Tuesday, March 19, 2019
Statutes are bonds. Courtroom charges are civil, not criminal. Clerk’s Praxis was the court of arches under the king’s bench at the time of Edward I. It’s a court of probates. John Hall wrote this book. This was used in vice-admiralty courts in the colonies in the American Revolution and this is what caused the revolution.
Everything involves bonds. When you are arrested there are two different sets of bond. A bid bond is filled out when you are arrested. US District court uses forms used SF 273, 274, and 275. There is another set of bonds. Both sets are put out by the GSA. SF form 24 is the bid bond. The performance bond is SF form 25. The payment bond is SF form 25 A. These are all put out by the GSA, under the Comptroller of the Currency under the GAO (general accounting office).
SF 273, 274 and 275 are the bonds for federal level courts to use. What are they doing with these bonds? In the court room you are being sued for debt collection. It is an action in assumpsit. The word, presume, comes from assumpsit. “I agree, or I undertook to do...” Assumpsit means collection of debt.
All these bonds have a penal sum attached to it. If you go into default judgement, you end up in prison wondering what is going on. If you argue jurisdiction, or refuse to answer questions that the court addresses to you, you’ll be in contempt of court and in jail. This goes back to Edward I and Clerk’s Praxis. This is all civil and not criminal. It’s a smoke screen to cover up what they are doing.
They brought someone to court under an arrest bond. There was a civil suit. Clerk’s Praxis is Latin for practice. Praxis means practice. This book is an actual practice book that goes into everything Jack Smith teaches, letter rogatories. You are held until the suit is complete, they get a default judgment for failure to pay a debt and then you are put in prison. Attorneys are there as a smoke screen to cover up what is really done. They lead you into default judgment by argument (dishonor), you go to prison and then the default judgment is sold.
US District Court buys all the state court judgments. Type US Court in any search engine. After you get to US Courts there are 11 circuit courts of the US listed. Click on circuit 7 and that takes you into all the list of courts. To find Ohio/Illinois find circuit 7 is northern Illinois district courts, bankruptcy courts, etc and then you’ll find a box that says clerks office. Scroll down and you’ll see administrative offices and under that you’ll see financial departments. It talks about the criminal justice acts, optional bids, it’s all spelled out.
Go to List of sureties. Why would they have a list of sureties in a federal district court? When you click on this it takes you to www.FMS.Treas.Gov. This is department of treasury. Then you will see on the left hand side of the screen, admitted and reinsured. Under that is list of sureties. Under that is ‘forms.’ If you click on admitted, reinsureds, there are over 300 insurance companies. There’s a complete list. There’s also a list of Surety Companies. These are more insurance companies. Under Circular 750 the dept of treasury these insurance company have to be certified before they can purchase the bonds. They can’t put up bonds unless they are certified by the secretary of the treasury.
Next you go to “forms.” Click here it goes to the Miller Backed Reinsurance; it’ll list three different type of bonds. You don’t use a bid bond in district court. These bonds come out of the GSA. The 273, 274 and 275 bond forms are as follows: 273 is the reinsurance agreement with the US; 274 is the Miller Act Reinsurance Performance Bond; 275 is your payment bond–the Miller Act Reinsurance Payment Bond.
What are they doing with these bonds? They have regulations governing these bonds.......2,000 pages governing these bonds. Gene will sell these for $50. If you go into these regulations they tell you they’re buying up commercial items (actual words) 2.01 of these regulations. These regulations are divided into 50 parts. There are 1126 pages Volume1; 823 pages in volume 2. Commercial items are nonpersonal property. Property that is not real estate, moveable property. Real estate is not moveable. These terms are defined in UCC.
Commercial items are commercial paper. This is the 8th edition of Black’s Law which just came out. “Commercial items: it’s commercial paper; negotiable instruments; anything you put your signature on is a negotiable instrument – lex mercantoria.(?) This is used in the courtroom because everyone of us is a merchant of law. Because I use commercial paper on a day-to-day schedule I am considered an expert. This is why they don’t tell us what’s going on in the court room. Every time we put our signature on a paper, we’re creating negotiable and non negotiable instruments and that makes us experts. When I endorse it under 3-419 I’m an accommodation party or an accommodation maker. Anyone who loans his signature to another party is an accommodation party. This is in 3-419 of the UCC.
When you loan your signature to them, they can rewrite your signature on any document they want to. The federal courts buy up the state courts default judgments. These are civil and just being called criminal to cover up what they are doing. If you don’t pay the debt you go to prison.
CUSIP is an identification system. DTC Depository Trust Corporation, and has several other monikers. Depository Trust Clearing Corporation. 1 trillion dollars a day goes through the DTC. Govt Clearing Securities Clearing Corporation is another day. CUSIP (committee on uniform identification processes) is a trademark of Standard and Poors and is on bottom floor of the building at Water Street in Washington DC. CUSIP cins (cusip international numbering system) is an international numbering system. Domestic securities have 6 digit numbers; international number (isid -- international securities identification division--plus) are a global networking system. Paine Webber, with 10,000 corporations in it, is the major stockholder of CCA, Corrections Corporation of America in Nashville, TN.
They have privatized the system. Ginnie Mae, Fannie Mae, HUD, are all international. Everyone is feeding off the prison system internationally. All major corporations are feeding off the prison system including REIT (Real Estate Investment Trust), PZN–Prison Trust. All real estate companies are holding bonds and the bonds are not redeemed and they haven’t closed my account. Lehman Bros just gave $6 billion. New York City had a $3 billion deficit. Lehman Brothers gave NYC the money to build credit facility (not prison system). Lehman Brothers is underwriting the prison system. They buy up the bid bonds, the court judgments.
