Tuesday, October 8, 2013

Directions To A Notary Public


THIS IS SUPER IMPORTANT STUFF HERE IN THE NOTICE PROCESS! COPY AND SAVE TO YOUR COMPUTER! 

This is where I've been hung up. Trying to get a damn notary public to do their job! If you have had trouble with notary public's in the past, then you should be as excited as I am about this material.
 

By: Jamie Weare Notsheep Barker

 Administrative process of using notices to offer discussion, seek clarification/Directions to Notary and such
~The administrative process of using notices to offer discussion to avoid conflict and secure a declaratory judgement is the simplest remedy. Notaries are ranked above a justice of the supreme court when acting in their administrative capacity with respect to notices, drafts, checks, bills of exchange, notes, or other negotiable instruments, and protesting the same for non presentment or non acceptance~
____________________________________________

Whereas Section 18 of the Notary Act does empower you to perform any duties found under any statute and whereas I do believe justice will only be served by a member of the Notary Society as I have made claims against a member of the Law Society, you are hereby charged and empowered to do the following lawful actions in order to serve justice and your Oath:

1. You will witness the attestation of an Affidavit and of a Notice of Understanding and Intent and a Claim of Right (OR OTHER DOCUMENTS).

2. You will open up a file in your office and therein you will keep the originals of said instruments.

3. You will create certified true copies of those documents and give those to
______________________________________ for service upon affected parties as named within the Affidavit.

4.______________________________________ will serve those documents and then attest to the service by way of a Certificate of Service, which you will also witness. Said Certificate will then be placed in the file previously opened.

5. You will wait TEN DAYS from date of service in order to give the affected parties a chance to either accept the claims silently or send you a sworn and attested Affidavit created upon full commercial liability and penalty of perjury contesting the beliefs, understandings and claims made in the originating Affidavit and Notice.

6. If within TEN DAYS you receive a proper Affidavit contesting the claims made you will contact the original Affiant and Claimant and inform them of the existence of contest. The contact number for said action is
________________________________.

7. In the absence of any contesting Affidavit you will sign a Default Judgment and Permanent Estoppel by Acquiescence barring the charging or prosecution of the claimant for the exercise of rights claimed and recognized by lack of contest.

8. All of these directives are completely lawful, within your mandate and necessary for the proper administration of justice. Failure to accept and follow these directives is an abandonment of your duties and a breach of your Oath.


 Notice process for statutory infractions

1) Notice of Conditional Acceptance / Notice of Discharge by way of Seeking Clarification /Notice of Permanent Estoppel by Acquiescence, Disclosure, Discovery (or whatever doc your seeking your ends with/to default)
2) Notice of dishonor
3) Notice of protest for non-acceptance (which once ignored BECOMES your declaratory judgment of permanent estoppel by silent acquiescence).

      "Remember this is the first of 3 notices, it is ALWAYS a 3 notice series cured through notice of dishonor and notice of protest for non acceptance which once ignored BECOMES your declaratory judgment of permanent estoppel by silent acquiescence. It flips their own script against them and they can NEVER respond. No one wins arguing with a thick headed cop on the roadside. So just sign everything under protest and duress, than when you and your property are safe you go right to a notary. If you got a ticket and demanded an original and a copy was imposed, you can jump immediately to notice of protest for non presentment.
make copies of every single notice you have served upon them and any and all affidavits you have filed...
and file a NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDY or MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGEMENT, or WRIT FOR DEFAULT or whatever you want to call it.
and in it, explain when and to who you sent notices or affidavits and how long you gave them to respond
and attach copies of every single notice and return receipt labeled as exhibits assign them letters and refer to them in your notice/motion/writ
explain that you have exercised your administrative remedy and demand that the charges be removed for failure to prosecute on ANY AND ALL levels of a criminal procedure" R.J.

Side Note:I find it difficult to convince my notary to hold my originals, so i hold them myself and have the effected parties respond to an address i provide...



     "Notice, is everything. You are entitled to actual notice, fair and proper notice, and notice reasonably calculated to afford you an opportunity to respond with respect to each and every element of the charge and the process, clarification and definition of terms... IF YOU BOTHER TO ASK FOR IT... and if you don't ask, you WILL BE DENIED due process, because they are using two set of dictionaries, and cooking two set of books. Its the only way any one can be convicted of anything, the system has become so utterly contradicted. Notice of jurisdiction the charge is brought in, notice of the law or grounds upon which the claim or charge is brought, notice of the nature and cause for the charge or claim, notice of... evidence of your criminal intent... everything... clarification and definition of terms... until you UNDERSTAND that you are guilty, because you really, really, want to help them convict you, step by step, means, opportunity, and most importantly, MOTIVE.
When they say person, what do they mean? When they ask your name, are you asking if im the man or woman given that christian name, or are you addressing the incorporated creature of statute created by government. And in this, NOTICE, is victory. You can just keep asking questions, and one you learn to ask questions you already know the answer to, I one hundred percent in my full liability capacity guarantee and do so promise, that you will prevail, and they will give up.

It is only by NOT providing notice of the fact that they are misapplying something, or perverting something somewhere in the administration of law not in accordance with the rules of procedure, in violation of due process requirements, that they presume to prosecute any case at all. If you ask the right questions, they must, and will, run from the right line of questioning regarding procedure or the law (forget the facts), they must run and withdraw or convict themselves on record with their answer. And when you start asking the simplest, fundamental questions of law and procedure, the act is destroyed, the illusion is broken, the emperor has no cloths.

Do the crime, do the time. Buy the ticket, take the ride.

Fair notice, who am I to you and who are you to me? By what authority? By what law in what jurisdiction according to what rules? He who brings the claim must bring the remedy.

Ask and you shall receive.

