• "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding metals, finance, politics, government and many other topics"

Ron Gibson on allodial title via your land patent

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
4,613
Likes
4,534
#81
Ever the lieyer, sort of correct and sort of wrong.
Minnesota and State of Minnesota are two different entities. Minnesota was created in 1858 and entered the union of States on the same terms as the original 13 States, while the State of Minnesota was created by a bunch of lieyers during the 187? reconstruction as a federal entity.

In order for me to be a citizen of the State of Minnesota I have to be a resident (just passing through, not domiciled) while if I am domiciled on the land of my birth I am a National of Minnesota created in 1858. Minnesota does not allow dual citizenship, so to be a part of Minnesota I am not subject to the jurisdiction thereof.

https://famguardian.org/Subjects/Taxes/Remedies/USvUSA.htm

Table 1: Two Political Jurisdictions within our Country
TWO POLITICAL JURISDICTIONS WITHIN OUR COUNTRY
Characteristic
"National government""Federal/general government"Also called“United States” the Corporation"United States of America"Geographical territoryFederal zone50 states of the UnionCitizenshipSTATUTORY “U.S. citizen” (Chattel Property of the government) are belligerents in the field and are “subject to its jurisdiction” (Washington, D.C.)
14th Amendment citizens, implemented by the Civil Rights Act of 1866 for the newly freed slaves (are now the slaves of the corporate government plantation)
(See 8 U.S.C. 1401(a) at http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1401)
  1. CONSTITUTIONAL "citizen of the United States", where "united States" means states of the Union and excludes federal territory.
  2. national” is “sovereign”, “Freemen”, and “Freeborn”. Unless that right is given up knowingly, intentionally, and voluntarily.
    “National of the United States of America”. NOT a "U.S. national" or "national of the United States" per 8 U.S.C. 1408 or 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(22)(B).
    (see 8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(21) at https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1101)
See Why You are a "national", "state national", and Constitutional but not Statutory Citizen
God that is worshipped: See Matt. 6:24Mammon/man/government (Satan)
Idolatry
One nation under “fraud”God
One nation under “God"Freedom and libertyCounterfeit, man-made freedom.
Freedom granted not by God, but by the government.​
"Can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath?"​
[Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Virginia Q.XVIII, 1782. ME 2:227]​
Liberty direct from God Himself:
"Where the spirit of the Lord is, there is Liberty."​
[2 Corinthians 3:17 (Bible)]​
Religious foundationThis government/state is god. It sets the morals and values of those in its jurisdiction. These value are ever changing at their whim.
Sovereign Americans are created by God and are answerable to their Maker who is Omnipotent. The Bible is the Basis of all Law and moral standards. In 1820, the USA government purchased 20,000 bibles for distribution.
Sovereign to whom citizens owe “allegiance”Government:
“Allegiance. Obligation of fidelity and obedience to government in consideration for protection that government gives. U.S. v. Kyh, D.C.N.Y., 49 F.Supp 407, 414. See also Oath of allegiance or loyalty.”​
[Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 74]​
“state”, which is the collection of individual sovereigns within a republican form of government. The People, as individuals, are the "sovereigns":
"The people of this State, as the successors of its former sovereign, are entitled to all the rights which formerly belonged to the King by his prerogative. Through the medium of their Legislature they may exercise all the powers which previous to the Revolution could have been exercised either by the King alone, or by him in conjunction with his Parliament; subject only to those restrictions which have been imposed by the Constitution of this State or of the U.S."​
[Lansing v. Smith, 21 D. 89., 4 Wendel 9 (1829) (New York)]​
Source of law“The state”, which is mob rule living under a democracy rather than a republic.
"You shall not follow a crowd to do evil; nor shall you testify in a dispute so as to turn aside after many to pervert justice.”
[Exodus 23:2, Bible, NKJV]
God, as revealed in the Bible/ten commandments. The sovereign People as individuals, to the extent that they are implementing God’s law, and within the limits prescribed by the Bill of Rights and the Equal rights of others.
(See book The Institutes of Biblical Institutes of Law, by Rousas Rushdoony)
Purpose of law

~more~
 
Last edited:

arminius

Argentate Bluster
Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
6,211
Likes
9,378
#82
This is from a BarnacleBob thread, and it applies here.

https://goldismoney2.com/threads/govern-yourself-accordingly-to-maga.213766/page-2#post-2036621

Only Ignorance of the Public Law

If your local Sheriff knew that he was doing anything wrong by prosecuting you under private foreign law, he probably wouldn't do it. The same for the highway patrolmen. And the State Troopers. And the Federal Agents.

Whenever they know the actual Public Law, they tend to obey it--- but as they are not taught the Public Law and are not instructed to enforce the Public Law by their corporate bosses --- what can you expect?

So far as they know, they are obeying and enforcing "the" law, that is, the only law they know. It never occurs to them that there is more than one kind of law, and that they may be dealing with people who live under different forms of law than they do.

We live and breathe and stand under the Public Law, not their private "law".

It's your Public Duty to tell them --- and teach them.

God knows that most of the "hired jurists" in this country are as ignorant as the Highway Patrol and are not capable of teaching anything but legal procedure and statutory law.

So, if we are standing around waiting for the magistrates and attorneys to teach Law Enforcement Officers the actual Public Law of this country, we will be waiting a long, long while. The Public Law isn't their baileywick and they don't wish to be held accountable to it, so of course, they don't study it or pay much attention to it.

They merely presume that you are one of them, that you adopt their law, and that you are accountable to the now 80 million statutes, codes, and regulations that they are required to obey.

Like the Wendy's employee running out on the street, grabbing me by the elbow, and demanding to know why I am not in uniform and flipping burgers---don't I know it's my shift?

They are engaged in a self-serving delusion that we all stand under the same law they do. That we have to be licensed, because they do. That we have to do all the things and obey all the statutes, codes, and regulations---- that they have heaped upon themselves.

Fortunately for us, that doesn't happen to be true. It remains for us to bring the news home to our employees.

Witness the discussion I had with one of them recently. He insisted that I had to obey statutory law. To which I replied:

Man is not subject to statutory law and not within its “contemplation”.

Statutory Law exists for the creations of Statute---- and not otherwise. That's why it is called "Statutory Law". It applies to persons, not people. Humans, not men. It comes from the same Latin root word as State and Status.

State is the level of government that controls the International Jurisdictions of Land and Sea. This jurisdiction is inhabited entirely by persons--- Lawful Persons and Legal Persons. Technically, no living, breathing man exists in these jurisdictions.

I might have added ---- as I act exclusively as a Lawful Person and stand under the Public Law, I am owed protection and assistance on the High Seas and Navigable Inland Waterways, and at all times, my Constitutional Guarantees and natural exemptions apply. I don't volunteer to waive any rights or adopt any offices of personhood.

They can all read.

Article VI. Article IV. Amendment X. Amendment XI.

He replied something to the effect that if I could show him any cases, statutes, etc., that agree with what I say, he'd accept my view. So I sent him two bon mots ---- in addition to the Constitution.