There are international treaties that are reinsurance treaties. Insurance Companies come in and act as sureties for the bid bonds. The performance, bid, and payment bonds are all surety bonds. All bid bonds must have a surety. The surety is guaranteeing the reinsuring of the bid bond by issuing the performance bond. They get an underwriter (investment broker or banker) to underwrite the performance bond which reinsures the bid bond. The underwriter takes the payment, performance and bid bonds and pools them into ‘mortgage backed securities’ which are called bonds and sold to TBA, The Bond Market Association, an actual corporation. After the payment bond is issued to reinsure or underwrite the performance bond, which reinsures the bid bond, the banks convert the bonds to investment securities. The banks and brokerage houses are selling these as investment securities. The prisoners are funding the whole enchilada. Because you got into default judgment when you went into the court room.
There are regulations governing these that are all in 48CFR, title 48 code of federal regulations. This is where Gene gets all the information. It’s on his $50 disc. Part 12 deals with commercial items, which are negotiable instruments, which are court judgments--the performance, payment and bid bonds. . Any time you deal in bonds you are dealing with risk management. A reinsurer and reinsurance means you are dealing in risk management. The reinsurer is assuming part of the risk of the bid bond; they give him a portion of the original premium. The original insurer gets part of the premium of the policy of the bid bond for acting as surety for the bid bond. The underwriter guarantees the resale of the bonds back to the public as investment securities.
To win in court you have to redeem the bond. Gene went to court and asked for his bid bond. He asked for post settlement closure of the account. This process is hypothecation. You have to know how to hypothecate the bond. Banks make derivatives out of your promissory notes and sell them (mortgages, credit cards etc). These prison bonds are being monetized. They make an investment security out of it. They make a fortune off the prisoners. These bonds go international into sinds and then into ANNA (annual numerical numbering association) in Brussels, Belgium with unlimited capital. This is where euro, yin, sterling, everything is under the prison system. All countries are feeding off it.
This is what was behind 911. State legislatures pass bond statutes so they can arrest people for paper terrorism. American Legislative Exchange Committee is behind all this. Paul Warrick owns this think tank. ALEC promotes privatization of the prison system. They go to the National Congress of Commissioners which are 72 judges and lawyers who ‘grew up’ under the UCC under lex mercantoria. “The principles of the law merchant are the rules of the decisions of all the courts.” Everything is commercial. All crimes are commercial. All crimes....kidnaping, robbery, extortion, murder. You don’t close the account, you go to prison. The bond gets sold domestically and internationally.
The bonds are sold on the NYSE. CCA (Corrections Corp of America) sells their stock and shares on the NYSE. John D. Russell owns 64 million shares of CCA. John Ferguson, VP, owns 5 million shares. They are on the CCA board of directors. The Dillon Corrections Corp is owned by David Dillon and merged with Trinity Ventures Investment who then became SB Warburg. That’s part of the Warburg family, located in Chicago, Illinois. They are hooked up with the BIF bank, the bank of international settlements in Switzerland, one of the largest banks in the world. This is why people do not win in court. Trial and pre sentencing are just a dog and pony show.
Don’t use a bond, Gene says. Use a bid bond. It has the word principle....I am the principal, the strawman is the surety. Put the strawman as the surety and myself as the principal. Then I fill out a performance bond which is a reinsurance bond for the bid bond. On the reinsurance bond I will put myself down as the guarantor or the reinsurer. The performance bond is 274. The payment bond underwrites the performance. I can underwrite the bid bond with the performance bond. That’s the reinsurer. The courts do this for me, because I don’t know this stuff. And then they make the money off me.
If you have a case pending, go into whatever district you are in. Find the court, type in the case number and it’ll tell me who has my bond. Banks are all tied into this. Every time I sign a check, it’s a promissory note, the bank makes a derivative out of it. The bank endorses it on the back, without recourse, and monetizes it by selling it as a derivative. They sell it internationally. My $100 check is used by 20 or 30 corporations internationally. This is why we are not getting back our canceled checks. The reason is they are sold as promissory notes. The banks make derivatives out of them and sell them internationally. Therefore, I am loaning money to the bank. The bank re-loans it to other people. The CUSIP # is a 9 digit number. Internationally it’s up into 12 digits, representing trillions of dollars.
What if you have a court case in default? Default is synonymous with dishonor. They are suing you civilly for collection of a debt. If you go into default judgment, if you have a claim, there mandatory rule 13. Rule 13 says that when a claim arises from the same transaction or occurrence it is mandatory that you file a counter claim. What is your counter claim? Post settlement and closure
of the account under public policy. You’re entitled to a discharge of the debt because you are the principle and the holder in due course of the original account; you own both sides of the account. You own the common stock and the preferred stock and you are the principal on the account which means you are the creditor. Everyone is acting like a debtor instead of a creditor. A creditor pays his debts.
You have to do the proper filing to establish your position. (UCC I–you have to be the secured party). You are the principal upon which all money circulates. This is the accrual method of accounting. Accruals are capital and interest from the principal. Any time you monetize debt you have a principal. You have to identify yourself as the principal. What they have to do is return all the capital and interest to you as the principal. This is the accrual method of accounting. When you go to court and argue jurisdiction what you are saying is you aren’t going to pay the debt. The strawman (all caps name) is the name they have a claim against because your mother signed the birth certificate with the state creating the strawman contract. They used your name in all capital letters. That makes you the fiduciary trustee of the account which means you pay all of your debts to honor the court. People in the redemption process are going into the court and arguing and getting into default judgment. If you don’t give your name or argue jurisdiction you’re causing problems. What you can do is give a conditional acceptance.