Is this a court of the judiciary, or a for profit corporate business? Cause if its a for profit corporate business (they all are now since 69) they cannot exercise the powers of government or police, fairly and impartially, in accordance with the requirements of DUE PROCESS, because they are biased and prejudiced by dual obligation. Can you give me fair notice of how this game is played? What are the rules for natural persons, American citizens, incorrectly charged as artificial persons and US citizens by a court who refuses to recognize they are breathing and speaking and not a creature of statute created by government identity theft of your name to create a business front, fended at the derogatory name calling from the start, with intent to diminish your rights and legal status in law by false designation and classification of your person in law. Its a frame up, from the moment you receive the paper work to the DEFENDANT OR RESPONDENT CORPERATE FRANCHIZE PERSON" P.R.

IRS


Police Duty

“It is not the duty of the police to protect you. Their job is to protect the Corporation and arrest code breakers.” Sapp v. Tallahasee, 348 So. 2nd. 363, Reiff v. City of Philadelphia, 477 F.Supp. 1262, Lynch v. N.C. Dept of Justice 376 S.E. 2nd. 247.

What the Gov thinks it looks like. / What they really look like.


Consent


I find that in the loss of freedoms we are our own worse enemies. Consent gives them away. We need to learn how to stop giving it on all levels.
~ Chris otf: Duke



People need to learn just what consent is before they can stop giving it. To one who does not understand what constitutes consent, it all appears to be trickery. When you understand, then you become the one who is large and in charge. 


If some one with a gun, pulling you over without probable cause...

 
If some one with a gun, pulling you over without probable cause or reasonable suspicion that you have committed any crime involving a victim or damaged party, to conduct a shakedown, anal probe, or a warrentless search, to fish around for a civil infraction he can write you for, but couldnt pull you over for in the first place, insists you sign something, you can always claim duress and coercion, and fear that you where dealing with a dangerous criminal when you signed, while you were falsely arrested at the side of the road, with him lying to you claiming you werent under arrest. I have, and it works. case dismissed just a year ago in Galveston, speeding, no insurance, and expired registration, less than a three page response, and no real citations or arguments. I didn't get into Persons or legal status, and barely mentioned that I was traveling and not driving. I merely stated I was suspicious of this lawless fruitcake for the reason that he pulled me without lawful justification in the first place and the signature is withdrawn. No contract. Simple. And I had forgotten about this ticket for nearly five years before I filed anything.

If the Judge wants to play with you, You disqualify him, orally in open court or by motion : Motion for disqualification - The respondent reserves the right to face his accuser, the fictional party state that can suffer no injury or damage, and demands a fair impartial Judge not employed by opposing counsels fictional party state. For the reason that the Judge is employed by the respondent or defendants opposition, and cannot preside over the action fairly and impartially, because he is employed by a party to the action, the state, the respondent moves for disqualification of the same. Its right there, logically, in front of your face

Its just sickening to me how every one has been so dumbed down. Every ticket is a scam, and people pay them. WTF?
9 times out of ten, you are pulled, so the cop can search for cause and justification to pull you. Its that simple. Cart before the horse, no due process.
and if he finds a civil infraction, its still not just cause to have pulled you, unless its criminal, involving a victim. The whole racquet is just that, from start to finish.
and people walk in, and plead NOT GUILTY, a negative that cant be proven, and proceed to argue issues they have just waived by pleading. You must refuse to plead a negative that cant be proven, and conditionally offer to plead guilty, upon fair and proper notice of the law your accused of violating, clarification of definitions and terms in that law, including nature and cause and how... this law has provided you proper notice that it applies to you, a natural person, and not a cooperate or franchise person, agent officer or representative of government. simple
'"...the tenderness of the law for the rights of individuals' entitles each person, regardless of economic or social status, to an unequivocal warning from the legislature as to whether he is within the class of persons subject to vicarious liability. Congress cannot be deemed to have intended to punish anyone who is not 'plainly and unmistakably' within the confines of the statute." (United States v. Lacher, 134 U.S. 624, 628, 10; S.Ct. 625, 626, 33 L.Ed. 1080; United States v. Gradwell, 243 U.S. 476,485, 37 S.Ct. 407, 61 L.Ed. 857. FN1 United States v. Wiltberger, 5 Wheat. 76, 95, 5 L.Ed. 37)).

“A state may impose an excise upon the franchise of corporations engaging in a business which every private Citizen has a right to engage in freely. The privilege taxed is the right to engage in such business with the special advantages which are incident to corporate existence." California Bank v. San Francisco, 142 Cal. 276, 75 Pac. 832, 100 A.S.R. 130, 64 L.R.A. 918. "A State may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a Right granted by the federal Constitution... Thus, it may not extract a license tax for the privilege of carrying on interstate commerce." (Murdock v Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105, 113 (1942); Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 491 (1966)).

All statutes, codes, rules and regulations are legislated, and written, giving fair notice to CORPERATE PERSONS and creatures of statute created by government, and give no fair notice that they apply to natural persons not created by governement.
" A person may this, or that... a person may not, this or that... any person who, does this or that..."

