(Reader: Doug Duff) To Prevent a Civil War

Reader Post | By Doug Duff

TO PREVENT A CIVIL WAR

Section 1 – INTRODUCTION

Both the “Slave” and the “Master” must be alerted to a process, long held TABOO, by the “judicial” system of control. I know you want the destination without the tedious journey; I’ll be as brief as possible; bear with me, please. I’ll show you how this is done. The first portion of this discourse will explain our position of “Defense” – or a “Defensible Position.” The last portion, perhaps the most important, is the “Enforceable Position.” Few know about this or how to utilize it; but you must.

BUCKLE UP; go with me on a journey to a destination you’ve never known. I am nothing more than a researcher. There are so many authorities on these subjects that I cannot give credit to the ones who should receive credit. I studied their instructions, adjusted their information, and attempted to place their information in a comprehensive manner.

This discourse is an attempt to correct “Over-Reaching Government,” whether it is from a Traffic Cop, Mortgage Foreclosure, Over-Regulation of everyday essentials (propane stoves, electric automobiles, fake meat, etc.), or absconding with your money from your personal bank account. Yes, you and I are victims of malicious vexation of our Personal Affairs, Wealth, Health, Hope, Family, and Society.

The “blind” can clearly see that you cannot win in their court system. They have the Fire Power. Well, that’s the only way to win; you fight Fire with Fire, and it works.

The first step “they” take toward any “over-reaching” action is Identity Theft. That’s right, they must first determine WHO you are, then, they (quickly) create a fake “Person” (person is a corporate Fiction) that they can charge with various crimes, infractions, faults, offenses, etc.

Let’s take this Introduction one step further. You and I, like every victim of Stockholm Syndrome, will argue in defense of our captors. In fact, we fail to recognize them as such. So, let’s pin the tail on the donkey and make positive identification. Every Agent and Agency of any government is our captor. If you deny this fact, you may as well throw in the towel. It’s over for you. Thousands of arguments decree their necessity.

A second way to identify our Captors is to follow the money trail. If money, or the power derived from acquiring money (taken from you), is the main artery of resource, then, you’ve found your captor.

Section 2 – Where did it begin (skip this section if in a hurry)?

Where do we begin? I’ll tell you. We begin with the time you were born. Under the National Securities and Exchange acts of 1933 and 1934 you’ll find that they are registering your Birth Certificate as a Certificated Security in the CEDE and Co. [The very NAME of the company says it all; CEDE means: To surrender possession of, especially by treaty.] That makes them the registered holder and owner (registered owner, not real owner). Who is the owner in fact? You are. You own everything and control nothing.  They control everything, why? Because, they are the registered owner of the certificated security (birth certificate) and they use this as collateral for International Trading. They are the registered holder – owner of all these instruments – commercial paper. Certificated securities are those represented in physical, paper form. This is the FIRST issue of your “Master – Slave” relationship. It all began with a piece of paper, a written “Stipulation.” (Stipule also means “straw”; the beginning of your Strawman.)

So, your journey into captivity began with a piece of paper; and now, some “official” places a name (quite similar to your True Name) on a piece of paper and it becomes a “Bond” (as in bondage) against your estate. Remember the mechanics of this sordid creation. It is the initial entrance of evil brought against the Living.

Short interlude here for Clarity. Several Trusts are created, not FOR you, but on behalf OF you, beginning with your Birth State Registration Number, which will be (eleven digits) 123-45-654321. THAT is your Estate Number. Your Social Security Number 123-45-6789 (nine digits), is a “Pass-through” account for paying the Charges against the Estate. The SSN is the principal and the Birth Certificate (Estate) is the surety.

For whatever reason, charges are brought against your Estate (because that’s where your property/value/money is). In court or out of court, charges are written on a Bid bond, which is GSA standard form SF 24, Performance bond SF 25, and Payment bond SF25A.  Your SS number is included here (it’s like a paymaster), they fill in the bid bond – this is also called a Prison Bond. Then a contractor comes in and they award him a contract – that’s how they’re building the prison systems, through a bid bond. 

Section 3 – A most important “step” for them.

Now, back to Identity Theft. Remember, the first thing they must acquire is your identity. They quickly create a Person (on paper) that will serve as your “Whipping Boy” in hopes that you will begin arguing and hoping you’ll step up to be Surety for “him.” Their system is most persuasive. Most people “admit” that person is them, big mistake. Read this paragraph until it “sticks.” Don’t forget it.

Question: Who has jurisdiction over the “person” they just created (by placing a name on a piece of paper)? Of course, the Creator has jurisdiction over his creation. You’ve just entered the majestic world of “casting Spells.” This level of Witchcraft and Sorcery is exceeded by nothing in existence. Keep the “casting of spells” in mind as you observe the strong arm of enforcement, which is now at the door. With this being said, we must look a “jurisdiction.” “A court has no jurisdiction to determine its own jurisdiction for a basic issue in any case before a tribunal is its power to act, and a court must have the authority to decide that question in the first instance.” Rescue Army v. Municipal Court of Los Angeles, 171 P2d; 331 US 549, 91 L. ed. 1666, 67 S. Ct. 1409. The high Courts have further decreed, that Want of Jurisdiction makes, “…all acts of judges, magistrates, U.S. Marshals, sheriffs, local police, all void and not just voidable.” Nestor v. Hershey, 425 F2d 504.

NOTICE: The act of utilizing terms and phrases of the Wise of antiquity, whether it be words found in the Holy Writ (Bible) or past cases of litigation found within the courts, legislative or judicial, of any nation or state, does not grant (nor yield) jurisdiction to any agent/agency over me due to the usage of said terms and/or phrases. Also, every “true” law provides a means of escape. Here’s one example: The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 60 (b), covers every “mistake” of Identity under every circumstance.

Think not that the concept of “Person” as a vehicle for use in commerce is new. It (the person) is not new. There is no requirement that it be surrendered to the court or any other body politic. Your person is part of your property.

Thomas Jefferson: Legal Argument, 1770. FE 1:376 – – “The law of nature, all men are born free, every one comes into the world with a right to his own person, which includes the liberty of moving and using it at his own will. This is what is called personal liberty, and is given him by the Author of nature, because necessary for his own sustenance.” [Never allow any gubm’t “privilege” to override your rights.]

We’re still talking jurisdiction. Every courtroom in America has a “Flag” positioned within it, similar to a True American Battle Flag, which has gold-fringed borders on 3 sides of it. This is your first signal that YOU HAVE ENTERED ADMIRALTY JURISDICTION. Admiralty Jurisdiction has 2 “legs” of operation, one is “Commercial” (Maritime) and the other is “Military” (true Admiralty). Every case will be of the commercial nature, which is “Maritime” insurance or it will be of a Contract Character UNLESS you divert it to the proper venue to receive Justice. You want to make sure YOUR case is in the Admiralty Military segment. How do you do this? Simple, it’s the “Dock” – uments you file. Yes, that play on words has a deeper meaning. Your documents are on the “docket.”

Above I stated that the ONLY way you can win in their court system is fight Fire with Fire. Here’s where the “fireworks” begins. You must maintain a Defensible Position by exercising your Right to Proper Venue, the Admiralty “Military” side of jurisdiction.

Section 4 – How do you “appear”?