If they don’t charge you, they don’t have a claim against the strawman. But don’t start arguing with the court about it. Do a conditional acceptance. “I’ll be happy to give me my name, if you’ll give me the charging paper.” Rebut the presumption that they have charges against you. They work on presumption and they don’t have to have anything. You have to rebut the presumption. Use a negative averment. The court is drafting you for performance. If you don’t perform you get into dishonor by non-acceptance. They make a formal presentment under 3-501 of the UCC in order to charge and they use the word charge. They use the same commercial term on your indictments, complaints, your information. They use the word charge. The following charges...........two counts of RICO, etc. Gene Keating and Roger Elvick both had the same charges. Roger has been in jail 9 months, Roger hasn’t been to trial yet. Gene is out of jail. Roger is arguing jurisdiction. He’s arguing whether they are an article III court.
The have a business credit report on you. If the judge says he’s going to do a psychiatric exam on you, you’re arguing. You have to be a gentleman and not get belligerent. Be gentle as a dove and wise as a serpent. If you act like a belligerent they’re going to beat you up. You’re the fiduciary trustee and the principal and owner of the account.
Following is Gene’s overlay (notes in ( ) not to be included in the overlay–just emphasis). Tell them what to do. You want full settlement and closure of the account. You have to do this from the get-go. “I accept your charges for value and consideration (you must use value and consideration) in return for post-settlement and closure of account xxxxxxxxx (social security number with no dashes–the cusip is the SS # without the dashes) cusip and autotris (automated tracking identification system) number. Cusip is uniform security identification processes. Cusip uses you SS# to identify you because the birth certificate is an investment security. All these are registered at state level with department of human resources, then to department of commerce at federal level, and the to the DTC (Depository Trust Corporation on Water Street. CUSIP is a trademark of Standard and Poor. It is located under the DTC building at 55 Water Street in New York City. The 9 digit cusip is also used for isid (international numbering system).
“I accept the charges for value and consideration. In return please use my exemption and principal for post-settlement and closure of case number #___________ and cusip and autotris account #555555555 as this account is prepaid and exempt from levy.” Then date it and place your signature it below the previous statement. (The case # references back to your SS#. That’s why they always get your SS#). Endorse as the strawman by ‘authorized by’ or agent with your signature. Write “good as aval” after the signature. I’m the fiduciary trustee who is assuming responsibility for the strawman as the authorized representative. When you put the word by, and then authorized representative it means someone other than the strawman signed. Other way to do it is the real Christian appellation and you don’t have to put ‘by.’ (John Peter; Public) Under 3-402 1a of UCC, “if a person acting as a representative or purporting to act as a representative signs an instrument the name of the signor the representative person is bound by the signature in the same extent a representative person would be bound by the signature on a simple contract.” That is, you’re not incurring any liability on the signature. (Lynn’s note: look this up, the tape was hard to hear at this point) That’s why you want to sign the strawman name and then by John Peter Public, authorized representative.
What they do is they put the autotris # in a manual in a module; every federal and state agency has my tracking number. They have it in the criminal task force. Passports, metro police, city, county, sheriff, FEMA, homeland security all use this #. Autotris was made in a forensics laboratory in Russia. It is owned by AD&M.(stopped between the two left arrows).
He used this on an ADA and it worked. They held him for 3 days and let him go. Judges and attorneys do not understand commercial law. They don’t teach it in law school. No one uses it in a court room. Nobody knows this stuff and that’s why Gene is teaching it. Because we are using commercial paper, the law assumes we understand what we are doing. You are responsible for your actions. If you use commercial paper on a daily basis, that makes you an expert by legal definition. They presume you know all this stuff when you go into a courtroom. The judges don’t even know this stuff.
If you don’t show up in court with an attorney, they grill you about competency and mental capacity. Here’s what you are dealing with. You are arguing with these people. You don’t want to argue in a commercial setting. What you want to do and the reason you have to have an attorney in a court room is that they are working on the public side and you are working on the private side. Everyone on the public side is insolvent or bankrupt. You are dealing in (Black’s Law) a fiction of law: You are referred to legal fiction. Why do they call it legal fiction? Definition: (this is the reason why you can’t argue venue and jurisdiction in a commercial setting) assumption that something is true even though it may be untrue. (In some aspects of admiralty you can argue venue and jurisdiction.) Made especially in judicial reasoning to alter how a legal rule operates, specifically a device by which a legal rule or institution is divergent from its original purpose to accomplish indirectly some other object. The constructive trust is an example of a legal fiction. Also termed a fiction of law........fictio juris. They will not allow you to defeat this fiction of law. This came out of Erie vs. Thompkins and courts at all levels are using fictions of law because everything is colorable and has the appearance of being rule, but it’s not real.
Gene worked with a case. Used a habeas corpus and the judge threw it out because Gene failed to give a colorable claim. How can you give color to a pleading? Confession and avoidance. Gene did a lot of research in this area. Confession and avoidance is a common law remedy. You avoid the consequences of the action by the plaintiff and you avoid by defenses. This has been changed to rule 8 concerning defenses federal rules of civil procedure.. Letter of affirmative defense, the law of discharge, the law merchant, the law of principle and equity, the law of satisfaction, the law of bankruptcy. Are they bankrupt? Sure they are. You don’t want to rebut the presumption. You want to settle the account as the principle. When they monetize a debt they always have a principle on which they borrow all this money. Trafficant said we were going through the biggest bankruptcy and reorganization in the history of the US. He’s in jail because he dishonored the court. All these judges know there’s know money. Under common law only gold and silver is money. Title 12 section 211 and 212--The lawful money of the US is construed as gold and silver coin. Any federal reserve note is redeemable at any federal reserve bank or treasury office for lawful money. Title 31 section 5118 2d. HJR192.