THAT the Supreme Court, in numerous instances, has reluctantly overturned the rulings of inferior State supreme courts, maintaining that "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." ( Church of Scientology v. U.S. Dept. of Justice 612 F. 2d 417, 425 (1979)). The "word ‘person’ as used and employed in most statutory language [and civil law] is ordinarily construed to exclude the [citizen or] sovereign, and that for one as such to be bound by statute, they must be 'specifically' named." ( Wilson v. Omaha Indian Tribe 442 US 653 (1979); Will v. Michigan state Police 491 U.S. 58, 105 L.Ed.2nd 45 (1989); U.S. v. General Motors Corporation, D.C. Ill, 2 F.R.D. 528, 530); "The people, or sovereign are not bound by general words in statutes, restrictive of prerogative right, title or interest, unless expressly named. Acts of limitation do not bind the King or the people. The people have been ceded all the rights of the King, the former sovereign ... It is a maxim of the common law, that when an act is made for the common good and to prevent injury, the King shall be bound, though not named, but when a statute is general and prerogative right would be divested or taken from the King [or the people] he shall not be bound." (The People v. Herkimer, 4 Cowen (NY) 345, 348 (1825); "Government admits that often the word 'person' is used in such a sense as not to include the [citizen or] sovereign but urges that... the term should be held to embrace government [and creatures of statute, representatives, employees, agents, officers, and offices, created by government and not by God]." (United States v. Cooper Corp. 318 US 600 (1941); United States v. Fox 94 US 315; United States v. Mine Workers 330 US 258 (1947); "unless the context indicates otherwise" - 1 U.S.C. Sec. 1, 2; Particularly is true where the statute imposes a burden or limitation, as distinguished from conferring a benefit or advantage." (United States v. Knight 14 pet. 301, 315 (1840); Chisolm v Georgia 2 Dall 419; Penhallen v Doane v Administration 3 Dall 54; McCullogh v Maryland 4 Wheat 316; Hauenstein v Lynharm 100 US 483 (1879); Yick Wo v Hopkins and Woo Loo v Hopkins 188 US 356 (1886)) '"...the tenderness of the law for the rights of individuals' entitles each person, regardless of economic or social status, to an unequivocal warning from the legislature as to whether he is within the class of persons subject to vicarious liability. Congress cannot be deemed to have intended to punish anyone who is not 'plainly and unmistakably' within the confines of the statute." (United States v. Lacher, 134 U.S. 624, 628, 10; S.Ct. 625, 626, 33 L.Ed. 1080; United States v. Gradwell, 243 U.S. 476,485, 37 S.Ct. 407, 61 L.Ed. 857. FN1 United States v. Wiltberger, 5 Wheat. 76, 95, 5 L.Ed. 37)).

Foot Note :
THAT The Supreme Court has warned, "Because of what appear to be Lawful commands [Statutory obligations, Rules, Regulations, and Restrictions] on the surface, many citizens, because of their respect for what appears to be law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their rights, due to ignorance... [ exploited by the deceptive practices, barratry, legal plunder, and malicious prosecution in inferior administrative State courts]." (United States v. Minker, 350 U.S. 179, 187, 76 S.Ct. 281, 100 L.Ed. 185 (1956);
THAT (a) A 'Statute' is not a "Law," (Flournoy v. First Nat. Bank of Shreveport, 197 La. 1067, 3 So.2d 244, 248), (b) nor is 'Code' "Law" (In Re Self v Rhay, 61 Wn 2d 261), in point of fact in Law, (c) a concurrent or 'joint resolution' of legislature is not "Law," (Koenig v. Flynn, 258 N.Y. 292, 179 N.E. 705, 707; Ward v. State, 176 Okl. 368, 56 P.2d 136, 137; State ex rel. Todd v. Yelle, 7 Wash.2d 443, 110 P.2d 162, 165), as "All codes, rules, and regulations are for government authorities only, not human/Creators in accordance with God's laws. All codes, rules, and regulations are unconstitutional and lacking due process…" (Rodriques v. Ray Donavan, U.S. Department of Labor, 769 F. 2d 1344, 1348 (1985)); ... lacking Due process, in that they they are void for ambiguity in their failure to specify the statutes' applicability to 'natural persons,' otherwise depriving the same of fair notice, as their construction by definition of terms aptly identifies the applicability of such statutes to "artificial or fictional corperate entities or persons," creatures of statute, or those by contract employed as agents or representatives, departmental subdivisions, offices, officers, and property of government, but not the 'Natural Person,' or American citizen Immune from such jurisdiction of legalism. “The common law is the real law, the Supreme Law of the land, the code, rules, regulations, policy and statutes are “not the law.” (Self v. Rhay, 61 Wn 2d 261), they are the law of government for internal regulation, not the law of man, in his seperate but equal station and natural state, a sovereign foreign with respect to government generally.

Ive had my coffee and a cigarette. Im done bitching

Monday, October 7, 2013

HEY FOLLOWING ORDERS GUY!


CASE LAW ON JUDICIAL IMMUNITY

Judicial immunity does not exist for judges who engage in criminal activity or aid and abet in criminal activity. The United States Supreme Court has stated that “if a court is without authority; its judgments and orders are regarded as nullities.” Elliot v. Piersol, 1 Pet. 328, 340, 26 U.S. 328, 340 (1828). http://supreme.justia.com/us/26/328/case.html They are not voidable, they are simply void and form no basis for alleging judicial immunity. When a judge acts as a trespasser of the law or when he does not follow the law, he loses subject matter jurisdiction and all of his orders are void or have no recognizable legal force or effect.

The United States Supreme Court further stated that “when a state officer acts under a state law in a manner violative of the Federal Constitution, he comes into conflict with the superior authority of that Constitution and he is in that case stripped of his official or representative character and is subjected in his person, to the consequences of his individual conduct. The State has no power to impart to him any immunity from responsibility to the supreme authority of the United States.” [Emphasis added] See Scheuer vs. Rhodes, 416 U.S. 232, 94 S.Ct. 1683 (1974). http://supreme.justia.com/us/416/232/index.html

In this capacity, the United States Supreme Court has indicated that “no state legislative or executive or judicial officer can war against the Constitution without violating his undertaking to support it.” Cooper v. Aaron, 358 U.S. 1, 78 S.Ct 1401 (1958). http://supreme.justia.com/us/358/1/index.html Any judge who does not comply with his oath office to uphold the Constitution of the United States wars against that Constitution and engages in acts which are in violation of the Supreme Law of the Land.

