(Reader: Doug Duff) A “License” to Lie

Reader Post | By Doug Duff

A “LICENSE” TO LIE.

It’s called a “Lie Sense,” a PERMIT to lie to your senses.

Are you “licensed?” Yeah, do you have a license? If so, you’re condemned by your Creator (shock treatment). That statement was thrown in to get you to discover a well-hidden truth. A crafty bargainer has duped you. Read (at least) to the end of “definition” and tell me I’m wrong.

The objection (of a “conscientious objector”) must be founded on deeply held moral, ethical, and religious convictions about right or wrong.

Man (one of Adams progeny) cannot be licensed.

One of the biggest “devices” of the confiscation and asset forfeiture plague and the State stampede of “licensing” is the use of “personification” to confiscate property. Personification is the idea that things or objects possess the free will and capacity to commit crimes. It is an idea deeply rooted in the practice of witchcraft, the occult, and devil worship. Objects are supposed to get that kind of power from the devil, or a curse.

A “license” issued by a fiction (corporation, government entity, etc.) is a permit rendered to another fiction (fictional legal entity) to do what would be otherwise against natural law. The “lie sense” is a permit for you to lie to your senses; allow a fiction to rule over truth.

Definitions follow:

A “LICENSE” TO LIE – (to the senses) = Lie Sense: a Permit to Lie to the Senses.

Jude 1:4 For there are certain men who crept in secretly, even they who were of old written of beforehand to this condemnation: ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying our only Master, God, and Lord, Jesus Christ.

Strong’s Concordance: lasciviousness, wantonness: Word Number 766
unbridled lust, excess, licentiousness, lasciviousness, wantonness, outrageousness, shamelessness, insolence. (lasciviousness and wantonness mean licentiousness)

Heritage Dictionary:

li·cen·tious adj. 1. Lacking moral discipline or ignoring legal restraint… 2. Having no regard for accepted rules or standards. [Latin licenti½sus, from licentia, freedom, license. See LICENSE.]

li·cense n. 1.a. Official or legal permission to do or own a specified thing. See Synonyms at permission. b. Proof of permission granted, usually in the form of a document, card, plate, or tag: a driver’s license. 2. Deviation from normal rules, practices, or methods in order to achieve a certain end or effect: poetic license. 3. Latitude of action, especially in behavior or speech. See Synonyms at  freedom. 4.a. Lack of due restraint; excessive freedom: “When liberty becomes license, dictatorship is near”(Will Durant). b. Heedlessness for the precepts of proper behavior; licentiousness.

REMEMBER: The “legal” definition of “license” is a “permit to do something that would otherwise be illegal.” Remember also, that “legalese” only gives enough information to place the inquirer off-balance and believe the intended meaning of the person defining the word, quite often to the “believers’” injury.

World English Bible

2 Peter 2:18 For, uttering great swelling words of emptiness, they entice in the lusts of the flesh, by licentiousness, those who are indeed escaping from those who live in error;

Darby Bible

Mark 7:22 thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, licentiousness, a wicked eye, injurious language, haughtiness, folly;

2 Corinthians 12:21 lest my God should humble me as to you when I come again, and that I shall grieve over many of those who have sinned before, and have not repented as to the uncleanness and fornication and licentiousness which they have practiced.

Galatians 5:19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are fornication, uncleanness, licentiousness,

KJV

Psalms 5:6 Thou shalt destroy them that speak leasing: the LORD will abhor the bloody and deceitful man.

leasing: Strong #: 3577 – – a lie, untruth, falsehood, deceptive thing

 “Leasing” is just another word for “licensing.”

Licensing, or licentiousness, is the factor that has placed us back into bondage.