They have to give you an out, a remedy. Affirmative defenses under rule 8 is my remedy for every commercial liability. These are prepaid accounts. The industrial society borrows money to manufacture product, like General Motors. They are on the public side of the accounting ledger. On one side of the ledger everything is private.
The principle is on one side, the debtor strawman is on the public side. That’s in the bankruptcy. You are the principle and the owner. You’re the stockholder, you’re the bank. This is not opinion, this is what is going on. Gene owns his own bank and drew up his own charter. You are the lienholder in this system. You own preferred stock and the common stock. The strawman is the beneficiary. Your exemption is in a bridge between the private side and the public side. That’s why you have the exemption.
Credits are liabilities and debits are assets. They can’t pass from the credit to the debit side, because we are constantly in dishonor. Debits are private and credits are public. They’re borrowing all this money using our credit. I am responsible for the strawman. The strawman name is on the complaint in court and the strawman is liable and has to pay. If the strawman doesn’t pay, I pay for him because I didn’t assume the responsibility as the fiduciary trustee and they sell the account. They don’t need a real complaint or a real warrant. It’s all colorable. They will not allow you to overcome them. You start arguing with them, not giving your name, they will drive you into submission and into contempt. Gene’s done all this. You don’t want to do this. They will kill you and collect the insurance money. I am insured by the FDIC and the FDIA under title 12 with a $10 million dollar policy. I’m worth more dead than alive. They’ll kill you without batting an eyelash. They killed a young woman by shooting her in the face with a pellet after the Red Sox won and she wasn’t doing anything.
The more people they kill the more money they make.
Judges and lawyers in Texas hired someone to shoot migrant workers and then they collected the insurance money on them. This is serious business. What does a creditor do? Pays his debts? I am the only one with any money. The banks don’t have money, everyone on the public side is bankrupt. Everyone who goes into court and argues with the judge over how they spell their name (all caps, etc). When you have ‘committed’ a felony they will appoint counsel. What you do is a letter Rogatory, a letter of advice. What goes in this letter Rogatory? You instruct the attorney that you are doing an acceptance for honor and you want an accounting of the total amount of the bill for full settlement and closure of the account and you give the case #, the cusip # and the autotris #. The letter Rogatory is in Clerk’s Praxis. What you say in the letter, you put your name in and “I ___________appoint ________(attorney’s name) as my fiduciary trustee, case #, autotris and cusip # , use my exemption for post settlement and closure of this case and account.” Date this and endorse it.
I’m actually creating all the money for the bank. They make derivatives and fractionalize it and makes trillions of dollars off me. Gene issued an international bill of exchange for his APA (parole officer) and they stopped billing him. They closed the account. He’s going after the bid bond, the performance bond and the payment bond–he wants them back. He’s the principle and he wants his capital and interest back.. After he did the international bill of exchange they arrested him and then let him go after 3 days. They quit billing him, the weekly parole bills. Dec 8, 1988, the US became a party to the municipal convention on the international bills of exchange.
They have insurance on the strawman and when you go in as an insurgent or belligerent,......... There is the war powers act and trading with the enemy act and you are subject to seizure wherever they find you. If you don’t allow them settlement and closure they will kill you without batting an eyelash. Don’t fire the attorney. Tell the judge that you are appointing the attorney as fiduciary trustee. When you go into court you have to be a gentleman, and don’t get vulgar. If you do things right you will not be held in contempt of court. Gene was charged with 3 counts of RICO, felony 1, 2 and 3, including intimidation. The only reason he spent any time in prison was that he couldn’t get his paperwork. He served 5 months. They dropped the first 2 counts.
They arrest you and what you want to do is go after the bid bond. There are two sets of bonds, the GSA 25, SF (standard form) . There are two sets of forms 24–bid bond, 25–performance bond, 25a is the payment bond.
Municipal convention supercedes article 3 of the UCC. This is in the official, master text of the UCC.
Wednesday, March 13, 2019
Tuesday, February 19, 2019
Thursday, February 14, 2019
“Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men dread it.”
[George Barnard Shaw]
This is the single most important lesson that you MUST learn. If you spend an hour to learn this material you will be rewarded for the rest of your life.
The word "person" in legal terminology is perceived as a general word which normally includes in its scope a variety of entities other than human beings.
One of the very first of your STATE statutes will have a section listed entitled "Definitions." Carefully study this section of the statutes and you will find a portion that reads similar to this excerpt.
In construing these statutes and each and every word, phrase, or part hereof, where the context will permit:
(1) The singular includes the plural and vice versa.
(2) Gender-specific language includes the other gender and neuter.
(3) The word "person" includes individuals, children, firms, associations, joint adventures, partnerships, eSTATEs, trusts, business trusts, syndicates, fiduciaries, corporations, and all other groups or combinations.
NOTE HOWEVER, THE DEFINITIONS STATUTE DOES NOT LIST MAN OR WOMAN -- THEREFORE THEY ARE EXCLUDED FROM ALL THE STATUTES !!! Under the rule of construction "expressio unius est exclusio alterius," where a statute or Constitution enumerates the things on which it is to operate or forbids certain things, it is ordinarily to be construed as excluding from its operation all those not expressly mentioned.