Furthermore, any actions which are not in full compliance with the United States Constitution produces orders which are void ab initio, as they are entered without jurisdiction and/or are otherwise illegal. In re Sawyer, 124 U.S. 200 (1888) http://supreme.justia.com/us/124/200/index.html; U.S. vs. Will, 449 U.S. 200, 216, 101 S.Ct. 471, 66 L.Ed.2d 392, 406 (1980) http://supreme.justia.com/us/449/200/index.html

Elliott v. Lessee of Piersol - 26 U.S. 328 (1828)
supreme.justia.com
Elliott v. Lessee of Piersol - 26 U.S. 328 (1828)Syllabus Case U.S. Supreme CourtElliott v. Lessee of Piersol, 26 U.S. 1 Pet. 328 328 (1828)Pet. 328Elliott v. Lessee of Piersol26 U.S. (1 Pet.) 328ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF KENTUCKY SyllabusA letter from a deceased member of a family stating the p...


The rest can be seen here.

Sunday, October 6, 2013

MICRO CIVICS COURSE

Americans are promised a Republican Form of Government, wherein the people directly exercise sovereignty (aka “self government”), and are served - not ruled - by government.
...
American people have rights and powers, endowed by their Creator.

American citizens have privileges and immunities, bestowed by their government.

...
Liberty is divided into four types : natural, personal, civil and political.
The former two are endowments, the latter two are government privileges.
★ Natural = absolute freedom (on one's own property or unclaimed land)
★ Personal = right of locomotion (freedom to travel on public roads and waterways)
★ Civil = permission from government (licenses, permits)
★ Political = participation in government (voting, holding office)
...
Governments in America are instituted for two purposes :
1. Secure rights (of all people), and
2. Govern those who consent (i.e. “Citizens”).
...
American people who absolutely own their private property and have a domicile, can exercise natural liberty (absolute freedom) over their private property. Outside of their private property, the people can exercise personal liberty (freedom to travel) upon the public roads and waterways. Everywhere else, one needs permission of the owner, lest he trespass.
...
American citizens enjoy privileges and immunities in exchange for surrendering their rights and powers, in order to exercise civil and political liberty. Citizens are subjects, because they are obligated to perform mandatory civic duties.
...
Participants in FICA (national socialism) have consented to be “contributors” (equally liable for paying the public debt), and “human resources” (pledged as surety), donors to their own benefits (self taxed), paupers (eligible for charity from the public treasury), and can enjoy the taxable privilege of engaging in usury (the abomination) with worthless notes. No law compels all Americans to participate, nor is there any law that punishes Americans who do not participate. It is 100% voluntary - voluntary servitude.
...
If one has consented to be a socialist serf, fomenting a slave rebellion is contrary to reason. Withdraw consent first, then verify if servant government is performing to specifications. If not, then consider other options.

Define Your Terms

From Robert Nunyer -

Define your terms, you will permit me again to say, or we shall never understand one another... ~ Voltaire

In order to maintain the "illusion of justice", the so-called "courts" do place merit on definitions; if you do not supply definitions to what you are saying, “the court” most certainly will, and those definitions will most assuredly NOT be to your benefit[1].

In your 'natural state' you are a 'sovereign without subjects', subject only to the law of nature[2]...

"The natural liberty[3] of man[4] is to be free from any superior power on Earth, and not to be under the will or legislative authority of man, but only to have the law of nature for his rule." ~ Samuel Adams

...UNLESS, of course, you have trespassed on some one else's natural rights[5], or have given your consent[6], express, implied, or tacit[7], to be governed by another, or others, in exchange for legal benefits and franchises. The most pronounced among these "benefits" is protection of your "rights"[8].

"To find out about natural persons[9], go live among them; to find out about citizens, consult a lawyer! Obvious as this may be, confusion about the categories of natural and of artificial persons is rife." ~ Frank Van Dun, Ph.D., Dr.Jur. - Senior lecturer Philosophy of Law
______________________________
DEFINITIONS & CITES

[1] "...through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you..."

[2] “Natural law is that body of rules which Man is able to discover by the use of his reason." ~ Hugo Grotius

"The natural law is defined by Burlamaqui to be “a rule which so necessarily agrees with the nature and state of man that, without observing its maxims, the peace and happiness of society can never be preserved.” And he says “that these are called “natural laws” because a knowledge of them may be attained merely by the light of reason, from the fact of their essential agreeableness with the constitution of human nature..." ~ A Dictionary of the Law (Black's 1st c. 1891), page 694

“There is in fact a true law - namely, right reason - which is in accordance with nature, applies to all men, and is unchangeable and eternal.” ~ Cicero

Law of nature, is a rule of conduct arising out of the natural relations of human beings established by the Creator, and existing prior to any positive precept. Thus it is a law of nature, that one man should not injure another, and murder and fraud would be crimes, independent of any prohibition from a supreme power. ~ Webster's 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language

"The law of nature is superior in obligation to any other. It is binding in all countries and at all times. No human laws are valid if opposed to this, and all which are binding derive their authority either directly or indirectly from it." ~ Institutes of American Law by John Bouvier, 1851, Part I, Title II, No. 9

[3] Natural liberty is the right which nature gives to all mankind of disposing of their persons and property after the manner they judge most consistent with their happiness, on condition of their acting within the limits of the law of nature, and so as not to interfere with an equal exercise of the same rights by other men. Burlamaqui, c. 3, § 15; 1 Bl. Comm. 125 ~ A Dictionary of the Law (Black’s 1st c. 1891), pg. 716

"Natural liberty, consists in the power of acting as one thinks fit, without any restraint or control, EXCEPT FROM THE LAWS OF NATURE. It is a state of exemption from the control of others, and from positive laws and the institutions of social life." ~ Noah Webster

This liberty is abridged by voluntarily submitting one's self to the dominion of a government not founded on the Law of Nature.

[4] Once someone consents to be governed he is, technically, no longer a "man" [human], but is now considered a "person".

