+ Reply to Thread
Page 8 of 20 FirstFirst 1 8 18 20 LastLast
Results 141 to 160 of 387

Thread: The Hoaxes of Deborah Tavares

  1. Link to Post #141
    Avalon Member peterpam's Avatar
    Join Date
    29th June 2012
    Posts
    1,663
    Thanks
    15,441
    Thanked 8,832 times in 1,595 posts

    Default Re: The Hoaxes of Deborah Tavares

    Quote Posted by onawah (here)
    The only proofs Snoop offers are simply based on contradicting Tavares's proofs, not any other whistleblower info.
    That is a HUGE discrepancy in logic and reasoning and any competent lawyer in a courtroom would be making a laughing stock out of such ridiculousness in very short order.
    And using wikipedia as proof of anything? Give me a break!
    The primary purpose of Agenda 21 according to what I have read is to dramatically reduce the population by any means necessary.
    If old growth forests must be sacrificed in the process, their plans extend far into the future and forests will grow again; people are not so resilient.


    Have you actually read the original document? When you say according to what you have read, will you share your sources?

    I don't think it is necessary to make personally criticize . Ask yourself why you are so angry? It can be a wonderful point of self reflection.

    Quote That is a HUGE discrepancy in logic and reasoning and any competent lawyer in a courtroom would be making a laughing stock out of such ridiculousness in very short order
    posted by Onawah


    Quote Ad hominem, which stands for the Latin term argumentum ad hominem, is a response to a person's argument by attacking the person's character rather than the logic or content of the argument. Ad hominem remarks are often an example of fallacy, because they are irrelevant to the overall argument.
    I would hire Snoop in a heartbeat if I needed a lawyer.
    Last edited by peterpam; 6th February 2019 at 14:47.

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to peterpam For This Post:

    Delight (6th February 2019), snoop4truth (6th February 2019)

  3. Link to Post #142
    Avalon Member Delight's Avatar
    Join Date
    12th January 2012
    Posts
    2,736
    Thanks
    5,029
    Thanked 11,916 times in 2,406 posts

    Default Re: The Hoaxes of Deborah Tavares

    peterpam said

    "I would hire Snoop in a heartbeat if I needed a lawyer."

    I would also!

    This is slightly off topic but there are some past events which have really bothered me because the conclusions reached as to "what happened" seem to ME to be nonsensical. One is 9/11, another Sandy Hook (and other mass shootings). One issue that I am concerned about is forced vaccination (and as as a nurse I can understand some science documentation). In each of these cases and not unlike the fires in California and Agenda 21, people have such HUGE emotional reaction that they can barely process the evidence.

    IMO there are some really serious issues presented in these and other topics. I look for sources that I can trust to help me make sense of the truth. That is why I am especially taken with the efforts that snoop has made showing how one person (group?) can with mal intent poison the desire to discover what is true SO WE CAN MOVE FORWARD to deal with pressing problems!!!!!

    People feel intense anger about events but the true source of the problem is never uncovered. If scapegoats are blamed and that makes people feel some less inner rage, that will never move us along to civilization that can with stand changes. IMO.

    Also in another post I stated that IMO many of the past revolutions and genocides were able to be undertaken BECAUSE a mass population was of the belief that their life problems were the fault of the targeted groups. That can happen anytime people are upset, emotional, THEN persuaded. That sincerely terrifies me... that many small twists of fact and truth add up and often will contribute to THE NEXT WAR.
    Last edited by Delight; 6th February 2019 at 18:24.

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Delight For This Post:

    Debra (7th February 2019), peterpam (7th February 2019)

  5. Link to Post #143
    United States Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Age
    72
    Posts
    27,723
    Thanks
    28,846
    Thanked 129,174 times in 20,635 posts

    Default Re: The Hoaxes of Deborah Tavares

    Quote Posted by snoop4truth (here)
    ... "EXTINCTION" "Silent Weapons For Quiet Wars" ...

    Conclusion: I am not making this stuff up.
    I seriously doubt that any prepared document from a major, usually dishonest, mendacious, perfidious, deceitful, deceiving, deceptive and duplicitous organization (such as NASA) can prove much of anything about their real intentions. So I doubt that any such document could prove what Deborah Tavares is claiming, and I also doubt that any such document could prove the contrary.

    The real intentions of such organizations are almost always held by the people, families, secret societies or other such, "behind the curtain."

    Quote Posted by Delight (here)
    I just disagree that he is manipulating information to draw illogical conclusions. The reason I say that I disagree is that my reading concerns his detailed analysis of her claims. He points out that no matter what subject she uses, her spin of them should not be used as arguments in favor of the claims she makes.
    The presence of some valid (in your estimation, at least) points does not prove the absence of some unproven, illogical or inaccurate conclusions as well.

    ===

    Our collective ability to think and argue logically, with sound rhetoric, can be short circuited by cries of danger, instilling fear.
    "Quick, quick, run, run!! The sky is falling!!"
    This includes cries to
    "Danger, danger! Beware the false fear monger! Beware the bearer of false hoaxes!"

    However on this Wild and Woolly Web, we often read calls for such immediate and panic'd reactions, short circuiting calm, logical discussion and sound rhetoric. Such messages are sometimes (as might be seen in this thread) framed using the words of logic and reason, even though the actual message endeavors to appeal more to the emotions than to the logical, and even though such messages contain critical flaws in the logic or rhetoric.

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Paul For This Post:

    onawah (6th February 2019)

  7. Link to Post #144
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Posts
    11,127
    Thanks
    27,056
    Thanked 47,650 times in 9,706 posts

    Default Re: The Hoaxes of Deborah Tavares

    If you read my statements carefully, you will see that I have not attacked Snoop's character.
    (We don't actually know who he is, in any case. He isn't taking any risks by divulging his identity, if you haven't noticed.)
    I stated that IF he is a shill then he does not belong on this forum.
    We can only talk about a hypothetical person here, since we don't know who he really is or anything about him other than what he has told us, which is very little.
    Stranger things have certainly happened than shills appearing right here on Project Avalon, repeatedly.
    What I have criticized is faulty reasoning, illogical and apparently uninformed conclusions, which could well be motivated by an intent to deceive.

    Do you actually think that the people behind Agenda 21 would PUBLISH their true agenda, for all to see?
    Have YOU read any other insider/whistleblower info about what Agenda 21 is actually for?
    Are you unaware of the many lies that NASA has told, revealed by credible insiders such as some of their very own astronauts and scientists?
    Are you unaware that NASA is a carefully designed front for the Secret Space Program?
    Have you studied the evidence that has been presented demonstrating that DEWs have been in the government's arsenal for quite some time?
    There is plenty of data demonstrating all that, compiled right here on Avalon, if you take the time to look.

    I am concerned about this because I used to live in No. Cal. and I still have loved ones living right in the targeted areas of the fires who are still unaware of how much danger they are in.
    One of our own here at Avalon, Sierra, lost her home in one of those fires. There are other Avalonians who live in that area.
    Evidently CA. is being used as a test case, and a few other areas around the world.
    The plan so far is having great success.
    Very few people are aware of it, so it will continue to be used, and spread, if it's not stopped.
    Do you think that is enough reason to be concerned?

    What makes me angry is the arrogance with which TPTB and their agents act, how blatant their tactics are becoming, and how effective all the nefarious things are that they have been doing for decades now to dumb the populace down so that people still don't notice how they are being fooled, manipulated and culled.
    Doesn't that make you angry?

    Tavares may be a nut job, but she is very vocal about some of those things that people need to be made aware of, about DEWs, about chemtrails, about what burnt out property owners are now facing, about smart meters--the list of things go on and on that are contributing to this crisis, and she is WAKING PEOPLE UP.
    No doubt it will bring about another crisis when it becomes public knowledge that she has been falsifying data, but if that is going to be used by TPTB, who will undoubtedly take full advantage of the opportunity to put people BACK TO SLEEP AGAIN, then the whole crisis will only worsen.

    Can you connect the dots here?
    Can you see the larger picture?
    Can you see a little into the future?
    Are you aware that the ruling families have been scheming and skillfully making plans for centuries now, using the governments of the world as their tools?
    Starting wars?
    Taking over governments and whole countries?
    Decimating the environment?
    Poisoning the planet and all living things that make this planet their home?

    There is a wealth of data about that on this very forum which many active members have spent a lot of time and effort compiling, myself included, and which should make any thinking person think again after reading some of Snoop's faulty conclusions.
    You don't have to be a lawyer, you just have to do some reading, use discernment, and be able to reason and think logically.
    Abilities which seem to have become more the exception these days, unfortunately, which only goes to show how well their plans have been working.

    Quote Posted by peterpam (here)
    Quote Posted by onawah (here)
    The only proofs Snoop offers are simply based on contradicting Tavares's proofs, not any other whistleblower info.
    That is a HUGE discrepancy in logic and reasoning and any competent lawyer in a courtroom would be making a laughing stock out of such ridiculousness in very short order.
    And using wikipedia as proof of anything? Give me a break!
    The primary purpose of Agenda 21 according to what I have read is to dramatically reduce the population by any means necessary.
    If old growth forests must be sacrificed in the process, their plans extend far into the future and forests will grow again; people are not so resilient.


    Have you actually read the original document? When you say according to what you have read, will you share your sources?

    I don't think it is necessary to make personally criticize . Ask yourself why you are so angry? It can be a wonderful point of self reflection.

    Quote That is a HUGE discrepancy in logic and reasoning and any competent lawyer in a courtroom would be making a laughing stock out of such ridiculousness in very short order
    posted by Onawah


    Quote Ad hominem, which stands for the Latin term argumentum ad hominem, is a response to a person's argument by attacking the person's character rather than the logic or content of the argument. Ad hominem remarks are often an example of fallacy, because they are irrelevant to the overall argument.
    I would hire Snoop in a heartbeat if I needed a lawyer.
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  8. Link to Post #145
    United States Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Age
    72
    Posts
    27,723
    Thanks
    28,846
    Thanked 129,174 times in 20,635 posts

    Default Re: The Hoaxes of Deborah Tavares

    Quote Posted by onawah (here)
    ...which could well be motivated by an intent to deceive ...
    I have come to the conclusion that I can not usually distinguish between those who intend to deceive, and those who have fallen too far for deception.

    I usually have to treat the posts here of others the same, regardless of whatever inner dialogue they may or may not be having with themselves that might, or might not, reflect a higher level of awareness than what is reflected in their posts here.

  9. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Paul For This Post:

    onawah (6th February 2019), peterpam (7th February 2019)

  10. Link to Post #146
    United States Avalon Retired Member
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Age
    72
    Posts
    27,723
    Thanks
    28,846
    Thanked 129,174 times in 20,635 posts

    Default Re: The Hoaxes of Deborah Tavares

    Quote Posted by onawah (here)
    Tavares may be a nut job, but she is very vocal about some of those things that people need to be made aware of, about DEWs, about chemtrails, about what burnt out property owners are now facing, about smart meters--the list of things go on and on that are contributing to this crisis, and she is WAKING PEOPLE UP.
    I agree, albeit only to some extent and with considerable modifications, that these issues are critical issues that people need to be more aware of and take action on. If I still lived in California, instead of rather more boring North Texas, I'd likely advocate even more vigorously regarding these issues.

    However, I would disagree with (well, to be more precise, can't stand) the methods and tactics that Tavares, and some of her opposition, are using.

    As I just happened to observe in this post, on a quite different matter (the real origins of the Cold War, between the West and Russia), riling us up and getting us divided against each other, operating out of our lower chakra (not a subject I know much about, but seems to be a useful perspective here), is one of the key ways that the bastards in power remain the bastards in power.

    As you do, I also abhor "faulty reasoning, illogical and apparently uninformed conclusions". I would go a step further however. I would not embrace the work of others, using such faulty methods, even if they seem to agree with me on key issues.

    When well informed, well considered discussion is reduced to a food fight, both sides lose.

    The bastards in power rely on this time and time again, turning key issues into food fights between passionate spokes people from both sides. Both sides lose. The bastards win again.

  11. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Paul For This Post:

    avid (6th February 2019), Delight (8th February 2019), Ernie Nemeth (7th February 2019), onawah (6th February 2019), peterpam (7th February 2019)

  12. Link to Post #147
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    30th September 2015
    Age
    59
    Posts
    212
    Thanks
    147
    Thanked 412 times in 163 posts

    Default Re: The Hoaxes of Deborah Tavares

    There still appears to be some confusion about what I am saying and what I am not saying. I do not know if this apparent confusion is real or fake. So, assuming that this apparent confusion is real, I am posting a clarification below. It is the new Condensed Summary of the hoaxes of Deborah Tavares. It includes three new hoaxes that were NOT part of the original. And, more summaries are coming soon. If your confusion is real, rather than fake, then just tell me, straight up, what you are confused about. If your confusion is real, and you are not playing some kind of game, just ask me a straight question and I will answer it. I am always happy to help those who truly want help.

    CONCISE SUMMARY OF THE HOAXES OF DEBORAH TAVARES:

    1. "The NASA War Document Hoax". The document is REAL, but has been "modified" to fit the hoax. It now has a FAKE and misleading TITLE and COVER. But, the hoax is NOT the document anyway. Instead, the hoax is Deborah Tavares' OWN fraudulent claims that THE DOCUMENT ALONE, ALL BY ITSELF, WITHOUT MORE, CONSTITUTES "PROOF" that NASA is already killing us all with diabolical weapons in furtherance of the planned extinction of mankind. But, her claims about this document are not so. NASA actually created and used this very document to urge American defense contractors to develop countermeasures against the diabolical weapons described therein in an effort to prevent any planned extinction of mankind. NASA may actually be killing us all with diabolical weapons in furtherance of the planned extinction of mankind. But, THIS PARTICULAR DOCUMENT ITSELF (upon which Deborah Tavares HERSELF says she bases this particular claim) provides no support for that proposition, because it was actually created and used in an effort TO PREVENT such an occurrence.

    2. "The Silent Weapons For Quiet Wars Hoax". The document is REAL, but it is only POLITICAL FICTION. It has also been "modified" to fit the hoax. It now has a FAKE, recently-added paragraph at the beginning which fraudulently indicates that it is the work of "The Bilderbergs". But, the hoax is NOT the document anyway. Instead, the hoax is Deborah Tavares' OWN fraudulent claims that THE DOCUMENT ALONE, ALL BY ITSELF, WITHOUT MORE, CONSTITUTES "PROOF" that "The Bilderbergs" adopted a plan in 1954 to kill us all with diabolical "silent weapons" in furtherance of the planned extinction of mankind. But, her claims about this document are not so. This document is actually POLITICAL FICTION and is a DISGUISED COMPLAINT about the treason and horrors suffered by U.S. soldiers when the U.S. government allegedly allowed them to be killed at Pearl Harbor in order to draw us into World War II. The Bilderbergs may actually be killing us all with diabolical "silent weapons" in furtherance of the planned extinction of mankind. But, THIS PARTICULAR DOCUMENT ITSELF (upon which Deborah Tavares HERSELF says she bases this particular claim) provides no support for that proposition, because it is actually POLITICAL FICTION.