“Expressio unius est exclusio alterius. A maxim of statutory interpretation meaning that the expression of one thing is the exclusion of another. Burgin v. Forbes, 293 Ky. 456, 169 S.W.2d 321, 325; Newblock v. Bowles, 170 Okl. 487, 40 P.2d 1097, 1100. Mention of one thing implies exclusion of another. When certain persons or things are specified in a law, contract, or will, an intention to exclude all others from its operation may be inferred. Under this maxim, if statute specifies one exception to a general rule or assumes to specify the effects of a certain provision, other exceptions or effects are excluded.”
[Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 581]
Generally words in a statute should be given their plain and ordinary meaning. When a statute does not specifically define words, such words should be construed in their common or ordinary sense to the effect that the rules used in construing statutes are also applicable in the construction of the Constitution. It is a fundamental rule of statutory construction that words of common usage when used in a statute should be construed in their plain and ordinary sense.
If you carefully read the statute laws enacted by your STATE legislature you will also notice that they are all written with phrases similar to these five examples :
- A person commits the offense of failure to carry a license if the person ...
- A person commits the offense of failure to register a vehicle if the person ...
- A person commits the offense of driving uninsured if the person ...
- A person commits the offense of fishing if the person ...
- A person commits the offense of breathing if the person ...
Notice that only "persons" can commit these STATE legislature created crimes. A crime is by definition an offense committed against the "STATE." If you commit an offense against a human, it is called a tort. Examples of torts would be any personal injury, slander, or defamation of character.
So how does someone become a "person" and subject to regulation by STATE statutes and laws?
There is only one way. Contract! You must ask the STATE for permission to volunteer to become a STATE person. You must volunteer because the U. S. Constitution forbids the STATE from compelling you into slavery. This is found in the 13th and 14th Amendments.
Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United STATEs, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the STATE wherein they reside. No STATE shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any STATE deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, nor deny any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
You become a STATE created statutory "person" by taking up residency with the STATE and stepping into the office of "person." You must hold an "office" within the STATE government in order for that STATE government to regulate and control you. First comes the legislatively created office, then comes their control. If you do not have an office in STATE government, the legislature's control over you would also be prohibited by the Declaration of Rights section, usually found to be either Section I or II, of the STATE Constitution.
The most common office held in a STATE is therefore the office known as "person." Your STATE legislature created this office as a way to control people. It is an office most people occupy without even knowing that they are doing so.
The legislature cannot lawfully control you because you are a flesh and blood human being. God alone created you and by Right of Creation, He alone can control you. It is the nature of Law, that what One creates, One controls. This natural Law is the force that binds a creature to its creator. God created us and we are, therefore, subject to His Laws, whether or not we acknowledge Him as our Creator.
The way the STATE gets around God's Law and thereby controls the People is by creating only an office, and not a real human. This office is titled as "person" and then the legislature claims that you are filling that office. Legislators erroneously now think that they can make laws that also control men. They create entire bodies of laws - motor vehicle code, building code, compulsory education laws, and so on ad nauseum. They still cannot control men or women, but they can now control the office they created. And look who is sitting in that office -- YOU.
Then they create government departments to administer regulations to these offices. Within these administrative departments of STATE government are hundreds of other STATE created offices. There is everything from the office of janitor to the office of governor. But these administrative departments cannot function properly unless they have subjects to regulate.
The legislature obtains these subjects by creating an office that nobody even realizes to be an official STATE office.
They have created the office of "person."
The STATE creates many other offices such as police officer, prosecutor, judge etc. and everyone understands this concept. However, what most people fail to recognize and understand is the most common STATE office of all, the office of "person." Anyone filling one of these STATE offices is subject to regulation by their creator, the STATE legislature. Through the STATE created office of "person," the STATE gains its authority to regulate, control and judge you, the real human. What they have done is apply the natural law principle, "what one creates, one controls."
A look in Webster's dictionary reveals the origin of the word "person." It literally means "the mask an actor wears."
The legislature creates the office of "person" which is a mask. They cannot create real people, only God can do that. But they can create the "office" of "person," which is merely a mask, and then they persuade a flesh and blood human being to put on that mask by offering a fictitious privilege, such as a driver license. Now the legislature has gained complete control over both the mask and the actor behind the mask.
- A resident is another STATE office holder.
- All STATE residents hold an office in the STATE government.
- But not everyone who is a resident also holds the office of "person."
- Some residents hold the office of judge and they are not persons.
- Some residents hold the office of prosecutors and they are not persons.
- Some residents hold the office of police office(rs) and they are not persons.
- Some residents hold the office of legislators and they are not persons.
- Some residents are administrators and bureaucrats and they also are not persons.
- Some residents are attorneys and they also are not persons.
- An attorney is a STATE officer of the court and is firmly part of the judicial branch. The attorneys will all tell you that they are "licensed" to practice law by the STATE Supreme Court. Therefore, it is unlawful for any attorney to hold any position or office outside of the judicial branch. There can be no attorney legislators - no attorney mayors - no attorneys as police - no attorneys as governor. Yes, I know it happens all the time, however, this practice of multiple office holding by attorneys is prohibited by the individual State and U.S. Constitutions and is a felony in most STATEs.
If you read farther into your STATE constitution you will find a clause stating this, the Separation of Powers, which will essentially read as follows:
Branches of government -- The powers of the STATE government shall be divided into legislative, executive and judicial branches. No person belonging to one branch shall exercise any powers appertaining to either of the other branches unless expressly provided herein.
Therefore, a police officer cannot arrest a prosecutor, a prosecutor cannot prosecute a sitting judge, a judge cannot order the legislature to perform and so on.