“The state citizen is immune from any and all government attacks and procedures, absent contract.” See Dred Scott vs. Sanford, 60 US (19How.) 393, or as the Supreme Court has succinctly said, “….every man is independent of all laws, except those prescribed by nature. He is not bound by any institutions formed by his fellowmen, without his consent.” Cruden vs. Neale, 2 N.C. 238, 2 S.E. 70.

I am waiting for him to come back and say that he "can't find" these cases; since they don't speak to statutory law, they won't be found among the tomes he regularly consults.

That itself will be quite a discovery, as he stumbles upon the records of land jurisdiction courts, for the simple and supreme Public Law has been well-buried beneath the weight of 80 million statutes, codes, and regulations and all the court cases attached to them, so much so that people are naturally mistaking all this foreign litigation as something that pertains to them ---- when, quite simply, it doesn't. And never did.

The burden of educating ourselves, and then teaching them, lies with us.

The corporation they work for only insures itself against loss, and uses them as "expendable instruments" to enforce their will, both illegally and unlawfully, on the American Public.
 

snoop4truth

Silver Miner
Joined
Mar 21, 2015
Messages
598
Likes
126
#83
Reply To BarnacleBob's comment posted above,

COMMENT: If your local Sheriff knew that he was doing anything wrong by prosecuting you under private foreign law, he probably wouldn't do it. The same for the highway patrolmen. And the State Troopers. And the Federal Agents.

MY RESPONSE: Every lawmaker (WHO ACTUALLY MAKES OUR LAW) in the United States is ELECTED by "We the People" in U.S. ELECTIONS, like those occurring right now. Every lawmaker in the United States is a U.S. citizen and a citizen of the state where they reside. Not one single lawmaker in the United States is a "FOREIGNER" and not a single law in the United States is a "FOREIGN" law (unless it is expressly adopted as U.S. law by our ELECTED lawmakers in a published law). Pretending that U.S. law is "FOREIGN" law will not make it so. U.S. law will still be U.S. law. This claim is a carefully-crafted lie designed and intended to de-legitimize the ELECTED government of "We the People".

The sheriff, highway patrolmen, state troopers and federal gents are too intelligent and too well-educated to mistake U.S. law for "FOREIGN" law (like amateur legal theorists do). So, they are not doing anything wrong by enforcing U.S. law made by those U.S. lawmakers who "We the People" ELECT to make our laws. Indeed, they only do something wrong when they refuse to enforce such U.S. law made by those U.S. lawmakers who "We the People" ELECT to make our laws.

COMMENT: Whenever they know the actual Public Law, they tend to obey it--- but as they are not taught the Public Law and are not instructed to enforce the Public Law by their corporate bosses --- what can you expect?

MY RESPONSE: Our law enforcement officers (all of whom are employed by those who "We the People" ELECT to control our law enforcement agencies (like the ELECTED city police chief, the ELECTED county sheriff, the ELECTED state governor) only enforce the ONE AND ONLY law that actually applies to all of us. There is no second set of laws to confuse amateur legal theorists. THERE IS ONLY ONE BODY OF LAWS AND THAT SINGLE BODY APPLIES TO ALL OF US. The claim that there is one body of law which applies to all of us and another body of law which does not is a carefully-crafted lie designed and intended to incite hatred and violence against the ELECTED government of "We the People".

COMMENT: So far as they know, they are obeying and enforcing "the" law, that is, the only law they know.

MY RESPONSE: Then, they are absolutely correct in this regard. They only enforce the one and only body of law that applies to us. That is exactly as it should be. The claim that there is one body of law which applies to all of us and another body of law which does not is a carefully-crafted lie designed and intended to incite hatred and violence against the ELECTED government of "We the People".

COMMENT: It never occurs to them that there is more than one kind of law, and that they may be dealing with people who live under different forms of law than they do.

MY RESPONSE: Correct. This hallucination does not occur to them, because that is not true and only exists in the fertile imaginations of amateur legal theorists. This is not true in the real world. In the real world, there is only one body of law and that is the body of law enforced. That is exactly as it should be. The claim that there is one body of law which applies to all of us and another body of law which does not is a carefully-crafted lie designed and intended to incite hatred and violence against the ELECTED government of "We the People".

COMMENT: We live and breathe and stand under the Public Law, not their private "law".

MY RESPONSE: The law made by those who "We the People" ELECT to make the law IS ONE AND ONLY BODY OF LAW THAT APPLIES TO ALL OF US unless the words of the particularly law itself expressly state otherwise. The claim that there is one body of law which applies to all of us and another body of law which does not is a carefully-crafted lie designed and intended to incite hatred and violence against the ELECTED government of "We the People".

COMMENT: It's your Public Duty to tell them --- and teach them.

MY RESPONSE: Good luck peddling amateur legal theories to legal experts who actually know what they are talking about. You do not.

COMMENT: God knows that most of the "hired jurists" in this country are as ignorant as the Highway Patrol and are not capable of teaching anything but legal procedure and statutory law.

MY RESPONSE: Yes. Judges are "hired" by "We the People". In the STATE court system, JUDGES ARE "HIRED" (DIRECTLY) BY "WE THE PEOPLE" IN CITY, COUNTY AND STATE ELECTIONS. In the FEDERAL court system, JUDGES ARE "HIRED" (INDIRECTLY) BY THE PRESIDENT WITH THE ADVICE AND CONSENT OF THE SENATE, BOTH OF WHOM "WE THE PEOPLE" ELECT TO DO THAT "HIRING" FOR US. Yes, it is true that all judges "hired" by "We the People" follow the law (statutes) made by those who "We the People" ELECT to make the laws (statutes) and it is true that all judges act as referees between the two opposing parties. Finally, it is true that the judges see to it that the rules of procedure are followed (to ensure that the defendant receives DUE PROCESS OF LAW AS REQUIRED BY THE U.S. CONSTITUTION). That is exactly as it should be.

COMMENT: So, if we are standing around waiting for the magistrates and attorneys to teach Law Enforcement Officers the actual Public Law of this country, we will be waiting a long, long while.

MY RESPONSE: Yes , you will be waiting for a very long time. This is because the judges, magistrates and law enforcement officers ALREADY KNOW THAT THE LAW THAT APPLIES TO ALL OF US. They do not need to be "taught" the law by the lawyers. So, we do not do it. There is no need to DUPLICATE what these legal experts already know. It is only amateur legal theorists. like yourself, who do not know the law.

COMMENT: The Public Law isn't their baileywick and they don't wish to be held accountable to it, so of course, they don't study it or pay much attention to it.

MY RESPONSE: Not so. The judges, magistrates, law enforcement officers and attorneys are accountable under the law. They study the law and become experts in it. It is true that these legal experts do not pay attention to imaginary, FAKE laws peddled by amateur legal theorists, like yourself. There is no reason for them to learn FAKE law which does not apply to anyone or to anything.

COMMENT: They merely presume that you are one of them, that you adopt their law, and that you are accountable to the now 80 million statutes, codes, and regulations that they are required to obey.

MY RESPONSE: Their presumption that you are a human being and that the law applicable to human beings applies to you is a sound one. Yes, you (as a human being) are subject to all of the statutes of the state where you find yourself and you (as a human being) are also subject to the statutes of the federal government in connection with those legal subjects that the states delegated to the federal government in the U.S. Constitution. Neither the state nor the federal government needs you to "adopt THEIR law". Our ELECTED law makers make the law and make it binding upon you without your adoption or consent. Our ELECTED lawmakers do not make one body of laws which applies to you and a second body of law which does not. The claim that there is one body of law which applies to all of us and another body of law which does not is a carefully-crafted lie designed and intended to incite hatred and violence against the ELECTED government of "We the People".