    3. "The Report From Iron Mountain Hoax". The document is REAL, but it is only POLITICAL SATIRE. So, the hoax is NOT the document itself. Instead, the hoax is Deborah Tavares' OWN fraudulent claims that THE DOCUMENT ALONE, ALL BY ITSELF, WITHOUT MORE, CONSTITUTES "PROOF" that ALL "environmental calamities" (including climate change, drought, fires, etc.) ARE FAKE ("engineered") and that they are created by the U.S. Government to justify "FAKE WARS" (described in the book) against these FAKE ("engineered") environmental calamities to prop up the U.S. economy and that the U.S. Government uses these FAKE ("engineered") environmental calamities as "weapons" to kill us all in furtherance of the planned extinction of mankind (something NOT in the book). But, her claims about this document are not so. This document is actually POLITICAL SATIRE and is a DISGUISED COMPLAINT WHICH OPENLY MOCKS U.S. policy of engaging in perpetual wars to prop up the U.S. economy. The U.S Government may actually be killing us all with FAKE ("engineered") "environmental calamities" (including climate change, drought, fires, etc.) in furtherance of the planned extinction of mankind. But, THIS PARTICULAR DOCUMENT ITSELF (upon which Deborah Tavares HERSELF says she bases this particular claim) provides no support for that proposition, because it is actually POLITICAL SATIRE.

    4. "The Agenda 21 Hoax". The document is REAL. So, the hoax is NOT the document itself. Instead, the hoax is Deborah Tavares' OWN fraudulent claims that THE DOCUMENT ALONE, ALL BY ITSELF, WITHOUT MORE, CONSTITUTES "PROOF" that the United Nations is forcing us out or our rural and suburban homes and into increasingly-smaller, densely-packed, over-populated "Kill Cities" or "Smart Cities" in furtherance of the planned extinction of mankind. But, her claims about this document are not so. According to the "Agenda 21" document itself (upon which Deborah Tavares HERSELF says she bases this particular claim), its purpose is to SLOW DOWN the rate at which the environment is destroyed. It would have PROTECTED THE REMAINING FORESTS, REDUCED DROUGHT and INSURED AN ADEQUATE SUPPLY OF FRESH WATER not contaminated by SEWAGE. Agenda 21 was first presented to the public at the "EARTH SUMMIT" (an environmental conference) in Rio De Janeiro, Brazil in 1992. It was only a SUGGESTION that member nations were permitted, BUT NOT REQUIRED TO ADOPT for themselves. Agenda 21 does not apply in the United States because it is not the law in the United States and therefore cannot be enforced in the United States. Contrary to Deborah Tavares' fraudulent claims, there is NOTHING in the Agenda 21 document itself (upon which Deborah Tavares HERSELF says she bases this particular claim) which suggests we will be forced out of our rural or suburban homes and into increasingly-smaller, densely-packed, over-populated "Kill Cities" or "Smart Cities" in furtherance of the planned extinction of mankind. NOTHING! The United Nations may actually be forcing us out of our rural and suburban homes and into increasingly-smaller, densely-packed, over-populated "Kill Cities" or "Smart Cities" in furtherance of the planned extinction of mankind. But, THIS PARTICULAR DOCUMENT ITSELF (upon which Deborah Tavares HERSELF says she bases this particular claim) provides no support for that proposition, because it does not address those particular subjects. (See Post #124 for some of the text of Agenda 21. See Post #166 for detailed information about Agenda 21).

    5. "The PG&E Satellite Beams Hoax". THE DOCUMENTS ARE FORGERIES AND THE ALLEGATIONS CONTAINED IN THOSE FORGERIES ARE VERIFIABLY FALSE. PG&E is a California electrical utility company which collects and generates electricity in a variety of ways. But, PG&E's conventional solar panels can only collect energy from the Sun during the middle of daylight hours. So, in 2009, PG&E announced that in the future it would use solar panels on satellites in space to collect energy from the Sun 24 hours a day, then beam it to earth using radio frequencies and then convert it to electricity on earth for its customers to use. When the recent forest fires burned northern California, Deborah Tavares wanted to blame PG&E and this technology for starting those fires. But, the scientific literature and PG&E's own documents indicated that this technology did not yet exist. SO, TO REBUT THAT INFORMATION, Deborah Tavares FORGED a series of FAKE emails (purportedly between the CPUC and PG&E) indicating that this technology already existed, that it was already in use and that it could be used to start fires. Thus, Deborah Tavares herself actually created the very FORGERIES which she fraudulently claims CONSTITUTE "PROOF" that PG&E used this technology to ignite the recent fires in California to kill us all in furtherance of the planned extinction of mankind. But, her claims about these FORGED emails are not so. These FORGED EMAILS prove nothing except that Deborah Tavares is a fraud. PG&E may actually be using radio frequencies beamed from satellites in space to kill us all in furtherance of the planned extinction of mankind. But, THESE PARTICULAR FORGED EMAILS THEMSELVES (upon which Deborah Tavares HERSELF says she bases this particular claim) provide no support for that proposition, because they are FORGERIES!

    6. The Genocide Agreement Hoax". The document is REAL. So, the hoax is NOT the document itself. The "Genocide Agreement" is actually the nickname of a proposed 1940's United Nations agreement BANNING GENOCIDE among signatory nations. The proposed "Genocide Agreement" DEFINED "GENOCIDE" BROADLY and banned the displacement of people from their homes. Further, under the proposed "Genocide Agreement", the United Nations would have the jurisdiction to criminally prosecute and punish individual CITIZENS of signatory nations who violated the terms of the agreement (like the Nuremberg Trials and The Nuremberg Hangings). All nations on earth (including the United States) wanted to ban genocide. But, the United States had concerns about signing the "Genocide Agreement" because of THE OTHER ACTS that it banned and because it delegated to the United Nations the jurisdiction to criminally prosecute and punish American citizens who violated its provisions (like at Nuremberg). Southern states in particular were concerned that the agreement might subject opponents of racial integration to the criminal jurisdiction of the United Nations. Regardless, in the 1980's the United States signed the "Genocide Agreement", despite these concerns. So, the hoax is not the document itself. Instead, the hoax is Deborah Tavares' OWN fraudulent claims that the Genocide Agreement ONLY BANS "NATIONS" FROM COMMITTING ACTS OF GENOCIDE and that THE UNITED STATES IS "NOT A NATION", BECAUSE "IT IS A CORPORATION" (which is not governed by the agreement or the ban) which loophole permits the United States to commit genocide on a "Day-by-Day" basis, which is why "WE ARE BEING EXTERMINATED". THE TRUTH: But, the United States is not a "corporation" and the Genocide Agreement actually bans genocide in the United States and subjects those who commit genocide and displacement to the criminal jurisdiction of the United Nations. The hoax is also Deborah Tavares' OWN (ENTIRELY INCONSISTENT) claims that the genocide agreement "INVADES DOMESTIC LAWS" and "ALLOWS FOREIGNERS TO 'OVER-RIDE' U.S. laws". (Note that if the Genocide Agreement really "DID NOT APPLY" to the United States because it is a "CORPORATION" as Deborah Tavares fraudulently claims above, it would be impossible for the Genocide Agreement to invade or over-ride anything in the United States.). THE TRUTH: Regardless, the Genocide Agreement only over-rides U.S. law as to the specific acts banned by the agreement, GENOCIDE and DISPLACEMENT. Nothing more. The United States may actually be killing us all in an act or acts of genocide in furtherance of the planned extinction of mankind, but THIS PARTICULAR DOCUMENT ITSELF (upon which Deborah Tavares HERSELF says she bases this particular claim) provides no support for that proposition, because this document applies in the United States and actually BANS GENOCIDE and DISPLACEMENT.

    7. "The Judge DALE Hoax". ALL OF THE "JUDGE DALE FORGERIES" ARE ENTIRELY FAKE. Further, EVERY SINGLE CLAIM MADE IN THE JUDGE DALE FORGERIES IS ALSO ENTIRELY FALSE. Deborah Tavares, Al Whitney (real name "Anita Larin") and amateur legal theorist, Rodney "DALE" Class wrote every single word of these FORGERIES (including "The Great American Adventure: Secrets Of America" and "The Matrix And The US Constitution"). But, they fraudulently told the American people they were written by a "retired federal judge" named "Judge DALE" which uses Rodney "DALE" Class' middle name, "DALE", as an inside joke on the American people. The purpose of this hoax was to make Americans think that their government and their justice system is completely illegal, illegitimate, invalid, corrupt & diabolical and to incite hatred and violence against innocent Americans.

    8. "The Court Registry Investment System Hoax". THE DOCUMENT IS FAKE. Deborah Tavares and her partners assembled this FAKE document from parts of REAL government documents and then ALTERED and CHANGED the WORDS and IMAGES to make it fit the hoax. Deborah Tavares' fraudulently claims that this FAKE document itself constitutes actual conclusive "proof" that all of the money collected by the courts in fines and penalties is forwarded on to the Federal Reserve. The purpose of this hoax, like the "Judge DALE Hoax" above, was to make Americans think that their justice system is completely illegal, illegitimate, invalid, corrupt & diabolical and to incite hatred and violence against innocent Americans.

    9. "The All Governments And Agencies Are Private, For-Profit Corporations Hoax". This hoax involves several false documents and videos. In this hoax, Deborah Tavares fraudulently claims that all governments and agencies are actually private, for-profit corporations "posing" as governments and agencies which "profit" by taxing, burdening and abusing the American people. To support this claim, Deborah Tavares cites examples of several ORDINARY, PRIVATE, FOR-PROFIT CORPORATIONS which happen to have names that SOUND SIMILAR to the names of governments and agencies (like "Federal Express" for example). But, contrary to her claims, NONE of the ORDINARY, PRIVATE, FOR-PROFIT CORPORATIONS she cites in support of this hoax are really governments or agencies. Not one. Deborah Tavares also fraudulently CHANGES THE REAL NAME of one such ORDINARY, PRIVATE, FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION to a FAKE NAME to make it fit the hoax (from "Internal Revenue Tax And Audit Service, Inc." to "Internal Revenue Service"). This hoax was designed to make Americans think that all governments and agencies are completely illegal, invalid, illegitimate, corrupt & diabolical and to incite hatred and violence against innocent Americans.

    10. "The Rod Class Has Obtained His Forth Administrative Ruling That All Government Agencies Are 'Private Entities' Hoax'". This hoax involves several FAKE press releases (co-authored by Deborah Tavares) and false videos. Note that this hoax was actually created in support of the hoax above to the effect that all governments are private, for-profit corporations (a Deborah Tavares hoax). The purpose of this hoax was to make Americans think that our state and local government agencies (including the DMV and local police departments) are completely illegal, invalid, illegitimate, corrupt & diabolical and to incite hatred and violence against innocent Americans.

    11. "The... Property Into Other Peoples' Name Hoax". This hoax involves several FAKE press releases and false videos. In this hoax, Rod Class and his partners (including Deborah Tavares) fraudulently claim that "a North Carolina judge has warned all [in-state] police officers to put their property into other peoples' names" (to make it look like the public can successfully sue police officers personally because they are merely "private contractors" impersonating public servants who issue traffic tickets to generate "profits" for their "corporate employers"). Note that this hoax was actually created in support of the hoax above to the effect that all governments and agencies are private, for-profit corporations (a Deborah Tavares hoax). The purpose of this hoax was to make Americans think that our local police agencies and their officers are completely illegal, illegitimate, invalid, corrupt & diabolical, that they can be successfully sued for issuing traffic tickets and to incite hatred and violence against innocent Americans.

    12. "The FAKE Jim Traficant Speech Hoax". This hoax involves a FAKE and FORGED "transcript" of a speech that a Congressman allegedly made to Congress to the effect that our federal government went bankrupt in 1933. (The REAL transcript of this speech is in the official Congressional Record and does NOT say this.). This FAKE and FORGED document is actually posted on Deborah Tavares' own website. The purpose of this hoax was to make Americans think that they themselves are collateral and debt slaves who exist solely to repay international bankers and to make Americans think that our government is completely illegal, illegitimate, invalid, corrupt & diabolical and to incite hatred and violence against innocent Americans.

    13. "The Sovereign Citizen Hoax". This hoax involves a FAKE and FORGED document written by Rodney "DALE" Class while pretending to be "Judge DALE". This FAKE document was posted on the website of Al Whitney (real name "Anita Larin") who, like Rod Class, is also Deborah Tavares' partner in these hoaxes. The purpose of this hoax was to make Americans think that ONLY INDIVIDUALS ARE "SOVEREIGN" and that "WE THE PEOPLE" (a plural term) collectively, as a whole (in the form of our elected government) ARE NOT "SOVEREIGN" (exactly backwards to the truth), such that our laws do not apply to INDIVIDUALS (the pretend "sovereigns"). But, none of this is so. The purpose of this hoax was to make Americans think that "We the PEOPLE" (a plural term) collectively, as a whole (in the form of our elected government) have no right to enforce our own laws, made by our own ELECTED lawmakers, against any INDIVIDUAL and to incite hatred and violence against innocent Americans.


    REMEMBER, "PATTERNS" NEVER LIE!


    For the hoaxes of ROD CLASS, click here.
    http://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...70#post1174970.

    For the hoaxes of EDDIE CRAIG, click here.
    http://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...70#post1174970

    ABOUT SNOOP4TRUTH:
    Snoop4truth is a legal expert and whistle blower who exposes online hoaxes. Snoop4truth did not reveal this information to harm Deborah Tavares. Instead, Snoop4truth revealed this information solely to reduce the CATASTROPHIC DAMAGE that such intentional fraud inflicts upon the American people every single day. Had it not been for Deborah Tavares' role in the "Judge DALE Hoax", Snoop4truth would not have revealed this information here.

    The message to all charlatans and hoaxers? Just tell the truth. The truth does not fear investigation. Only lies fear investigation. The truth can be supported by using the truth. Only lies must be supported by using hoaxes (other lies). There is no such thing as a "good reason" to intentionally defraud the American people, not even to make a popular (and sensational) conspiracy theory appear to be true.