An “apparition” is a ghost that cannot be seen. Remember, the court system is a “fiction” and can only deal with other “fictions.” Thus, the reason for the UPPER CASE names on the documents. An upper case name is a “nom de guerre,” a NAME OF WAR, which is the ONLY way it can be recognized by a military/admiralty court. The name of war means you have entered a military stratagem (a clever, often underhand scheme for achieving an objective).

A brief explanation of “why” this nom de guerre is so demanding: “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. [My opinion, you must DENY that you are at war with any government.]

Also, “The omission of the Christian name by either plaintiff or defendant in a legal process prevents the court from acquiring jurisdiction, …” Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 8^thed., pg. 2287

To further clarify the issue at hand (concerning Admiralty Jurisdiction and all acts under vi et armis), the Creator of an item/object has jurisdiction over the same. The corporate STATE, State, or UNITED STATES did not create the Vessel of flesh in body form; it only created an object of contemplation as ink on paper without life. Said item/object can not exist beyond an “apparition” and is not a true vessel. The Vessel of flesh in body form does exist and is present, but does not “appear.” Occupant/Claimant (the man) is Pilot of said Vessel, now standing upon the Land. Laws of Admiralty Jurisdiction understand this concept. Clearly, Occupant (the Man Child) does not claim a vested interest in the (apparition) UNITED STATES; nor does Occupant claim citizenship of said (apparition) UNITED STATES; however, Occupant does claim a vested interest (from Occupant’s ancestral descendantcy) in Thee United States of America as a Citizen thereof. Clearly, birthright is “Prime Estate” and a Common Law Trust; clearly, Claimant has a perfected lien against Prime Estate with a Security Agreement (Birth Certificate) identifying Trust Number 123-12-123456 as Debtor. Attributes of a proper trust are centralized management and limited personal liability of the principal (Occupant); clearly, said Common Law Trust at hand has a Termination Date, which is the instant life departs from the vessel (the body of flesh).

Numbered Resultant Trusts associated with the NOM DE GUERRE name were established by an act of law and are different, not the same, and alienated from the Man and Man’s Appellation and are not the same entity as the Man (or His Christian Appellation); and, as an operation of law, usufruct of that name can not injure anyone; thus, the Birth Certificate that DEBTOR (U.S. CENSUS BUREAU) rendered unto Occupant is a Fiction At Law and is indemnified of any claim that arises while Occupant is taking usage of that name.  Said nameis DEBTOR’S property.  [DEBTOR created the name; DEBTOR provides Occupant a way to exist without being harmed by DEBTOR’S manipulation of debt, whether associated or disassociated with said numbered trusts and name(s).]

Any issue that may arise from time to time indirectly against Occupant or directly against any NAME or numbered account Occupant has taken usufruct of is an issue of Probate under Bankruptcy Laws which may be disguised as civil or criminal action by ___________ COUNTY, the STATE OF______________, UNITED STATES, or any other form of municipal corporation, which is a fiction at law. The fictitious and factitious UNITED STATES, her “Seamen” or any subsidiaries subject to her corporate ‘motherhood,’ that may bring charges against Occupant with assumed (but not true) character of “decedent” – a dead (debt) entity – is, and will be, under the auspice of capitulation (a set of conditions) of an estate derived from the birthing event of the male child identified who is debtor only to his Creator as recorded in the ______ Family Bible soon after nativity of said child. Said issues, or claims, must be submitted to the DEBTOR that owns and has created Resultant Trust numbered accounts. [U.C.C. 9-307(h)]

Occupant, as the vessel, has never been offered to the public for hire and purports “no cargo, no passenger” rule. Occupant may have been presumed lost at sea after seven (7) years for which there may be a presumptive death certificate issued. Occupant does not accept the liability of Decedent or Decedent’s office. Rule of “Non-Assumptsit” applies to any alleged “Interstate Commerce Clause.”

Occupant, conceaved in the dark of night and born in the light of day into the family of _____, is not the decedent. The “Prime Estate,” recorded at THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, BUREAU OF THE CENSUS, NOTIFICATION OF BIRTH REGISTRATION as “File Number ___-__ and Birth Certificate number ___-__-______ dated (month, day, year) is Certified Proof that said estate exists. Occupant’s Political Society of Election is upon the soil of  ________ Township, ________ County, ________ State. Occupant is born free from legal, social, or political restrictions and manumitted from any alleged debtor/slave relationship.

An entity, in the nature of a Special Purpose Vehicle and Transmitting Utility, known as Social Security Administristation numbered account, ___-__-____, subordinate to the “berthing event” estate, was formed to suffice and satisfy all claims against said Prime Estate and act as Trustee (with respect to property held in trust) of the Prime Estate. Occupant is the representative of the estate. Occupant is the beneficiary to the Trust and one of the People of the posterity of the constitutional trust of The united States of America.

Section 5 – What about resistence?

I will begin with short dialog of Pastor Standring who made the most incredible remark when asked what the court tries to do to his clients in the courtroom.  “Oh,” Pastor Standring said, “They just try to talk us into agreeing to move the case out of the Admiralty, and into the civil venue.”  If I have learned anything about litigating claims against the government, it is that where I need to go is where the judges do not want me to go, even if I do not entirely understand why.  I liken it to the military term of “pressing into the fire,” as the safest approach.  Retreat usually gets one caught in crossfire, and death is the result.”

Through the Judiciary Act of 1789 (1 Stat. 73), the U.S. Congress placed admiralty and maritime law under the jurisdiction of the federal district courts. Parties may not contract out of admiralty jurisdiction and states may not infringe on admiralty jurisdiction, either judicially or legislatively (Wikipedia).

A point of information must be inserted to add clarity to one major contention. Here is a typical statement of jurisdiction: “Jurisdiction – The district courts of the United States shall have exclusive jurisdiction to…” Well, there you have it. No you don’t. Here’s one of the biggest tricks you’ll find. You cannot show me a district court of the United States. Why? Because, they are United States District Courts, a COMPLETELY different jurisdiction and venue. Here is how “courts” are defined at 28 U.S. Code § 610 – Courts defined Current through Pub. L. 113-234. “As used in this chapter the word “courts” includes the courts of appeals and district courts of the United States, the United States District Court for the District of the Canal Zone, the District Court of Guam, the District Court of the Virgin Islands, the United States Court of Federal Claims, and the Court of International Trade.” [Read that until it soaks in. This is so important that I am adding the following:]

In Balzac v. Porto Rico;

“The United States District Court is not a true United States court established under article 3 of the Constitution…”

American Insurance v. 356 Bales of Cotton

“The term ‘District Courts of the United States,’ as used in the rules, without an addition expressing a wider connotation has its historic significance. It describes the constitutional courts created under article 3 of the Constitution. Courts of the Territories are legislative courts, properly speaking, and are not District Courts of the United States. We have often held that vesting a territorial court with jurisdiction similar to that vested in the District Courts of the United States does not make it a ‘District Court of the United States.’ Reynolds v. United States, 98 U.S. 145 , 154; The City of Panama, 101 U.S. 453 , 460; In re Mills, 135 U.S. 263, 268 , 10 S.Ct. 762; McAllister v. United States, 141 U.S. 174, 182 , 183 S., 11 S.Ct. 949; Stephens v. Cherokee Nation, 174 U.S. 445, 476 , 477 S., 19 S.Ct. 722; Summers v. United States, 231 U.S. 92, 101 , 102 S., 34 S.Ct. 38; United States v. Burroughs, 289 U.S. 159, 163 , 53 S.Ct. 574. Not only did the promulgating order use the term District Courts of the United States in its historic and proper sense, but the omission of provision for the application of the rules to the territorial courts and other courts mentioned in the authorizing act clearly shows the limitation that was intended.”

