on doing a series of articles and videos with what time he may have left as a free man to get that message out.

Again, I would like reiterate that I do not know enough about what Ernie is talking about to know if what he premises is truth or not. I do believe that he asked me, as a friend, to help him get the information out. So, I will do just that. Maybe there is truth to what he is speaking and instead of dismissing it outright because he looks a bit different, or what he says doesn’t align with our own world view, maybe we should try listening to what he has to say and decide for ourselves. I believe our world today could truly benefit from more people listening to others, especially if those people are outside our narrow, individual experience.

We will be releasing a couple of times a month videos of Ernie and I discussing his legal beliefs on jurisdiction and the constitution, along with articles and supporting referenced documents.

 

 

Please support our coverage of your rights. Donate here: paypal.me/RedoubtNews

 

2 Comments on ernie-wayne: ter Telgte Released from Jail

  1. A apt poem with a little license taken:

    “First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
    Because I was not a Socialist.

    Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
    Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

    Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
    Because I was not a Jew.

    Then they came for Ernie, and I did not speak out-
    Because I was not Ernie.

    Then they came for me — and there was no one left to speak for me.”

  2. Today, most Americans would not, do not recognize LIBERTY and FREEDOM if it was siting beside them.

    Samuel Adams: “If men, through fear, fraud or mistake, should in terms renounce or give up any natural right, the eternal law of reason and the grand end of society would absolutely vacate such renunciation. The right to freedom being the gift of Almighty God, it is not in the power of man to alienate this gift and voluntarily become a slave.”

    Ernie is correct on that however we wish to travel, we may NOT be Lawfully required to register – no drivers license, not vehicle registration unless it is a commercial venture. Backed by the courts here…

    “The use of the highway for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common fundamental right of which the public and individuals cannot rightfully be deprived.” Chicago Motor Coach v. Chicago, 169 NE 221.

    “The right of the citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city may prohibit or permit at will, but a common law right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Thompson v. Smith, 154 SE 579

    “The right to travel is a part of the liberty of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment.” Kent v. Dulles, 357 US 116, 125

    “The right to travel is a well-established common right that does not owe its existence to the federal government. It is recognized by the courts as a natural right.” Schactman v. Dulles 96 App DC 287, 225 F2d 938, at 941

    “Traffic infractions are NOT a crime.” People v. Battle, 50 Cal. App. 3, step 1, Super, 123 Cal. Rptr. 636, 639 (caps are mine)

    It has been understood throughout our country’s history that Americans have the inalienable right to use the roadways unrestricted in any manner as long as they are not damaging or violating property or rights of others. Those that serve within our government when requiring the people to obtain drivers licenses, register their vehicles, having to accept vehicle inspections and DUI/DWI/Etc roadblocks (at times being criminally punished for questioning that “authority”, is restricting, and violating, the people’s common law right/accepted since our founding as Natural Right to travel by any means we had or can afford.

    Law enforcer of all types are taught to enforce “color of law”, pretend laws/statutes that have no Lawful authority. (“Law with a capital “L” means constitutional) They are taught to use *terrorism (domestic) as law against the American people because much of what is enforced today has no Lawfulness to it.

    “If the State converts a right (liberty) into a privilege, the citizen can ignore the license and fee and engage in the right (liberty) with impunity.” Shuttlesworth v. City of Birmingham, Alabama, 373 U.S. 262)

    “Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them.” Miranda v. Arizona, 384 US 436, 491.

    “The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime.” Miller v. US, 230 F 486, at 489.

    “There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of this exercise of constitutional rights.” Sherer v. Cullen, 481 F 946

    It is important to realize that that the American system of law dictates that there are ONLY two ways to legally remove a right belonging to the people. These are:
    — by Lawfully amending the constitution, or
    — by a person KNOWINGLY waiving a particular right.

    Americans who have voluntarily and KNOWINGLY waived their right to travel unregulated and unrestricted by requesting placement under such jurisdiction and went through the system for a state driver’s license, vehicle registration, mandatory insurance, etc. (In other words, by contract.) What makes this legal and not a violation of our common law Right to travel is that Americans knowingly volunteer by contract (drivers license, vehicle registration) to waive their supposed to be government PROTECTED rights. When Americans are forced, coerced or unknowingly (dumbed down) placed under the state’s powers, the courts have said it is a clear violation of their Rights.

    What about property, is it also our Right? Do those in government have the LAWFUL authority to tax us once a year on any type of property we own? No, they do not.

    “Constitution of this state declares, among inalienable rights of each citizen, that of acquiring, possessing and protecting property. This is one of primary objects of government, is guaranteed by constitution, and cannot be impaired by legislation.” Billings v. Hall (1857), 7 C. 1.

    “Right of protecting property, declared inalienable by constitution, is not mere right to protect it by individual force, but right to protect it by law of land, and force of body politic.” Billings v. Hall (1857), 7 C. 1.

    John Adams: “The moment the idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the laws of God and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it anarchy and tyranny commence. If “Thou shalt not covet,” and “Thou shalt not steal,” were not commandments of heaven, they must be made inviolable precepts in every society before it can be civilized or made free.’

    John Adams: “Property is surely a right of mankind, as really as liberty”.

    “As general rule men have natural right to do anything which their inclinations may suggest, if it be not evil in itself, and in no way impairs the rights of others.” In Re Newman (1858), 9 C. 502.

    James Madison: “Government is instituted to protect property of every sort; as well that which lies in the various rights of individuals, as that which the term particularly expresses. This being the end of government, that alone is a just government, which impartially secures to every man, whatever is his own.”

    “It is not the function of our government to keep the citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the government from falling into error.” U.S. Supreme Court in American Communications Association v. Douds 339 U.S. 382, 442 (1950)

    It is VERY important to remember that when an Amendment is on the ballot, it is, IF passed, changing the state’s Constitution. I believe that there would not be any amendments on ballots if it was to put limits on those that serve within our government. If my belief is true, then whenever an Amendment (state) is passed the people of the state gives up more power over themselves and their actions.

    “The basic purpose of a written constitution has a two-fold aspect, first securing [not granting] to the people of certain unchangeable rights and remedies, and second, the curtailment of unrestricted governmental activity within certain defined spheres.” Du Pont v. Du Pont, 85 A 724

    Cooley, The General Principles of Constitutional Law, 3rd. ed. (1898), pp. 386-387. (Little & Brown Co.): “In the construction of these instruments the following rules are actually observed:
    1. The practical construction must be uniform. A constitution does not mean one thing at one time and another at some subsequent time.
    2. The object of construction is to give effect to the intent of the people in establishing the Constitution; it is the intent of the law giver that is to be enforced. But the intent is to be found in the instrument itself…”

    Consider this, because it seems that today most people do not know this anymore, and it is critical to our Liberty and legitimate government; “The perpetuity and indissolubility of the Union by no means implies the loss of distinct and individual existence, of the right of self-government by the States. Under the Articles of Confederation each State retained its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right not expressly delegated to the United States. Under the Constitution, though the powers of the States were much restricted, still, all powers not delegated to the United States, nor prohibited to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people… Not only, therefore, can there be no loss of separate and independent autonomy to the States, through their union under the Constitution, but it may be not unreasonably said that the preservation of the States, and the maintenance of their governments, are as much within the design and care of the Constitution as the preservation of the Union and the maintenance of the national government. The Constitution, in all its provisions, looks to an indestructible Union, composed of indestructible States.” Texas v. White (1868), 7 Wall. (U.S.) 700

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*