    I hope this helps.

    All The Best,

    Snoop
    Last edited by snoop4truth; 16th February 2019 at 15:22.

  13. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to snoop4truth For This Post:

    Akasha (12th February 2019), Debra (7th February 2019), peterpam (7th February 2019)

  14. Link to Post #148
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    30th September 2015
    Age
    59
    Posts
    212
    Thanks
    147
    Thanked 412 times in 163 posts

    Default Re: The Hoaxes of Deborah Tavares

    Quote Posted by peterpam (here)
    Quote Posted by onawah (here)
    The only proofs Snoop offers are simply based on contradicting Tavares's proofs, not any other whistleblower info.
    That is a HUGE discrepancy in logic and reasoning and any competent lawyer in a courtroom would be making a laughing stock out of such ridiculousness in very short order.
    And using wikipedia as proof of anything? Give me a break!
    The primary purpose of Agenda 21 according to what I have read is to dramatically reduce the population by any means necessary.
    If old growth forests must be sacrificed in the process, their plans extend far into the future and forests will grow again; people are not so resilient.
    Have you actually read the original document? When you say according to what you have read, will you share your sources?

    I don't think it is necessary to make personally criticize . Ask yourself why you are so angry? It can be a wonderful point of self reflection.

    Quote That is a HUGE discrepancy in logic and reasoning and any competent lawyer in a courtroom would be making a laughing stock out of such ridiculousness in very short order
    posted by Onawah


    Quote Ad hominem, which stands for the Latin term argumentum ad hominem, is a response to a person's argument by attacking the person's character rather than the logic or content of the argument. Ad hominem remarks are often an example of fallacy, because they are irrelevant to the overall argument.
    I would hire Snoop in a heartbeat if I needed a lawyer.
    Hello Peterpam,

    ONAWAH'S COMMENT: THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF AGENDA 21 ACCORDING TO WHAT I HAVE READ is a depopulation plan.

    YOUR RESPONSE: HAVE YOU EVER ACTUALLY READ THE ORIGINAL [AGENDA 21] DOCUMENT? WHEN YOU SAY ACCORDING TO WHAT YOU'VE READ, WILL YOU SHARE YOUR SOURCES?


    MY REPONSE: You already know the answer to these simple questions. Why ask? Besides, you'll never receive an answer anyway. Regardless, your simple questions go to the very heart of why Deborah Tavares can get away with her fraud for so long. I have already complained about that subject enough. So, enough said.

    YOUR QUESTIONS TO ONAWAH: Ask yourself why you are so angry? It can be a wonderful point of self reflection.

    MY RESPONSE: That is really deep. Your second sentence above is so true. But, true self-reflection is impossible for some people to do. Regardless, those are great questions.

    But, you should have ALSO asked her, "Who are you angry with?" Yourself? Tavares? Snoop?

    Then, you should have FINALLY asked her, "WHO SHOULD YOU BE ANGRY WITH?"

    Now, THAT would be a wonderful point of self-reflection.

    Great stuff, as always.

    All My Best,

    Snoop
    Last edited by snoop4truth; 8th February 2019 at 17:44.

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to snoop4truth For This Post:

    peterpam (7th February 2019)

  16. Link to Post #149
    Argentina Avalon Member Hazelfern's Avatar
    Join Date
    30th July 2013
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    400
    Thanks
    1,879
    Thanked 1,459 times in 346 posts

    Default Re: The Hoaxes of Deborah Tavares

    For the record, Onawah is not angry. She is one of the finest writers on this forum. That is not up for debate.
    You apparently have only one agenda and should be booted in my opinion.

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to Hazelfern For This Post:

    onawah (7th February 2019)

  18. Link to Post #150
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    30th September 2015
    Age
    59
    Posts
    212
    Thanks
    147
    Thanked 412 times in 163 posts

    Default Re: The Hoaxes of Deborah Tavares

    Quote Posted by Hazelfern (here)
    For the record, Onawah is not angry. She is one of the finest writers on this forum. That is not up for debate.
    You apparently have only one agenda and should be booted in my opinion.
    Hello Hazelfern,

    To the extent that your comments were directed to me, thank you for your comments.

    To the extent that your comments were directed to me, I will respond to them below.

    YOUR COMMENT: For the record, Onawah is not angry.

    MY RESPONSE: For the record, I did not raise the subject of Onawah's anger. Another member did. This other member is especially bright, perceptive, insightful and analytical. But, most of all, she is courteous, thoughtful and loving. (ex: Posts 75, 111, 127, 139).

    And, despite your denials to the contrary, it is perfectly obvious to everyone here that Onawah really is angry. There is overwhelming evidence on this very thread that supports this conclusion. (ex: Posts 125, 126, 128, 133, 138). Indeed, any other conclusion in the face of this overwhelming evidence is simply disingenuous. Do not pretend otherwise.

    It is perfectly clear when reading this other member's words, that in asking Onawah about her obvious anger, she was acting as a friend. (Post 141). She was trying to help Onawah find the source of her anger. She knew that if Onawah could find the source of her anger, then Onawah could eliminate her anger entirely or at least redirect it towards the real wrongdoer, not against a fellow Truther. She was trying to help Onawah, as any true friend would do. Her inquiry into Onawah's anger was not an attack or an insult on Onawah. To the contrary, it was an act of love and kindness. It was the act of a friend. (Post 141).

    Indeed, if I were to spend weeks engaging in similar pattern of behavior (attacking, criticizing, and undermining a fellow Truther FOR TELLING THE TRUTH ABOUT HOAXES on a forum entitled "KNOWN HOAXES AND OTHER BAD INFORMATION"), I would hope that I would have a friend who cared enough to do the same for me.

    It is perfectly clear to everyone here that something is very wrong when a Truther treats another Truther in such a way FOR DOING WHAT IS RIGHT! It may not be anger. It may be denial. It may be something else. But, everybody knows that something is very wrong when a Truther treats another Truther in such a way FOR DOING THE RIGHT THING! I hope that if I were to ever to engage in weeks of similar behavior, I will have such a friend to do the same for me.

    YOUR COMMENT: She is one of the finest writers on this forum. That is not up for debate.

    MY RESPONSE: My reading of this thread indicates that no one has ever claimed otherwise. So, that is a red herring claim. As I read this thread, the question was NOT whether Onawah was a "FINE WRITER". Instead, as I read this thread, the question was whether Onawah was "FINE READER". (ex: Posts 124, 125, 141, 148)

    The only reason that this subject ever came up in the first place was that Onawah herself raised the subject of WHAT SHE HAD READ to the effect that Agenda 21 was a depopulation plan. (Post 125).

    YOUR COMMENT: You apparently have only one agenda and should be booted in my opinion.

    MY RESPONSE: Yes, I have an agenda. And, as it turns out, MY AGENDA IS TO DO EXACTLY WHAT THE TITLE OF THIS VERY FORUM CALLS ME TO DO. As, I wrote to Rick in Post 113,

    "[T]he TITLE of this particular forum is "KNOWN HOAXES AND OTHER BAD INFORMATION". The TITLE of this forum is not "WHY WE SHOULD IGNORE THE FRAUD AND HOAXES OF A POPULAR CHARLATAN". ..

    The very TITLE of this forum is "KNOWN HOAXES AND OTHER BAD INFORMATION". I did not create this forum. Projectavalon.net did. The very fact that this forum exists at all is a reflection that projectavalon.net ITSELF recognizes that HOAXES EXIST, that THEY ARE A SERIOUS THREAT to members of projectavalon.net and that they SHOULD BE EXPOSED for the benefit of everyone, members and visitors alike. Otherwise, this forum would serve absolutely no purpose at all.

    So, I thought that I was answering projectavalon.net's "call" in posting this information here. I thought I was doing a good thing, not a bad thing. But, some here have attacked me for doing EXACTLY what this very forum asks me to do, report "KNOWN HOAXES AND OTHER BAD INFORMATION". If it is wrong for me to post such information here, then projectavalon.net should take this forum down. Otherwise, my reporting this information here is the right thing for me to do, not the wrong thing for me to do and I should be supported for doing so, instead of the reverse.

    Here's an idea. Perhaps you could start some competing threads reflecting your views with the following TITLES:

    1. "STOCKHOLM SYNDROME: Why We All Should Defend And Protect The Very Abuser Who Defrauds Us The Most"; or how about

    2). "BATTERED WIFE SYNDROME: Hit Us Again Deborah With Another Hoax. You Haven't Abused Us Enough Already"; or how about

    3). "WE CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH: Let Us Revel In The Lies Of Deborah Tavares Until Hell Freezes Over".

    All kidding aside.... this is the point. The truth is always a good thing, not a bad thing. Never lose sight of that reality. Never. Not even in conspiracy theory.

    Indeed, the truth is more important in conspiracy theory than in any other field. If those of us in conspiracy theory ever lose sight of the fact that conspiracy theory IS SUPPOSED TO BE BASED ON TRUTH (and not on hoaxes), we are doomed. Not only will we fail, but we will become pariahs to the rest of the world. So, we need to put our own house in order. The rest of the world is watching. And, right now all they see of conspiracy theory is Deborah Tavares (whose claims are verifiably false) presuming to speak for us all. That should be of serious concern to all of us.

    One of the tenets of conspiracy theory is that "REALITY IS NOT WHAT WE ARE TOLD IT IS". But, with Deborah Tavares leading conspiracy theory, "CONSPIRACY THEORY IS NOT WE ARE TOLD IT IS." That means with Deborah Tavares leading conspiracy theory, CONSPIRACY THEORY IS JUST AS FALSE AND FRAUDLENT AS THE CLAIMS FROM THE OTHER SIDE. And, I'm not sure which one is worse. But, I am sure that BOTH ARE BAD for the public and one IS VERY BAD FOR CONSPIRACY THEORY AND FOR CONSPIRACY THEORISTS THEMSELVES. That is my concern. That should be your concern too.
    ...

    If Deborah Tavares was really ONE OF US, she would not be intentionally defrauding us. If Deborah Tavares was really HELPING US, she would not be deliberately lying to us. But, she is.

    LIES DO NOT HELP US. LIES HURT US. WAKE UP!

    HOAXES DO NOT HELP US. HOAXES HURT US. WAKE UP!

    ALL THINGS CONSIDERED, DEBORAH TAVARES IS A NET NEGATIVE TO THE TRUTH MOVEMENT, NOT A NET POSITIVE.

    DEBORAH TAVARES DOES MORE DAMAGE TO US THAN THE OTHER SIDE EVER POSSIBLY COULD BECAUSE SHE IS ATTACKING US FROM INSIDE THE TRUTH MOVEMENT WHERE WE ARE THE MOST VULNERABLE AND WHERE WE HAVE LET OUR GUARD DOWN.

    Friends do not lie to friends. Allies do not lie to allies. Family does not lie to family. Truthers do not lie to Truthers.

    She is not our friend. She is not our ally. She is not our family. She is not a Truther. She is not one of us.

    Look, Deborah Tavares has her own standards of right & wrong and for honesty & integrity (which are clearly depicted in the video in Post# 104 above and clearly reflected in the conduct described in Post #1 above). I also have my own standards for right & wrong and for honesty & integrity (which is reflected by my work in this thread).

    It is clear that my standards for all these things are much higher and much more absolute than those of Deborah Tavares. So, I will never intentionally defraud you to "sell" my claims to you. But, Deborah Tavares will intentionally defraud you to "sell" her claims to you. So, as between Deborah Tavares and myself, which one of us is your REAL enemy? And, which on of us is your REAL friend? Are you better off being lied to? Or are better off being told the truth? Think about it.
    ...

    There are conspiracies out there that are real. Those real conspiracies make things bad enough. There is no reason for Deborah Tavares to spend her entire career creating and peddling FAKE conspiracies to mislead, shock and frighten the American people. Indeed, by creating and peddling FAKE conspiracies, Deborah Tavares takes the collective eye of the American people off of the REAL conspiracies that they should be focusing their attention on. As a result of charlatans like Deborah Tavares, the American people spend much of their time, energy, money and resources fighting FAKE conspiracies and fighting FAKE enemies THAT ARE NOT EVEN REAL. This is part of what upsets me about what Deborah Tavares does.

    But, there is more. By creating and peddling such obviously FAKE conspiracies, Deborah Tavares only serves to discredit and delegitimize the entire Truth Movement in general. The elaborate hoaxes of Deborah Tavares only serve to destroy the credibility of others who expose conspiracies that are actually real. The elaborate hoaxes of Deborah Tavares only serve to cast doubt upon every conspiratorial claim and upon every other person involved in the Truth Movement. While I do not believe Deborah Tavares is a "double agent", those who really do exploit and abuse the people could not have concocted a better "agent provocateur" inside the Truth Movement than Deborah Tavares to destroy its credibility from within.
    ...

    FACT: It often takes COURAGE to stand for the TRUTH, as it does on this thread. But, it is ALWAYS the right thing to do, whether it is popular to do so or not.

    SUGGESTION: Get out of your "group think". Think for yourself. Use your critical thinking skills. Critically analyze whether you are better off being lied to over and over again OR whether you are better off being told the truth (whether that truth is popular or not and whether that truth validates your own belief system or not). Think about it.

    (end of quote)

    Your closing remarks (to the effect that I should be booted off a forum entitled "KNOWN HOAXES AND OTHER BAD INFORMATION" for doing nothing but reporting "KNOWN HOAXES AND OTHER BAD INFORMATION") is not only misguided and reversed, it also reveals that Onawah may not be the only one on this thread with an anger problem.

    Look Hazelfern, I realize that the lies of Deborah Tavares are more consistent with your belief system than the truth from Snoop is about those lies. I realize that my revealing the truth about the hoaxes of Deborah Tavares may not make me popular with those who want to believe Deborah Tavares' hoaxes whether her claims are true or not. But, my revealing the truth about the hoaxes of Deborah Tavares is still the right thing for me to do. And, whether you realize it or not, and whether you admit or not, I am not your enemy. It precisely people like you who I am trying to help by revealing this truth about these hoaxes in the first place.

    If you do not want the truth, fine, don't read the truth. But, do not interfere with my efforts to provide the truth to those here that want the truth (whether or not it is popular and whether or not it validates their belief systems).

    The truth will still be the truth.

    All The Best,

    Snoop
    Last edited by snoop4truth; 10th February 2019 at 20:26.

  19. The Following User Says Thank You to snoop4truth For This Post:

    Akasha (12th February 2019)

  20. Link to Post #151
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Posts
    11,127
    Thanks
    27,056
    Thanked 47,650 times in 9,706 posts

    Default Re: The Hoaxes of Deborah Tavares

    Once again, some massive holes in Snoop's reasoning, though not as many as before--indicating some progress, at least, hopefully.
    However...


