(Reader: Doug Duff) Regarding Sovereignty



Reader Post | By Doug Duff

SOVEREIGNTY in a Nutshell

Most “instructors” attempt to teach you WHAT to think, or what you “should” think. They should be teaching you “HOW” to think objectively. The Subject of this topic is Sovereignty and NOT what you’ve been taught.

Few people know the True Meaning of “SOVEREIGN.” Let’s break this word down etymologically.

Begin with “so.” So means “In This Manner.” Next, go on to “ver,” which means “Truthfully,” as in “Verily, verily, I say unto you.” Finally, look at “reign,” which means “To Rule.” Add them all together by their meaning – In This Manner Truth Rules.”

That is the true Definition of Sovereignty, dear friends.

The Author of any article, declaration, or other writ has the Power to DEFINE. This “authority” should/must be the first position of instruction on any document, commonly called, “Definitions.”

My “Pen” name is “Funky Pretzel” – one of about a dozen such names I have written under. That’s no big deal. You need to know the “Message,” not the Messenger.




Funky Pretzel

Below is a few examples that may be of interest to you. (I have eleven pages of such examples, thus, only a few.)

Sovereign Citizen cannot be punished for sincerely held religious convictions, such as the belief that he is in fact born free and at liberty to act as such. (Cheek v. United States, 498 U.S. 192 (1991).

A sovereign is exempt from suit, not because of any formal conception or obsolete theory, but on the logical and practical ground that there can be no legal right as against the authority that makes the law on which the right depends. Kawananakoa v Polyblank 205 U.S. 349, 353 27 S. Ct. 526, 527, 51 L. Ed. 834 (1907).

sovereign is not a person in a legal sense” In re Fox, 52 N. Y. 535, 11 Am. Rep. 751; U.S. v. Fox, 94 U.S. 315, 24 L. Ed. 192.

A waiver of sovereign immunity “cannot be implied but must be unequivocally expressed.” King, 395 U.S. At 4.

“All jurisdiction is founded on consent; either the consent of all the citizens, implied in the social compact itself, or the express consent of the party or his sovereign.” UNITED STATES V. BEVANS U.S. Supreme Court·16 U.S. 336 (1818).




“All that government does and provides legitimately is in pursuit of its duty to provide protection for private tights (Wynehamer v. People, 13 NY 378). which duty is a debt owed to its creator, WE THE PEOPLE and the private unenfranchised individual; which debt and duty is never extinguished nor discharged, and is perpetual. No matter what the government/state provides for us in manner of convenience and safety, the unenfranchised individual owes nothing to the government. “Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43- U.S. Supreme Court: Hale, 201 U.S. 43 (1906). Allegiance applies to subjects not sovereignty. Talbat v. Janson. 3 US (3 Dall) 133.

Americans are sovereigns without being a subjects we are equal. Chisholm supra LEd at 472.ONE FINAL NOTE: Many times I have quoted “cases” that no one seems to be able to find. When you are researching, remember, there is a vast difference between DCUS and USDC (District Court of the United States and United States District Court); also, the Supreme Court of the United States versus United States Supreme Court.


Contact Author

If you wish to contact the author of this article. Please email us at [] 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 [] 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


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 to provide raw unvetted information from various sources. We are also focused on disclosing extraterrestrial contact and humanity’s lost ancient origins.

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 © 2022 Operation Disclosure