Here’s a simple statement for clarity; the USDC is not the same as the DCUS. Neither is the UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT the same as the Supreme Court of the United States. Know this and you’ll know more than most judges.

Moving on, some repetition is necessary. The “Flag” of this court and every court in America identifies the Base Jurisdiction extant to be that of The Admiralty. Of that Base Jurisdiction there are two separate and distinct categories. That Flag identifies maritime (commercial) courts and admiralty (military) courts. Maritime/Commercial Jurisdiction will deal with contracts and issues between corporations and other fictional entities of law. Admiralty/Military Jurisdictions deal with any injuries that may occur against a Living Man.

You must be specific in your presentment to assure that you have entered Admiralty Military Court by way of details explained here. Admiralty Law is under Article III, where the Constitution and statutory law both apply! You cannot apply Constitutional Law in any other jurisdiction.

There are certain issues that legally bind up the judicial officers into either following the law, or walking the plank.  In the Admiralty, the state waives its immunity seven different ways, through the Suits in Admiralty Act (three ways), through the Bills of Lading Act, through the Admiralty Extension Act, through the Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act, and through the Public Vessels Act. (Benedicts on Admiralty)

To place a pleading within the admiralty, the jurisdictional statement needs to reference 28 U.S.C. 1333 or 1337.  Tax Cases need to reference 28 U.S.C. 2461 and 2463, since all tax revenue cases are done through the admiralty, and are disguised as civil proceedings.   Additionally, in the caption of the suit a reference such as “Within The Admiralty” is required to hold the court accountable.  The courts in the United States have always been open since 1789 to receive admiralty documents, and are still required to do so by authorization of 5: Stat. 516, Ch. 188, §: 5 with the enactment date of August/23/1842, with the authority of the act of the September/24/1789: Chapter: 20.

The Suits in Admiralty Act (Title: 46: U. S. A. Codes, Appendix, Chapter 20 §§ 742-749) is a law where the United States specifically waives its immunity in three situations: (1) if the admiralty suit involves a vessel [key word] of the United States. Once we look into the definition of the word vessel, we will discover that any of the actors working for the United States are vessels, enabling us to properly apply this provision within our case.  In “Benedicts on Admiralty”, one finds that the description of a vessel is so vague, that anything can be a vessel. We are all vessels; human bags carrying “sea water.”  “Our blood has the same specific gravity as sea water.” In the Bible, a woman is described as the “weaker vessel.” (2) Cases that involve cargo belonging to the U.S… Within the context of our case, when the cargo [the paperwork] of the United States harms us, the United States gives us a blanket waiver of immunity, or (3), the United States could be sued in the admiralty as if it were a private party. Since we are going into international jurisdiction, (a set aside, fenced territory) every time we go into the court, we are entitled to sue the United States in the admiralty as if the United States were a private party. [Monaco vs. Mississippi, 1934. Sounds like we can get relief on foreign soil.]

The Bill of Lading Act (Title: 49: U. S. Codes, Chapter 147 § 14706) helps level the field, by imposing liability against carriers that misplace, or mis-deliver our cargo (paperwork). Cargo can literally be anything. If the bill of lading sufficiently describes the cargo, the carrier is liable for damages caused by mis delivery. A bill of lading is nothing more than a document given to the shipper (clerk of court) that gives instructions where the cargo is to be delivered, and what the cargo looks like. For the bill of lading to be effective, it must describe the cargo being transported sufficiently so that the shipper can identify the cargo enough to be held responsible, if the shipper delivers the cargo somewhere else.

The Bill of Lading Act includes a criminal penalty, because the losses suffered by the customers of the shippers can be very great.  Use a Bill of Lading in all your lawsuits.  The bill of lading describes the cargo (the lawsuit), and tells the court clerk to carry the suit into the admiralty jurisdiction of the court (Title 49 U. S. Codes, Chapter 801 § 80113). The clerk is a public vessel and the carrier.  Your bill of lading identifies the cargo as the lawsuit by describing the suit’s postal registry number that you place on the front page and by describing the paperwork as having an American flag on the paperwork, a U.S. Postal Service STAMP, etc.  The bill of lading creates a liability for which the damaged party can recover in a suit if the documents are diverted into another venue. If a carrier is found wanting in due diligence concerning the delivery of the cargo, the liability attaches at the time of the diversion of the documents.  The bill of lading therefore takes away the immunity of clerks and judges, if the cargo is not delivered into the Admiralty court it adds criminal penalties for compliance failures (49 U. S. Codes, Chapter 801 §: 80116).

The Admiralty Extension Act (46 U. S. A. Appendix, Ch. 19-A § 740) extends the admiralty jurisdiction inland.  All states by law have access to the sea.  Therefore any land locked country has an easement, so to speak, across other countries (or states) in order to get to the sea.  All states have an admiralty jurisdiction in all of their courts, and they hate admitting it.

The enumerated, specified and distinct Jurisdictions established by the ordained Constitution (1789), Article III, Section 2, and under the Bill of Rights (1791), Amendment VII, were hodgepodged and fundamentally changed in 1982 to include Admiralty Jurisdiction, which was once again brought inland. 

“This is the fundamental change necessary to effect unification of civil and Admiralty procedure. Just as the 1938 Rules abolished the distinction between actions at law and suits in equity, this change would abolish the distinction between civil actions and suits in Admiralty.”(Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, 1982 Ed., pg. 17; also see, Federalist Papers No. 83; Declaration Of Resolves Of The First Continental Congress; Oct. 14, 1774, Declaration Of Cause And Necessity Of Taking Up Arms; July 6, 1775, Declaration of Independence; July 4, 1776, Bennet vs. Butterworth, 52 U.S. 669.)

The Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act. (Title 28 U. S. codes § 1605) Any foreign sovereigns are liable for damages while doing business in the United States.  This provision has application since the foreign sovereign, the judges, clerks, etc., operate on the behalf of a de facto foreign fiction government. Officials are liable for the damages that they commit while doing business in the country. (Corp. U.S. is foreign to us.)

The Public Vessels Act (46: U. S. Codes Chapter: 22:§: 781) is another of the admiralty provisions that are helpful to the litigants of the Universal-Legal-Technology.  Since a judge, police officer, prosecutor, court clerk, or other public vessel has damaged the libellant, the libellant is authorized to sue for the damages in the venue of the Admiralty jurisdiction.  Again, the Public Vessels Act is a law that specifically waives any immunity of the government.  

Section 6 – Why is the United States Post Office important?

Now, a quick note about WHY the Post Office is so important to tie in with all the other “venues” we deal with. The constitution of the United States has vested congress with power to establish post offices and post roads. Art. 1, s. 8, n. 7. (Whoa to the Pirate that entraps those on Post Roads.)

Also, the formation of the Universal Postal Union in 1874 has another legal effect that is very important to the Universal-Legal-Technology.  The Universal Postal Union unites member countries into a single, worldwide postal territory. (1997 Encyclopedia Britannica) We have already learned that any litigant is going into international jurisdiction every time he goes to any court.  Since the litigant needs to establish that his papers are official, he uses a dollar postage stamp on the face of the first page.  The stamps also invoke postal statutes and the Universal Postal Union jurisdiction. The litigant needs to autograph across the stamp, then date the autograph, for two reasons: to comply with postal regulations concerning private mail carriers, and to make a continuance of evidence that the process (paper work) is mail.  Additionally, on the back of the first page, we authenticate the authority of the Post-Office with an endorsed and dated (2 cent) STAMP. (It has been said that the front of a page is “Public” while the backside of a page is “Private.”)