COMMENT: Like the Wendy's employee running out on the street, grabbing me by the elbow, and demanding to know why I am not in uniform and flipping burgers---don't I know it's my shift?

MY RESPONSE: Working for Wendy's is a choice. Being subject to the laws of our ELECTED lawmakers is not a choice. Being subject to the laws of the state where you find yourself and being subject to the laws of the federal government is not a choice. Neither the state nor the federal government needs your "consent" to the law to hold you to it. The ELECTED state and federal government get their "consent" to govern FROM "WE THE PEOPLE" COLLECTIVELY, AS A WHOLE, THROUGH THE ELECTION PROCESS, not from you, the single individual, outside the collection process.

COMMENT: They are engaged in a self-serving delusion that we all stand under the same law they do.

MY RESPONSE: There is only ONE, SINGLE body of law and it applies to ALL HUMAN BEINGS, unless the particular law states otherwise. It is true that all of us (as human beings) are subject to the same, ONE, SINGLE body of law. That is exactly as it should be. The claim that there is one body of law which applies to all of us and another body of law which does not is a carefully-crafted lie designed and intended to incite hatred and violence against the ELECTED government of "We the People".

COMMENT: That we have to be licensed, because they do. That we have to do all the things and obey all the statutes, codes, and regulations---- that they have heaped upon themselves.

MY RESPONSE: The "THEY" that you refer to is "We the People" (ALL OF US) speaking with a single voice through our ELECTED representatives. Yes, every statute, code and regulation which applies to "We the People" also applies to you as a single individual. That is exactly as it should be. The claim that there is one body of law which applies to all of us and another body of law which does not is a carefully-crafted lie designed and intended to incite hatred and violence against the ELECTED government of "We the People".

COMMENT: Fortunately for us, that doesn't happen to be true.

MY RESPONSE: Your simpleton "US" and "THEM" analytical framework does not work here. You are a human being like all the rest of us. You live here in this country like all of the rest of us. You can vote and run for office like all of the rest of us. You can move to another country like all of the rest of us. In BOTH the state and federal system, our laws are made by those who who "We the People" ELECT to make them. In BOTH the state and federal system, our law enforcement officers are employed by officials who "We the People" ELECT to enforce those laws. In the state court system, our judges and our prosecutors are ELECTED by "We the People". (In the federal system, they are appointed by those who "We the People" ELECT to make those appointments for us.). In a republic like ours, WE ARE THE GOVERNMENT! The "US" and "THEM" game does not apply. Our votes determine who our lawmakers are, what our laws are, who enforces those laws and who the judges and prosecutors are. SO, WE PICK OUR OWN GOVERNMENT AND EVERYONE IN IT!

COMMENT: It remains for us to bring the news home to our employees.

MY RESPONSE: But, it does not remain for you bring FAKE news home to your employees.

COMMENT: Witness the discussion I had with one of them recently. He insisted that I had to obey statutory law. To which I replied: Man is not subject to statutory law and not within its “contemplation”.

MY RESPONSE: Sure. We endure billion-dollar, bitterly-fought ELECTIONS every couple of years to ELECT lawmakers who make laws which will not apply to anyone or to anything. We go to all of this trouble to pass laws which are completely useless and irrelevant. Yeah, right Einstein.

COMMENT: Statutory Law exists for the creations of Statute---- and not otherwise. That's why it is called "Statutory Law".

MY RESPONSE: Laws made by those who "We the People" ELECT to make them are called statutes to distinguish them from laws made by appellate judges (called "case law" or the "common law") and Constitutional law written by our founding fathers, as amended. All three combine to form a SINGLE BODY called "the law" and it applies to all of us as human beings, unless the particular law states otherwise. That is exactly as it should be.
The claim that there is one body of law which applies to all of us and another body of law which does not is a carefully-crafted lie designed and intended to incite hatred and violence against the ELECTED government of "We the People".

COMMENT: It applies to persons, not people. Humans, not men. It comes from the same Latin root word as State and Status.

MY RESPONSE: So now "people" are not human beings?! So now, men are not "humans"?! Have you lost your fucking mind?! What are people? What are humans? Are they extraterrestrial aliens?! Aberrations? Ghosts, Mirages? Get a fucking grip! Are you feeling OK?

COMMENT: State is the level of government that controls the International Jurisdictions of Land and Sea. This jurisdiction is inhabited entirely by persons--- Lawful Persons and Legal Persons. Technically, no living, breathing man exists in these jurisdictions.

MY RESPONSE: I note that you completely failed to produce a single, real law that supports this amateur legal theory. Regardless, the legal definition of a "state" is the body of people who reside within certain established borders speaking with a single voice. I have provided you with proof of this many times. ALL OF THESE HUMAN BEINGS WHO RESIDE WITHIN ESTABLISHED BORDERS ARE LIVING BREATHING MEN AND WOMEN. There is no such thing as a jurisdiction that does not apply to anyone or anything as you contend. Why in hell would government create a useless jurisdiction which does not apply to anyone or anything in any location" Get a fucking grip grip!

COMMENT: I might have added ---- as I act exclusively as a Lawful Person

MY RESPONSE: So, now you admit that the law applies to you as a "person"? Keep your lies straight. People are seeing through them. You are not fooling anybody.

COMMENT: and stand under the Public Law,

MY RESPONSE: You and everybody else on the planet. You stand under exactly the same ONE, SINGLE body of law which applies to every other human being. You are not the exception to the rule. YOU ARE THE RULE.

COMMENT: I am owed protection and assistance on the High Seas and Navigable Inland Waterways, and at all times, my Constitutional Guarantees and natural exemptions apply.

MY RESPONSE: Look Einstein, either the law AS A WHOLE applies to you or it does not. You cannot cherry pick which ones you want and which ones you don't want. The law is a PACKAGE DEAL. It is a single and inseparable body. If, as you claim, the law does not apply to you, then you are not "owed protection and assistance on the High Seas [under the law]" or "Navigable Inland Waterways [under the law]" or at all times, your "Constitutional Guarantees and natural exemptions". EITHER THE LAW (AS A WHOLE) APPLIES TO YOU OR IT DOES NOT. Make up your mind. People are seeing through your amateur bullshit. You are not fooling anybody.

COMMENT: I don't volunteer to waive any rights or adopt any offices of personhood.

MY RESPONSE: It is not up to you to pick your species. Whether you call yourself a man, a woman, a child, a person, a group pf people, a citizen, a non-citizen, a subject, a non-subject, a resident, a non-resident, a legal alien, an illegal alien and so on and so forth, YOU ARE A HUMAN BEING AND THE LAW APPLIES TO YOU. PERIOD! Your bullshit "word games" will not work. You are not fooling anybody.

COMMENT: He replied something to the effect that if I could show him any cases, statutes, etc., that agree with what I say, he'd accept my view. So I sent him two bon mots. “The state citizen is immune from any and all government attacks and procedures, absent contract.” See Dred Scott vs. Sanford, 60 US (19How.)