Homo vocabulum est naturae; persona juris civilis. Man (homo) is a term of nature; person (persona) of civil law. ~ Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition (c.1990), page 736

[5] TRES'PASS, n. In law, violation of another's rights... ~ Noah Webster

FOR'FEITURE, n. ...the losing of some right [just claim]...by an offense, crime, breach of condition or other act. ~ Noah Webster

[6] Consensus facit legem. Consent makes the law. ~ Bouvier's 1856 Law Dictionary, page 1638; Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition (c.1990), page 305)

[7] Tacit consent is consent by silence, or not interposing an objection [rebuttal]. So we say, a tacit agreement or covenant of men to live under a particular government, when no objection or opposition [rebuttal] is made; a tacit surrender of a part of our natural rights... ~ Noah Webster

[8] Protectio trahit subjectionem, subjectio projectionem. Protection draws to it subjection, subjection, protection. The protection of an individual by government is on condition of his submission to the laws, and such submission on the other hand entitles the individual to the protection of the government. ~ Maxim of law, Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition (c.1990), page 1223

[9] NATURAL PERSONS. Such as are formed by nature, as distinguished from artificial persons, or corporations, formed by human laws for purposes of society and government. Wharton. ~ A Dictionary of the Law (Black’s 1st c. 1891), pg. 802

If you vote, you CAN'T complain!

Voting is the ultimate form of consent. The biggest adhesion contract. You claim when signing the registration card that you are their property IE a US citizen. They are a corporation. You trade in your sovereign rights when you agree to become one of their citizens. To be an American, one need not be a US citizen. The term did not even exist before the end of the civil war. 
IT IS NOTHING BUT A LEGAL STATUS THAT FUCKS YOU BY TAKING AWAY YOUR RIGHTS IN EXCHANGE FOR DEPENDENCY AND BENEFITS!
VACATE THE FICTION!

Gov Shutdown


Gov shutdown = Reason for BIG ASS tax hike across the board.
Increase the theft. The one thing that gov does well.

~ Chris otf: Duke

Saturday, October 5, 2013

OBAMACARE IS BY IMPLIED CONSENT ONLY!

 October 5, 2013 at 2:45pm 

ObamaCare is by Implied Consent Only!

By Robyna Choleton, October 5, 2013

"ObamaCare" is by implied consent only.  Such implied consent may be denied by affidavit that can be recorded as a public statement.  Americans have unalienable sovereignty -- and properly understood, this means their public serv-ANTS may NOT foist a contract over the American public (whether voters or not), without opportunity for the public to disclaim the presumption. 

Formally refuse ObamaCare by submitting one's affidavit in truth* to the offending agency which pretends that ObamaCare applies to all Americans, when it does not.  ObamaCare may only apply by adhesion contract to those who don't know what their own sovereignty means.  An affidavit submitted that is not timely rebutted by an intended recipient, becomes valid in its standing, and thereby releases the affiant from any unwanted presumption.  All presumptions of implied consent by corporate "government" (in name only), need to be formally disclaimed.

Note:  This is not "legal" advice.  "Legal advice" is apparently only available from licensed attorneys, if you can find one of them; they don't exist.  [An attorney's bar card is not a state-issued license, since the Bar Association is a private closed-shop union, which was established under the hegemony of and subordination to the Lawyers Guild of London, et al, an alien cabal which perpetually seeks to undermine American sovereignty].

A template on Word is available which may be customized to one's own data, for formally withdrawing one's consent to ANYTHING the corporate government (either state of federal) has foisted, or attempts to foist unlawfully upon living flesh and blood Americans.  No one has to accept corporately created ObamaCare, period.

* A copy of a "Notice of Affidavit, and Affidavit of Withdrawal of Consent" template, may be requested by email, at <r_choleton@yahoo.com>.

A comment left on my friend Norah Holloway's page over on Facebook.

Wicked comment left on one of the threads on my wall. Read and Enjoy.

"I'm pretty anti government and pretty fricken anti police, justice and democracy have been completely perverted and are at the root of systemic illnesses in all areas that are supposed to maintain peace, balance, truth, justice, health & well being....we wage wars under the guise of peacekeeping, preach equality but judge each other by income class ethnicity, sexual orientation, religious beliefs and almost any other way we can separate ourselves all the while working everyday in a system that concentrates wealth and power to an elite minority; we are constantly lied to and misguided by corporate media manipulation and information blackouts and manufactured truth; you have to pay for justice in courts that swear never to state facts in a courtroom, and peace officers are now law enforcement with the intent of charging people with petty criminal acts for profit and labelling them for future profit (repeat offences cause fines to go up) : ie. traffic violations, drug charges, and all those other kooky by laws and outrageous legislation preventing non corporate entities the right to compete against corrupt corporate giants; apparently the HEALTH of the intangible economy and GDP are more important than climate change, deforestation, ocean acidification, endangered keystone species, extreme radiation release ( fukashima aka Oh FUK!) or global pollution from fossil fuel industry and the geo climatic engineering destroying our finite planet; healthcare which should be preventative is now is the reverse its actually illness & pharmaceutical based instead of proactive and education/prevention based; & well being....Well, that's based on how well the government and corporate giants are deceiving us into complacency and how much profit they are taking in from our working class lives.

So in the immortal and poetic words of N.W.A, "fuck the police.""

Non criminals being harvested for organ transplants.


I'm watching a show right now about Chinese organ transplants. It's a sham that they are called donors. They arrest people who have committed no crimes, and shoot them for their organs when some rich guy needs a new part. This is the stuff that real monster movies are made from. Red Reign is the name of the show. I'm watching it on Hulu Plus. I'm sure it' available on Netflix and probably youtube as well.

The politics are crafted to make some countries sound like such good guys. I'll just consider that part of the usual propaganda we are all so used to these days. Look past that tripe. What is going on with organ transplants, not only in China, is reprehensible. These people are monsters. Just how far do you think the US is from such activities with the complete privatization of prisons? Their only job is to turn a buck. Think about that.