Because these "offices" are not “persons”, the STATE will not, and cannot prosecute them, therefore they enjoy almost complete protection by the STATE in the performance of their daily duties. This is why it is impossible to sue or file charges against most government employees. If their crimes should rise to the level where they "shock the community" and cause alarm in the people, then they will be terminated from STATE employment and lose their absolute protection. If you carefully pay attention to the news, you will notice that these government employees are always terminated from their office or STATE employment and then are they arrested, now as a common person, and charged for their crimes. Simply put, the STATE will not eat its own.
The reason all STATE residents hold an office is so the STATE can control everything. It wants to create every single office so that all areas of your life are under the complete control of the STATE. Each office has prescribed duties and responsibilities and all these offices are regulated and governed by the STATE. If you read the fine print when you apply for a STATE license or privilege you will see that you must sign a declaration that you are in fact a "resident" of that STATE.
"Person" is a subset of resident. Judge is a subset of resident. Legislator and police officer are subsets of resident. If you hold any office in the STATE, you are a resident and subject to all legislative decrees in the form of statutes.
They will always say that we are free men. But they will never tell you that the legislatively created offices that you are occupying are not free.
They will say, "All men are free," because that is a true statement. What they do not say is, that holding any STATE office binds free men into slavery for the STATE. They are ever ready to trick you into accepting the STATE office of "person," and once you are filling that office, you cease to be free men. You become regulated creatures, called persons, totally created by the legislature. You will hear "free men" mentioned all the time, but you will never hear about "free persons."
If you build your life in an office created by the legislature, it will be built on shifting sands. The office can be changed and manipulated at any time to conform to the whims of the legislature. When you hold the office of "person" created by the legislature, your office isn't fixed. Your duties and responsibilities are ever changing. Each legislative session binds a "person" to ever more burdens and requirements in the form of more rules, laws and statutes.
Most STATE constitutions have a section that declares the fundamental power of the People:
Political power -- All political power is inherent in the People. The enunciation herein of certain Rights shall not be construed to deny or impair others retained by the People.
Notice that this says "people" it does not say “persons”. This statement declares beyond any doubt that the People are Sovereign over their created government. This is natural law of creation and the natural flow of delegated power.
A Sovereign is a private, non-resident, non-domestic, non-person, non-individual, NOT SUBJECT to any real or imaginary statutory regulations or quasi laws enacted by any STATE legislature which was created by the People.
When you are pulled over by the police, roll down your window and say,
"You are speaking to a Sovereign political power holder. I do not consent to you detaining me. Why are you detaining me against my will?"
Now the STATE office of policeman knows that "IT" is talking to a flesh and blood Sovereign. The police officer cannot cite a Sovereign because the STATE legislature can only regulate what they create. And the STATE does not create Sovereign political power holders. The creation or servant is not greater than its master and maker. It is very important to lay the proper foundation, right from the beginning. Let the police officer know that you are a Sovereign. Remain in your proper office of Sovereign political power holder. Do not leave it. Do not be persuaded by police pressure or tricks to put on the mask of a STATE "person."
Why aren't Sovereigns subject to the STATE's charges? Because of the concept of office. The STATE is attempting to prosecute only a particular office known as "person." If you are not in that STATE created office of "person," the STATE statutes simply do not apply to you. This is common sense, for example, if you are not in the STATE of Texas, then Texas laws do not apply to you. For the STATE to control someone, they have to first create the office. Then they must coerce a warm-blooded creature to come fill that office. They want you to fill that office.
Here is the often expressed understanding from the United States Supreme Court, that
". . .in common usage, the term "person" does not include the Sovereign, statutes employing the word person are ordinarily construed to exclude the Sovereign."
[Wilson v. Omaha Tribe, 442 U. S. 653, 667 (1979) (quoting United States v. Cooper Corp., 312 U. S. 600, 604 (1941)]
See also United States v. Mine Workers, 330 U. S. 258, 275 (1947).
The idea that the word "person" ordinarily excludes the Sovereign can also be traced to the
". . .familiar principle that the King is not bound by any act of Parliament unless he be named therein by special and particular words."
[Dollar Savings Bank v. United STATEs, 19 Wall. 227, 239 (1874)]
As this passage suggests, however, this interpretive principle applies only to "the enacting Sovereign." United States v. California, 297 U. S. 175, 186 (1936). See also Jefferson County Pharmaceutical Assn., Inc. v. Abbott Laboratories, 460 U. S. 150, 161, n. 21 (1983).
Furthermore, as explained in United States v. Herron, 20 Wall. 251, 255 (1874), even the principle as applied to the enacting Sovereign is not without limitations:
"Where an act of Parliament is made for the public good, as for the advancement of religion and justice or to prevent injury and wrong, the king is bound by such act, though not particularly named therein; but where a statute is general, and thereby any prerogative, Right, title, or interest is divested or taken from the king, in such case the king is not bound, unless the statute is made to extend to him by express words."
U. S. Supreme Court Justice Holmes explained:
"A Sovereign is exempt from suit, not because of any formal conception or obsolete theory, but on the logical and practical ground that there can be no legal Right as against the authority that makes the law on which the Right depends."
[Kawananakoa v. Polyblank, 205 U. S. 349, 353, 27 S. Ct. 526, 527, 51 L. Ed. 834 (1907)]
The majority of American STATEs fully embrace the Sovereign immunity theory as well as the federal government. See Restatement (Second) of Torts 895B, comment at 400 (1979).
The following U. S. Supreme Court case makes clear all these principals.