MY RESPONSE: I found this case in less than 2 seconds. The quote above is entirely FAKE and appears nowhere in the case. See proof here. https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3231372247892780026&q="Dred+Scott"&hl=en&as_sdt=40003

COMMENT: or as the Supreme Court has succinctly said, “….every man is independent of all laws, except those prescribed by nature. He is not bound by any institutions formed by his fellowmen, without his consent.” Cruden vs. Neale, 2 N.C. 238, 2 S.E. 70.

MY RESPONSE: I also found this case in less than 2 seconds. Again, this quote is entirely FAKE and appears nowhere in the case. See proof here. CLICK ON THE ADDENDUM BUTTON. https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3913774/cruden-v-neale/

Sometimes, its hard to keep your lies straight, isn't it? People are seeing through your bullshit. You aren't fooling anybody.

COMMENT" I am waiting for him to come back and say that he "can't find" these cases;

MY RESPONSE: That will never happen. I am a real legal expert, not a poser or pretender. If it is a law, I can find it in seconds. The language you claimed was in the cases you cited above is just as FAKE and FRAUDULENT as the rest of your bullshit amateur legal theories. You are a complete fraud and everybody can see it. You aren't fooling anybody. If you yourself were capable of doing legal research, you would already know that your claims about these cases were false.

COMMENT: since they don't speak to statutory law, they won't be found among the tomes he regularly consults.

MY RESPONSE: How far did you get in school? What do you know about legal research? What do you know about what I regularly consult in the course of my research?

COMMENT: That itself will be quite a discovery, as he stumbles upon the records of land jurisdiction courts,

MY RESPONSE: There is no court in the world with such a bullshit name. Get your lies straight. You aren't fooling anybody.

COMMENT" for the simple and supreme Public Law has been well-buried beneath the weight of 80 million statutes, codes, and regulations and all the court cases attached to them,

MY RESPONSE: There is a only one, single body of law. All of it applies to all of us, unless the particular law itself says otherwise. None of the law is "buried" anywhere beneath anything. The only reason that you mistakenly think that the law is "buried beneath" something is that you are too ignorant, too illiterate and too incompetent to perform legal research yourself. You are way, way way out of your league.

COMMENT" so much so that people are naturally mistaking all this foreign litigation as something that pertains to them ---- when, quite simply, it doesn't. And never did.

MY RESPONSE: U.S law is not foreign law. U.S. law applies to all of us here in the U.S. and always has, unless the particular law itself states otherwise. No person really mistakes U.S. law for foreign law, except for amateur legal theorists, like yourself, who do not know any better. The claim that there is one body of law which applies to all of us and another body of law which does not is a carefully-crafted lie designed and intended to incite hatred and violence against the ELECTED government of "We the People".

COMMENT: The burden of educating ourselves [lies with us].

MY RESPONSE: Agreed. But, indoctrinating yourselves in amateur legal theories is not an "education" It is a delusion. Amateur legal theory is a delusional belief system, like Voodoo. Both amateur legal theory and Voodoo prey on the least educated, least literate, least sophisticated and least powerful people in society. These people are easy targets for false religions and false belief systems. But, neither Amateur legal theory nor Voodoo actually work. Sticking pins in dolls does not really kill someone thousands of miles away. Likewise, pretending that the laws of the ELECTED government of "We the People" are illegitimate and inapplicable will not make you exempt form the law. Voodoo and amateur legal theory are only real in the minds of their delusional believers. But, neither is actually real and neither actually works.

COMMENT: and then teaching them, lies with us.

MY RESPONSE: You cannot teach to others something you do not know yourself. And, you are utterly clueless about real law. You are desperately looking for a scandal in an effort to de-legitimize the laws of the ELECTED government of "We the People" , but you will not find such a scandal in the law. This is because the law comes from US by way of our own ELECTIONS. So, you will just have to continue making up your bullshit lies to sell your own delusional and pathological hatred of the laws of the ELECTED government of "We the People".

COMMENT: The corporation they work for only insures itself against loss, and uses them as "expendable instruments" to enforce their will, both illegally and unlawfully, on the American Public.

MY RESPONSE: The claim that the ELECTED government of "We the People" is a "corporation" is a carefully-crafted lie designed and intended to incite hatred and violence against the laws of the ELECTED government of "We the People". Our law actually reflects the will of the majority of "We the People" as a whole. So, the will imposed on individuals in a republic like ours is imposed by the majority of "We the People" through the ELECTION process. So, THEY" are "US". WE ARE THE GOVERNMENT THROUGH THE ELECTION PROCESS! You are mindlessly selling hatred and violence against the American people.

You could use a remedial course on 7th grade Civics.

You have a lot to learn.
 
Last edited:

arminius

Argentate Bluster
Platinum Bling
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Jun 6, 2011
Messages
6,211
Likes
9,378
#84
Alot to learn about the civics the legal-empire teaches, for the fake imposed empire and it's lieywer representatives, like you, who are vapid regarding true law. All you see is your vested interest unenacted empire legalize, period. The only reason it's part of the real world is because of the consent of the morons you and yours have elicited in order to perpetuate you schemes of REPRESENTING our PERSONS. Ya I get that the legalese language has gotten so convoluted that one needs a lieywer just to save significant time in reality when litigating. That doesn't make the profession any less unconstitutional pirates.
 

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
4,613
Likes
4,534
#85
Reply To BarnacleBob's comment posted above,



MY RESPONSE: The claim that the ELECTED government of "We the People" is a "corporation" is a carefully-crafted lie designed and intended to incite hatred and violence against the laws of the ELECTED government of "We the People". Our law actually reflects the will of the majority of "We the People" as a whole. So, the will imposed on individuals in a republic like ours is imposed by the majority of "We the People" through the ELECTION process. So, THEY" are "US". WE ARE THE GOVERNMENT THROUGH THE ELECTION PROCESS! You are mindlessly selling hatred and violence against the American people.

You could use a remedial course on 7th grade Civics.

You have a lot to learn.
Snoop's "we the people" have a Democracy, while our "we the people" have 50 republic States.
 

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
4,613
Likes
4,534
#86
Anna von Reitz
6d ·

Common Misconceptions - 5.0: We, the People


The meaning of the phrase "We, the People" seems self-evident, but it's not. There is a reason why the Founders used a capital "P".

By separating the National Soil Jurisdiction from the International Jurisdiction of the Land and Sea, we wound up with two names for this country -- both The United States (National Soil Jurisdiction) and The United States of America (International Land and Sea Jurisdiction) -- and knowing this, you are finally ready to take in the difference between "people" and "People".

The people of this country live in The United States and "stand on" its soil, but the People with a Capital "P" inhabit The United States of America's International Land Jurisdiction and "stand on" the Land.

The "People" are the only ones who can enforce the Law of the Land, that is, the Constitutions, because they are the only ones occupying the International Land Jurisdiction of this country, and they are the only ones who ratified the Constitutions.

When we act as State Citizens we are not only counted as one of the "People" of this country, we are recognizable internationally as "Lawful Persons".

Lawful Persons stand on and occupy the International Land Jurisdiction of every country on Earth; together, we uphold the Public Laws of our Land Jurisdiction, including the Constitutions, and we accept our Public Duty to do so.

