Why does the American flag have a gold fringe?

Discussion in 'US Flag Specs and Design' started by EmailPoster, Jun 6, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Peter Ansoff

    Peter Ansoff USA Flag Site Admin

    Hello, again, Nathaniel!

    I would like you to show me where it says they are "just decorative", fair trade right?

    Absolutely! Here is what the Attorney General of the United States said in a 1925 opinion:

    "In flag manufacture a fringe is not considered to be part of the flag, and it is without heraldic significance . . . The fringe does not appear to be regarded as an integral part of the flag, and its presence can not be said to constitute an unauthorized addition to the design prescribed by statute." (34 US Op. Atty. Gen 483, 1925) (emphasis added)

    The US Army Institute of Heraldry web site (FRINGE ON THE AMERICAN FLAG) quotes from the 1925 opinion, and then explains further:

    "It is customary to place a gold fringe on silken (rayon-silk-nylon) National flags that are carried in parades, used in official ceremonies, and displayed in offices, merely to enhance the beauty of the flag. The use of fringe is not restricted to the Federal Government. Such flags are used and displayed by our Armed Forces, veterans, civic and civilian organizations and private individuals." (emphasis added)

    "As to the yellow fringe on our flags, APFN states, . . ."

    Who or what is "APFN"? What document is this quotation from?

    Martial Law Flag "Pursuant to 4 U.S.C. chapter 1, §§1, 2, & 3; Executive Order 10834, August 21, 1959; 24 F.R.6865; a military flag is a flag that resembles the regular flag of the United States, except that it has a YELLOW FRINGE border on three sides."

    Please, read 4USC Ch. 1 and Executive Order 10834. (They're both available online.) When you do, you will find that this quotation is fake -- it does not appear in either of these documents. Neither of them says anything at all about fringes or martial law.

    The placing of a fringe on the national flag, the dimensions of the flag and the arrangement of the stars in the union are matters of detail not controlled by statute, but are within the discretion of the President as Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy."

    I've already addressed this quotation in an earlier post (it's from the same 1925 opinion that I quoted above. Your post incorrectly cites it as "83" instead of "483.") This says that the President can, if he wishes, direct that flags used by the armed forces should or should not have fringes. No president has ever done this. Even if one had, it would not mean that the fringe had any symbolic significance.

    President, Dwight David Eisenhower, by Executive Order No.10834, signed on August 21, 1959 and printed in the Federal Register at 24 F.R. 6865, pursuant to law, stated that: "A military flag is a flag that resembles the regular flag of the United States, except that it has a yellow fringe border on three sides"

    No, he didn't. Again, please read Executive Order 10834, and see what he really stated.

    Best regards,

    Peter Ansoff
  2. MidnightDStroyer

    MidnightDStroyer New Member

    From what I've seen by reading links mentioned throughout this thread & researching specific citations from court cases, the gold fringe doesn't indicate military jurisdiction...It's the Law that indicates jurisdiction. However, to further elaborate, I must also point out that the Constitution itself does establish military courts. However, in court citations where some people have tried to challenge the court's jurisdiction have run into one common flaw in their approach...They first off submit to the court's jurisdiction (become plaintiff or defendant) before they can bring suit to challenge that jurisdiciton! Some court citations are quoted at Court Cases on Yellow Fringed Flags

    However, I've also read a first-hand witness account posted at Man declares sovereignty, challenges jurisdiction of court, page 1\' where this man refuses to properly enter into the court's "enclave" of jurisdiction & successfully challenged the court's jurisdiction to attempt prosecution. This is quoted from the link in this paragraph in this post:
    "Jurisdiction is based upon Law, and not upon flags or 'signs.' In addition, "the plaintiff or anyone else who has filed" an action in a military court, is voluntarily submitting himself to the court's jurisdiction. To go to a military court, and enter into a 'contract' with that court, then argue one is not under its jurisdiction, is, of course, frivolous. Since scripture forbids going to courts of law, plaintiffs and litigants are forsaking God's Law, and are thus under man's law. "It is an elementary rule of pleading, that a plea to the jurisdiction is... a tacit admission that the court has a right to judge in the case, and is a waiver to all exceptions to the jurisdiction." 6 Bush Ky.8."