Deuteronomy 28:68 And the Lord shall bring you into Egypt again with ships, by the way whereof I spoke unto you, You shall see it no more again; and there you shall be sold unto your enemies for bondmen and bondwomen, and no man shall buy you 

            What does the Power Elite call UNITED STATES? New Egypt! And it is a fiction – you shall see it no more again. And you have been brought into slavery by way of artificial vessels (ships) called a strawman. And no man bought us as slaves – WE SOLD OURSELVES INTO BONDAGE to our enemies who never paid a dime for our credit or us. Isaiah 52: 3, “Ye have sold yourselves for nought; and ye shall be redeemed without money.”

End of DEFINITIONS, now, move into Truth like you’ve never known it and learn how to “escape from Egypt.” Just remember, a “License” is a permit to Lie.

Colossians 2:20 (N I V) Since you died with Christ to the elemental spiritual forces of this world, why, as though you still belonged to the world, do you submit to its rules:

BOTTOM LINE: A license, any license, all licenses place us in a subordinate slave position. Licenses apply only to the fiction, the un-real, the not alive. To “have” a license is truly against my religion.

ALL GOVERNMENTS ARE CORPORATIONS

PROPRIETORS OF CHARLES RIVER BRIDGE v. PROPRIETORS OF, 36 U.S. 420 (1837) verifiable at http://laws.findlaw.com/us/36/420.html

“Corporations are also of all grades, and made for varied objects; all governments are corporations, created by usage and common consent, or grants and charters which create a body politic for prescribed purposes; but whether they are private, local or general, in their objects, for the enjoyment of property, or the exercise of power, they are all governed by the same rules of law, as to the construction and the obligation of the instrument by which the incorporation is made…”

There is a circus of conflicting deceitful codes that act as the operating procedures of the FEDERAL CORPORATION: the United States. Yes, the United States is a Corporation [See 28 U.S.C. § 30020(15)].  The States are sub-corporations of the Federal United States, the aforementioned Corporation.  [See 1934, State Compact Act; Buck Act, 4 U.S.C. § 101].

“From the earliest of times the law has enforced rights and exacted liberties by utilizing a corporate concept, by recognizing, that is, juristic persons other than human beings. The theories by which this mode of legal operation has developed, has been justified, qualified, and defined are the subject matter of a very sizable library. The historic roots of a particular society, economic pressures, philosophic notions, all have had their share in the law’s response to the ways of men in carrying on their affairs through what is now the familiar device of the corporation. Law has also responded to religious needs in recognizing juristic persons other than human beings.” [U.S. v. Scophony Corporation of America, 333 U.S. 795 (1948)]

“The Government may carry on its operations through conventional executive agencies or through corporate forms especially created for defined ends.”Federal Crop Insurance Corp. v Merrill, 332 US 380-388 (1947).

There IS a war going on and the battle is for your mind. “They” are getting to your “mind” by going through (using/changing) your NAME. In Merriam-Webster, pg. 1534, “Under International Law of Warfare, all parties to a cause must appear by nom de guerre, because an “alien enemy cannot maintain an action during the war in his own name“.

Using this “nom de guerre” (ALL UPPER CASE NAME) you are in conflict/battle in the current “Secret (commercial) War:”

As per: article by Chuck Morse,  “Is the ‘National Emergency of FDR’ Still In Place?” You will find that: “This was a classic example of sleight of hand. In fact, Congress exempted all laws, based on the emergency of 1933 that were already in place. Rather than being based on the authority of the President under a ‘national emergency’ these federal laws have now been codified as a permanent part of the U.S. Federal Code. Included among the codified laws would be Section 5(b) of the Trading with the Enemy Act, which classifies the American citizen as an enemy of the government.Therefore, although the “national emergency” technically ended on September 14, 1976, when the 93rd Congress passed H.R. 3884, the National Emergencies Termination Act (50 USC 1601, Public Law 94-412) because the last paragraph said that it didn’t apply to any “authorities under the act of October 6, 1917, as amended,” the classification of an American citizen still stands as enemy of the government.”

Now, allow me to “shock your conscience” a little; not one in a thousand Americans can tell me where the “United States” is located. NO YOU CAN’T.