Legal Persons, by contrast, occupy the International Sea Jurisdiction, a watery domain full of deceits. Legal Persons function under Private Law --- Codes, Regulations, and Statutes. The officers and employees of all incorporated businesses are all acting as Legal Persons by definition.

Thus, we have people living in The United States, and People occupying the Land Jurisdiction of The United States of America as Lawful Persons (State Citizens), and we have Legal Persons occupying the Maritime Jurisdictions belonging to The United States of America, too.

The hard part arises when you can't tell the difference between the people, the People (Lawful Persons) and the (Legal) Persons.

In the last few decades the number of us consciously functioning as Lawful Persons has greatly declined, and the number of us unconsciously functioning as Legal Persons has increased.

What this means in practical terms is that there are fewer and fewer of us who are "declared" and competent to enforce the Constitutions and other Public Laws, and more and more of the people living in The United States are being illegally and immorally conscripted into the foreign political status of Legal Persons, known as U.S. Citizens, who have no constitutional guarantees, no standing to enforce the Constitutions, and no ability to defend themselves from rapacious foreign courts and tax collectors.

We need a few good People to put the teeth back into the Constitutions. The fast-track belongs to those who are not employed by incorporated entities and not receiving any unearned welfare benefits.

Go to: www.TheAmericanStatesAssembly.net and get girded up today.
 

snoop4truth

Silver Miner
Joined
Mar 21, 2015
Messages
598
Likes
126
#87
If there is a case that says this, then this is the law. But, if there is no case that says this, then this is not the law. This is just another bullshit hallucination intended to validate the hatred of the ELECTED government of "We the People".
 

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
4,613
Likes
4,534
#88
If there is a case that says this, then this is the law. But, if there is no case that says this, then this is not the law. This is just another bullshit hallucination intended to validate the hatred of the ELECTED government of "We the People".
Are your 'We the People" US Citizens?
 

snoop4truth

Silver Miner
Joined
Mar 21, 2015
Messages
598
Likes
126
#89
According to the actual written words of the law itself, both.

Preamble Of The United States Constitution

WE THE PEOPLE of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.


Amendment XIV Of the United States Constitution

Section 1.

ALL PERSONS BORN... IN THE UNITED STATES... ARE CITIZENS of the United States AND [CITIZENS} 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 to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
 

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
4,613
Likes
4,534
#90
According to the actual written words of the law itself, both.

Preamble Of The United States Constitution

WE THE PEOPLE of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.


Amendment XIV Of the United States Constitution

Section 1.

ALL PERSONS BORN... IN THE UNITED STATES... ARE CITIZENS of the United States AND [CITIZENS} 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 to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Great the first part is the lawful dejure Unite States

Preamble Of The United States Constitution

WE THE PEOPLE of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Insert a bunch of lieyers here: Who went off the tracks after the civil war and formed a quasi-lawful defacto govt.


The new corporate govt they formed started adopting changes to the original Constitution FOR.

Your US Citizens are second class citizens under the control of the Municipal Congress and have one thing in common with the people who formed the original country of The united States joined into a federation of States by a Constitution that created the rules for the Federal govt employed by the States.
That one thing they have in common is to reject being US Citizens and become the State nationals they lawfully are.

This is law, and the lieyers like to claim what they did was not expressly forbidden by the constitution, but the tenth says if it's not in the constitution they did not have legal permission to make a new nation of top down rule.

Tenth Amendment
Tenth Amendment Annotated


The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
 
Last edited:

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
4,613
Likes
4,534
#91
Anna von Reitz
18h ·

Communist China --- The Last Bastion of Freedom?

It sounds preposterous, I know. The whole concept seems impossibly converted, and yet, we are living in a world where black is white and up is down. I've learned something odd about this odd world, and it's time to share it on.

The Chinese never sold their people as "assets" to the central bankers.

FDR sold the Municipal citizens of the United States back in 1933. Hardly anyone knew this at the time. Except for a scant mention in his First Inaugural Speech, even the victims were given no notice.

And from there, by an unlawful, foreign, and undisclosed process of "assumption" the bankers and their minions wiggled forward year by year, kidnapping and conscripting more and more Americans under color of law, until there was hardly anyone (when we started) who was claiming their birthright political status anymore-- according to them.

And that meant they owned us. That meant they would loan the rats in Washington, DC, more credit based on the value of our labor and our private property holdings. And we would live our lives as slaves and never even know that our homes and farms and businesses were no longer our own. Our lives were no longer our own. Our labor was no longer our own.

Because our purported Masters in DC sold us as slaves to the central banks as the assets backing their debts.

But China never did that, China, poor as it was, turned away from this betrayal of their people and was not impressed by the banker's song and dance of money made out of thin air, backed, of course, by the labor and possessions of other people.

And that is why China is such a plum. And that is why, now that the birth certificate fraud has been discovered, the bankers and politicians are so anxious to find a new means to claim ownership of you and your assets --- by injecting patented mRNA into your genome and "converting" you into a "GMO product".

I want to retch. But more importantly, I want those bankers and the corporations supporting their bid to do this, recognized as international criminals. I want the audacity and criminality of what they are proposing to do to be recognized worldwide. And I want these criminals not only stopped dead in their tracks, I want them in jail. Now.

But it is up to you, too. It's up to all of you to wake up. It's up to the Chinese to realize that they have been targeted and why. It's up to Americans to wake up and realize what these rats are proposing to do under cover of a health emergency---- and why.

The death tolls from respiratory illness this last year are more or less the same as all other years. Look at the facts. Look at the numbers.

You have to shake these vermin off your shoulders. You have to wake up. We are already living in a world where Communist China is the last major free nation. And if we don't want to go down the drain with a flourish, it's time to change the patent laws and hold the corporations and the banks accountable.
 

Scorpio

Hunter of Chin Li's Boo Hoo Flu
Founding Member
Board Elder
Site Mgr
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
33,389
Likes
49,525
#92
not buying that one BJ
 

michael59

heads up-butts down
Sr Site Supporter
Platinum Bling
Joined
Apr 1, 2014
Messages
11,869
Likes
7,960
Location
on the low side of corporate Oregon
#94
If there is a case that says this, then this is the law. But, if there is no case that says this, then this is not the law. This is just another bullshit hallucination intended to validate the hatred of the ELECTED government of "We the People".
HAHAHAH-AH-HA..... I am laughing here.....Snooopie U B bad dog! Here snoop I'll feed you the Oregon constitution....
oregon constitution ART 1, sec 1; though it is called Oregon Bill of Rights:

Section 1. Natural rights inherent in people. We declare that all men, when they form a social compact are equal in right: that all power is inherent in the people, and all free governments are founded on their authority, and instituted for their peace, safety, and happiness; and they have at all times a right to alter, reform, or abolish the government in such manner as they may think proper.—

I will draw your attention to this: We declare that all men, when they form a social compact are equal in right:.... Reads like a dream correct? Well it does till one considers that a benefit deigned is not a benefit received AND I will cherry pick this, ...when they form a social compact... So, there is a social compact that must be performed. Well, I am living inside the bound of Oregon and this man never formed a social compact with anyone here inside the bound of Oregon.