    From this, it's not the gold fringe itself that designates any particular jurisdiction. The flag itself could merely be denoting the particular "enclave" in which it stands, which denotes the practical boundaries in which the court has jurisdiction. One of our Sovereign Citizens' Rights (not specifically enumerated in the Constitution itself, but upheld by the Supreme Court) is the unlimited ability to enter into contracts...But this also includes the Right to NOT enter contracts. The man's refusal to enter into the courtroom proper is a determination of his REFUSAL to enter into contract with the court & submit to its jurisdiction.

    So, this quote indicates that, not only are the courts exercising the Constitutionally-established jurisdictions, but also indicates that one cannot argue that jurisdiction after submitting oneself to that jurisdiction. The only successfully-challenged cases while inside the court's jurisdiction involve whether the specific charges brought to the defendant can be proscecuted under Common/Constitutional Law, Admiralty/International Law or Civil Law. Bringing suit to court cannot apply the laws of one jurisdiction to affect persons/properties under a different jurisdiction.

    In essence, the plaintiff/defendant can successfully challenge the charges if the precise jurisdiction is questionable. Civil cases cannot be tried as a Criminal case, because only Common Law has jurisdiction over Criminal cases: Criminal cases include only when one person has violated the Rights of another person or his property, whereas Civil cases fall under the UCC & other Laws of Equity & Admiralty cases are only concerned with Military & International Law.

    I may not be much in researching Flags...I haven't really spent much time on the topic of flags, but I have been researching law for the past several months. Between the links posted previously in this thread, plus looking into law is what got this info for me. ;)
  3. Peter Ansoff

    Peter Ansoff USA Flag Site Admin

    Please Read Before Posting In This Thread

    Dear fellow forum members,

    Several posters in this thread have cut-and-pasted and paraphrased material from web sites dealing with the so-called "Sovereign Citizen" movement. This material is apparently designed to show why "sovereign citizens" don't have to obey laws, have drivers' licenses, pay taxes, etc. It consists mostly of incoherent, pseudo-legalistic gobbledygook and document citations that are faked or taken out of context. Needless to say, people who have tried to use such "arguments" in real court cases have not had very much luck.

    More to the point, most of the stuff in these posts has nothing to do with the purpose of this forum, which is to discuss the American flag, other flags and related topics. We welcome all points-of-view here, and we've had some pretty lively discussions, which is good. However, there is no purpose to be served by endless regurgitation of the same nonsense, and there are plenty of other web sites where folks can go if they enjoy that sort of thing. Any future posts that include this kind of material will be deleted or edited as appropriate.

    And -- PLEASE don't keep posting that fake quote from Executive Order 10834 about the gold fringe on US flags! There is NOTHING in that E.O. that says anything about fringes, military courts or martial law. You don't have to take my word for it -- you can read the document yourself online in several places.

    There an article on the ADL web site here:

    Sovereign Citizen Movement -- Extremism in America

    that gives some background on the movement.

    Regards to all,

    Peter Ansoff
    Forum Admin
  4. That didn't give ANY background info on the movement but only talked of a couple "persons"..... take 10 minutes and watch this.... "US Citizen" means freed slave ... 14th amendment citizens are what you all are... I am a sovereign American tracing my roots back to the 1700 here in AMERICA.


    you can delete my words but you can not delete me....

    Michael Badnarik.... google him get informed. wake up.
  5. Flaguser

    Flaguser New Member

    HA! Thats what you think! You are all secretly controlled by the old wise ones, from their hidden base in Atlantis! They get orders from their masters on Mars who make crop circles when their invisble ships land. They can "delete" you any time they want to, just by focusing their incoherance ray at you. This is true, because it is written on the back of the Constitution in disappearing ink. Beware the wise ones!
  6. Peter Ansoff

    Peter Ansoff USA Flag Site Admin

    Dear fellow forum members,

    I think that it's time to close this thread. If anyone disagrees, please post a note in the admin section, or send me a private message, and we can discuss it.


    Peter Ansoff
    Forum Admin
  7. i agree.... i must have read this the same moment as you did!

    This thread died and then died again !
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page