The U.C.C. (Uniform Commercial Code), the “rule-book” for all transactions, is owned by UNIDROIT located in Rome, Italy (close to the “Holy See”) and the U.S. government pays UNIDROIT $260,000 per year for the use of their copyrighted material. Every piece of legalese that moves in, by, or through the United States in is conjunction with U.C.C.

(i) Now, let’s discover the “location” of the United States:

a. U.C.C. § 9-307 (h) [Location of United States.]

The United States is located in the District of Columbia; and,

b. “A “U.S. Citizen” upon leaving the District of Columbia becomes involved in “interstate commerce”, as a “resident” does not have the common-law right to travel, of a Citizen of one of the several states.” Hendrick v. Marylalnd S.C. Reporter’s Rd. 610-625. (1914); and,

c. It is clear that a “U.S. Citizen”, becomes a “resident” when outside the District of Columbia; and,

d. A Citizen of one of the several states is not the same as a U.S. citizen.

(ii) See also Internal Revenue Code Section 7701(39) which reads:

a. “I.R.C. Section 7701(39) IF ANY CITIZEN OR RESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES DOES NOT RESIDE IN (AND IS NOT FOUND IN) ANY UNITED STATES JUDICIAL DISTRICT, SUCH CITIZEN OR RESIDENT SHALL BE TREATED AS RESIDING IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FOR PURPOSES OF ANY PROVISIONS OF THIS TITLE TO “ (A) jurisdiction of courts, or (B) enforcement of summons.”

b. Also see Internal Revenue Code Section 7408(C) and Art. 1, Section 8, Clause 17 Constitution for the United States of America as defined and reinstated in National Mutual Insurance Company of the District of Columbia v. Tidewater Transfer Company, 337 U.S. 582, 93 L.Ed. 1556 (1948):

c. Which further states that citizens of the District of Columbia are not embraced by the judicial power under Article 3 of the Constitution for the United States of America, the same statement is held in Hepburn v. Dundas v. Elizey, 2 Cranch (U.S.) 445, 2 L.Ed. 332.; In 1804, the Supreme Court, through Chief Justice Marshall, held that a citizen of the District of Columbia was not a citizen of a state; and,

d. In NATIONAL MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. TIDEWATER TRANSFER COMPANY, (SUPRA), “We therefore decline to overrule the opinion of Chief Justice Marshall:

We hold that the District of Columbia is not a state within Article 3 of the Constitution. In other words cases between citizens of the District and those of the states were not included of the catalogue of controversies over which the Congress could give jurisdiction to the federal courts by virtue of Article 3. In other words Congress has exclusive legislative jurisdiction over citizens of Washington District of Columbia and through their plenary power nationally covers those citizens even when in one of the several states as though the district expands for the purpose of regulating its citizens wherever they go throughout the states in union“.

We have just learned that a citizen of a state, any state, is not the same as a U.S. citizen. Let’s discover the primary differences:

“… the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States do not necessarily include all the rights protected by the first eight amendments to the Federal Constitution against the powers of the Federal Government“. — Maxwell v. Dow, 176 US 581, 597 (1899)

WARNING: Chew the next one up real good before you attempt to swallow it!

“The right of trial by jury in civil cases, guaranteed by the 7th Amendment (Walker v. Sauvinet, 92 U.S. 90, 23 L. ed. 678), and the right to bear arms, guaranteed by the 2d Amendment (Presser v. Illinois, 116 U.S. 252, 29 L. ed. 615, 6 Sup. Ct. Rep. 580), have been distinctly held not to be privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States, …” — Twining v. New Jersey, 211 U.S. 78, 98 (1908)

“All offices attached to the seat of government shall be exercised in the District of Columbia, and not elsewhere, except as otherwise expressly provided by law.” 4 U.S.C. § 72

So, somebody has stepped WAY over the line, but how did they do it? You gave them a license to do it!

Remember, “Under International Law of Warfare, all parties to a cause must appear by nom de guerre, because an “alien enemy cannot maintain an action during the war in his own name“. Merriam-Webster, pg. 1534.