“Having thus avowed my disapprobation of the purposes, for which the terms, State and sovereign, are frequently used, and of the object, to which the application of the last of them is almost universally made; it is now proper that I should disclose the meaning, which I assign to both, and the application, [2 U.S. 419, 455] which I make of the latter. In doing this, I shall have occasion incidentally to evince, how true it is, that States and Governments were made for [and BY] man; and, at the same time, how true it is, that his creatures and servants have first deceived, next vilified, and, at last, oppressed their master and maker.”
[Justice Wilson, Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 Dall. (2 U.S.) 419, 1 L.Ed 440, 455 (1793)]
... A STATE, useful and valuable as the contrivance is, is the inferior contrivance of man; and from his native dignity derives all its acquired importance. ...
Let a STATE be considered as subordinate to the people: But let everything else be subordinate to the STATE. The latter part of this position is equally necessary with the former. For in the practice, and even at length, in the science of politics there has very frequently been a strong current against the natural order of things, and an inconsiderate or an interested disposition to sacrifice the end to the means. As the STATE has claimed precedence of the people; so, in the same inverted course of things, the government has often claimed precedence of the STATE; and to this perversion in the second degree, many of the volumes of confusion concerning Sovereignty owe their existence. The ministers, dignified very properly by the appellation of the magistrates, have wished, and have succeeded in their wish, to be considered as the Sovereigns of the STATE. This second degree of perversion is confined to the old world, and begins to diminish even there: but the first degree is still too prevalent even in the several STATES, of which our union is composed. By a STATE I mean, a complete body of free persons united together for their common benefit, to enjoy peaceably what is their own, and to do justice to others. It is an artificial person. It has its affairs and its interests: It has its rules: It has its Rights: and it has its obligations. It may acquire property distinct from that of its members. It may incur debts to be discharged out of the public stock, not out of the private fortunes of individuals. It may be bound by contracts; and for damages arising from the breach of those contracts. In all our contemplations, however, concerning this feigned and artificial person, we should never forget, that, in truth and nature, those who think and speak and act, are men. Is the foregoing description of a STATE a true description? It will not be questioned, but it is. .... See Our Enemy The State
It will be sufficient to observe briefly, that the Sovereignties in Europe, and particularly in England, exist on feudal principles. That system considers the prince as the Sovereign, and the people as his subjects; it regards his person as the object of allegiance, and excludes the idea of his being on an equal footing with a subject, either in a court of justice or elsewhere. That system contemplates him as being the fountain of honor and authority; and from his grace and grant derives all franchise, immunities and privileges; it is easy to perceive that such a Sovereign could not be amenable to a court of justice, or subjected to judicial control and actual constraint. It was of necessity, therefore, that suability, became incompatible with such Sovereignty. Besides, the prince having all the executive powers, the judgment of the courts would, in fact, be only monitory, not mandatory to him, and a capacity to be advised, is a distinct thing from a capacity to be sued. The same feudal ideas run through all their jurisprudence, and constantly remind us of the distinction between the prince and the subject.
"No such ideas obtain here (speaking of America): at the revolution, the Sovereignty devolved on the people; and they are truly the Sovereigns of the country, but they are Sovereigns without subjects (unless the African slaves among us may be so called) and have none to govern but themselves; the citizens of America are equal as fellow citizens, and as joint tenants in the Sovereignty."
[Chisholm v. Georgia (February Term, 1793) 2 U. S. 419, 2 Dall. 419, 1 L. Ed 440]
There are many ways you can give up your Sovereign power and accept the role of "person." One is by receiving STATE benefits. Another is by asking permission in the form of a license or permit from the STATE.
One of the subtlest ways of accepting the role of "person," is to answer the questions of bureaucrats. When a STATE bureaucrat knocks on your door and wants to know why your children aren't registered in school, or a police officer pulls you over and starts asking questions, you immediately fill the office of "person" if you start answering their questions.
It is for this reason that you should ignore or refuse to "answer" their questions and instead act like a true Sovereign, a King or Queen, and ask only your own questions of them.
You are not a "person" subject to their laws.
If they persist and haul you into their court unlawfully, your response to the judge is simple and direct, you the Sovereign, must tell him:
“I have no need to answer you in this matter.
It is none of your business whether I understand my Rights or whether I understand your fictitious charges.
It is none of your business whether I want counsel.
The reason it is none of your business is because I am not a person regulated by the STATE. I do not hold any position or office where I am subject to the legislature. The STATE legislature does not dictate what I do.
I am a free Sovereign "Man"(or woman) and I am a political power holder as lawfully decreed in the STATE Constitution at article I (or II) and that constitution is controlling over you.”
You must NEVER retain or hire an attorney, a STATE officer of the court, to speak or file written documents for you. Use an attorney (if you must) only for counsel and advice about their "legal" system. If you retain an attorney to represent you and speak in your place, you become "NON COMPOS MENTIS", not mentally competent, and you are then considered a ward of the court. You LOSE all your Rights, and you will not be permitted to do anything herein.
The judge knows that as long as he remains in his office, he is backed by the awesome power of the STATE, its lawyers, police and prisons. The judge w ill try to force you to abandon your Sovereign sanctuary by threatening you with jail. No matter what happens, if you remain faithful to your Sovereignty, The judge and the STATE may not lawfully move against you.
The STATE did not create the office of Sovereign political power holder. Therefore, they do not regulate and control those in the office of Sovereign. They cannot ascribe penalties for breach of that particular office. The reason they have no authority over the office of the Sovereign is because they did not create it and the Sovereign people did not delegate to them any such power.
When challenged, simply remind them that they do not regulate any office of the Sovereign and that their statutes only apply to those STATE employees in legislative created offices.