What are we doing by placing our paper work into the jurisdiction of the Universal Postal Union?  To answer that question, we need to look at the structure and finance of that organization. The official aims and purposes of the Universal Postal Union (UPU) are two: to form “a single postal territory for the reciprocal exchange of correspondence” and “to secure the organization and improvement of the postal services and to promote in this sphere the development of international collaboration.” (Universal Postal Union, p. 73) “The organization of the circulation of the international mail is based on the freedom of transit,  . . . as a result, therefore, only by enduring absolute freedom of transit can the effectual universality of the postal territory be attained. * * *  Freedom of transit is guaranteed throughout the entire territory of the union.  Administrations may exchange, through the intermediary of one or more of their number, both closed mails and open mail according to the needs of the traffic and the requirements of the service.” (Universal Postal Union, p. 74)

So, the members of the union have been operating as sovereign, independent countries, and their currency is based on the gold French Franc.  Gold is the acceptable form of money in international jurisdictions, or paper backed by gold. (The backing of paper does not necessarily have to be gold; it can be anything real at market value like timber, oil, minerals, metals, land, etc.) When we purchase postal money orders, the money order is backed by gold (we have entered “Substance,” which makes available “Tort Law”) and not the fiat “money” called Federal Reserve Notes.  The FRNs, as some call them, are based instead on a promise to pay a debt.  The debt is based only upon the “full faith and credit of the United States,” and lacks any intrinsic value.

Final word on “Going Postal” is simple; we are INTERNATIONAL. By placing the postage stamp on our admiralty paperwork and endorsement on the back of the first page, we are using the authority of the sovereignty of the longest surviving, solvent, governmental authority in the United States.  Through the admiralty, we are taking the Post-Office and the judicial system back some two hundred years, and simultaneously creating a new territory with all the rights of union membership afforded to clearly independent countries. We are establishing the laws in this new territory with the paper work that we have filed. As we will see later, we are also correcting the errors of the founding forefathers; in that we are also bringing the equal rights that they neglected to give to all the people in the United States. We are eliminating all of the legal deficiencies that handicap the sovereign status of us, the people, within the court. We are guaranteed that all of the parties in the case: the clerk, judge, bailiff, and litigants have the freedom of transit in the admiralty court.  If the clerk, judge, or other official fails to deliver our documents as directed, or delay them, or obstruct them, that person is faced with several penalties within the postal and admiralty statutes.  The final advantage is that if we are obstructed, because of the transitory nature of the action, we are in the Admiralty and can take the case offshore for adjudication in any court in the world.

Miscellaneous criteria for determining mandates of “International” nature:

Point 1. Technically, there are no independent state courts in the United States. The Judicial Districts were all abolished in 1856 by the Act of the 34^th Congress. The United States Supreme Court in 1860, reviewing the Act of the 34^th Congress, ordered ALL the States in existence at that time to close down all the Courts of law and all courts complied in 1860. None of the Courts of any State are created by the Constitution (charter) of their State.

Point 2. All “states” were placed under International Law at: 49 Stat. 3097; Treaty Series 881 (according to Yale Law School), Convention signed at Montevideo December 26, 1933; Senate advice and consent to ratification, with a reservation, June 15, 1934; Ratified by the President of the United States, with a reservation, June 29, 1934; Ratification of the United States deposited with the Pan American Union July 13, 1934; Entered into force December 26, 1934; Proclaimed by the President of the United States January 18, 1935; Article 8 reaffirmed by protocol of December 23, 1936.

Point 3. The International Organization Immunities Act of 1945 placed all courts under the jurisdiction of the United Nations (reference Title 22 CFR Foreign Relations with Oaths of Office under section 92.12 and 92.31).  Under Title 8 USC 1481 oath takers (judges, law enforcers, etc.) voluntarily forfeit their citizenship via the Oath of Office thus becoming foreign agents and are required to register under the Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act (though they seldom do).

Section 7 – The “Oath” and Contract Law

Let’s cover an item of great importance, the Oath Of Office, which “they” must give. If they do NOT give Oath Of Office, they are ultra vires and ALL they do will be under Color of Law. Remember, their Oath is nothing more than an OFFER TO CONTRACT. An offer must have an “Acceptance” to consummate a Contract. When they “take” an Oath they are, also, “giving” something important. They are making an offer to contract.

My acceptance of Presidential Oath made by the President of the United States of America (Article 2, Section 1), is a “Binding Agreement” to fulfill his Promise as Executive Trustee;

The President’s oath is consideration sufficient to support the simple contract the President (executive trustee) has with the people (beneficiaries). He does not have an oath of office. That is different than an oath. All legislative, executive, and judicial officers performing under him in his capacity as Commander in Chief have oaths of office. He has a Constitutional Oath. (5 USC 3331 & 3332)

To further explain: CONDUCT CONSUMMATES CONTRACT:

Young-man v. Nevada Irr. Dist. (1969) 74 Cal.Rptr. 398, 449 P.2d 462, 70 C.2d 240, “terms of an express contract are stated in words, while those of an implied agreement are manifested by conduct.”

Blaustein v. Burton (1970) 88 Cal.Rptr. 319, 9 C.A.3d 161; and Medina v. Van Camp Sea Food Co. (1946) 171 P.2d 445, 75 C.A.2d 551, “making of agreement may be inferred by proof of conduct as well as by proof of use of words.”

Penn Sec. Life Ins. v. Rising(1976) 133 Cal.Rptr. 59, 62 C.A. 3d 302, “where agreement which is established by acts and conduct of the parties is subject to different inferences or interpretations, that which is the more reasonable must be drawn.”

Obden v. Sanders LA, 1827 25 U.S. 312, 12 Wheat. 213, 6L.ED 606, “obligation of a contract is the law which binds the parties to perform their agreement.”

NOTICE to all public servants: I accept your oath of office (if any) as your firm and binding contract between you and me, one of the People of Posterity, whereby in order to get paid for your work, you have promised to serve, protect, and defend my unalienable rights. All agents or informants working to monitor my travel(s) and any other means of movement or communication without my express written permission are barred from any stoppage, detainment, harassment, or penalties due to my use of Public Facilities. I reserve all my rights without prejudice, UCC1-308, including all property rights. My time is one of my properties. If you take any of my time by way of your infringement of my rights, you agree to pay a user fee of 100,000 dollars of United States of America money, payable in gold or silver coin, per hour or any fraction thereof, payable immediately. Your infringement against my time is binding contract to pay. This action is in support of my mission to encourage public servants to obey public law.

Section 8 – Let’s drive some nails in their coffin.

Now, let’s move into the act of cutting off their money supply. That’s the only language they comprehend.

Let’s move into procedure. Above, we stated that IDENTITY THEFT is their first step in stealing from us. This is where the most important step comes into play. You must properly RECORD YOUR D.B.A. (at county level). By law, you should have done this at, or near, your 18^th birthday. Is it important? It prevents them from taking $ (money) from your Estate. If you don’t record your D.B.A. they will charge your Estate and make money every time they want to use it. Besides, they can arrest you for not doing this since you’re a lawbreaker before you enter court.