    Snoop wrote: " The NASA War Document Hoax The document is REAL, but has been "modified" to fit the hoax. It now has a FAKE and misleading TITLE and COVER. But, the hoax is NOT the document anyway. Instead, the hoax is Deborah Tavares' OWN fraudulent claims that THE DOCUMENT ITSELF, ALONE, WITHOUT MORE, CONSTITUTES ACTUAL CONCLUSIVE "PROOF" that NASA is already killing us all with diabolical weapons in furtherance of the planned extinction of mankind. But, this claim is not so. The document itself actually "proves" that NASA is working to protect us all from diabolical weapons in order to prevent any planned extinction of mankind."

    Again, no, Snoop, the document proves no such thing, whether it's been altered by Tavares or not.
    It most certainly doesn't PROVE that NASA is working to protect us from all diabolical weapons.
    One document could not possibly PROVE that one way or another.
    Do you think NASA would actually admit in a public document that they are using weapons against US citizens?
    NASA has consistently lied about all kinds of things and there is lots of proof painstakingly recorded on this very forum demonstrating that, so there is no reason to think they might not be lying about this issue as well.
    NASA is a tool of the Secret Space Program.
    If someone is proven in a court of law to have lied about one thing, WHATEVER they say is not considered to be accountable or reliable.
    If Snoop is actually a lawyer, and fails to understand that, I certainly wouldn't hire him, and I would feel sorry for anyone who did.


    Snoop wrote: "The Silent Weapons For Quiet Wars Hoax" The document is REAL, but is only political fiction. It has also been "modified" to fit the hoax. It now has a FAKE and misleading PREFACE/FORWARD. But, the hoax is NOT the document anyway. Instead, the hoax is Deborah Tavares' OWN fraudulent claims that THE DOCUMENT ITSELF, ALONE, WITHOUT MORE, CONSTITUTES ACTUAL CONCLUSIVE "PROOF" that "The Bilderbergs" adopted a plan in 1954 to kill us all with diabolical "silent weapons" in furtherance of the planned extinction of mankind. But, this claim is not so."

    Here again, a faulty conclusion when Snoop states, "But this claim is not so."
    He cannot ascertain whether that claim is true or not by what is said in one document, whether the document has been altered or not.
    Then he contradicts himself by saying the planned extinction of mankind is certainly possible.
    But he has already planted in the mind of readers that the claim is not so, that there was no such plan created by the Bilderbergs.
    (Many whistleblowers have been presenting evidence showing the Bilderbergs DO have such a plan, way before Tavares ever came on the scene.)
    That is a mixed message Snoop is sending once again, and his illogical reasoning could help to create the confusion that he himself says he wants to clear up.
    This is exactly the kind of tactic that shills commonly use to subtly confuse and obfuscate the truth.
    We have threads on Avalon about those very tactics, and they too, are well documented...


    Snoop wrote: "The Agenda 21 Hoax". The document is REAL. So, the hoax is NOT the document itself. Instead, the hoax is Deborah Tavares' OWN fraudulent claims that THE DOCUMENT ITSELF, ALONE, WITHOUT MORE, CONSTITUTES ACTUAL CONCLUSIVE "PROOF" that the United Nations is forcing us out or our rural and suburban homes and into increasingly-smaller, densely-packed, over-populated "Kill Cities" or "Smart Cities" in furtherance of the planned extinction of mankind. But, this claim is not so. According to the "Agenda 21" document itself (upon which Deborah Tavares HERSELF says she bases this claim), its REAL purpose is to SLOW DOWN the rate at which the global environment is destroyed. It was written by the world's leading environmental scientists. If it had been made the law in the United States (and it was not), it would have PROTECTED THE FORESTS REDUCED DROUGHT and ENSURED AN ADEQUATE SUPPLY OF FRESH WATER not contaminated by SEWAGE. Agenda 21 was presented at the "EARTH SUMMIT" (an environmental conference) in Rio De Janeiro, Brazil in 1992. It was only a SUGGESTION that member nations were permitted, BUT NOT REQUIRED TO ADOPT for themselves. Agenda 21 does not apply in the United States because it is not the law in the United States and is therefore not enforceable in the United States. Contrary to Deborah Tavares' fraudulent claims, there is NOTHING in the Agenda 21 document itself (upon which Deborah Tavares HERSELF says she bases this claim) which suggests we will be forced out of our rural or suburban homes and into increasingly-smaller, densely-packed, over-populated "Kill Cities" or "Smart Cities" in furtherance of the planned extinction of mankind. NOTHING! So, whether or not the United Nations is actually forcing us out or our rural and suburban homes and into increasingly-smaller, densely-packed, over-populated "Kill Cities" or "Smart Cities" in furtherance of the planned extinction of mankind (which is certainly possible), this particular document itself (upon which Deborah Tavares HERSELF says she bases this claim) provides no support for that proposition.(See Post #124 for the text of Agenda 21.)."

    Again, Snoop offers nothing to prove that the real Agenda 21 wasn't designed for depopulation, as many whistleblowers and insiders have stated.
    The authors of Agenda 21 would certainly not write that down in a document for everyone to see.
    What they would do is create a false document for public viewing designed to deceive, in accordance with the same kind of tactics the ruling families have been employing for centuries, which are well known.
    Proving that Tavares has falsified documents pertaining to what Agenda 21 purports to be DOES NOT prove that Agenda 21 ISN'T really a plan created by TBTB for depopulation, for creating "smart cities", for confiscating desirable real estate for themselves via murder and mayhem, etc.


    Snoop wrote: "THE "EMAILS" ARE FORGERIES AND THE ALLEGATIONS CONTAINED IN THESE "EMAILS" ARE VERIFIABLY FALSE. So, the hoax IS THE DOCUMENTS THEMSELVES as well as Deborah Tavares' OWN fraudulent claims that THE "EMAILS" THEMSELVES, ALONE, WITHOUT MORE, CONSTITUTE ACTUAL CONCLUSIVE "PROOF" that PG&E actually used lasers on satellites in space to ignite the recent California fires and that PG&E will continue to use those lasers to kill us all in furtherance of the planned extinction of mankind. But, this claim is not so."

    Again, Snoop has no legitmate basis for his statement "this claim is not so". The evidence that Tavares presented may not be genuine, evidence designed to show that PG&E is "using lasers on satellites in space to ignite the recent California fires and that PG&E will continue to use those lasers to kill us all in furtherance of the planned extinction of mankind".
    BUT that doesn't prove that some of her allegations are not correct.
    Other insiders/whistleblowers have presented legitimate evidence to that effect.
    Proving Tavares's claims were fabricated does NOT prove that such weapons do not exist and are not being employed.


    Snoop wrote: "The Sovereign Citizen Hoax". This hoax involves a FAKE and FORGED document written by Rodney "DALE" Class while pretending to be "Judge DALE". This FAKE document was posted on the website of Al Whitney (real name "Anita Larin") who, like Rod Class, is also Deborah Tavares' partner in these hoaxes. The purpose of this hoax was to make Americans think that ONLY INDIVIDUALS ARE "SOVEREIGN" and that "WE THE PEOPLE" (a plural term) collectively, as a whole (in the form of our elected government) ARE NOT "SOVEREIGN" (exactly backwards to the truth), such that our laws do not apply to INDIVIDUALS (the pretend "sovereigns"). But, none of this is so."

    Again, Snoop provides no proof for his statement that "none of this is so". There are ongoing debates about the sovereignty of US citizens, about how England and the Royals still own the US (on paper at least), about Constitutional Law and how it applies to individuals.
    Simply proving that Tavares forged documents pertaining to these matters is not sufficient evidence to draw the conclusion that "none of this is so".


    As to why I am angry, I already stated that quite clearly in post http://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1273550
    "What makes me angry is the arrogance with which TPTB and their agents act, how blatant their tactics are becoming, and how effective all the nefarious things are that they have been doing for decades now to dumb the populace down so that people still don't notice how they are being fooled, manipulated and culled.
    Doesn't that make you angry?"

    And why I am concerned: "I am concerned about this because I used to live in No. Cal. and I still have loved ones living right in the targeted areas of the fires who are still unaware of how much danger they are in.
    One of our own here at Avalon, Sierra, lost her home in one of those fires. There are other Avalonians who live in that area.
    Evidently CA. is being used as a test case, and a few other areas around the world.
    The plan so far is having great success.
    Very few people are aware of it, so it will continue to be used, and spread, if it's not stopped.
    Do you think that is enough reason to be concerned? "

    I think I have proved my case.
    I hope it isn't necessary to state again that I think Tavares and her coherts do need to be exposed for any hoaxes they are trying to perpetrate.
    But any attempts to whitewash real conspiracies in that process also need to be exposed.
    To me, it is an insult to what I hope is the overall intelligence of Avalon to try to insinuate that NASA doesn't lie, that the Bilderbergs aren't plotting against the rest of the human race, that there aren't many means being employed by the elite to control and reduce the populace,etc.--insinuations which seem to continue to escape the notice of some here.
    Whether Snoop is doing that unintentionally or intentionally, either way, it raises questions, such as is he actually a lawyer then, and/or is he a shill?
    I can't force people to read attentively, to improve their skills in logic or reasoning, though I can point out obvious mistakes that might help them to see and learn for themselves where the faulty logic is, where false conclusions are being drawn.
    There are reams of information on Avalon about all the conspiracies that are being perpetrated on the people of this planet, and the ones that have been cited in this thread are all quite well documented.
    I am not inclined to spend a lot of time doing homework for others, or try to make others change their beliefs about the wealth of information there has been for years before Tavares came on the scene concerning nefarious schemes afoot being perpetrated by secret ops in our own governments, backed by the elite families.
    People believe what they want to believe until they are ready to wake up and believe what's true rather than what is comfortable or convenient, or rather than willingly be soothed back to sleep.
    Last edited by onawah; 8th February 2019 at 01:06.
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  21. Link to Post #152
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    30th September 2015
    Age
    59
    Posts
    212
    Thanks
    147
    Thanked 412 times in 163 posts

    Default Re: The Hoaxes of Deborah Tavares

    Again, there still seems to be some confusion about what I am saying and what I am not saying.

    So, I added some extra emphasis to my summaries to call attention to phrases that are repeatedly ignored.

    I also added 3 words to each of the top 5 hoax summaries to make them even more clear to those that are still confused.

    Finally, I changed and lengthened the language a single sentence of the first summary. (Remember, these were supposed to be the "Concise Summaries" of these hoaxes which one particular member had requested. Now, they are not so "concise" anymore. Regardless, here they are now.).

    Pay special attention to underlined text.

    CONCISE SUMMARY OF THE HOAXES OF DEBORAH TAVARES:

    1. "The NASA War Document Hoax". The document is REAL, but has been "modified" to fit the hoax. It now has a FAKE and misleading TITLE and COVER. But, the hoax is NOT the document anyway. Instead, the hoax is Deborah Tavares' fraudulent claims that THE DOCUMENT ITSELF, ALONE, WITHOUT MORE, "PROVES" that NASA is already killing us all with diabolical weapons in furtherance of the planned extinction of mankind. But, this claim about the document is not so. The fact that NASA CREATED THE DOCUMENT (which depicts diabolical weapons that OTHER NATIONS could develop to use against Americans in the future) and the fact that NASA USED THE DOCUMENT at a convention of American defense contractors TO ENCOURAGE THEM TO DEVELOP COUNTERMEASURES against those particular diabolical weapons actually "proves" that NASA USED THIS PARTICULAR DOCUMENT in an effort to protect us from those very diabolical weapons in order to prevent any planned extinction of mankind. So, whether or not NASA is actually killing us all with diabolical weapons in furtherance of the planned extinction of mankind (which is certainly possible), THIS PARTICULAR DOCUMENT ITSELF (UPON WHICH DEBORAH TAVARES HERSELF SAYS SHE BASES THIS PARTICULAR CLAIM) provides no support for that proposition.

    2. "The Silent Weapons For Quiet Wars Hoax". The document is REAL, but it is only POLITICAL FICTION. It has also been "modified" to fit the hoax. It now has a FAKE, recently-added paragraph at the beginning which fraudulently indicates that it is the work of "The Bilderbergs". But, the hoax is NOT the document anyway. Instead, the hoax is Deborah Tavares' OWN fraudulent claims that THE DOCUMENT ALONE, ALL BY ITSELF, WITHOUT MORE, CONSTITUTES "PROOF" that "The Bilderbergs" adopted a plan in 1954 to kill us all with diabolical "silent weapons" in furtherance of the planned extinction of mankind. But, her claims about this document are not so. This document is actually POLITICAL FICTION and is a DISGUISED COMPLAINT about the treason and horrors suffered by U.S. soldiers when the U.S. government allegedly allowed them to be killed at Pearl Harbor in order to draw us into World War II. The Bilderbergs may actually be killing us all with diabolical "silent weapons" in furtherance of the planned extinction of mankind. But, THIS PARTICULAR DOCUMENT ITSELF (upon which Deborah Tavares HERSELF says she bases this particular claim) provides no support for that proposition, because it is actually POLITICAL FICTION.

    3. "The Report From Iron Mountain Hoax". The document is REAL, but it is only POLITICAL SATIRE. So, the hoax is NOT the document itself. Instead, the hoax is Deborah Tavares' OWN fraudulent claims that THE DOCUMENT ALONE, ALL BY ITSELF, WITHOUT MORE, CONSTITUTES "PROOF" that ALL "environmental calamities" (including climate change, drought, fires, etc.) ARE FAKE ("engineered") and that they are created by the U.S. Government to justify "FAKE WARS" (described in the book) against these FAKE ("engineered") environmental calamities to prop up the U.S. economy and that the U.S. Government uses these FAKE ("engineered") environmental calamities as "weapons" to kill us all in furtherance of the planned extinction of mankind (something NOT in the book). But, her claims about this document are not so. This document is actually POLITICAL SATIRE and is a DISGUISED COMPLAINT WHICH OPENLY MOCKS U.S. policy of engaging in perpetual wars to prop up the U.S. economy. The U.S Government may actually be killing us all with FAKE ("engineered") "environmental calamities" (including climate change, drought, fires, etc.) in furtherance of the planned extinction of mankind. But, THIS PARTICULAR DOCUMENT ITSELF (upon which Deborah Tavares HERSELF says she bases this particular claim) provides no support for that proposition, because it is actually POLITICAL SATIRE.