And, the Oxford English Dictionary, 2^nd. ed., Clarendon Press (1989). It is by International Doctrine that the use of nom de guerre would indicate a state of war.

It is with the enforcement of obedience (military jurisdiction) by vi et armis (force of arms) that we can know the Government, Public Law, Public Servants are waging war against the Private Citizen and the People. [If you’re writing tickets, fines, fees, receipts, etc., you’re waging economic war on your mother, father, and kindred.]

According to Digest of International Law, Volume 10, and pages 95-127, the Departments of State, Justice, Commerce, and the Treasury, in disregard to the administrative orders of the President, conduct an “Alien Enemy Program” whose sole purpose is to unconstitutionally seize the properties of all Private Citizens, militarily, with the aid of such maritime hypothecations as “bottomry bonds”, etc.

Volume 20: Corpus Juris Sec. Section 1785: “The United States Government is a foreign corporation with respect to a state” NY re: Merriam 36 N.E. 505 141 S.Ct.1973, 41 L.Ed.287

Now, do you recall that I stated above that you gave them a “license” by way of your “name?” Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 8^thed., pg. 2287“The omission of the Christian name by either plaintiff or defendant in a legal process prevents the court from acquiring jurisdiction, …” Your “Christian name” is not in all UPPER CASE letters.

And, to be a little more explicit, a “Delaware Corporation” demands that a corporation has a “last” name; figure that one out, especially when your “family” name is not part of your Christian Appellation.

Enter: The CLEARFIELD DOCTRINE

“As the use of private corporate commercial paper, debt currency or securities is concerned, removes the sovereignty status of the government of “We the People” and reduces it to an entity rather than a government in the area of finance and commerce as a corporation or person. Governments descend to the level of a mere private corporation and take on the characteristics of a mere private citizen. This entity cannot compel performance upon its corporate statute or rules unless it, like any other corporation or person is the holder-in-due course of some contract or commercial agreement between it and the one upon whom the payment and performance are made and are willing to produce said documents and place the same evidence before trying to enforce its demands called statutes”. For purposes of suit, such corporations and individuals are regarded as entities entirely separate from government.” Clearfield Trust Co. v. United States 318 US. 363-371.

“When governments enter the world of commerce, they are subject to the same burdens as any private firm or corporation” — U.S. v. Burr, 309 U.S. 242 See: 22 U.S.C.A.286e, Bank of U.S. vs. Planters Bank of Georgia, 6L, Ed. (9 Wheat) 244; 22 U.S.C.A. 286 et seq., C.R.S. 11-60-103

NOTE:  Under the Clearfield Doctrine, the courts are no longer government entities in that they are demanding private monies and must have a contract with you to compel performance. They are no more special as a normal business than your local Jack In The Box.

Did/does the court demand payment in a certain “species”? [U.S. $]

Did the court make payment [on the record, or by way of agreement] of any entry fees, etc.?

If one USD is given, or demanded, [species] HJR 192 is over-ridden and all Instruments have become “bogus financial instruments” involving private creditors and all “enjoined in the fraud” may be prosecuted under a variety of statutes; conspiracy (18 U.S.C. Sec 371); mail fraud (18 U.S.C. Sec 1341); uttering a false security (18 U.S.C. Sec 472); bank fraud (18 U.S.C. Sec 1344); and possessing and uttering a counterfeit security (every “ticket”) (18 U.S.C. Sec 513). SEE, United States v. Uullman, 187 F.3d 816 (8th Cir. 1999); United States v. Hanzlicek, 187 F.3d 1228, 1230 (10th Cir. 1999); United States v. Wells, 163 F.3d 889 (4th Cir. 1998); United States v. Stockheimer, 157 F.3d 1082 (7th Cir. 1998).

DICTIONARY OF LAW (1893) Corporation. A creature of the crown, created by letters-patent. An artificial being, indivisible, intangible, and existing only in contemplation of law. 1 Blackstone, 295.