I am inserting a small notation here to make sure that your address shows as General Delivery, Postal location. (Mail yourself a letter with your Christian name to Post Office as General Delivery. Save it to your files.) Your “person” resides in a box, less than one-foot square, near its zip postal address. Separate your Being from your person.

Now, you’ve started on your journey/destination with several “incidentals”, which I shall attach and make reference to. So, file your fangs before you get out of bed and prepare to launch for their jugular vein. Be quick because they’re gonna RUN.

First statement entered (before any court commences) MUST be that of Corporate Denial. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 52, applies in Civil and Criminal actions with equal force and effect because criminal is always civil in nature. No civil or criminal cause of action can arise lest there be a contract. See Eads v. Marks, 249 P. 2d 257, 260. There is always a presumption that a contract exists and that the responding party is a Corporation. Under Rule 52, which is the same in all states as in the Federal Rules, the Texas Court of appeals (5^th Cir) has ruled of the finding of fact, by the Court, that “the failure of an adverse party to deny under oath the allegation that he is incorporated dispenses with the necessity of proof of the fact”. Thus, a presumption becomes a finding of fact by the court unless rebutted before trial. You must fully inform the court (and, verify that the court “understands”) that, “I am a living man, the blood flows and the flesh lives, and we are sovereign.  Nothing stands between my self and the Divine Creator of All That Is.”  

If Affiant (that’s you) is not a Corporation he cannot appear and plead. See West Union Tel. Co. v Eyser, 2 Colo. 141; Greenwood v. Railroad Co., 123 Mass. 32; Foster v. white Cloud, 32 Mo. 505; Hobich v. Folger, 20 Wall. 1; Boyce v. M.E. Church, 43 Md. 359; Folsom v. Star Union Etc. Fright Line, 54 Iowa 490.

Next entry must be that of “Expat-Repat” that you have expatriated from status at law of a 14^th Amendment citizen to an Elector with Standing In Law to declare all you desire.

Next is a “Letter Rogatory” where you instruct the “court” to keep your Claim “Within The Admiralty” jurisdiction, that your cargo/paperwork is to remain as a “SPECIAL” visitation to their court, etc. This can be included on the face of your B.O.L. (You must not become part of a “General” Deposit within their “Warehouse System.”)

Now, let’s discover the first “Element of Fraud.” Every “license” in the entire system, whether it is Legislative, Executive, or (pretend) Judicial, is activated with WHAT? It is activated by way of the transmission of Federal Reserve Notes, legally contraband and private gambling Script, or their equal. Not one of those bastardized agencies used silver or gold coins! You’ve discovered the Achilles Heal of the entire bogus camp, FRAUD. It’s not just fraud it’s security fraud. You can get a lot of mileage from this one. Everything that follows is “Fruit From The Poisonous Tree.” I heard of one fellow that paid his entire “debt” to the court with Monopoly Money and they didn’t say one word. (Something about “specie.”)

It’s time to throw in an “Objection.” Your objection is a form of declaring, “I do not consent. I do not volunteer.” This is an important element to bring forward. They assume that you have volunteered into any mess they wish to place upon you. As stated previously, their fake “money” is what keeps their wheels turning. Remember, a fiction can only deal with other fictions (something not real).

I object to the mandatory use of FEDERAL RESERVE NOTES. “Federal reserve notes are legal tender in absence of objection thereto.” MacLeod v. Hoover (June 22, 1925) 159 La 244, 105 So. 305.

Therefore, I refuse for good cause shown, this court’s/agency’s attempt to induce me to be a tort feasor to the Constitution for the United States of America where at Article 1, Section 10, it states, “No State shall emit bills of credit; make anything but Gold and Silver Coin a tender in payment of debts.”   

The Congress of the United States of America, by the authority of the Gold Bullion Act of 1985, Public Law 99-185, December 17, 1985, 99 Statutes 1177, has given its intent that all Americans can no longer be forced into an obligor/grantor status to said Federal Reserve Bank Notes.

Title 31 USC Section 408 prohibits the redemption of any currency into gold and Title 31 USC Section 405(a)-3 prohibits the redemption of any United States currency dollar for dollar into gold and silver. So, the law itself prohibits movant from using any money of account. And, for a check to be a negotiable instrument, it must contain an unconditional promise to pay a sum certain in money and be payable on demand or at a definite time (UCC 3-103 (b) (c)). Thus, neither the bank nor the movant is able to comply with the law of money and cannot be held a contemnor. “Money”, as you know it, or think it to be, is “contraband” at statute!!!

“The terms ‘lawful money’ and ‘lawful money’ of the United States shall be construed to mean gold or silver coin of the United States.” 12 USC 152. Also, Boric v. Trott, Pa. 5 Phila. 366. 404; Klauber v. Biggerstaff, 47 Wis. 551 (1879); Lawry v. McGhee, 16 Tenn. 242 (1835), and, [Please make a mental note that “law” and “money” are interlocked and directly connected. You cannot have one without the other.]

“”Money” does not include treasury notes”. Foquet v. Headley, 3 Conn. 534, 536, and,

“In legal acceptation, “money” means current metallic coins; therefore an indictment for embezzling “money” is not sustainable by proof of embezzling greenbacks or national currency notes.” Block v. State, 41 Tex. 620, 622. And,

“The term “money” does not include bank notes. They pass as cash, and constitute a part of the circulating medium, and for many purposes are to be considered as money; but, in the strict sense of the term, they are not included therein.” Dowdle v. Corpening, 32 N.C. 58,60. And,

“”Money,” as used in Crimes Act, section 13, providing that any person stealing any money, the property of another, shall be guilty of larceny, cannot be construed to include bank bills, for strictly bank bills are not money, though for many purposes they are treated as such.” Johnson v. State, 11 Ohio St. 324,325. And,

“The term “money,” in the statute defining robbery as taking from the person of another any money or personal property of any value whatsoever, with force and violence, and with intent to steal or rob, does not include bank notes.” Turner v. State, 1 Ohio St. 422,426. And,

“Federal Reserve Notes are not dollars.” U.S. Treasury, General Counsel, Munk. And,

“Both notes and checks are acknowledgments of indebtedness and promise of payment.” Hegeman v. Moon, 131 N.Y. 462, 30 N.E. 487. Smith v. Treuhart et al, 223 N.Y.S. 481. And,

A fact noted above must be reiterated here, first that “law” and “money” (gold and silver) are “interlocked and directly connected”, and, after finding that Federal Reserve Notes are “worthless securities” (words from the IRS), can be “stolen”, as in “robbery”, and being worthless, are a “Fiction Of Law”.

“The answer is the law, wherein the litigant shall substantiate the Debt Collector is attempting to dispute the nothing as if it were the factual default of a statutory obligation, wherein fees, may be defined as interest. The Fee is the statutory creature moving within the fictional falsity as if it is presumed to be standing as the amortized obligation“. Ryan v Motor Credit Company, 130 J.J. Eq. 531, 23 A.2d 607, 621

This is the fiction of law, wherein the fictional falsities are perfected by devious means. Read Ballentine’s Law Dictionary.

“Any false representation of material facts made with knowledge of falsity and with intent that it shall be acted on by another in entering into contract, and which is so acted upon, constitutes “fraud,” and entitles party deceived to avoid contracts or recover damages.” Barnsdall Refining Corp. v. Birnamwood Oil Co., 92 F.2d 817.

Let’s move on; we have a lot of grass to mow.