    4. "The Agenda 21 Hoax". The document is REAL. So, the hoax is NOT the document itself. Instead, the hoax is Deborah Tavares' OWN fraudulent claims that THE DOCUMENT ALONE, ALL BY ITSELF, WITHOUT MORE, CONSTITUTES "PROOF" that the United Nations is forcing us out or our rural and suburban homes and into increasingly-smaller, densely-packed, over-populated "Kill Cities" or "Smart Cities" in furtherance of the planned extinction of mankind. But, her claims about this document are not so. According to the "Agenda 21" document itself (upon which Deborah Tavares HERSELF says she bases this particular claim), its purpose is to SLOW DOWN the rate at which the environment is destroyed. It would have PROTECTED THE REMAINING FORESTS, REDUCED DROUGHT and INSURED AN ADEQUATE SUPPLY OF FRESH WATER not contaminated by SEWAGE. Agenda 21 was first presented to the public at the "EARTH SUMMIT" (an environmental conference) in Rio De Janeiro, Brazil in 1992. It was only a SUGGESTION that member nations were permitted, BUT NOT REQUIRED TO ADOPT for themselves. Agenda 21 does not apply in the United States because it is not the law in the United States and therefore cannot be enforced in the United States. Contrary to Deborah Tavares' fraudulent claims, there is NOTHING in the Agenda 21 document itself (upon which Deborah Tavares HERSELF says she bases this particular claim) which suggests we will be forced out of our rural or suburban homes and into increasingly-smaller, densely-packed, over-populated "Kill Cities" or "Smart Cities" in furtherance of the planned extinction of mankind. NOTHING! The United Nations may actually be forcing us out of our rural and suburban homes and into increasingly-smaller, densely-packed, over-populated "Kill Cities" or "Smart Cities" in furtherance of the planned extinction of mankind. But, THIS PARTICULAR DOCUMENT ITSELF (upon which Deborah Tavares HERSELF says she bases this particular claim) provides no support for that proposition, because it does not address those particular subjects. (See Post #124 for some of the text of Agenda 21. See Post #166 for detailed information about Agenda 21).

    5. "The PG&E Satellite Beams Hoax". THE DOCUMENTS ARE FORGERIES AND THE ALLEGATIONS CONTAINED IN THOSE FORGERIES ARE VERIFIABLY FALSE. PG&E is a California electrical utility company which collects and generates electricity in a variety of ways. But, PG&E's conventional solar panels can only collect energy from the Sun during the middle of daylight hours. So, in 2009, PG&E announced that in the future it would use solar panels on satellites in space to collect energy from the Sun 24 hours a day, then beam it to earth using radio frequencies and then convert it to electricity on earth for its customers to use. When the recent forest fires burned northern California, Deborah Tavares wanted to blame PG&E and this technology for starting those fires. But, the scientific literature and PG&E's own documents indicated that this technology did not yet exist. SO, TO REBUT THAT INFORMATION, Deborah Tavares FORGED a series of FAKE emails (purportedly between the CPUC and PG&E) indicating that this technology already existed, that it was already in use and that it could be used to start fires. Thus, Deborah Tavares herself actually created the very FORGERIES which she fraudulently claims CONSTITUTE "PROOF" that PG&E used this technology to ignite the recent fires in California to kill us all in furtherance of the planned extinction of mankind. But, her claims about these FORGED emails are not so. These FORGED EMAILS prove nothing except that Deborah Tavares is a fraud. PG&E may actually be using radio frequencies beamed from satellites in space to kill us all in furtherance of the planned extinction of mankind. But, THESE PARTICULAR FORGED EMAILS THEMSELVES (upon which Deborah Tavares HERSELF says she bases this particular claim) provide no support for that proposition, because they are FORGERIES!

    6. The Genocide Agreement Hoax". The document is REAL. So, the hoax is NOT the document itself. The "Genocide Agreement" is actually the nickname of a proposed 1940's United Nations agreement BANNING GENOCIDE among signatory nations. The proposed "Genocide Agreement" DEFINED "GENOCIDE" BROADLY and banned the displacement of people from their homes. Further, under the proposed "Genocide Agreement", the United Nations would have the jurisdiction to criminally prosecute and punish individual CITIZENS of signatory nations who violated the terms of the agreement (like the Nuremberg Trials and The Nuremberg Hangings). All nations on earth (including the United States) wanted to ban genocide. But, the United States had concerns about signing the "Genocide Agreement" because of THE OTHER ACTS that it banned and because it delegated to the United Nations the jurisdiction to criminally prosecute and punish American citizens who violated its provisions (like at Nuremberg). Southern states in particular were concerned that the agreement might subject opponents of racial integration to the criminal jurisdiction of the United Nations. Regardless, in the 1980's the United States signed the "Genocide Agreement", despite these concerns. So, the hoax is not the document itself. Instead, the hoax is Deborah Tavares' OWN fraudulent claims that the Genocide Agreement ONLY BANS "NATIONS" FROM COMMITTING ACTS OF GENOCIDE and that THE UNITED STATES IS "NOT A NATION", BECAUSE "IT IS A CORPORATION" (which is not governed by the agreement or the ban) which loophole permits the United States to commit genocide on a "Day-by-Day" basis, which is why "WE ARE BEING EXTERMINATED". THE TRUTH: But, the United States is not a "corporation" and the Genocide Agreement actually bans genocide in the United States and subjects those who commit genocide and displacement to the criminal jurisdiction of the United Nations. The hoax is also Deborah Tavares' OWN (ENTIRELY INCONSISTENT) claims that the genocide agreement "INVADES DOMESTIC LAWS" and "ALLOWS FOREIGNERS TO 'OVER-RIDE' U.S. laws". (Note that if the Genocide Agreement really "DID NOT APPLY" to the United States because it is a "CORPORATION" as Deborah Tavares fraudulently claims above, it would be impossible for the Genocide Agreement to invade or over-ride anything in the United States.). THE TRUTH: Regardless, the Genocide Agreement only over-rides U.S. law as to the specific acts banned by the agreement, GENOCIDE and DISPLACEMENT. Nothing more. The United States may actually be killing us all in an act or acts of genocide in furtherance of the planned extinction of mankind, but THIS PARTICULAR DOCUMENT ITSELF (upon which Deborah Tavares HERSELF says she bases this particular claim) provides no support for that proposition, because this document applies in the United States and actually BANS GENOCIDE and DISPLACEMENT.

    7. "The Judge DALE Hoax". ALL OF THE "JUDGE DALE FORGERIES" ARE ENTIRELY FAKE. Further, EVERY SINGLE CLAIM MADE IN THE JUDGE DALE FORGERIES IS ALSO ENTIRELY FALSE. Deborah Tavares, Al Whitney (real name "Anita Larin") and amateur legal theorist, Rodney "DALE" Class wrote every single word of these FORGERIES (including "The Great American Adventure: Secrets Of America" and "The Matrix And The US Constitution"). But, they fraudulently told the American people they were written by a "retired federal judge" named "Judge DALE" which uses Rodney "DALE" Class' middle name, "DALE", as an inside joke on the American people. The purpose of this hoax was to make Americans think that their government and their justice system is completely illegal, illegitimate, invalid, corrupt & diabolical and to incite hatred and violence against innocent Americans.

    8. "The Court Registry Investment System Hoax". THE DOCUMENT IS FAKE. Deborah Tavares and her partners assembled this FAKE document from parts of REAL government documents and then ALTERED and CHANGED the WORDS and IMAGES to make it fit the hoax. Deborah Tavares' fraudulently claims that this FAKE document itself constitutes actual conclusive "proof" that all of the money collected by the courts in fines and penalties is forwarded on to the Federal Reserve. The purpose of this hoax, like the "Judge DALE Hoax" above, was to make Americans think that their justice system is completely illegal, illegitimate, invalid, corrupt & diabolical and to incite hatred and violence against innocent Americans.

    9. "The All Governments And Agencies Are Private, For-Profit Corporations Hoax". This hoax involves several false documents and videos. In this hoax, Deborah Tavares fraudulently claims that all governments and agencies are actually private, for-profit corporations "posing" as governments and agencies which "profit" by taxing, burdening and abusing the American people. To support this claim, Deborah Tavares cites examples of several ORDINARY, PRIVATE, FOR-PROFIT CORPORATIONS which happen to have names that SOUND SIMILAR to the names of governments and agencies (like "Federal Express" for example). But, contrary to her claims, NONE of the ORDINARY, PRIVATE, FOR-PROFIT CORPORATIONS she cites in support of this hoax are really governments or agencies. Not one. Deborah Tavares also fraudulently CHANGES THE REAL NAME of one such ORDINARY, PRIVATE, FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION to a FAKE NAME to make it fit the hoax (from "Internal Revenue Tax And Audit Service, Inc." to "Internal Revenue Service"). This hoax was designed to make Americans think that all governments and agencies are completely illegal, invalid, illegitimate, corrupt & diabolical and to incite hatred and violence against innocent Americans.

    10. "The Rod Class Has Obtained His Forth Administrative Ruling That All Government Agencies Are 'Private Entities' Hoax'". This hoax involves several FAKE press releases (co-authored by Deborah Tavares) and false videos. Note that this hoax was actually created in support of the hoax above to the effect that all governments are private, for-profit corporations (a Deborah Tavares hoax). The purpose of this hoax was to make Americans think that our state and local government agencies (including the DMV and local police departments) are completely illegal, invalid, illegitimate, corrupt & diabolical and to incite hatred and violence against innocent Americans.

    11. "The... Property Into Other Peoples' Name Hoax". This hoax involves several FAKE press releases and false videos. In this hoax, Rod Class and his partners (including Deborah Tavares) fraudulently claim that "a North Carolina judge has warned all [in-state] police officers to put their property into other peoples' names" (to make it look like the public can successfully sue police officers personally because they are merely "private contractors" impersonating public servants who issue traffic tickets to generate "profits" for their "corporate employers"). Note that this hoax was actually created in support of the hoax above to the effect that all governments and agencies are private, for-profit corporations (a Deborah Tavares hoax). The purpose of this hoax was to make Americans think that our local police agencies and their officers are completely illegal, illegitimate, invalid, corrupt & diabolical, that they can be successfully sued for issuing traffic tickets and to incite hatred and violence against innocent Americans.

    12. "The FAKE Jim Traficant Speech Hoax". This hoax involves a FAKE and FORGED "transcript" of a speech that a Congressman allegedly made to Congress to the effect that our federal government went bankrupt in 1933. (The REAL transcript of this speech is in the official Congressional Record and does NOT say this.). This FAKE and FORGED document is actually posted on Deborah Tavares' own website. The purpose of this hoax was to make Americans think that they themselves are collateral and debt slaves who exist solely to repay international bankers and to make Americans think that our government is completely illegal, illegitimate, invalid, corrupt & diabolical and to incite hatred and violence against innocent Americans.

    13. "The Sovereign Citizen Hoax". This hoax involves a FAKE and FORGED document written by Rodney "DALE" Class while pretending to be "Judge DALE". This FAKE document was posted on the website of Al Whitney (real name "Anita Larin") who, like Rod Class, is also Deborah Tavares' partner in these hoaxes. The purpose of this hoax was to make Americans think that ONLY INDIVIDUALS ARE "SOVEREIGN" and that "WE THE PEOPLE" (a plural term) collectively, as a whole (in the form of our elected government) ARE NOT "SOVEREIGN" (exactly backwards to the truth), such that our laws do not apply to INDIVIDUALS (the pretend "sovereigns"). But, none of this is so. The purpose of this hoax was to make Americans think that "We the PEOPLE" (a plural term) collectively, as a whole (in the form of our elected government) have no right to enforce our own laws, made by our own ELECTED lawmakers, against any INDIVIDUAL and to incite hatred and violence against innocent Americans.


    REMEMBER, "PATTERNS" NEVER LIE!


    For the hoaxes of ROD CLASS, click here.
    http://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...70#post1174970.

    For the hoaxes of EDDIE CRAIG, click here.
    http://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...70#post1174970

    ABOUT SNOOP4TRUTH:
    Snoop4truth is a legal expert and whistle blower who exposes online hoaxes. Snoop4truth did not reveal this information to harm Deborah Tavares. Instead, Snoop4truth revealed this information solely to reduce the CATASTROPHIC DAMAGE that such intentional fraud inflicts upon the American people every single day. Had it not been for Deborah Tavares' role in the "Judge DALE Hoax", Snoop4truth would not have revealed this information here.

    The message to all charlatans and hoaxers? Just tell the truth. The truth does not fear investigation. Only lies fear investigation. The truth can be supported by using the truth. Only lies must be supported by using hoaxes (other lies). There is no such thing as a "good reason" to intentionally defraud the American people, not even to make a popular (and sensational) conspiracy theory appear to be true.


    I hope this helps.

    All The Best,

    Snoop
    Last edited by snoop4truth; 16th February 2019 at 15:27.

  22. The Following User Says Thank You to snoop4truth For This Post:

    Akasha (12th February 2019)

  23. Link to Post #153
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Posts
    11,127
    Thanks
    27,056
    Thanked 47,650 times in 9,706 posts

    Default Re: The Hoaxes of Deborah Tavares

    Better. But to be clear, there was no confusion on my part about what you had written previously.
    What there was, was illogical and faulty reasoning, and inaccurate conclusions on your part.

    In the subsequent post where you wrote
    :

    " 'The Rod Class Has Obtained His Forth Administrative Ruling That All Government Agencies Are 'Private Entities' Hoax'. This hoax involves several FAKE press releases (co-authored by Deborah Tavares) and false videos. Note that this hoax was actually created in support of the hoax above to the effect that all governments are private, for-profit corporations (a Deborah Tavares hoax). The purpose of this hoax was to make Americans think that our state and local government agencies (including the DMV and local police departments) are completely illegal, invalid, illegitimate, corrupt & diabolical and to incite hatred and violence against innocent Americans."

    ...You have offered no proof that the allegations made were false. Nor do you offer any proofs regarding the allegations made in the other documents that you cited (whether they were forged or not). Such as here where you wrote:

    "The Sovereign Citizen Hoax". This hoax involves a FAKE and FORGED document written by Rodney "DALE" Class while pretending to be "Judge DALE". This FAKE document was posted on the website of Al Whitney (real name "Anita Larin") who, like Rod Class, is also Deborah Tavares' partner in these hoaxes. The purpose of this hoax was to make Americans think that ONLY INDIVIDUALS ARE "SOVEREIGN" and that "WE THE PEOPLE" (a plural term) collectively, as a whole (in the form of our elected government) ARE NOT "SOVEREIGN" (exactly backwards to the truth), such that our laws do not apply to INDIVIDUALS (the pretend "sovereigns"). But, none of this is so."