The United States may be deemed a corporation, United States v. Hillegas, 3 Wash. 73 (1811); so may a State, 1 Abb. U.S. 22 and 35 Ga. 315; and so, a county. United States under Title 28, Section 3002 (15)(A).”United States means – (A) a Federal corporation.”

NO “LICENSE” OF JURISDICTION

As per the Supreme Court in Murdock v. Pennsylvania 319 US 105, “A state may not, through a license tax, impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the Federal Constitution.“

Have you questioned, “what if I have no nexus with the state in form of license granted”, as per; “It is impossible to prove jurisdiction exists absent a substantial nexus with the state, such as voluntary subscription to license.  All jurisdictional facts supporting claim that supposed jurisdiction exists must appear on the record of the court.”  Pipe Line v Marathon. 102 S. Ct. 3858 quoting Crowell v Benson 883 US 22.

And, without a license, you’re not a “Licensee”, as per; “Where a person is not at the time a licensee, neither the agency, nor any official has any jurisdiction of said person to consider or make any order.   One ground as to want of jurisdiction was, accused was not a licensee and it was not claimed that he was.”  0’Nei1 v Dept Prof. & Vocations  7 CA 2d 398; Eiseman v Daugherty 6 CA 783

And, what if you’re not employed for compensation as a “licensee” for the act so accused, as per: “Agency, or party sitting for the agency, (which would be the magistrate of a municipal court) has no authority to enforce as to any licensee unless he is acting for compensation. Such an act is highly penal in nature, and should not be construed to include anything, which is not embraced within its terms. (Where) there is no charge within a complaint that the accused was employed for compensation to do the act complained of, or that the act constituted part of a contract. ”  Schomig v. Kaiser, 189 Cal 596.

More about non-granted jurisdiction as that of a “licensee”, as per: “An action by Department of Motor Vehicles, whether directly or through a court sitting administratively as the hearing officer, must be clearly defined in the statute before it has subject matter jurisdiction, without such  jurisdiction of the licensee, all acts of the agency, by its employees, agents, hearing officers, are null and void.”  Doolan v. Carr, 125  US 618; City v Pearson, 181 Cal. 640.

And, failure to reveal material facts is grounds for estoppel. “Failure to reveal the material facts of a license or any agreement is immediate grounds for estoppel.” Lo Bue v. Porazzo, 48 Cal.App.2d 82, 119, p.2d 346, 348.

And, who is required to “pay” for use of public highways, as per: “The tax is placed upon those obtaining compensation for the use of the public highways.” –In re Bush, 6 Cal.2d 43 [Crim. No. 3945. In Bank. April 1, 1936.] In the Matter of the Application of C.E.BUSH for a Writ of Habeas Corpus.

Let’s take this a couple steps further: as per;18 USC 31, (6) Motor vehicle.— The term “motor vehicle” means every description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways in the transportation of passengers, passengers and property, or property or cargo.

And, as per;18 USC 31, (10) Used for commercial purposes.— The term “used for commercial purposes” means the carriage of persons or property for any fare, fee, rate, charge, or other consideration, or directly or indirectly in connection with any business, or other undertaking intended for profit.

Miscellaneous points:

Point 1.The Fourth Amendment forbids stopping a vehicle even for limited purposes of questioning its occupants unless the police officer has a founded suspicion of criminal conduct. U.S. V. Ramirez & Sandoval, 872 F2d. 1392.

Point 2. “An action by Department of Motor Vehicles, whether directly or through a court sitting administratively as the hearing officer, must be clearly defined in the statute before it has subject matter jurisdiction, without such jurisdiction of the licensee, all acts of the agency, by its employees, agents, hearing officers, are null and void.” Doolan v. Carr, 125 US 618; City v Pearson, 181 Cal. 640.

Point 3. “Agency, or party sitting for the agency, [which would be the magistrate of a municipal court] has no authority to enforce as to any licensee unless he [licensee] is acting for compensation. Such an act is highly penal in nature, and should not be construed to include anything which is not embraced within its terms. (Where) there is no charge within a complaint that the accused was employed for compensation to do the act complained of, or that the act constituted part of a contract.” Schomig v. Kaiser, 189 Cal 596.