Confessions of an Economic Hit Man

All Wars Are Bankers Wars

Perhaps now you might connect the dots and understand just why the United States instigates it's criminal wars of aggression against a fake terror threat. Once you understand the very real fact that al-Qaeda was created by and is still run by the CIA, you will understand that all wars are banker's wars.

School

 “Schools train people to be ignorant, with style. They give you the equipment that you need to be a functional ignoramus. American schools* do not equip you to deal with things like logic; they don’t give you the criteria by which to judge between good and bad in any medium or format; and they prepare you to be a usable victim for military-industrial complex that needs manpower.”

“As long as you’re just smart enough to do a job and just dumb enough to swallow what they feed you, you’re gonna be alright. But if you go beyond that then you’re gonna have these grave doubts that give you stomach problems, headaches…make you want to go out and do something else. So, I believe that schools mechanically and very specifically try and breed out any hint of creative thought in the kids that are coming out.”

-Frank Zappa

Modern Slaves


One of my least favorite things is looking at track housing from an areal photograph. I can't look at all those tight little projects anymore without it screaming out to me slave housing. Add a community board who enforces rules and such, and I just can't comprehend how people are willing to live in one of these places. Especially when you consider that none of these people even own the land their overpriced houses sit on. I just shake my head anymore.

So you spend 40 to 50 hours per week working for someone else because you choose to?


No you don't. You are trapped in a system whereby the natural resources of the world, which are your birthright, are squandered by corporations. You are forced into dependence on a perpetual debt based economy, of which your energy and labour, are used as surety for the creation of a usurious money supply with ever decreasing value. You are but cattle to be used as the real controllers of this world, the money lenders, see fit. The product of your entire life's work is already claimed by your masters before you are even born. You are dumbed down by the "education" system to repeat a State sponsored curriculum instead of being taught how to think for yourself. Your mind is bombarded with propaganda via the news media. You are trained to worship what used to be court jesters, but are now labelled "celebrities." Your life is not your own, and you have been conditioned to such an extent that you are almost completely unaware of your indentured servitude. In fact, you are like a caged animal with the door wide open. You could simply choose to walk out, but you have become so inured, so dependent on the system that enslaves you that freedom seems like a very scary concept to you.

Truth About "Debt"

By: ZJ Free
 
If all of the rules which enabled the Federal Reserve Act to be passed(?) were followed, the people (who are the Creditors of the government) would have the unrestricted ability to discharge all 'debt' which they incurred from proceeds of payment of interest on the 'loans' extended to government.

Living souls do not incur 'debt' as they are only ever the Creditor. The debtors are the 'government' and the FICTIONS created by government.

Be the Creditor, NOT the debtor. Know who you are...!!

Hint: Read "Modern Money Mechanics" a publication from the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago. Truth straight from the horse's mouth, which seldom comes from that direction...!!

Vacate Their Stupidity!

This is not just a board member, he's the fucking chairman of the board! You are being lied to, or they really are this stupid!

Who's dumber? The dumb representative, or the person willing to be represented by a dumb ass?

Friday, October 4, 2013

As corrupt as it gets.

 

It's typical and common for district attorneys to charge anyone at all involved with a firearm in any sort of circumstance. They operate from two core principles that are diametrically opposed to liberty.

1. They are paid to prosecute people and derive benefit and prestige from 'victories' in the courtroom. The inherent conflict of interest here is that they could care less about guilt or innocence but more about winning. Justice, as any attorney will tell you, is not about right and wrong, but about meeting the burden of proof.

2. As officers of the State, and universally, supporters of 'the rule of law' they will always believe in the supremacy of the State. Therefore, they subconsciously accept the false premise that the State should have a monopoly on the legitimate use of force.

Both of these conditions were a large factor in why common law required the use of a grand jury. It was referred to as grand because it was the more important of the two in the jury system. The grand jury decided first and foremost if you should have your liberty denied - if there was a crime even committed. We essentially no longer have this, but have invested this incredibly destructive power in a single, and essentially unaccountable human being: the police officer.

Just being charged with a crime, not even convicted has a terrible and life long consequence. Your arrest records are public, your job, your credit, your reputation is all potentially lost by the whim of some cop you may have pissed off. Moreover, any DA can bring charges against you without any sort of review by a grand jury. It costs a LOT of money to defend yourself from legal charges and even if you win, the tens of thousands will never be repaid.

And what's worse, you have zero recourse. There is no legal means to demand justice from those who supposedly administer it. This was the heart of why we had a grand jury.

Such destructive power was never to be left in the hands of one person. How often have you heard of a DA loosing a reelection bid? Rarely. So these people become entrenched and to do business in their courts, practicing attorneys must pay fealty or face a rough time from DA's who won't cooperate.

Add all this in, and you get travesties we don't hear about. The Castle Doctrine, which exists in my state, Pennsylvania, was part of a band aid remedy to this type of abuse. As we can see, it's a joke. Treating symptoms but not root causes. If you really want to repair the system, DA's MUST be held accountable. Grand Juries must be the only way to arrest without a crime being committed in the officer's presence. Individual police officers must be subject to electoral review - ie; cops should be able to be fired by local referendum.

None of these will EVER happen because the judicial system, or more accurately, the prison industrial complex is far too corrupt. There's way too much power and money invested here for change to occur without a violent overthrow of the system. The people in charge are too intelligent to allow it to ever get that bad. But we're close...

Copy and paste this to your local police facebook page! EVERYBODY!!!!