If you are “re-presented” by an attorney you are deemed incompetent. You must fire your attorney, especially, if “they” snuck one in on you. Demand to know whether any attorney is present to represent you. Barr v Day, 124 Wn. 2d 318, at 328 (1994) “Attorney when fired, is fired without question.”

And, a “sovereign” city decides to bring charges against you? Presidential documents, FEDERAL REGISTRY 48 #38 Title 3, Executive Order 12407, signed on February 22, 1983, by Ronald Reagan revoked all powers from municipalities, policing, and maintenance, referenced at; COMMUNITY COMMUNICATIONS CO. v. BOULDER, COLORADO, “Ours is a [Page 455 U.S. 40, 41] “dual system of government,” Parker, supra, at 351, “which has no place for sovereign cities.”

Maybe a “state” or “fed” decides to claim superiority over you? 19 C.J.S. Sections 884 of Chapter XVIII, Foreign Corporations – – Section 884. Status

“A corporation exists only in contemplation of law, and by force of law, and where that law ceases to operate, the corporation can have no existence . A state cannot impose one of its artificial creatures on another sovereignty nor confer on its corporators powers which they can lawfully exercise beyond its jurisdiction. Rather, it must dwell in the place of its creation, and cannot migrate to another sovereignty.” [Legal Entities: stay the hell in your box.] The United States of America, 1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW, Washington, DC   20501 – 0001 (DUNS number 161 906078).

Did you demand that I address this court (the Judge) as “your Honor?” Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th edition, under the word Honor defines the term “Office of Honor” which says “As used in constitutional and statutory provisions, this term denotes a public office of considerable dignity and importance, to which important public trusts or interests are confided, but which is not compensated by any salary or fees, being thus contrasted with an “office of profit.” End quote. (I won’t get into the “Slush Fund” in this document, your “Profit.”) (5 USC 3331 calls this an “office of profit.”)

I must insert a notation here about a particular term – “utterance.” I know a man who did all his documents correctly. The over-reaching gubm’t couldn’t touch him except through an “utterance.” He got several years of jail time for a concocted, trumped up, charge on a paper he introduced into the system, a situation very much like “they” practice everyday.

Black’s 1st “UTTER. To put or send into circulation; to publish or put forth. To utter and publish an instrument is to declare or assert, directly or indirectly, by words or actions, that it is good; uttering it is a declaration that it is good, with an intention or offer to pass it.  Whart. Crim. Law, Section 703″ (possibly 708).

“To utter, as used in a statute against forgery and counterfeiting, means to offer, whether accepted or not, a forged instrument, with the representation, by words or actions, that the same is genuine. 48 Mo. 520.”

And, Black’s 7th, “UTTER. 2. To put or send (a document) into circulation; esp., to circulate (a forged note) as if genuine…”

Title 18 USC sec. 4 of the commission of crimes cognizable by a court of the United States under Title 18 sec. 513 says, to wit: “513(a) Whoever makes, utters or possesses a counterfeited security of a State, of a political subdivision thereof, or of an organization, or whoever makes, utters or possesses a forged security of a State or political subdivision thereof or of an organization, with intent to deceive another person, organization, or government shall be fined not more than $250,000 or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.” Now, let’s look at the first “element of fraud” that caused this court system to “bring me to justice.” YOU (the legal system) created a “person” on paper that seems to be quite similar to a person of mine own proper operation that is NOT me, nor mine. Is that not an “Utterance?” And, under Admiralty Law your creation of a person on paper is not above my creation of a person on paper; and, I have already made full claim to that Person under my action of D.B.A. Does this “court” and all its’ actors deserve 10 years in prison? That’s a good start. Sounds like the practice of “sophistry” and RICO to me.

At this point let’s make a “break” in the diatribe to show a change of thought process. Here’s a line to draw your attention to the fact that, until now, the only reply we’ve had from our opressors has been, “Hmmm, Whatcha gonna do about it?” So, here’s my line:

Ask yourself the question, “What causes fear and trembling in the corrupt administrators of the “present” system?” Is it trying to get the Police on your ‘side’? No and H-NO. The system can squash them as easily as they squash one of us. Well, what if we “vote in” candidates of our choice? NO, again. With the ballot counting, ballot stuffing, mule management system, etc., etc., your vote has never counted, but it makes you feel good.

Section 9 – Let’s Lance that Boil!

So, what IS the answer to our very serious problem? The answer has been well hidden. But before full disclosure it is important for you to know what the answer is NOT. Bear with me.

It has been said that a “Jury” is the 4^th branch of government. How can that be? The “court” (judge) limits what a jury can hear. The court establishes the “rules” as the game is played. The court instructs the jury on what to think, how to reason, and how to respond to specific data or information that may have been presented.

“To instruct” is a synonym for “to order”. In the military, when someone is instructed to do something it is merely a softer way to give them an order. Therefore, for judges to instruct jurors on anything is usurpation and is jury tampering.

We must eradicate all jury instructions and eradicate from judges’ little minds any desire to instruct or order a jury about anything. The proper position of a judge vis’ a vis’ a jury is that of humble servant and legal advisor, not instructor.

Indeed, the Jury is NOT the 4^th branch of government, nor is it the 3^rd, when there are only 2 branches of government since all Municipal, County, District, and Superior Courts were created by STATUTE, which is Legislative. Pull up your “charters,” prove me wrong. All city and county charters in every state will clearly show that we have only executive and legislative branches in every state (formed via statute).

In your county charter you’ll find for the Superior Court System something like this, “_____ COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION, which by its name falls within the definition of agency.

Have you ever heard a FTA (failure to appear) case where the judge says, “Issue a warrant for his arrest?” That’s not the order of a Judge; that’s the order of an Executive. His authority is via Statute.

Your State Statutes show the Executive Authority is vested in the office of the Elected County Prosecutor, Deputy Prosecutor, Special Prosecutor, and Attorney General.

So, with only 2 branches of government, how can We The People find Relief or Equity in such a system of manipulation? Please, don’t lose me now; I MAY have an answer.

It is NOT through the Constitution for the United States of America.

Padelford, Fay & Co. v. Mayor and Aldermen of City of Savannah, 1854 “*55 But, indeed, no private person has a right to complain, by suit in Court, on the ground of a breach of the Constitution. The Constitution, it is true, is a compact, but he is not a party to it. The States are the parties to it. And they may complain.”

The Answer? I’ve just spent several minutes explaining what the solution is NOT. In this document I’ve explained the precepts of how to obtain and maintain a DEFENSIBLE POSITION when dealing with the courts. That is extremely important. Now, I’ll attempt to explain how to get relief and remedy. That will come ONLY when we maintain an ENFORCEABLE POSITION.

Section 10 – Scalpel, please.

Now, we are ready to release the kraken (a huge sea monster in Norwegian legend). And, since it’s a “sea” monster that has been destroying us (Admiralty Law (of the sea)) it is only fitting that to ‘fight fire with fire’ we utilize a Sea Monster to destroy a Sea Monster.

We’ve tried pleading our cause and “praying” to the court. It hasn’t worked. So, here’s the Big Kuhuna. We are Constituting Common Law (American) Grand Juries. This is not hard to follow; you won’t get lost.