    You are basing the claim that "none of this is so" here on your opinions about the document in question, but you offer no proofs that at least some of the allegations in that document might actually be true, and may have been held to be so by other whistleblowers and researchers. ( I am not an expert on this subject, but I know there are controversies.)
    ...Those who have closely studied Constitutional Law and the hold that the English royals still believe they have over US citizens (on paper, at least) --whom they consider to be subjects.
    Or other researchers and whistleblowers who have studied the issues surrounding Social Security numbers and what they may really mean (that we are property) and similar issues which have been shown to make similar claims about our sovereignty, and who would likely disagree.

    Without proof, your opinions don't really mean as much as you seem to feel they do.
    You may be an expert on documents that Tavares and her associates have published, but that doesn't mean that you have proven everything they've claimed is false or without some basis in fact.
    Last edited by onawah; 8th February 2019 at 04:10.
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  24. Link to Post #154
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Posts
    11,127
    Thanks
    27,056
    Thanked 47,650 times in 9,706 posts

    Default Re: The Hoaxes of Deborah Tavares

    But there IS a hidden agenda behind the cell towers.
    If you read the threads about why EMFs and especially microwaves and 5G are dangerous, not only to our health but to our right to privacy, it is made abundantly clear why they are dangerous.
    And because so many people have failed to notice that, they are now pushing to have 5G devices much, much closer to where we live and work and play than cell phone towers were, and they will be many times more numerous than cell towers.
    And they have become so sure that they can proceed unchallenged, they don't even feel like they have to disguise them as palm trees.
    Quote Posted by peterpam (here)
    In this video Deborah is talking about 2 cell phone towers. Both towers are hidden in artificial palm trees. Deborah goes on to tell us that they have been "stealthily hidden from us". Which gives the listener the feeling that they are trying to hide them from the masses. It implies that there is a hidden agenda with these cell towers.

    The fact is that they placed are that way because that is what the community required. It is done for aesthetic reasons. We just had a big issue in my community where they put up a cell tower and the community demanded that they do something because it looked bad. They hid it in a tall fake pine. They really aren't hidden at all. It's easy to spot but at a distance looks better than a tall pole with boxes. Why is it necessary to tell us that these cell towers (that she is likely is using herself) have been stealthily hidden? Why not just present the information you have?

    I'm pretty sure some would wonder why I would bring up such a trivial point? Like Snoop says, if you look for patterns you can get a better overall picture.




    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4C_x7t4dmkQ
    Last edited by onawah; 8th February 2019 at 04:07.
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  25. Link to Post #155
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    30th September 2015
    Age
    59
    Posts
    212
    Thanks
    147
    Thanked 412 times in 163 posts

    Default Re: The Hoaxes of Deborah Tavares

    Quote Posted by onawah (here)
    Better. But to be clear, there was no confusion on my part about what you had written previously.
    What there was, was illogical and faulty reasoning, and inaccurate conclusions on your part.

    In the subsequent post where you wrote
    :

    " 'The Rod Class Has Obtained His Forth Administrative Ruling That All Government Agencies Are 'Private Entities' Hoax'. This hoax involves several FAKE press releases (co-authored by Deborah Tavares) and false videos. Note that this hoax was actually created in support of the hoax above to the effect that all governments are private, for-profit corporations (a Deborah Tavares hoax). The purpose of this hoax was to make Americans think that our state and local government agencies (including the DMV and local police departments) are completely illegal, invalid, illegitimate, corrupt & diabolical and to incite hatred and violence against innocent Americans."

    ...You have offered no proof that the allegations made were false. Nor do you offer any proofs regarding the allegations made in the other documents that you cited (whether they were forged or not). Such as here where you wrote:

    "The Sovereign Citizen Hoax". This hoax involves a FAKE and FORGED document written by Rodney "DALE" Class while pretending to be "Judge DALE". This FAKE document was posted on the website of Al Whitney (real name "Anita Larin") who, like Rod Class, is also Deborah Tavares' partner in these hoaxes. The purpose of this hoax was to make Americans think that ONLY INDIVIDUALS ARE "SOVEREIGN" and that "WE THE PEOPLE" (a plural term) collectively, as a whole (in the form of our elected government) ARE NOT "SOVEREIGN" (exactly backwards to the truth), such that our laws do not apply to INDIVIDUALS (the pretend "sovereigns"). But, none of this is so."

    You are basing the claim that "none of this is so" here on your opinions about the document in question, but you offer no proofs that at least some of the allegations in that document might actually be true, and may have been held to be so by other whistleblowers and researchers. ( I am not an expert on this subject, but I know there are controversies.)
    ...Those who have closely studied Constitutional Law and the hold that the English royals still believe they have over US citizens (on paper, at least) --whom they consider to be property.
    Or other researchers and whistleblowers who have studied the issues surrounding Social Security numbers and similar issues which have been shown to make similar claims about our sovereignty, and who would likely disagree.

    Without proof, your opinions don't really mean as much as you seem to feel they do.
    You may be an expert on documents that Tavares and her associates have published, but that doesn't mean that you have proven everything they've claimed is false or without some basis in fact.
    Onawah,

    YOUR COMMENT: Better [referring to my "Concise Summaries" which are no longer "concise"]. But to be clear, there was no confusion on my part about what you had written previously. What there was, was illogical and faulty reasoning, and inaccurate conclusions on your part.

    MY RESPONSE: Agreed. There was no real confusion on your part. You were only pretending to be confused so as to manufacture a pretext to complain about imaginary inconsistencies, imaginary illogical and faulty reasoning and imaginary conclusions which do not exist. To be clear, you aren't fooling anybody.

    Even you are capable of understanding that that my sole "conclusion" is that "The documents that Deborah Tavares uses in support of her claims do not support her claims". Even you can comprehend that simple premise. I actually have pets that can understand that simple premise. So, I know that you can. Do not pretend otherwise. You are not fooling anybody.

    There is nothing inconsistent, illogical or faulty about that single conclusion ("The documents that Deborah Tavares uses in support of her claims do not support her claims".). Indeed, the reverse is true. That is perfectly clear. That is perfectly logical. That is perfectly reasonable. That is perfectly rational. That same FACTUALLY CORRECT premise has been repeated on this thread over and over again. And, you know it. So does every one else on this thread. (See Post 58, 74). So you aren't fooling anybody. What's more, that premise has already been conclusively proven, something that even you, to your credit, actually admit too. So, case closed.

    Because of you, there are THREE (3) different versions of the truth on this thread, "Concise Summaries", "Detailed Summaries" and "Full Length Explanations" of these hoaxes. They cannot all be the wrong length! So, you aren't fooling anybody.

    YOUR COMMENT: In the subsequent post where you wrote:" 'The Rod Class Has Obtained His Forth Administrative Ruling That All Government Agencies Are 'Private Entities' Hoax'. This hoax involves several FAKE press releases (co-authored by Deborah Tavares) and false videos. Note that this hoax was actually created in support of the hoax above to the effect that all governments are private, for-profit corporations (a Deborah Tavares hoax). The purpose of this hoax was to make Americans think that our state and local government agencies (including the DMV and local police departments) are completely illegal, invalid, illegitimate, corrupt & diabolical and to incite hatred and violence against innocent Americans."

    ...You have offered no proof that the allegations made were false. Nor do you offer any proofs regarding the allegations made in the other documents that you cited (whether they were forged or not).

    MY REPONSE: There is a very good reason for the absence of proof in the "Concise Summaries" (which you requested and which you quote above). You refused to even read any of the "Full Length Explanations" of these hoaxes (which contained all the proof) because you complained that they were too long. You also refused to even read any of the "Detailed Summaries" (which contained some of the proof) because you also complained that they were also too long.

    So, I wrote the "Concise Summaries" (which you requested and which you quoted above) to reduce every single hoax to its simplest possible form so that you (and others) would read them be able to understand the basics of every single hoax in seconds, not minutes. In Post 86, you effectively stated that this simplicity and conciseness was a good thing.

    But, you have since done an "about face" and now you complain that the "Concise Summaries" (which you requested and which you quoted above) are too short because they do not contain the proof that you complained made the "Detailed Summaries" and the "Full-Length Explanations" too long. Thus, you cannot even keep your own stories straight. You cannot keep your own complaints straight. You cannot even keep your own false pretenses straight. And, everybody knows it. So, you're not fooling anybody.

    Your own "PATTERN" of conduct described above (as reflected by Posts, 26, 30, 41, 56, 86, 116, 125, 126, 128, 133, 139) proves that I had you pegged in Post 44. You do not oppose the truth because of any of your fake, fabricated, phony, false pretenses about which you complain. You actually oppose the truth precisely because it is the truth. And, for no other reason. So, you aren't fooling anybody.

    Regardless, I will post the whole truth below (with proof) anyway, not because you will actually read it, because you will not, but to show everyone else on this thread just how completely lost you are with your fake, phony pretensions. You aren't fooling anybody.

    YOUR COMMENT: Such as here where you wrote: "The Sovereign Citizen Hoax". This hoax involves a FAKE and FORGED document written by Rodney "DALE" Class while pretending to be "Judge DALE". This FAKE document was posted on the website of Al Whitney (real name "Anita Larin") who, like Rod Class, is also Deborah Tavares' partner in these hoaxes. The purpose of this hoax was to make Americans think that ONLY INDIVIDUALS ARE "SOVEREIGN" and that "WE THE PEOPLE" (a plural term) collectively, as a whole (in the form of our elected government) ARE NOT "SOVEREIGN" (exactly backwards to the truth), such that our laws do not apply to INDIVIDUALS (the pretend "sovereigns"). But, none of this is so."

    You are basing the claim that "none of this is so" here on your opinions about the document in question, but you offer no proofs that at least some of the allegations in that document might actually be true, and have been held to be so by other whistleblowers and researchers.

    MY RESPONSE: Refer to my comment above. It applies directly to this comment too. But, I will post the whole truth below (with proof) anyway, not because you will actually read it, because you will not, but to show everyone else on this thread just how completely lost you are with your fake, phony pretensions. You aren't fooling anybody.

    YOUR COMMENT: ...People who have closely studied Constitutional Law and the hold that the English royals still believe they have over US citizens (on paper, at least) --whom they consider to be property. Or other researchers and whistleblowers who have studied the issues surrounding Social Security numbers and similar issues which have been shown to make similar claims about our sovereignty, and who would likely disagree.

    MY RESPONSE: Do yourself a favor. Stay out of the law, government and history. You are way, way, way out of your league. That is precisely what got Deborah Tavares and Rod Class into trouble here in the first place. Everything in the law is in writing. I can obtain it in seconds. So, any claim you make, I can debunk (with proof) in seconds. Trust me. You do not want to go there.

    Regardless, I will post the whole truth below (with proof) anyway, not because you will actually read it, because you will not, but to show everyone else on this thread just how completely lost you are with your fake, phony pretensions. You aren't fooling anybody.

    YOUR COMMENT: Without proof, your opinions don't really mean as much as you seem to feel they do.

    MY RESPONSE: If I did not have proof, I would not have created this thread. For your information, ALL OF THE PROOF THAT YOU CLAIM I DO NOT HAVE IS ALREADY ON THIS VERY THREAD IN THE POSTS THAT YOU HAVE REFUSED TO READ! I will post that proof below just to show everyone else on this thread just how completely lost you are with these fake, phony pretensions.

    YOUR COMMENT: You may be an expert on documents that Tavares and her associates have forged, but that doesn't mean that you have proven everything they've claimed is false or without some basis in fact.

    MY RESPONSE: Let's divide this into two parts, legal claims and non-legal claims.

    As to legal claims, I am not only an expert in forgeries, I am also an expert in the law itself. I have already posted ON THIS THREAD AND ON THE ROD CLASS THREAD "actual proof" that ALL of the claims that Deborah Tavares, Al Whitney (real name "Anita Larin") and Rodney "DALE" Class have ever made about the law are false. If you had bothered to read the "Full-Length Explanations" of these hoaxes above, you would already know this. But, as you did with Agenda 21, you simply refused to read them.

    As to non-legal claims, I have only investigated THE DOCUMENTS THEMSELVES (only) that Deborah Tavares herself uses in support of her non-legal claims. I do not investigate the claims that might be supported by these documents (whether NASA is actually killing us all with diabolical weapons, whether the Bildebergs are actually killing us all with silent weapons, whether the U.S. government is actually killing us all with FAKE "engineered" environmental calamites, whether, the U.N is driving us out of our rural and suburban homes to kill us all in Kill Cities or Smart Cities, whether PG&E is killing us all with lasers on satellites in space, whether the U.S. government is killing us all in connection with the Genocide Agreement). I have repeatedly said this. And, everybody knows this. That subject (conclusions that might be supported by those documents) is irrelevant to the question of whether the documents that Deborah Tavares uses in support of her claims actually support the claim or not. And, that is as far as I go in these non-legal claims. And, everybody knows it.

    Right now, my sole focus is on whether the documents that Deborah Tavares uses in support of her claims actually support her claims. Nothing more. And, everybody knows this, including you.

    But, you repeatedly pretend that I am focusing on the conclusions instead. Then, you spend your life ATTACKING IMAGINARY CONCLUSIONS THAT YOU KNOW I NEVER MADE! That is truly bizarre.

    You act as if I am supposed to DEFEND IMAGINARY CONCLUSIONS THAT YOU KNOW I NEVER MADE! That is absolute madness. How am I supposed to respond to that? I just shake my head in utter disbelief. Get a grip.

    You act as if I am supposed to ARGUE WITH YOU ABOUT IMAGINARY CONCLUSIONS THAT YOU KNOW I NEVER MADE. Are you OK?

    Regardless, back to the DOCUMENTS. Because of my expertise in forgeries and my expertise in reading comprehension and critical thinking skills, I have determined that every single DOCUMENT that Deborah Tavares uses in support of her claims does not actually support her claims. That is the sole purpose of this thread. Nothing more. And you know it. Do not pretend otherwise. You aren't fooling anybody.

    Snoop
    Last edited by snoop4truth; 10th February 2019 at 20:34.

  26. The Following User Says Thank You to snoop4truth For This Post:

    Akasha (12th February 2019)

  27. Link to Post #156
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    30th September 2015
    Age
    59
    Posts
    212
    Thanks
    147
    Thanked 412 times in 163 posts

    Default Re: The Hoaxes of Deborah Tavares

    COMMENT 6: DEBORAH TAVARES, ROD CLASS & "THE "ALL GOVERNMENTS ARE PRIVATE, FOR-PROFIT CORPORATIONS HOAX".