By:  Rhonda Ramsey

Well well well officers. Looks like we’ve got some issues here. Thanks to former sheriff’s deputy and Rule of Law Radio Show host Eddie Craig’s 2.5 hour presentation called “Secrets Police Don’t Want You To Know” at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B3nok7Cby28 the world now knows that:

1. The statement “driving is a privilege, not a right” is only true if the driver in question is a COMMERCIAL driver, and non-commercial drivers have the right to drive with no license, no insurance, no registration, and no license plate on their car whenever they please

2. It is impossible for a non-commercial driver to be engaging in TRANSPORTATION or be DRIVING because the legal definitions (and not the standard English dictionary definitions which are irrelevant) of those two capital words imply that they only relate to COMMERCE. This also means that it is IMPOSSIBLE for a non-commercial driver to be charged with DUI/DWI since the “D” stands for DRIVING (although a non-commercial driver can be charged with non-transportation crimes like negligence, reckless endangerment, and property damage)

3. It is impossible for a non-commercial driver to be OPERATING a VEHICLE because the legal definitions of those two capital terms also imply that they only relate to COMMERCE

4. The fact that TRANSPORTATION is a COMMERCIAL activity means that it is ILLEGAL for law enforcement personnel to pull over, stop at checkpoints, or issue transportation law tickets to non-commercial drivers. Transportation laws only apply to commercial drivers, period!

And personally, I find it disgusting that law enforcement and govt personnel say that they are issuing tickets to non-commercial drivers in order to “keep the roads safe” when in reality this is an outright lie to conceal the fact that the real reason they break the law in this regard is to GENERATE REVENUE. If it had to do with public safety, then they would make you retake the driving test every time your license expired, which they don’t. And besides, having a rectangular piece of plastic in your wallet or a sticker on your car windshield or a metal plate on your car trunk IS NOT gonna make you any more or less safe than not having those things.

You can bet that I’m gonna do my part to make this video spread like wildfire, and I got more than enough free time on my hands to post this message on the facebook pages of all the police departments on planet Earth who have facebook pages. You have nobody to blame but yourselves for this. It’s not my problem that you decided to illegally abuse your authority in this regard, and it wasn’t my idea for Eddie Craig to make this video to expose one of the most despicable scams in history.

Now that I’ve told you this, I trust you guys will start acting like you understand that transportation laws only apply to commercial drivers and won’t act like you don’t. If not, then you deserve to be banned from law enforcement for all eternity! Oh, and Eddie Craig’s transportation stop script, courtroom script, and red light camera letter to avoid paying red light camera tickets can all be found at http://logosradionetwork.com/tao/

Only in Bizarro Land would you be forced to pay for something you did not buy.


If Apple were like Obozocare...


One for down under.

Click on pic for larger image.

2 Classes of Citizens?

Article IV, Section 2 Clause 1 says; "The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States."

Notice they do not use the word "RIGHTS" when describing what "citizens" have. No, they use the word "PRIVILEGES" instead. That goes for both groups of citizens, Federal and State. None the less, this story may be an eye opener for some people who have not seen these rulings before. If you are to surrender your sovereignty to someone else because you are not capable of handling your own affairs, then it may as well be either the State or Federal government. I see no real difference. In either case, you subjugate yourself threw your own consent to the rule of another. You trade in your human rights for company privileges. You are a slave either way. VACATE THE FICTION!
 
By: Sovereignty International
There have always been 2 classes of citizens in America.
The Constitution for the United States of America talks about 2 classes of citizens.
Article IV, Section 2 Clause 1 says; "The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States."
The courts have talked about the two classes of citizens as shown below.
"there is in our Political System, a government of each of the several states and a government of the United States  Each is distinct from the other and has citizens of its own." . US vs. Cruikshank, 92 US 542,
The Fourteenth Amendment, "....creates or at least recognizes for the first time a citizenship of the United States, as distinct from that of the States."
Black's Law Dictionary, 5th Edition at pg 591;
"One may be a citizen of a State and yet not a citizen of the United States. Thomasson v State, 15 Ind. 449; Cory v Carter, 48 Ind. 327 (17 Am. R. 738); McCarthy v. Froelke, 63 Ind. 507; In Re Wehlitz, 16 Wis. 443."
Mc Donel v State, 90 Ind. Rep. 320 at pg 323;
"Both before and after the 14th Amendment to the Federal Constitution it has not been necessary for a person to be a citizen of the U.S. in order to be a citizen of his State" Crosse v. Board of Supervisors, Baltimore, Md., 1966, 221 A. 2d 431 citing US Supreme Court Slaughter House Cases and U.S. v. Cruikshank 92 US 542, 549, 23 L. Ed 588 1875
"There are two classes of citizens, citizens of the United States and of the State. And one may be a citizen of the former without being a citizen of the latter" Gardina v. Board of Registers 48 So. 788, 169 Ala. 155 (1909)
"Citizenship of the United States does not entitle citizens to privileges and immunities
of Citizens of the State, since privileges of one are not the same as the other" Tashiro v. Jordan, 255 P. 545 California Supreme Court
The United States Supreme Court quite thoroughly expanded on the two classes
of citizenship in the case Maxwell v Dow, 20 S.C.R. 448, where it said:
"...that there was a citizenship of the United States and a citizenship of the states,
which were distinct from each other, depending upon different characteristics and circumstances in the individual; that it was only privileges and immunities of the citizens of the United States that were placed by the amendment under the protection of the Federal Constitution, and that the privileges and immunities of a citizen of a state, whatever they might be, were not intended to have any additional protection by the
paragraph in question, but they must rest for their security and protection where they have heretofore rested."
Maxwell v Dow, 20 S.C.R. 448, at pg 451;
These two classes of citizenship continue to this day, "Privileges and immunities clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protects only those rights peculiar to being a citizen of the federal government; it does not protect those rights which relate to state citizenship. 14,§ 1."
Jones v Temmer, 829 F.Supp. 1226 (D.Colo. 1993);
Because there are 2 classes of citizens, and also because of circumstances that will become known below, it is necessary to assert your sovereignty. In order to understand how and why you assert your sovereignty, we need to have some background knowledge.
A state citizen is one of "We the People" found in the preamble to the constitution. You can be in a state without being in the United States. In fact, if you read their codes, the United States in the United States Code is the District of Columbia and the Territories. The Puerto Rico website even talks about it.
What is a US citizen?
  And yes, they do contradict themselves on occasion when talking about rights v privileges. For one thing, they call rights privileges. A RIGHT IS NOT A PRIVILEGE! Civil rights are privileges, not real rights. One existed since the dawn of time. The other is given to you by government. Assuming the People created government, then how can their creation hand down privileges to their creator? IT CAN'T! More proof that citizens are NOT the same as the People, and hold a status below that of government. ONLY the People reign above gov!