In a stunning six to three, 1992 Decision that went almost unnoticed, Justice Antonin Scalia writing for the majority said:

In the Supreme Court case of United States v. Williams, 112 S.Ct. 1735, 504 U.S. 36, 118 L.Ed.2d 352 (1992), Justice Antonin Scalia, writing for the majority, confirmed that the American grand jury is neither part of the judicial, executive nor legislative branches of government, but instead belongs to the people. It is in effect a fourth branch of government “governed” and administered to directly by and on behalf of the American people, and its authority emanates from the Bill of Rights, the acts of the Grand Jury is the consent of the people. [It has occurred to me that, just above, Justice Scalia referred to this “designate function of performance” as “American grand jury.” He did not call it a Common Law Grand Jury. Perhaps we should follow his lead with an “American Grand Jury”.]

“The grand jury is mentioned in the Bill of Rights, but not in the body of the Constitution. It has not been textually assigned, therefore, to any of the branches described in the first three Articles. It “is a constitutional fixture in its own right. In fact the whole theory of its function is that it belongs to no branch of the institutional government, serving as a kind of buffer or referee between the Government and the people”. — Justice Antonin Scalia

“Thus, citizens have the unbridled right to empanel their own grand juries and present “True Bills” of indictment to a court, which is then required to commence a criminal proceeding. Our Founding Fathers presciently thereby created a “buffer” the people may rely upon for justice, when public officials, including judges, criminally violate the law.” — Justice Antonin Scalia

“The grand jury is an institution separate from the courts, over whose functioning the courts do not preside, we think it clear that, as a general matter at least, no such “supervisory” judicial authority exists. The “common law” of the Fifth Amendment demands a traditional functioning grand jury.” — Justice Antonin Scalia

“Although the grand jury normally operates, of course, in the courthouse and under judicial auspices, its institutional relationship with the judicial branch has traditionally been, so to speak, at arm’s length. Judges’ direct involvement in the functioning of the grand jury has generally been confined to the constitutive one of calling the grand jurors together and administering their oaths of office. The grand jury’s functional independence from the judicial branch is evident both in the scope of its power to investigate criminal wrongdoing, and in the manner in which that power is exercised.” — Justice Antonin Scalia

“The grand jury ‘can investigate merely on suspicion that the law is being violated, or even because it wants assurance that it is not.’ It need not identify the offender it suspects, or even “the precise nature of the offense” it is investigating. The grand jury requires no authorization from its constituting court to initiate an investigation, nor does the prosecutor require leave of court to seek a grand jury indictment. And in its day-to-day functioning, the grand jury generally operates without the interference of a presiding judge. It swears in its own witnesses and deliberates in total secrecy.” — Justice Antonin Scalia

“Recognizing this tradition of independence, we have said the 5th Amendment’s constitutional guarantee presupposes an investigative body ‘acting independently of either prosecuting attorney or judge” — Justice Antonin Scalia

“Given the grand jury’s operational separateness from its constituting court, it should come as no surprise that we have been reluctant to invoke the judicial supervisory power as a basis for prescribing modes of grand jury procedure. Over the years, we have received many requests to exercise supervision over the grand jury’s evidence-taking process, but we have refused them all. “it would run counter to the whole history of the grand jury institution” to permit an indictment to be challenged “on the ground that there was incompetent or inadequate evidence before the grand jury.” — Justice Antonin Scalia

NOTES:

1. The “American (Common Law) Grand Jury” is lawful (and legal).
2. The American Grand Jury can write and issue True Bills of indictment to the court system.
3. The American Grand Jury is enforceable via County Sheriff, County Coroner, State Attorneys General, Private Attorneys General, Alien Property Custodian, Provost Marshall, Sworn Posse Comitatus, other direct militant servers of The People, AND the Director of the OFFICE of FOREIGN ASSET CONTROL.

Bottom Line: You will eliminate the Vile and Corrupt Admiralty Legal System IMMEDIATELY (or, we will burn your donkeys to a crisp with it).

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

Following is a basic list of guidelines that might apply to this initiation of action.

TO BE DISTRIBUTED to “All” County Clerks, “All” Chief Court Clerks, “All” Administrative Judges, and, “All” District Executives. Without delay!

SUBJECT: (American) Grand Juries and their unalienable right of consent.

Dear Servants;

The People of ___________ are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights1. To secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the “CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED”. Whenever any appointed or elected servant becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Duty (Right) of the Consenters (American Grand Jury) to remove such servants and appoint or elect new servants.

Prudence indeed dictates that presentments against elected and appointed servants should not be charged for light and transient causes; but, when a long train of abuses and usurpations finds the People under absolute Despotism, it is the right, it is the duty of the People (American Grand Jury) to remove such disobedient servants and provide new Guards for their future security. Such has been the patient sufferance of the People of __________; and such is now it may be necessary to change the guard by a “True Bill”. To prove this, let the Facts be submitted to a candid world. [Typical charges against the Over-Reaching Agencies might be:]

______________ has/have conspired to supplant the unalienable right of We the People to lawfully assemble as consenters under a common cause to protect the unalienable rights of the People of ___________ as constitutionally prescribed and protected under the Fifth and other Amendments.

___________ has/have obstructed the Administration of Justice by the People.

___________ has/have obstructed the Consenters access to the court by conspiring, reporting false

___________ has/have charges, and issued orders to reject Grand Jury filings to all County Clerks.

___________ has/have abused their powers by filing false reports with the FBI in an effort to intimidate the People into submission.

___________ has/have abused their powers by sending the FBI on a fishing expedition in the hope of finding evidence, that does not exist, in order to charge the People with a crime.

___________ has/have abused their powers by accusing the People of terrorist acts and causing them to be interrogated as such.

___________ has/have misinformed the elected clerks of the counties of ______and the employed clerks of the courts of _________claiming that the 5th Amendment has been legislated away and therefore the People’s right to consent is void, thus allowing the judges to continue in their acts of contempt of the People.

We have warned the judges of __________________, from time to time, of attempts by their administrative courts to not extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the Law of the Land and their duty to obey it, i.e., honor their Oath to hold their office in good behavior. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity. They have been deaf to the cries of the injured for justice. We the People must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity of holding them in contempt of Natural Law (Common Law).

We, therefore, the People of _____________, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of ___________, solemnly publish and declare, that ___________ are, and of Right ought to be free and sovereign People, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence.

FURTHER GUIDELINES:

There are no rules defining a procedure for how they are elected. The people, without the influence of government, decide for themselves how the grand jury members are elected.

There must be 25 members; they must be “People” of the County (not citizens), etc., etc.

Other data is available concerning the establishing and performance of a Common Law Grand Jury, which I will not cover here.

Many other facets and facts apply to your Redemption Process as we Assume our Rightful Position as Heirs to the Sovereignty of Planet Earth, such as:

Claiming Right of Postliminy;

Eliminating any assumed Power Of Attorney;

Notice of Mistake (many mistakes) and demand for corrections;

Denial of “Enemy Of The State” status;

Claim of “Beneficiary” to the Estate; denial of “Trustee-ship” to everything.

Official Challenge of Jurisdiction;

Denial of Debtor Status (as per UCC 9-307(h));

Showing of Foreign involvement (google Order 1778 of 1997, see what you get)

Inland Piracy (18 USC, Sec. 1652. Citizens as pirates) Ride that pony to the finish.

And, dozens more Facts, which I’ll be happy to supply.

And, now I present my final Statement: Information: In law, Information means; “A formal accusation of a crime made by a public officer rather than by Grand Jury Indictment”. [This could get exciting.] A “Libel of Review” may be appropriate and a “Libel of Information” may cause panic among the compulsive lying gubm’t agents.