    FIRST, SEE THE HOAX HERE:

    ARTICLES:
    http://www.stopthecrime.net/usa-corp...brochure-1.pdf (NOTE THE WEBSITE).
    https://anticorruptionsociety.com/20...ate-franchise/ (an article actually written by Rodney "DALE" Class while pretending to be "Judge DALE". See paragraphs ACTUALLY NUMBERED "1, 2 & 3")
    https://www.akupressllc.com/150121Cr...ourtDenver.pdf (at page ACTUALLY NUMBERED "3" in the 4th paragraph at about 50% through the text)
    https://scannedretina.com/2014/11/27...erican-people/ (at the first BLOCK INDENTED paragraph IN ALL ITALIC TYPE)
    http://houseofpraani.com/portfolio/itnj/ (at the 2nd paragraph)
    https://globalfreedommovement.org/ex...ith-rod-class/

    VIDEOS:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQeazE8_Ipk
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7DicAWY4P4 (at :1:00-1:15)

    YOU MUST SEE THE FOLLOWING VIDEOS!:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05o4CpB9I8g&t=260s (at 2:25-4:00, 5:25-6:15, 6:40-7:30, 7:55-8:50)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTRPZD3_w5k (at 42:10-42:35, 47:50--49:00)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRnogqeqzxk (at 6:20-6:45, 7:10-7:55, 25:55-26:45)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQeazE8_Ipk (at 43:15-43:50, 52:30-53:00)

    THE HOAX:
    Deborah Tavares, Rod Class and other amateur legal theorists falsely claim that all governments and all government agencies are private, for-profit corporations. But, this is not so.

    THE TRUTH:
    No government or government agency is a private, for-profit corporation.


    FACT:
    In amateur legal theory, the "law" comes ONLY from the claims of other amateur legal theorists. But, in the REAL law, the law comes ONLY from the actual WRITTEN WORDS of the REAL LAW itself. Consider the REAL law below.

    U.S. v Cooper Corp., https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006 (HOLDING THAT THE UNTIED STATES IS NOT A "CORPORATION"). In this case, a private corporation sought to sue the United States under a federal statute that authorized civil lawsuits against any "person". The private corporation argued that the United States was such a "person" because it was a "corporation" (an artificial legal person). But, the court ruled otherwise and wrote, "While there may be isolated cases which hold that the different states, and even the United States, are "bodies politic and corporate", THEY DO NOT HOLD THAT THE UNITED STATES IS A CORPORATION EXISTING BY THE LAWS OF THE UNTIED STATES [in the way that amateur legal theorists mean it]... . THE UNITED STATES CANNOT, THEREFORE, BE CLASSIFIED AS A CORPORATION EXISTING UNDER THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES [in the way that amateur legal theorists mean it]... ." (in the 3rd to last paragraph of this case).

    ABOUT CORPORATIONS:
    The term, "corporation" FOOLS Deborah Tavares, Rod Class and other amateur legal theorists. They mistakenly believe that there is only ONE TYPE OF CORPORATION in the whole world and that EVERY CORPORATION in the whole world IS A PRIVATE, FOR-PROFIT corporation. https://anticorruptionsociety.com/20...ate-franchise/ (at the paragraph ACTUALLY NUMBERED "3"). But, this is not so.

    One loose, informal definition of a "corporation" is simply "a separate, legal entity which may enter into contracts in its own name and sue and be sued in its own name". Governments happen to have these same basic characteristics. So, in this sense, AND ONLY IN THIS SENSE, all governments are arguably "corporations" (loosely and informally speaking).

    BUT, THIS IS NOT WHAT DEBORAH TAVARES, ROD CLASS AND OTHER AMATEUR LEGAL THEORISTS MEAN BY CLAIMING THAT ALL GOVERNMENTS ARE "CORPORATIONS". Instead, they mean that ALL governments are corporations WHICH ARE "IN THE BUSINESS" OF STEALING MONEY FROM THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO GENERATE "PROFITS" FOR THEIR "PRIVATE OWNERS". https://anticorruptionsociety.com/20...ate-franchise/ (at the paragraph ACTUALLY NUMBERED "3"). Such IMAGINARY governmental entities would NOT merely be "corporations". Instead, such IMAGINARY governmental entities would actually be PRIVATE, FOR-PROFIT corporations. THAT IS SOMETHING ENTIRELY DIFFERENT IN THE LAW! NO GOVERNMENT OR GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY IN THE UNITED STATES IS A "CORPORATION" IN THIS SENSE OF THE WORD (in the way that amateur legal theorists mean it) and the courts have repeatedly said so.

    OTHER TYPES OF CORPORATIONS UNDER THE REAL LAW

    Remember, Deborah Tavares, Rod Class and other amateur legal theorists mistakenly believe that every CORPORATION in the whole world is a PRIVATE, FOR-PROFIT corporation (the "bad" kind of corporation). But, this is not so.

    Unknown to Deborah Tavares, Rod Class and other amateur legal theorists, there are DOZENS and DOZENS of different types of corporations. But, ONLY ONE (1) TYPE of corporation is a PRIVATE, FOR-PROFIT corporation which makes "PROFITS" for its "PRIVATE STOCKHOLDERS" (the "bad" kind of corporation). Unknown to Deborah Tavares, Rod Class and other amateur legal theorists, there are COUNTLESS OTHER TYPES of NON-PROFIT corporations WHICH ARE ACTUALLY OWNED BY THE PUBLIC, OPERATED BY THE PUBLIC AND SERVE THE PUBLIC (not "private stockholders") FOR THE PUBLIC GOOD.

    For example, there are PUBLICLY-OWNED, NON-PROFIT corporations (like some publicly-owned hospitals, schools and universities and some electrical and water utilities, NONE of which have "stockholders" and NONE of which make "profits"). There are also PUBLICLY-OWNED, NON-PROFIT MUNICIPAL corporations (like cities and towns, NONE of which have "stockholders" and NONE of which make "profits" and ALL of which are controlled entirely by people ELECTED by "We the People" TO CONTROL THEM). There are countless other different types of PUBLICLY-OWNED, NON-PROFIT corporations which serve the public (not "private stockholders"). But, Deborah Tavares, Rod Class and other amateur legal theorists do not know enough to even realize this. Click on the links below.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonprofit_corporation

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_corporation

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State-owned_enterprise

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Municipal_corporation

    [https://thestartupgarage.com/corpora...ciations-llcs/

    https://thestartupgarage.com/corpora...fit-religious/

    ABOUT "FEDERAL CORPORATIONS"
    Our federal government has even structured seventeen of our federal government agencies as PUBLICLY-OWNED, NON-PROFIT "federal corporations" (NO STOCKHOLDERS, NO PROFITS, etc.). In general, all of the federal agencies that are structured this way have two things in common, they all have their own customers (or their own source of revenue) and none of them receive any money from Congress.

    Three well-known examples of such federal agencies are the United States Postal Service (The Post Office-U.S. Mail), AMTRAK (a publicly-owned, non-profit railroad) and the Tennessee Valley Authority (a publicly-owned, non-profit ELECTRICAL POWER utility). You will note that ALL THREE of these PUBLICLY-OWNED, NON-PROFIT "federal corporations" have their own customers and none of them receive any money from Congress.

    There are THREE MAIN REASONS why the federal government structured these federal agencies as PUBLICLY-OWNED, NON-PROFIT "federal corporations": 1). To force each such federal agency to work within their own budgets BY USING THEIR OWN REVENUES (received from their own customers/sources) instead of receiving money from Congress; 2). To relieve taxpayers of the burden of paying for governmental services that they might not even use (not everyone uses snail mail, rides trains or lives in the "Tennessee Valley"); and 3). To ensure that each such federal agency provide the highest possible quality of service at the lowest possible cost to the taxpayer in order to avoid their own failure and collapse (which, due to this organizational structure, would have no adverse effect on the rest of the federal government or on the taxpayer anyway). IT'S ALL ABOUT ACCOUNTABILITY AND FAIRNESS TO THE TAXPAYER. For more on this subject, click here. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL30365.pdf

    FACT:
    All corporations are "ARTIFICIAL" persons (NON-human beings).

    FACT:
    No "NATURAL" person (no human being) can be a corporation.

    THE SECRET CORPORATION MYTH:

    Contrary to what Deborah Tavares, Rod Class and other amateur legal theorists mistakenly believe, there is no such thing as a "SECRET CORPORATION" of any kind (regardless of what type they are or whom they serve). All corporations (no matter what type they are or whom they serve) ARE PUBLICLY "INCORPORATED" IN A STATE OR PUBLICLY "CREATED" BY STATUTE OR ORDINANCE. All "PRIVATE" corporations ARE PUBLICLY "INCORPORATED" IN A STATE AND ARE PUBLICLY "REGISTERED" IN EVERY STATE WHERE THEY DO BUSINESS. So if they exist, THERE WILL BE A "PUBLIC RECORD" OF THEM, their "articles of incorporation", their creation date, their purpose, their function, their powers, their scope, their addresses, their officers (and often their directors), their trade names, their fictitious names, their trademarks, their service marks, their annual reports, their registered agent for service of civil lawsuits and so forth, ALL OF WHICH ARE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC ONLINE. Further, all "PUBLIC" corporations (no stockholders and no profits) ARE PUBLICLY "CREATED" BY A PUBLIC STATE OR FEDERAL "STATUTE" OR BY A PUBLIC COUNTY OR CITY "ORDINANCE". So, if they exist, THERE WILL BE A "PUBLIC RECORD" OF THEM, their creation date, their purpose, their function, their powers, their scope and so forth, ALL OF WHICH ARE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC ONLINE).

    Translation: ALL CORPORATIONS (regardless of what type they are or whom they serve) ARE PUBLICLY "CREATED" BY A DOCUMENT THAT IS ACTUALLY FILED IN THE "PUBLIC RECORD" FOR ALL THE WORLD TO SEE! There are NO EXCEPTIONS! NONE! Whether an entity is a "corporation" IS "ALWAYS" A MATTER OF "PUBLIC RECORD"! So, there is NO "GUESS WORK" about whether an entity is a corporation or not. If an entity is not PUBLICLY "INCORPORATED" in a state or was not PUBLICLY "CREATED" by a PUBLIC statute or PUBLIC ordinance, THEN IT IS NOT A CORPORATION! It is that simple. There are NO EXCEPTIONS! NONE! This means that there is NOTHING "SECRET" OR "MYSTERIOUS" about the existence of either PUBLIC or PRIVATE corporations. Their documents are IN THE "PUBLIC RECORD" for all the world to see. But, Deborah Tavares, Rod Class and other amateur legal theorists do not know enough to even realize this.

    Translation: To find out if an entity is a corporation, the ONE and ONLY place to find the answer IS IN THE PUBLIC RECORD (not in Dun & Bradstreet, not on a list of entities with EIN numbers and not on amateur legal theory websites). All "PRIVATE" corporations can be found online at the STATE "SECRETARY OF THE STATE, DIVISION OF CORPORATIONS" or the foreign equivalent if a foreign "PRIVATE" corporation. All "PUBLIC" corporations can be found in STATE and FEDERAL STATUTES and in county or city ORDINANCES or the foreign equivalent if a foreign "PUBLIC" corporation. If an entity cannot be found in those places, IT IS NOT A CORPORATION. It is that simple. But, Deborah Tavares, Rod Class and other amateur legal theorists do not know enough to even realize this.

    THREE SOURCES OF CONFUSION IN AMATEUR LEGAL THEORY:

    Amateur legal theorists are PATHOLOGICALLY DESPERATE to discredit and delegitimize the FEDERAL government of “We the People”. So, if any FEDERAL statute contains the terms, "corporate" or "corporation" in reference to anything FEDERAL, then amateur legal theorists will use that FEDERAL statute in support of their false claim that the FEDERAL government is itself a PRIVATE, FOR-PROFIT corporation which makes "PROFITS" for its "PRIVATE STOCKHOLDERS". Two such FEDERAL statutes cited by amateur legal theorists in support of this false claim are the "Act Of 1871" and "Title 28 U.S.C. (15)(a)".

    THE ACT OF 1871:
    The Act Of 1871 reads in pertinent part, "...[We hereby create] a government by the name of [the "CITY" of] THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA [not the ”United States Of America”] by which name it is hereby constituted a BODY CORPORATE [this term is a source of the confusion] for MUNICIPAL [means "CITY"] PURPOSES [not for other purposes]... [and this body is empowered to] exercise all... powers of a MUNICIPAL CORPORATION [this term is also a source of the confusion and actually means "CITY GOVERNMENT"] not inconsistent with [means "CONSISTENT WITH"] the Constitution and the laws of the United States." http://www.loc.gov/law/help/statutes.../c41s3ch62.pdf.


    Thus, the Act of 1871 simply created a "CITY" GOVERNMENT for the "CITY" of Washington, D.C., (NOT FOR THE ENTIRE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT). But, amateur legal theorists are intellectually unable to tell the difference between the two (a "CITY" GOVERNMENT on one hand and the "ENTIRE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT" on the other hand). Remember, if any FEDERAL statute contains the terms, "corporate" or "corporation" in reference to anything FEDERAL, then amateur legal theorists will use that FEDERAL statute in support of their false claim that the FEDERAL government is itself a PRIVATE, FOR-PROFIT corporation which makes "PROFITS" for its "PRIVATE STOCKHOLDERS".

    But, because the "CITY" of Washington, D.C. is the seat of the FEDERAL government and because they mistakenly believe that all corporations in the world are PRIVATE, FOR-PROFIT corporations, Rod Class and other amateur legal theorists falsely claim that the terms, "body corporate" and "municipal corporation" (contained in the Act Of 1871) prove that the "ENTIRE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT" (rather than merely the "CITY" GOVERNMENT of Washington, D.C.) IS ITSELF A PRIVATE, FOR-PROFIT corporation which makes "PROFITS" for its "PRIVATE STOCKHOLDERS. https://www.akupressllc.com/150121Cr...ourtDenver.pdf (at page ACTUALLY NUMBERED "3" in the 4th paragraph at about 50% through the text). But, this is not so.

    FACT:
    There is NOTHING about the Act of 1871 that has any affect whatsoever on the FEDERAL government itself. Instead, The Act of 1871 only relates to the "CITY" government of Washington, D.C. Likewise, NOTHING about the Act Of 1971 makes the FEDERAL government itself (or the "CITY" of Washington, D.C. for that matter) a PRIVATE, FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION which makes "PROFITS" for its private "STOCKHOLDERS". But, Deborah Tavares, Rod Class and other amateur legal theorists do not know enough to even realize this.