Now snoop I will draw your attention to ART 1, sec 33:
Section 33. Enumeration of rights not exclusive. This enumeration of rights, and privileges shall not be construed to impair or deny others retained by the people.—
So, there is equal rights and rights not enumerated, two totally different things. It is a matter of logic that one cannot have equal rights and then have a right that is not listed because " men who form a social compact" as opposed to "retained by the people" are two different things. What I am telling U snoop is these two separate things, 1 and 33, are referencing two separate things and it is all been there, in the Oregon Constitution since 1859. Now, in referencing the word "privileges" in #33 and the whole of #33.
This enumeration of rights, comma, and privileges shall not be construed to impair or deny others retained by the people. Why the comma before the word and snoop? It is there because this #33 is referring to two separate things. In fact if one should notice the word privileges and the word and in front of it and just start there this #33 reads 'and privileges shall not be construed to impair or deny,' what is impairing and/or denying other rights retained by the people? Why it is the enumeration of the rights listed in the so called "Bill of rights" of the Oregon Constitution.

So snoooopie, the Oregon Constitution has clearly showed since 1859 that there are two things that operate inside the bound of Oregon. They are: those that have formed a social compact and those that have not. Now what is a social compact that this Oregon Constitution is referencing, or what has someone else done that I have not done? I cannot never know because it is something that "they" have done and it must be a thing that this man has not done; so what is it?

The only answer is: Swearing allegiance to the fiction or STATE. Swearing allegiance changes the, or a, people to a PERSON. PERSON has equal rights and this is harmonious to and as per the #14th amendment of the USA constitution which is all about equality. And, what comes with this equality? Or, better yet: What is it that this equality brings? It brings "policy" and, what is policy? Policy is what others have already dictated as to how one will live their life, though policy is dictated it can be re-manufactured to fit social instances. And, what does all this mean?

It means, just like I told a judge; sitting face to face, that he-yes-he was living policy and not-yes-not living life. And, this elected judge, why he could say nothing because I had just showed him that he could not judge that which was not similar to him; meaning I was not begotten by a fiction which by the way is what #33 and #1 is all about. They, the things in #1 and #33, are showing that yes there are two separate things in the bound of Oregon: one is by choice and the other is just there and always has one more right than the other.

So snoopie, next time you call bullshit just re-read this reply and educate your self.

edited to add: snoopie, you should understand what the word PERSON is all about. A people can be a PERSON but a PERSON can never be a people. And, this one is for Bigjon: Are you a relig guy? Remember the Jesus when he cast the thing out of the guy and the thing went into a bunch of pigs? Legion was its name-o correct? What is legion? Well according to the words used legion is many, correct? PERSON is many, so Leagion could have said "I am Corporation, because I am many." Or, it could have said "I am PERSON, because I am many." Either one fit.


 
Last edited:

Scorpio

Hunter of Chin Li's Boo Hoo Flu
Founding Member
Board Elder
Site Mgr
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
33,389
Likes
49,525
#95
BJ,

sometimes you cannot see the forest thru the trees,

you actually think chin li is operating independent of the world monetary system?
you really think the chin li society is the last bastion of freedom in the world?

sometimes you need to review what your authors write and form your own opinion, rather than just being a parrot for stupid commentary

I could waste time proving chin li is mainlining world fiat, but I don't feel like it

as for me being programmed, you might want to step in front of that mirror and ask yourself
 

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
4,613
Likes
4,534
#96
BJ,

sometimes you cannot see the forest thru the trees,

you actually think chin li is operating independent of the world monetary system?
you really think the chin li society is the last bastion of freedom in the world?

sometimes you need to review what your authors write and form your own opinion, rather than just being a parrot for stupid commentary

I could waste time proving chin li is mainlining world fiat, but I don't feel like it

as for me being programmed, you might want to step in front of that mirror and ask yourself
All very true, I looked in the mirror and I saw you.

We live in a country where we only have equitable title while the govt holds lawful title. Socialism for sure, maybe even communism, if you take into account all the planks of the communist manifesto have been brought about by this govt of and for US Citizens.

Just cause the programmers of "land of the free, home of the brave" say we are free, does not make it so.
So as you pay your taxes to stay out of prison and you put on your mask before going into Menards you can thank your programmers for those wonderful thoughts about freedumb and capitalism.

Are we so different than chin lee?
 

michael59

heads up-butts down
Sr Site Supporter
Platinum Bling
Joined
Apr 1, 2014
Messages
11,869
Likes
7,960
Location
on the low side of corporate Oregon
#97
Are we so different than chin lee?
oh yeah beach, we b free; free to pay and pay again.
The chin pay tax on real estate once and only once. Remember the ghost city thread? yeh, they purchase the land, apt, building and get taxed once.
so? Who B free'r than freewillie? why not us.
 

Scorpio

Hunter of Chin Li's Boo Hoo Flu
Founding Member
Board Elder
Site Mgr
Midas Supporter ++
Joined
Mar 25, 2010
Messages
33,389
Likes
49,525
#98
Just cause the programmers of "land of the free, home of the brave" say we are free, does not make it so.
no different than the people spouting other narratives,

if I don't agree with you then I must be x,

when thousands of posts disagree with your version of 'me'

you are the one smoking dope and not paying attention, too busy with pure rubbish

I never said we were free, you ran with that ball all on your own,

etc.
 

snoop4truth

Silver Miner
Joined
Mar 21, 2015
Messages
598
Likes
126
#99
Insert a bunch of lieyers here: Who went off the tracks after the civil war and formed a quasi-lawful defacto govt.

The new corporate govt they formed started adopting changes to the original Constitution FOR.

Your US Citizens are second class citizens under the control of the Municipal Congress and have one thing in common with the people who formed the original country of The united States joined into a federation of States by a Constitution that created the rules for the Federal govt employed by the States.

That one thing they have in common is to reject being US Citizens and become the State nationals they lawfully are.

This is law, and the lieyers like to claim what they did was not expressly forbidden by the constitution, but the tenth says if it's not in the constitution they did not have legal permission to make a new nation of top down rule.
MY RESPONSE" THE ACT OF 1871 HOAX: Amateur legal theorists claim that the Act of 1871 somehow converted the entire United States of America into a private, for-profit "corporation". But, this is not so.

The Act of 1871 merely created a "CITY GOVERNMENT" for THE CITY of Washington D.C. Nothing more. The term "MUNICIPAL corporation" appears in the Act, but this term only means a publicly-owned, non-profit CITY GOVERNMENT, not a private, for profit corporation. The term "body corporate" also appears in the act, but this term only means that the new CITY GOVERNMENT can enter into contracts and sue and be sued in its own name. This term does not mean a private, for-profit corporation.

The Act of 1871 did not (and could not) convert the entire United States of America itself into a private, for-profit corporation. It would take an amendment to the United States Constitution to do that, because acts of congress are INFERIOR to the Constitution and the Constitution controls the structure and form of the United States of America. An act of congress is legally powerless to convert the United States into a private, for-profit corporation. There is nothing about the Act of 1871 which has any effect whatsoever on the United States of America itself. But, amateur legal theorists do not know enough to even realize this. They mistakenly believe that because Washington, D.C. is the "seat" of the federal government, the creation of a CITY GOVERNMENT for that city somehow converted the entire United States into a "MUNICIPAL corporation" (A "CITY GOVERNMENT") too. But, this is not so.