Claimant (that’s me) charges that “wrongful information”, which is the entering, editing, registering, recording, or charging of any living man/woman with a crime, when there is NO INJURED PARTY, is a Tort (damage, injury, or wrongful act done willfully, negligently, or in circumstances involving strict liability, but not involving breach of contract, for which a civil suit can be brought), and establishes liability upon the “Actor” bringing forward the Accusation; And,

Claimant, in all cases, at all times, reserves the right to administer “Waiver of Tort”, if Claimant, at his discretion determines justice would be better served by a charge of Wrongful Information than with remedy of Tort.

Why am I not licensed? “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, Claimant has no record or evidence that Claimant is 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;

As per the Supreme Court in  Schware v. Board of Examiners. 353 U.S. 238, 239, “they [attorneys] cannot represent any private citizen nor any business [as apposed to Corp.] as the State cannot license the practice of law”; And, “Ignorance of the law does not excuse misconduct in anyone, least of all in a sworn officer of the law.” In re McCowan (1917), 177 C. 93, 170 P. 1100; And, “No officer can acquire jurisdiction by deciding he has it. The officer, whether judicial or ministerial, decides at his own peril.” Middleton v. Low (1866), 30 C. 596, citing Prosser v. Secor (1849), 5 Barb.(N.Y) 607, 608.

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. And, “founded suspicion” of the driver or occupant is determined from the inception, as per; “Founded suspicion [OF CRIMINAL CONDUCT] must exist at the time the officer initiates the stop”. U.S. v. Thomas, 863 F2d. 622, 625. And, “Founded suspicion exists when the officer is aware of specific articulable facts that, together with rational inferences drawn from them, reasonable warrant a suspicion that the person to be detain has committed or is about to commit a crime“. U.S. v. Cortez, 449 U.S. 411, 416, U.S. v. Robert L., 874 F2d. 701, 703. And, “any restraint of a person for the purpose of checking identification and asking questions or detaining him or her briefly while obtaining is such a detention; it comported with the Fourth Amendment only when based on articulable facts supporting a reasonable suspicion that the person has committed a criminal offense.”  U.S. Hensley, 469 U.S. 221 [83 L.Ed.2d. 604]. And, “In a unanimous decision the U.S. Supreme Court” held: “demand for identification is an intrusion on the interests prohibited by the Fourth Amendment and requires reasonable suspicion based on articulable facts relating to the person or his or her conduct [CRIME], in order to be lawful.” When police officers, with or without arresting an individual, detain the individual for the purpose of requiring him to identify himself, they perform a seizure of person subject to the requirements of the Fourth Amendment. …that the defendant’s conviction requiring identification upon a lawful stop [RELATED TO CRIME] was improper, the police officer’s stopping the defendant and requiring him to identify himself violated defendant’s First, Fourth and Fifth Amendments was in violation of…United States Constitution when the police officer has no reasonable suspicion to believe that the defendant was engaged or been engaged in criminal conduct”.  Brown v. Texas, (1979) 443 U.S. 46 [61 L.Ed.2d. 357]. And, “A person driving an automobile cannot be stopped to see if he or she is licensed to drive”.  Delaware v. Prouse, (1979) 440 U.S. 648, [ 59 L.Ed2d. 660].

And, “Judicial Council sponsored legislation that reclassifies minor traffic violations as noncriminal infractions”. Validated at http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/reference /documents/ar2001-1.pdf  “Further, infractions are not crimes and the rule forbidding successive prosecutions of a defendant is not applicable when an infraction is one of the offenses involved”. People v. Battle (1975) 50 Cal.App.3d Supp. 1 [123 Cal.Rptr. 636]. fn. 1 [1b]; And, “The term “liberty ” as used in state and federal constitutions consists partially of the right to be free from arbitrary restraint; for example, the right of a citizen to drive on public street with freedom from police interference, unless he is engaged in suspicious conduct associated in some manner with criminality is a fundamental constitutional right”. People v. Horton, (1971) 14 Cal.App.3d. 930, [92 Ca.Rptr. 666]; And, “The innocent individual who is harmed by an a---e of governmental authority is assured that he will be compensated for his injury.” Owens v. City of Independence, 100 S.Ct 1398 (1980); And, …If one individual does not possess such a right over the conduct of another [Good and Lawful Christian Man], no number of individuals [in a deliberative body] can possess such a right. All combinations, therefore, to effect such an object, are injurious, not only to the individuals particularly oppressed, but to the public at large.” People v. Fisher, 14 Wend.(N.Y.) 9, 28 Am. Dec. 501.

And, “Where lawful services are blended with such as are forbidden, the whole being a unit and indivisible, the bad destroys the good.” Trist v. child, 21 Wall. 452 (1874).(Actus Reus: A wrongful deed renders the actor criminally liable when combined with mens rea, a guilty mind.)

With “Equality under the Law” being paramount I call attention to: Damages awarded; TRESEVANT v. CITY OF TAMPA, 241F2D.336 (11TH CIR.1984) Motorist illegally held for 23 minutes in a traffic charge was awarded $25,000 in damages. The above case sets the foundation for $75,000 dollars per hour, or $1,800,000 dollars per day.

And, Quoted, as per; A Lawyer’s View of the Justice System, Joseph H. Delaney, July/August, 1999, issue of Analog Science, Vol. CXVIX No. 7 & 8 — “… the proportion of judges who are dishonest, who are on the take, who harbor prejudices against parties or counsel, is far greater than the lay public realizes. … Corruption is rampant in courts at every level throughout the country. It is equally rampant among prosecutors and law enforcement people. … The primary corrupting influence is the drug business. … the dope interests own contemporary justice. … There is no greater shock than to find that even with both law and the facts in your favor your constitutional rights are worthless because you can’t get the crooked regime to enforce them.”

NOW, I REITERATE: “Citizens as pirates… shall be imprisoned for life.”

Here’s the “REAL” bottom line: Daniel 11:32 – – And such as do wickedly against the covenant shall he pervert by flatteries; but the people that know their God shall be strong, and do exploits. Let’s bind the enemy with Truth and start doing EXPLOITS.

DISCLAIMER: I am not an attorney; I do not give legal advice. I’m nothing more than a Pissant that wishes to do the will of my Creator. [For education purposes only.]

Misc. Note:

TO ESTABLISH THE FACT that Law of the High Seas was brought Inland, SEE: The First Judiciary Act; September 24, 1789; Chapter 20, page 77. The Constitution of the United States of America, Revised and Annotated – Analysis and Interpretation – 1982; Article III, §2, Cl. 1 Diversity of Citizenship, U.S. Government Printing Office document 99-16, p. 741: “…the United States, … within their respective districts, as well as upon the high seas; (a) saving to suitors, in all cases, the right of a common law remedy, where the common law is competent to give it; and shall also have exclusive original cognizance of all seizures on land,…” (Also, see U.C.C. 1-103.6)

I reiterate: You will eliminate the Vile and Corrupt Admiralty Legal System IMMEDIATELY (or, we will burn your donkeys to a crisp with it).

______________________________________________________

Contact Author

If you wish to contact the author of this article. Please email us at [voyagesoflight@gmail.com]. Availability of author’s contact information depends on if said article was user submitted or reposted.
______________________________________________________

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 [voyagesoflight@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 at the bottom.
______________________________________________________

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