Point 4. “The high Courts, through their citations of authority, have frequently declared, that “…where any state proceeds against a private individual in a judicial forum it is well settled that the state, county, municipality, etc., waives any immunity to counters, cross claims and complaints, by direct or collateral means regarding the matters involved.” Luckenback v. The Thekla, 295 F 1020, 226 Us 328; Lyders v. Lund, 32 F2d 308;

Point 5. “When enforcing mere statutes, judges of all courts do not act judicially (and thus are not protected by “qualified” or “limited immunity,” – SEE: Owen v. City, 445 U.S. 662; Bothke v. Terry, 713 F2d 1404) – – “but merely act as an extension as an agent for the involved agency — but only in a “ministerial” and not a “discretionary capacity…” Thompson v. Smith, 154 S.E. 579, 583; Keller v. P.E., 261 US 428; F.R.C. v. G.E., 281, U.S. 464.

Point 6. It is factual that any magistrate sitting in ministerial capacity has no ability to receive grants of “judicial” power from the legislature, as per: “Ministerial officers are incompetent to receive grants of judicial power from the legislature, their acts in attempting to exercise such powers are necessarily nullities.” Burns v. Sup. Ct., SF, 140 Cal. 1.

Point 7. And, as per the Supreme Court in Murdock v. Pennsylvania 319 US 105, “A state may not, through a license tax, impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the Federal Constitution.“

BIBLICAL & LOGICAL REASONS FOR NOT SUBMITTING TO FOREIGN TAX:

NOTE: A “person” is licensed (taxed), not the real living man.

A “person” is a legal entity, not a living man. The “office of person” is a privilege created by a larger legal entity named UNITED STATES. A United States (U.S.) citizen is a “person.” This “office of person” is a license from a larger licensed corporation.

Homo vocabulum est naturae; persona juris civilis – Man is a term of nature; person of civil law.

Private law is a license, and not a contract, for the receiver of the privilege has no action enforceable against the giver of the privilege:

            A dispensation or license properly passeth no interest, nor alters or transfers property in any thing, but only makes an action lawful which without it had been unlawful.

            A license is a mere privilege without enforceable rights, which distinguishes it from an easement giving definite property rights enforceable against the entire world.

            A ‘license’ is not a contract between the state and the licensee, but is a mere personal permit. Neither is it property or a property right. Nor does it create a vested right.

            A sovereign [*the lawgiver] is exempt from suit, not because of any formal conception or obsolete theory, but on the logical and practical ground that there can be no legal right as against the authority that makes the law on which the right depends. Car on peut bien recovoir loy d’autruy, mais il est impossible par nature de se donner loy. Nemo suo statuto ligatur necessitative.

So, whatever is established by the Commander-in-Chief or “Congress,” is in derogation of the Christian common Law, and: One, is a privilege “protected by the military power of the Union”; and, Two, may be taxed constitutionally as an excise for revenue purposes:

            DEROGATION. The partial abrogation of a law. To derogate from a law is to enact something which impairs its utility and force; to abrogate a law is to abolish it entirely.

All statutes are to be construed with reference to the provisions of the common law, and provisions in derogation of the common law are held strictly. UCC 1-103.6

NOT A SLAVE OR WARD OF THE COURT

[WHO’S YOUR DADDY?]

Beware – all assumed or presumed authority of any governmental, quasi-governmental, International Monetary Fund, Internal Revenue Service, or any other regulatory or taxing agency functions under the doctrine of “Partus Sequitur Ventrem”, meaning that the offspring is the property of the owner of the mother. Reference is made to; the case of Alberty v United States brought in 1896, approximately 40 (forty) years after the emancipation proclamation is proof positive that, unless proven otherwise, the federal government will declare jurisdiction based upon ownership, this long after Involuntary Servitude being proclaimed illegal.