Thursday, October 3, 2013

Haha! Best one yet on the government shutdown!

But but but, who's pic-a-nic baskets will Yogie steal to eat? He will starve!
The analogy is Yogie / the gov, stealing Pic-a-nic baskets / funds from the public.

 Yogie as a cartoon character is as much a fiction as government or any other corporation. It's a construct like the Matrix. It's not real. Stop being afraid of a fiction! Vacate the fiction!

Not Just in Africa.

Look at any Pacific Island. Look at North, Central, and South America.

It's not just the people themselves who are the parasites, it's their mentality.

RIP Tom Clancy


Wednesday, October 2, 2013

You have to fight to make your own freedom. NOBODY is going to just give it to you.

To believe that some guy living in a mud hut half way around the world is somehow responsible for taking away your freedoms is absurd. If you believe this, they you should be committed and given electric shock therapy. It's about stealing the guy in the mud huts resources and enslavement. That's all it's ever been.

As a US citizen, you really don't have any rights.

As a US citizen, you really don't have any rights. You have privileges you must beg them for permission to exercise.
You also have no real right to complain when they tell you to do something.

Begging For Marriage Permission





"The Marriage License originated from the time when Free Men and Women would occasionally intermarry with slaves. You had to get permission from the slave's owner, thus a license. After the Civil War the slaves became Property of THE UNITED STATES called 14th Amendment U.S. citizens. A STATE marriage License today gives a slave (14 th amendment U.S. citizen) permission to marry A Free Man or Woman or to marry another slave. Because 14th Amendment citizens are property of the STATE (THE UNITED STATES), they have no lawful rights of any kind because in the eyes of the Law they don't exist, they are legally dead. They cannot marry without the STATE's permission. So if you beg ( apply) for a license to marry you are affirming their claim that you are STATE PROPERTY and that the products of your marriage are STATE PROPERTY. Are you STATE PROPERTY? Are your Sons and Daughters STATE PROPERTY (SLAVES)?"

Never ever apply (beg) for a license from the STATE to do something which you have a Natural Lawful Right to do.

Things you were taught to believe that were never true:

 
 By: Jeff Ganaposki
❏ Government was instituted to protect the people
❏ Government can tax incomes because the U.S. constitution was amended
❏ You cannot live nor work in the USA without a Social Security account and number
❏ Everyone born in the USA are U.S. citizens at birth

❏ You were endowed with civil and political rights / liberties
❏ America is a democracy (or constitutionally limited indirect democracy)
❏ Americans elect their leaders
...............
__ Governments were instituted to secure rights, not protect all people. All government can do is prosecute deliberate injury after the fact. You cannot sue the government for failure to protect.
__ No government instituted to secure rights is delegated power to tax rights. Any income tax is an excise tax levied upon a revenue taxable privilege, where the amount of tax is determined by the income derived.
__ There is no law compelling participation in FICA, nor punishing non-participation in FICA.
__ The 13th amendment prohibits involuntary servitude in the United States and territories subject to THEIR jurisdiction. Since citizenship comes with mandatory civic duties, no one can be “born a citizen” within the USA. Only those outside of the USA in Federal jurisdiction may be “born a citizen.”
__ Civil and political liberties / rights are privileges granted by government. Natural and personal liberty are endowments from our Creator.
__ Americans are promised a republican form of government. However the servant government is organized as a constitutionally limited indirect democracy to serve the sovereign people.
__ Since government is servant of the sovereign people, it is not their leader. However, those who are subjects of the government must be obedient to it and the elected officers / public servants.

Tuesday, October 1, 2013

Are You Properly Indoctrinated?

Republican Form of Government

Let us question your level of indoctrination.

1. Was America’s governments created by (a) all the people, or (b) some of the people?
1.a. If all people did consent, but not all could vote, how did they give consent?
1.b. If all people did not consent, then government does not have the delegated power to govern those who did not consent. (See: Declaration of Independence, 1776)
2. If government has the delegated power to secure rights, does it have the power to tax rights?
(c) yes, (d) no.
2.a. If government has the power to tax rights, doesn’t that infringe or diminish those rights?
(e) yes, (f) no.
2.c. If government has no power to tax rights, then it can only tax privileges it grants.
(g) correct, (h) incorrect.
3. If a government was created by some people, who consented to be governed, can they break their obligation to help secure rights of all the people - which includes those who did not consent?
(i) yes, (j) no.
4. Any servant government or its subject people who ignore their obligation to serve the sovereign people and secede are (k) exercising state’s rights or (l) in breach of their compact.
5. If a “dollar bill” is a note, a promise to pay face value in the future, and it is not a certificate (receipt) for money in the vault, then what “value” does it have when Congress repudiated their promise to redeem them?
(m) face value, (n) no par value.
6. Other than the U.S. government, who else are liable parties on the “dollar bills” (Federal Reserve notes)?
(o) Federal Reserve corporation, (p) all Americans, (q) enumerated “Human Resources” via FICA.
7. If a pauper is a status criminal, because he is accepting charity from the public treasury, what is the difference between a pauper and a recipient of entitlements under FICA?
(r) a participant has a right to entitlements, (s) no difference.
8. If a vagrant (homeless) was a status criminal before 1935, why aren’t all enumerated “human resources” treated like vagrants now?
(t) It is inconvenient to enforce the law, (u) they are status criminals - guilty until proven innocent, (v) stop asking embarrassing questions !


For answers, click on comment.