Again, the U.S. Constitution is what determined the structural form of the United States government (as a constitutional republic controlled by the VOTE of "We the People" in elections). That same U. S. Constitution is the SUPREME LAW of the land. SO, NO LAW CAN TRUMP THE U.S. CONSTITUTION.

The Act of 1871 is a mere statute passed Congress. A statute passed by Congress is an INFERIOR LAW when compared to the U.S. Constitution (which is the SUPREME LAW of the land). So, a mere statute, like the Act of 1871, has no power to change the Constitution or the structural form of the United States government which the U.S. Constitution established.

TO CHANGE THE STRUCTURE OF THE U.S. GOVERNMENT FROM A CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC TO A CORPORATION, THE U.S. CONSTITUTION ITSELF WOULD HAVE TO BE AMENDED. The U.S. Constitution sets forth the ONLY WAYS that the U.S. Constitution can be amended (like the vote of 2/3 of all the states). BUT, NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THESE THINGS EVER HAPPENED. NEVER.

That means that no change of the structural form of the U.S. government from a constitutional republic to a corporation ever occurred. The Act of 1871 itself specifically states that the only powers that Congress gave to to the CITY GOVERNMENT of Washington, D.C. are powers that are CONSISTENT WITH THE U.S. CONSTITUTION. So, contrary to your understanding, the Act of 1871 DOES NOT CONFLICT WITH (or change) the U.S. Constitution. THE ACT OF 1871 CONFORMS TO THE U.S. CONSTITUTION (AS IT MUST ANYWAY, AS A LAW INFERIOR TO THE U.S. CONSTITUTION). That means that neither the form of our constitutional republic nor our U.S. Constitution was ever changed by the Act of 1871 (an INFERIOR Act of Congress).
 

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
4,613
Likes
4,534
excerpts of https://famguardian.org/Subjects/LawAndGovt/Citizenship/usa.htm#Index

Divine Right Of Kings
Human enslavement has taken all sorts of forms since the beginning of time. The most insidious form is when one individual, such as a king, claims that God gave him the right of enslavement. This is called The Divine Right of Kings. At the root of this assumed right is basic feudal slavery. The divine right the King of England claimed was the right to have absolute authority over every one of his subjects so they could not leave his political-religious jurisdiction. That is, the king's subjects did not have the right to expatriate, according to his assumed divine right over them.

The American Revolution of 1776 was the result of individuals who believed that the King did not have the right to prevent the people from leaving his political-religious jurisdiction. The Revolution was fought over liberty of choice. Our Constitution is the political document that resulted from that struggle and it guarantees our liberty to choose the political domain we want to be controlled by without compelled performance. Therefore, if we want to move from one political jurisdiction to another, we are guaranteed that right - called expatriation. We are guaranteed the right to change our political territory any time we desire.

Few are aware today that their political choice has been made for them, and it is a political choice that has taken away their absolute rights under the Constitution and its first ten Amendments, the Bill of Rights. They are unaware that they were given at birth an economic privilege of an alternative political domain - allowed by the Constitution, but operating outside of it. An alternative domain that operates with the same Divine Right of Kings as did the King of England. Thus, the Constitution is operating in an economic capacity rather than a political one.

~

What an assumed noble reason. Assure civil rights by adding an Amendment to the Constitution. Who would be against civil rights? After all, isn't that what this country was all about? So we now have the 14th Amendment. It is extremely unfortunate that as we look back at the racial cover that was used to get the Amendment into law, we continue to see, even today, the same use of racial issues to cover an undercurrent of corporate private law being used in the public sector for exploiting the population.

It [the 14th Amendment] is a set-back to proper government. This operation of the 14th Amendment runs counter to the ideals expressed in the Preamble to the Constitution itself. It does any thing but promote domestic tranquility. They [the Republican Party] knew what they intended by the vague terms of section one of the Amendment. They knew that it could be interpreted so as to extend far beyond the negro race question. They desired to nationalize all civil rights; to make the Federal power supreme; and to bring the private life of every citizen directly under the eye of Congress ... . This result was to be obtained by disenfranchising the whites and enfranchising the blacks ... . It meant the death knell of the doctrine of State's rights - the ultimate nationalization of all civil rights and the consequent abolition of State control over the private rights and duties of the individual. It meant the passing over of the police power of the State, into the police power of the national government, thereby giving Congress undefined and unlimited powers whereby it would be enabled to enter fields of legislation from which hitherto it had been barred ... .

~

The 14th Amendment is private unilateral contract law being used in the public sector to dictate public policy. Everyone born since 1868 has, by accident of birth, become subject to the 14th Amendment. "Subject to" is accomplished through the constructive trust created under the Roman civil law offer and acceptance principles and all its ramifications, including being citizens primarily of the United States government and not of the state in which you live. Plus, you also have the additional benefit of being part of and responsible for the public debt of the trust. The 14th Amendment does not say that all persons are subject to, it says "and subject to" which is the first clue to revealing that each citizen does have a choice as to whether or not they want to be "subject to."

The 14th Amendment citizenship is one which a citizen keeps unless he voluntarily relinquishes it and which, once acquired, cannot be shifted, canceled, or diluted at the will of the Federal Government, the states, or any other governmental unit.

Allegiance in this country is not due to Congress, but to the people, with whom the sovereign power is found ...

~

Expatriation
On July 27, 1868, one day before the 14th Amendment took effect, an "Act" of Congress was passed. This Act was 15 United States Statute at Large,/55 known as the "Expatriation Statute." Though this Statute is no longer included in the United States Code, it has not been repealed and is still in effect./56 This Statute is extremely important because it is the public municipal law the individual can use for private purposes to remove him/herself from the private trust law operating in the public sector. That is, a private individual, who has found himself or herself bound by private law that is being used in the public sector to promote public policy of compelled performance which he did not have a choice in, can access the public positive statute law to move back under the liberty and protection of the Republic and its separation of powers.

~
 

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
4,613
Likes
4,534
Index.
Your Will Was Probated

It may come as a surprise to realize that your Will was probated the day you were born. Yes, it is true. The very day you were born by accident into the United States is the day you died to the Law of the Republic./78 In other words, by operation of law, you were born into the corporate municipal legislative democracy of Washington, D.C..

It is presumed that everyone born into this country since 1933 has wanted to be a part of the public policy of the municipal corporation of the District of Columbia. This is because the public trust was established by public policy when the gold was removed as a standard in payment of debt. Up until the gold was removed, less than 51% of the population was involved as beneficiaries of the 14th Amendment trust. The moment the gold standard was removed, more than 51% of the population automatically became members of the trust. This meant the private municipal trust could be moved into the public sector to become public policy because the amount of the population volunteering for the benefits indicated a public desire. In addition, the trust was confirmed by the U.S. (S)upreme (C)ourt decision of Erie Railroad v. Tompkins in 1938 saying "there is no general federal common law." In other words, it is now presumed that everyone is a 14th Amendment "person" as implied by law and so silence on the part of the citizen is his consent to be treated as a "constructive trustee" and as primarily being a United States citizen.