The case of Alberty v United States was over the murder of a half-black, half Choctaw man by a half-black, half-Cherokee man on Cherokee territory, with the United States demanding, and getting, jurisdiction over the Cherokee Tribal justice, because of ownership.

In Black’s Law Dictionary, we see that a Marriage License is only appropriate when a couple is contemplating a marriage between people of different races, as between a white person and a Negro.

Affiant specifically denies any association with “the State” (any State) in the States’ capacity as “Parens Patriae”, or as “In Loco Parentis”, defined below:

Parens patriae – Lat. (literally) “parent of the country”, the role of the state as sovereign. See Black’s Law Dictionary, 5th ed.

In loco parentis – In the place of the parent; or, instead of a parent; charged factitiously with a parent’s rights, duties, and responsibilities. See Black’s Law Dictionary, 5th ed.

This exhibition is to dispel any presumptions/assumptions that when the mother (any mother, or other informant) signs the birth certificate of the child, the presumption is that she is the black slave that is still owned by the government, or that the child is a fatherless child (of a truth, most document administrators reporting in, and for, hospitals, do NOT care that there is a Father’s Name on the birth certificate, but the Mother’s MAIDEN Name is paramount) and automatically a ward of the court/government, therefore, without this admonition, the doctrine of Partus Sequitur Ventrem (above)may apply and the owner can do with the children as the owner wishes.

[Concerning such owned “children of the state”] “The law secures their parental right only so long as they shall promptly recognize and discharge their corresponding obligations. As the child owes allegiance to the government of the country of its birth, so it is entitled to the protection of that government, which as parens patriae, must consult its welfare, comfort, and interests in regulating its custody during its minority. PURINTON V. JAMROCK, 195 Mass. 187, 80 N.E. 102, 18 L.R.A., N.S., 925″

To continue the thought (as quoted in the 2000 Census brochure), the object of the Census, by law, is to count the “defective, dependant, and delinquent classes“. Virtually everyone counted in the 2000 Census is now presumed to be “defective, dependent, and delinquent”, and thus, wards of the Court/State. Does that sound like a corporate collection of “incompetent persons”?

In the past volley of words, the point has been made that the GOVERNMENT has become the parent (Father) to all children, regardless of age. The natural Father has been replaced with a Fictional Entity, a fiction. So, what is a fiction? It is a lie. The fiction is your (if you’re under governmental jurisdiction) Father. Now, we see our father is a Liar. O.K., who’s the father of lies?

The Holy Writ mentions the “motherless” only one time, however, it mentions the “fatherless” forty four (44) times. Could there be a message in this statement?

We are known as “Human Resources” in governmental documents. A “Resource” is a claim of “property” and when related to people constitutes “slavery.“

Now, a few words [again] about U.S. citizens according to; Wheeling Steel Corp. v. Fox, 298 U.S. 193, 80 L.Ed. 1143, 56 S.Ct. 773, “Therefore, the U.S. citizens residing in one of the states of the union, are classified as property and franchises of the federal government as an “individual entity.”

Oh, and a couple more things, you grant a “license” if you hire, or obtain, an attorney, as per: 7 CJS, Section 2,3, and 4; “A Client is one who applies to a lawyer or councelor for advice or direction in a question of law, or commits his cause to his management in prosecuting a claim or defending against a suit in a court of justice; one who retains the attorney, is responsible to him for his fees, and to whom the attorney is responsible for the management of the suit; one who communicates facts to an attorney expecting professional advice. Clients are also called “wards of the court” in regard to their relationship with their attorneys. …attorney with an obligation to the courts and to the public no less significant than his obligation to his clients. Thus, an attorney occupies a dual position, which imposes dual obligations. His first duty is to the courts and the public, not to the client, and whenever the duties to the client conflict with those he owes as an officer of the court in the administration of justice, the former must yield to the latter.”

