As I was surveying David Wilcock's Mass Arrests Transcript of his interview with Drake, there were a number of "EDITOR" comments throughout the document. These had information that some might find useful, so I post that here.

Particularly I found the U.S. Constitution links interesting.

These do not appear in the pdf version, so apparently were added later. Also, you may open the web article and search (CTRL-F) for "[EDITOR:" to find them.

These are listed in order of appearance in the website article.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

EDITOR Notes from David Wilcock's "Mass Arrests" Drake Interview Transcript
[KP Note: these snips are separated by short lines]

[EDITOR: Common Law predates Admiralty law (which is the corporate "law," legal fiction "law" and under the UCC Code), which is the basis of all the current statutes, regulations, etc, that currently "govern" the US.
 
It's all color of law, which means that it's a mere imitation, an imposture of the Substantive Law that is the Organic Constitution for the United States of America, as Lawfully amended.

Color of law has its origins in Common Law, but it does not operate within the Common Law.

Common Law is like clear water; color of law is like petro oil -- the former supports life, the latter destroys.  Note that I underlined "for" above. The two links below will explain why I underlined the "for":
 
-- This is the Organic Constitution of 1787, as Lawfully Amended.
 
http://constitution.org/usconsti.htm -- The corporate version. "Of" means "owned" by the "United States" that is a corporation that was incorporated in 1871. This corporation functions outside of the Common Law and entirely within the color-of-law system. The current US "government" is NOT YOUR government!
 
This is explained very well by this link: http://www.barefootsworld.net/usfraud.html]

---------------------

DK: The neat thing about this is that the manner of the process steps outside of both Ecclesiastic-based Law and Canon Law.
 
Any formal statute, be that local, state, national, or international [that operates under color of law – ED.] And it protects itself, because it does not state anything other than the simple Notification Process.
 
[EDITOR: I inserted the above comment to make sure that people understand that the "formal statute" mentioned is under color of law, which is the corporate, Admiralty "laws" that currently dominate the entire G5 nation structure.]

---------------------

DW: Mmm.
 
DK: It stays within the system, but also is set in such a fashion that it's outside of any challenge. This is the idea that I was trying to find out about...
 
[EDITOR: If the Notification Process arises anywhere in the color-of-law system, it can be challenged by any color-of-law entity/agency, hence the critical need to stay within the Common Law system.
 
The value of the Notification Process is that it is recognized by an existing legal authority -- the International Court of Justice in the Hague -- hence any color-of-law authority automatically has no standing, no power of law over anything within Common Law.
 
Color-of-law is inferior to Common Law, because Common Law is real and substantive by being based on the land, the will of the People, the Organic Constitution and being in a group of sovereign nation-states united by a Declaration of Independence.]

---------------------

[http://www.usmarshals.gov/index.html]

Read more...