This Sovereign individual paradigm is explained by the following U. S. Supreme Court case:
"The individual may stand upon his constitutional Rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited. He owes no such duty [to submit his books and papers for an examination] to the STATE, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the protection of his life and property. His Rights are such as existed by the law of the land [Common Law] long antecedent to the organization of the STATE, and can only be taken from him by due process of law, and in accordance with the Constitution. Among his Rights are a refusal to incriminate himself, and the immunity of himself and his property from arrest or seizure except under a warrant of the law. He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their Rights."
[Hale v. Henkel, 201 U. S. 43 at 47 (1905)]
Let us analyze this case. It says, "The individual may stand upon his constitutional Rights." It does not say, "Sit on his Rights." There is a principle here: "If you don't use 'em you lose 'em." You have to assert your Rights, demand them, "stand upon" them.
Next it says, "He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way." It says "private business" - you have a Right to operate a private business. Then it says "in his own way." It doesn't say "in the government's way."
Then it says, "His power to contract is unlimited." As a Sovereign individual, your power to contract is unlimited. In common law there are certain criteria that determine the validity of contracts. They are not important here, except that any contract that would harm others or violate their Rights would be invalid. For example, a "contract" to kill someone is not a valid contract. Apart from this obvious qualification, your power to contract is unlimited.
Next it says, "He owes no such duty [to submit his books and papers for an examination] to the STATE, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the protection of his life and property." The court case contrasted the duty of the corporation (an entity created by government permission - feudal paradigm) to the duty of the Sovereign individual. The Sovereign individual doesn't need and didn't receive permission from the government, hence has no duty to the government.
Then it says, "His Rights are such as existed by the law of the land [Common Law] long antecedent to the organization of the STATE." This is very important. The Supreme Court recognized that humans have inherent Rights. The U. S. Constitution (including the Bill of Rights) does not grant us Rights. We have fundamental Rights, irrespective of what the Constitution says. The Constitution acknowledges some of our Rights. And Amendment IX STATEs, "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain Rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." The important point is that our Rights antecede (come before, are senior to) the organization of the STATE.
Next the Supreme Court says, "And [his Rights] can only be taken from him by due process of law, and in accordance with the Constitution." Does it say the government can take away your Rights? No! Your Rights can only be taken away "by due process of law, and in accordance with the Constitution." "Due process of law" involves procedures and safeguards such as trial by jury. "Trial By Jury" means, inter alia, the jury judges both law and fact.
Then the case says, "Among his Rights are a refusal to incriminate himself, and the immunity of himself and his property from arrest or seizure except under a warrant of the law." These are some of the Rights of a Sovereign individual. Sovereign individuals need not report anything about themselves or their businesses to anyone.
Finally, the Supreme Court says, "He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their Rights." The Sovereign individual does not have to pay taxes.
If you should discuss Hale v. Henkel with a run-of-the-mill attorney, he or she will tell you that the case is "old" and that it has been "overturned." If you ask that attorney for a citation of the case or cases that overturned Hale v. Henkel, there will not be a meaningful response. We have researched Hale v. Henkel and here is what we found :
- We know that Hale v. Henkel was decided in 1905 in the U. S. Supreme Court.
- Since it was the Supreme Court, the case is binding on all courts of the land, until another Supreme Court case says it isn't. Has another Supreme Court case overturned Hale v. Henkel? The answer is NO. As a matter of fact, since 1905, the Supreme Court has cited Hale v. Henkel a total of 144 times. A fact more astounding is that since 1905, Hale v. Henkel has been cited by all of the federal and STATE appellate court systems a total of over 1600 times. None of the various issues of this case has ever been overruled.
So if the STATE through the office of the judge continues to threaten or does imprison you, they are trying to force you into the STATE created office of "person." As long as you continue to claim your Rightful office of Sovereign, the STATE lacks all jurisdiction over you. The STATE needs someone filling the office of "person" in order to continue prosecuting a case in their courts.
A few weeks in jail puts intense pressure upon most "persons." Jail means the loss of job opportunities, separation from loved ones, and the piling up of debts. Judges will apply this pressure when they attempt to arraign you. When brought in chains before a crowded courtroom the issue of counsel will quickly come up and you can tell the court you are In Propria Persona or simply "PRO PER", as yourself and you need no other. Those who are "pro per" or "pro se" are "representing themself", which means they are representing an officer in the government. Don't ever claim to be "pro se" or "pro per", but rather "sui juris":
“Pro se. For one’s own behalf; in person. Appearing for oneself, as in the case of one who does not retain a lawyer and appears for himself in court.”
[Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth, p. 1221]
“Sui juris. Of his own right; possessing full social and civil rights; not under any legal disability, or the power of another, or guardianship. Having capacity to manage one’s own affairs; not under legal disability to act for one’s self.”
[Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth, p. 1434]
Do not sign their papers or cooperate with them because most things about your life are private and are not the STATE's business to evaluate. Here is the Sovereign People's command in the constitution that the STATE respect their privacy:
Right of privacy -- Every man or woman has the Right to be let alone and free from governmental intrusion into their private life except as otherwise provided herein. This section shall not be construed to limit the public's Right of access to public records and meetings as provided by law. See U.S. Constitution, Ninth Amendment .
If the judge is stupid enough to actually follow through with his threats and send you to jail, you will soon be released without even being arraigned and all charges will be dropped. You will then have documented prima facie grounds for false arrest and false imprisonment charges against him personally.
Now that you know the hidden evil in the word "person", try to stop using it in everyday conversation. Simply use the correct term, MAN or WOMAN. Train yourself, your family and your friends to never use the derogatory word "person" ever again.
This can be your first step in the journey to get yourself free from all STATE control.