Also,  “Wards of the Court” are infants and persons of unsound mind. Davis’ Committee v. Loney, 290 Ky. 644, 162 SW 2d 189, 190  Their rights must be guarded jealously. Montgomery v. Erie R. Co., C.C.A.N.J., 97 F.2d 289, 292, and that;

If men, through fear, fraud or mistake, should in terms renounce or give up any natural right, the eternal law of reason and the grand end of society would absolutely vacate such renunciation. The right to freedom being the gift of Almighty God, it is not in the power of man to alienate this gift and voluntarily become a slave. Samuel Adams, our great president.

Now, remember, when some fat “orator” with a size 56” waist starts hammering on Romans 13, “obey those that have rule over you” exactly who [or, what] has rule over you. Our Creator has rule over His Creation. You have rule over what you create. If the “State” created you, they have rule over you. So, next time you hear, “render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s” remind that fat a$$ that Caesar is DEAD; thank God for that.

There is much information you must have in order to conduct and plan your service to God and Country.  For example, you must KNOW who your adversaries are and what they plan and plot in order to control, enslave and destroy you. So, I’ll end this little oration with a particular statement. Maybe you know who, or what, the Babylonian Harlot is; and, maybe you don’t. Therefore, I will draw you a picture; every jack-booted armored code-enforcer that writes those collection tickets against “your” license and every fiction based collector of contraband securities based upon private “Federal Reserve Notes” and every agent that sucks your “currency” from your livelihood are doing one thing, and one thing ONLY. They are feeding the Babylonian Whore; and, so are you when you “license” yourself to them. Put that in your smoke and pipe it.

YOU ARE: either part of the Problem or part of the Solution. You know what you are.

An apposing argument might be, “Well, it doesn’t hurt to compromise a little, especially when the “law” instructs us to do something. Romans 13 instructs us to be subject to those that rule over us.  WWJD? Can’t we have a “peaceful” situation and just give in a little? Why be so stubborn and dogmatic about “principles?” (Render unto Caesar?) Caesar is DEAD; lets keep him that way.

And, I would answer that little diatribe with: Matthew 10:34 (KJV) “Think not that I am come to send peace on earth; I came not to send peace, but a sword.”

I am not qualified to alter or defer the will of Master Yahshua Ha’Machiach.

Now, do you think you can become a “Conscientious Objector” to the sin of “license?”

Final notation:

In the US everything is permitted that is not forbidden. In Germany everything is forbidden that is not permitted. In France everything is permitted even if it’s forbidden. In the Soviet Union everything is forbidden even if it is permitted.

It’s called a “Lie Sense,” a PERMIT to lie to your senses. That’s all ANY permit is, a “license” to lie to your senses (yourself).

______________________________________________________

Contact Author

If you wish to contact the author of this article. Please email us at [UniversalOm432Hz@gmail.com] and we’ll forward your email to the author.
______________________________________________________

Guest Posting

If you wish to write and/or publish an article on Operation Disclosure all you need to do is send your entry to [UniversalOm432Hz@gmail.com] applying these following rules.

The subject of your email entry should be: “Entry Post | (Title of your post) | Operation Disclosure”

– Must be in text format
– Proper Grammar
– No foul language
– Your signature/name/username at the top
______________________________________________________

Newsletter

If you wish to receive the daily Operation Disclosure Newsletter, you can subscribe via the PayPal “Subscribe” button located on the site.
______________________________________________________

Our mission at Operation Disclosure is to get you up-to-date on the latest conspiracies and geopolitics. We also aim to provide raw unvetted information about world events from various sources and user submitted research on topics such as exopolitics, extraterrestrial and UFO/UAP sightings, secret space programs, and the lost or ancient origins and history of humanity.

Disclaimer: All articles, videos, and images posted on Operation Disclosure were submitted by readers and/or handpicked by the site itself for informational and/or entertainment purposes. All statements, claims, views and opinions that appear on this site are always presented as unverified and should be discerned by the reader. We do not endorse any opinions expressed on this website and we do not support, represent or guarantee the completeness, truthfulness, accuracy, or reliability of any content posted on this website.

Copyright © Operation Disclosure