Despite the suspension of the fixed gold standard, the path to liberty for the individual lies in the state court of probate because the general common law of the soil still lies in the state courts.

More at Index.
 
Last edited:

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
4,613
Likes
4,534
Take Back Your Estate

It seems that if one seriously questions the government's tax and economic policy, or challenges the tax collecting agencies, that he will be labeled a "tax protester." Remember, a "tax protester" is a 14th Amendment person who is required to file a return and pay a tax. However, you must take aim at the agencies that are the trusters of your estate and when you do, you will be dealing directly with the Internal Revenue Service and the taxing agencies of your state. Taking back your estate means revoking the gift held in trust - "constructive trust" held by the taxing agencies. [Review footnote 24 on constructive trusts]


Starting the process of moving your political choice back under republican laws requires that you state your Will. That is, you must make a public declaration of what your political Will is under the Constitution. Do you want to be a part of the public policy - the trust - or do you want to be able to use public municipal law for your private benefit. Making your Will known requires that your declaration be specific as to your desire about severing the trust.


It is generally recognized that the acceptance of a beneficial testamentary gift, evidenced by signing a IRS W-4 form or similar tax form, will convey the same results as voting. The opinion has been frequently expressed that renunciation of such a gift, in order to be effective, must be express, clear and unequivocal, as by some positive act or statement of the beneficiary./84 The following could be your Will by declaration and thus your political decision to choose the Republican form of government. Pay attention to the content of the sample declaration. Content is important.


Declaration of Independence
I, John [and/or Jane Doe] in the name of the Almighty Creator, By [my/our] Declaration of Independence solemnly Publish and Declare [my/our] Right to expatriate absolute, [my/our] res in trust to the foreign jurisdiction known as the municipal corporation of the District of Columbia, a democracy, and return to the Republic. Any and all past and present political ties implied by operation of law or otherwise in trust with the democracy is hereby dissolved. I, John [and/or Jane Doe] have full power to contract, establish commerce as guaranteed by the full 10 Amendments to the Bill of Rights to the Constitution of the nited States of America, a Republic.

So Done this _________ day of ______________, 19____.


Signed, _______________________________


Address _____________________________________________


Affirmed and subscribed before me this __________ day of __________, 19___


Name of Notary _______________________


Notary Public Seal



Publishing your Declaration of Independence according to your state's Legal Notice Statute fulfills this requirement. Some states require the Legal Notice to be published only once, other states require three times, some more, etc.. Check your Legal Notices in your state Statute books. Note: Some newspapers will want to put the declaration under Public Notice which is OK.


A word of caution. Some people have filed their "Notice" in the court without advertising in the newspaper. If your state Statute books require a "Notice" to be published in the newspaper and you do otherwise, the system does not have to recognize the "Notice," so beware.


You must start your process of severing the Trust by filing your Declaration of Independence. Once you have filed it and it has been advertised, the newspaper will send you back an Affidavit of Publication. This will be one of the "Exhibits" you will use as evidence to the probate court of your will.





Index .
 

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
4,613
Likes
4,534
What a colossal load of amateur bullshit!
He said lieyers had no clue, you are the proof. Stick to generalities and terms that keep changing their meanings.
 

Bigjon

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Midas Supporter
Joined
Apr 1, 2010
Messages
4,613
Likes
4,534
Anna von Reitz
1d ·

The Progression of Lies -- Why There Has to Be War in This System

Please note that since the nineteenth century there has been talk about evolution and evolution has been the rallying cry of Progressives. The existence of Progressives implies the existence of a Progression--- evolution, in some sense. Progression implies movement, from one place or status or circumstance or condition to another.

According to the Progressives, Cro-Magnon becomes Homo Sapien becomes Homo sapien sapien....

So who are these "Progressives" and what are they trying to "Progress" to?

Thus far, "man" has been converted to a "male" and then, to a "Corporation".

That is, the man becomes defined as a human and then becomes a thing, in a progression leading to his ultimate destruction. "People" have been converted to "Persons" and then, to THINGS-- Corporations.

"Man" has become "Human" and, if we don't wake up, will soon be an "Artificial Intelligence" next, via conversion of our natural DNA to something altered and patented by the Vermin.

What this amounts to is a deliberate and evil process of "dehumanization" and unlawful conversion being pursued by criminals. Why?

To avoid accountability under the Public Law.

Each "person" operates in a different jurisdiction and venue of law, so by "progressively" converting a man to a male to a corporate THING, they avoid the penalties that accrue for their activities.

They deliberately and with malice traffick you out of the realm of the Public Law into the venal snake-pits of their private corporate "laws", "codes", and "statutes".

There is no law against raping, pillaging, enslaving or murdering a corporation.

And if you allow yourselves to be "interpreted" as a corporation, guess what?

This Unlawful Conversion, which is progressive and sequential and which leads inexorably to the worst kind of disrespect for life and Nature, is what these vermin have been up to for six generations.

A man naturally operates as a Lawful Person on the land.

A male (animal) naturally operates as a Legal Person on the sea.

A corporation (thing) operates as a LEGAL PERSON, in the airy fairy jurisdiction of the air ---- most of it, hot air.

And at each step, unalienable and inalienable rights are stripped away by changing labels and definitions. When we resist this process, the "Progressives" claim that we are at "war" with them, when in fact, we were never operating in their jurisdiction at all.

Lies and Legal Fictions are always "at war" with the Truth.

And that, in a nutshell, is why we live in a world full of constant "war". It's why our country has been at war for 90% of its existence.

In order to expedite their Grand Plan, the Masters of Deceit latched onto us via a secretive, non-consensual, unconscionable contract when they "registered" our birth and claimed that we were British Territorial U.S. Citizens.

Then, to further expedite their evil intent and enhance their ability to plunder under color of law, they also "registered" our NAMES as Municipal Corporation franchises of various kinds, which allowed them to abuse us as much as they liked under more False Legal Presumptions.

This is called a "double-ended impersonation scheme" by which you are deliberately misidentified twice, first as a Territorial Person and second as a Municipal PERSON.

There is no "Red" and "Blue", no "North" and "South", no "Black" and "White".

Those are just labels designed to give you the idea that there are two sides and something to fight against, when in fact, there are only two huge commercial corporations, the US, INC. and the USA, Inc., and both of them are ultimately owned and operated by the Pope.

So there aren't really two sides. There's just one predator with two arms and hands ready to grab anything of value that you possess, including your lives. Those are insured for over a million dollars each, so it is easy to see why these criminals have motive to instigate a shooting war on our streets.

Please take this information in and internalize it fully.

What we are dealing with are two groups of the Pope's flunkies ---one operating the Government of Westminster, trying to move everything to "safe harbor" in China (Joe Biden), and then, more of the Pope's flunkies trying to set up a basis to claim that you are a Genetically Modified Organism (GMO) by vaccinating you like cattle with their patented mRNA---(Bill Gates et alia) and using this as a rationale to claim that they literally own you as a GMO Product.

Answer their "offer" of sterility and abject servitude by going to www.TheAmericanStatesAssembly.net, and by declaring your correct political status as a birthright American, and by joining your lawful State Assembly.

Get ready to shove it all the way to China.