    TITLE 28 U.S.C. 3002(15)(a):
    Title 28 U.S.C. 3002 (15)(a) reads in pertinent part, "DEFINITIONS... As used in THIS chapter [ONLY, and not for any other purpose],... United States means- ... a federal corporation [this term is a source of the confusion]... ." FACT: Title 28 U.S.C. 3002 (15) (a) merely provides the definitions (only) SOLELY FOR THE PURPOSE OF A SINGLE FEDERAL CHAPTER (AND THOSE DEFINITIONS DO NOT APPLY TO ANY OTHER CHAPTER AND CANNOT BE USED IN CONNECTION WITH ANY OTHER PURPOSE). This is why the VERY FIRST WORDS of Title 28 U.S.C. § 3002 read, “As used in THIS chapter [and NOT other chapters or for other purposes]... ." https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/3002 (See the VERY FIRST WORDS at the TOP of this section.). The SINGLE CHAPTER for which Title 28 U.S.C. § 3002 provides definitions is the FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE ACT (chapter 176).

    But remember, if any FEDERAL statute contains the terms, "corporate" or "corporation" in reference to anything FEDERAL, then amateur legal theorists will use that FEDERAL statute in support of their false claim that the United States is itself a PRIVATE, FOR-PROFIT corporation which makes "PROFITS" for its "PRIVATE STOCKHOLDERS". So, Rod Class and other amateur legal theorists falsely claim that Title 28 U.S.C. 3002(15)(a) proves that the United States is itself a PRIVATE, FOR-PROFIT corporation which makes "PROFITS" for its "PRIVATE STOCKHOLDERS". But, this is not so.

    The SINGLE CHAPTER for which Title 28 U.S.C. 3002(15)(a) provides definitions (chapter 176) relates to the "PROCEDURE" ONLY that the "United States" must follow when collecting certain debts. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/3001. Title 28 U.S.C. § 3002 (15) (a) DOES NOT actually define the "United States" as a ”federal corporation”. Instead, it actually defines a “federal corporation” (like AMTRAK) as the “United States” SOLELY FOR PURPOSES OF THE FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE ACT.

    APPLICATION:
    So, if AMTRAK (a "federal corporation") sought to collect on such a debt, it would have to follow the SAME "PROCEDURE" set forth in the Fair Debt Collection Procedure Act THAT ANY OTHER PART OF THE "UNITED STATES” GOVERNMENT WOULD HAVE TO FOLLOW TO COLLECT SUCH A DEBT. It is that simple. But, Deborah Tavares, Rod Class and other amateur legal theorists do not know enough to even realize this.

    FACT:
    This definition IN THE FEDERAL DEBT COLLECTION PROCEDURE ACT does not mean that the entire “United States” is itself a PRIVATE, FOR-PROFIT corporation which generates "PROFITS" for its "PRIVATE STOCKHOLDERS".


    DUN & BRADSTREET:
    Deborah Tavares, Rod Class and other amateur legal theorists mistakenly conclude that all governments and governmental agencies are "corporations" because governments and government agencies ARE LISTED IN "DUN & BRADSTREET". See the bottom paragraph on page 2 of 6 here. https://anticorruptionsociety.files....c-handout1.pdf. Scroll down to about 80% through the text of this article here. https://itnjcommittee.org/did-you-kn...s-governments/. But, contrary to what amateur legal theorists mistakenly believe, DUN & BRADSTREET DOES NOT REFLECT A "LIST" OR "REGISTRY" OF "CORPORATIONS".

    Instead, Dun & Bradstreet merely reflects the CREDIT WORTHINESS of ANY ORGANIZATION (corporate or otherwise) with which other organizations (corporate or otherwise) might enter into contracts. APPLICATION: So, if you were the CEO of a building contractor that builds highways and if you were contacted by a state government to build a highway in the state, you could look up that state government in Dun & Bradstreet to determine whether it pays its building contractors on time. It is that simple. Thus, Dun & Bradstreet likewise DOES NOT reflect that a government is a "corporation" (much less a PRIVATE, FOR-PROFIT corporation). But, amateur legal theorist do not know enough to even realize this.


    THE ACTUAL REAL LAW ITSELF ON WHETHER GOVERNMENTS ARE "CORPORATIONS" FOR AMATEUR LEGAL THEORY PURPOSES:

    1). Thompson v. Scutt, https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. (RULING AGAINST ALL OF THE DEFENDANT'S AMATEUR LEGAL THEORIES, including his amateur legal theories that the state and federal government are "CORPORATIONS"). In this case, the court wrote, "Petitioner [an amateur legal theorist] also contends that THE STATE OF MICHIGAN AND THE UNITED STATES ARE CORPORATIONS, and as such, can only "interface" with other artificial entities, not natural persons like Petitioner [a false claim that Rod Class also makes]. In support of his argument, Petitioner [an amateur legal theorist] cites the Federal Debt Collection Procedures Act (FDCPA), 28 U.S.C. 3002 et seq [discussed above], and the Michigan Constitution, Article VII, section 1, NEITHER OF WHICH SUPPORTS HIS CLAIM THAT THE STATE OF MICHIGAN AND THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ARE CORPORATIONS [read this phrase again]. Petitioner [an amateur legal theorist] contends that, AS CORPORATIONS, the State of Michigan and the federal government cannot "concern [themselves] with anything OTHER THAN CORPORATE, ARTIFICIAL ENTITIES AND INTANGIBLE ABSTRACTIONS [a false claim that Rod Class also makes].... .’' But, the court held otherwise and wrote, “SUCH REASONING IS DEVOID OF LEGAL SUPPORT [Translation: are amateur legal theories] and contrary to common sense." (at paragraph 9 at about 40% through the text of the case). The court continues at footnote 2 near the end of the case as follows, "The FDCPA [discussed above] DOES NOT STATE THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS A CORPORATION [much less a private, for-profit corporation]. Article VII of the Michigan constitution merely indicates that 'each organized county shall be a BODY CORPORATE [not a private, for-profit corporation].'" (at footnote 2 near the end of the case).

    2). DuBose v. Kasich, https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. (RULING AGAINST ALL OF THE PLAINTIFF'S AMATEUR LEGAL THEORIES, including the amateur legal theory that the state and federal government are "CORPORATIONS"). In this case, an amateur legal theorist unsuccessfully sued various government officials. The court wrote, "Plaintiff [an amateur legal theorist] sets forth his own versions of various 'sovereign citizen' [amateur legal] theories. Such [amateur legal] theories involve the alleged CORPORATE STATUS OF OHIO AND THE UNITED STATES... ." But, the court held otherwise and wrote, "... [F]ederal courts have routinely recognized that such [amateur legal] theories are MERITLESS and WORTHY OF LITTLE DISCUSSION [read that phrase again]... . " (at the 13th paragraph, just above section "IV" at about 95% through the text).

    3). Florance v. Buchmeyer, https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. (RULING AGAINST ALL OF THE PLAINTIFF'S AMATEUR LEGAL THEORIES, including his amateur legal theory that the state and federal government are federal "CORPORATIONS".). In this case, an amateur legal theorist unsuccessfully sued various government agencies and officials. The court wrote, "Plaintiff [an amateur legal theorist] responds that the STATE OF TEXAS is not protected by immunity under the Eleventh Amendment because it is a 'FEDERAL CORPORATION'... ." (at section "D" at about 65% through the text of the case). Later in the text in section "k" the court held otherwise and wrote, "Plaintiff [an amateur legal theorist] cites 28 U.S.C. § 3002(15) [discussed above] in the paragraph pertaining to his claim against the USA... . To the extent that Plaintiff [an amateur legal theorist] relies on § 3002(15) [discussed above] to sue the USA, IT DOES NOT APPLY BECAUSE § 3002 [discussed above] IS SIMPLY A DEFINITIONS STATUTE IN THE CHAPTER THAT AUTHORIZES THE USA TO... [COLLECT CERTAIN DEBTS]." (in section "k" at about 85% through the text).

    4). U.S. v. Petersen, https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. (RULING AGAINST ALL OF THE DEFENDANT'S AMATEUR LEGAL THEORIES, including his amateur legal theory that the United States is a "CORPORATION".). The court wrote, "... Defendant [an amateur legal theorist] contends that 'THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IS A FEDERAL CORPORATION, and one that is 'located in the ["CITY" of the] District of Columbia'. ... [The Defendant] further claims that the 'United States Government [rather than merely the "CITY" government of Washington, D.C.] was officially [c]ommercialized in 1871,' apparently arguing that this entity's powers 'shall be limited to the ["CITY" limits of the] District of Columbia.' ... . BUT [THE] DEFENDANT'S RELIANCE ON 28 U.S.C. § 3002(15) [discussed above] IS MISPLACED [read that phrase again]. That statute is simply a definitional provision DEFINING the "United States" as, among other options, 'a federal corporation' SOLELY FOR PURPOSES OF THE CHAPTER WHICH IT IS PART... . The applicability of [this] Chapter... is confined to CIVIL actions [filed] by the United States [against debtors]... to recover a judgment on a debt... . This CRIMINAL action [this case] is not [such a] a CIVIL debt collection action [so that definition is inapplicable in this case]... . In addition, [THE] DEFENDANT'S RELIANCE ON THE... [Act Of 1871 discussed above], IS LIKEWISE MISPLACED [read that phrase again] as that statute simply 'created a ["CITY"] government by the name of the District of Columbia [not "The United States Of America"],' a municipal corporation [which means a "CITY" government] with ‘jurisdiction over all the territory within the [CITY] limits of the District.’... . The present CRIMINAL prosecution of [the] Defendant [in this case] has nothing to do with the powers that Congress delegated to the ["CITY" of the ] District [Of Columbia. So, THAT DEFINITION DOES NOT APPLY IN THIS CASE]." (at the 13th, 14th and 15th paragraphs at about 35% through the text).

    5). U.S. v. Wiggins, https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...en&as_sdt=4000. (RULING AGAINST ALL OF THE DEFENDANT'S AMATEUR LEGAL THEORIES, including his amateur legal theory that the United States is a "CORPORATION".). The court wrote, "Wiggins [an amateur legal theorist]... ERRONEOUSLY CITES 28 U.S.C. § 3002(15) [discussed above] to support his assertion that THE UNITED STATES IS A CORPORATION... . [But, t]hat statute governs the collection of federal debt.... . Section 3002(15) [discussed above] merely provides that the term "United States," WHEN USED "IN THIS... [STATUTE]," refers to a federal corporation, agency, entity, or instrumentality of the United States [not a private, for-profit corporation]." (at footnote 18).

    6). Kitchens v. Becraft, https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. (RULING AGAINST ALL OF THE PLAINTIFF’S AMATEUR LEGAL THEORIES, including his amateur legal theory that the United States is a "CORPORATION".). In this case, an amateur legal theorist unsuccessfully sued a Texas state official]. The court wrote, "Next, Kitchens [an amateur legal theorist] contends that 'THE UNITED STATES IS A CORPORATION' and thus has no sovereign authority." But, the court held otherwise and wrote, "[T]he Plaintiff's [Kitchen's] objections ARE WITHOUT MERIT [read that phrase again]." (at the 6th paragraph at about 50% through the case).

    7). U.S. v. Beavers, https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. (RULING AGAINST ALL OF THE DEFENDANTS' AMATEUR LEGAL THEORIES, including their amateur legal theory that the United States is a "CORPORATION".). In this case, the court wrote, "The Defendants [both amateur legal theorists] assert that THE "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" IS A FEDERAL CORPORATION that went bankrupt in 1933 [a false claim that Rod Class also makes] and lacks jurisdiction to prosecute criminal matters... .' But, the court held otherwise and wrote, "THE COURT FINDS THE DEFENDANT'S [the amateur legal theorists'] ARGUMENTS TO BE MERITLESS [read this phrase again]." (at the 17th-18th paragraph at about 50% through the text). At footnote 9, the court continues, "As explained [above], the Defendants cite 28 U.S.C. § 3002 [discussed above] to support their claim that THE UNITED STATES IS A CORPORATION. HOWEVER, A COMPLETE READING OF 28 U.S.C. § 3002 BELIES [means "REFUTES"] THIS INTERPRETATION." (at footnote 9).

    8). Kubicki v U.S., https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. (RULING AGAINST ALL OF THE DEFENDANT'S AMATEUR LEGAL THEORIES, including his amateur legal theory that the United States is a "CORPORATION".). In this case, a tax protester/amateur legal theorist unsuccessfully sued the United States. The court wrote, "Plaintiff [an amateur legal theorist] argues that Defendant [the United States] has no immunity [from his suit], BECAUSE THE UNITED STATES HAS IDENTIFIED ITSELF AS A FEDERAL CORPORATION for purposes of tax collection activity.' But, the court held otherwise and wrote, "To support this proposition, Plaintiff [the amateur legal theorist] cites 28 U.S.C. § 3002(15)[discussed above]. THIS SECTION, HOWEVER, DOES NOT DEFINE THE UNITED STATES AS A FEDERAL CORPORATION for purposes of tax collection. Instead, IT MERELY PROVIDES THE DEFINITION OF THE "UNITED STATES’ FOR PURPOSES OF THE [SAME] STATUTE [IN WHICH IT APPEARS] AS A ‘FEDERAL CORPORATION’ [not a private, for-profit corporation]... ." (at the 8th paragraph not including block-indented portions at about 60% through the text).

    9). U.S. v. Boyce, https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. (RULING AGAINST ALL OF THE TAX PROTESTERS' AMATEUR LEGAL THEORIES, including their amateur legal theory that the United States is a "CORPORATION".). The court wrote, "The Boyces [both tax protesters and amateur legal theorists]... assert that the court's jurisdiction is limited to individuals residing within the ["CITY" limits of the] District of Columbia citing 28 U.S.C. § 3002(15) [discussed above], WHICH DEFINES THE "UNITED STATES" AS... A FEDERAL CORPORATION... . [T]hey contend the court's jurisdiction extends only to the section of territory occupied by 'THE ULTIMATE PARENT FEDERAL CORPORATION,' i.e. the ["CITY" of The] District of Columbia." But, the court held otherwise and wrote, "THIS ARGUMENT IS UNAVAILING [is an amateur legal theory]. Section 3002(15) [discussed above] defines 'United States ONLY for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 3001...', which governs 'federal debt collection procedure'. IT DOES NOT DEFINE THE 'UNITED STATES' AS A FEDERAL CORPORATION FOR PURPOSES OF TAX LAWS [much less as a private for-profit corporation], NOR DOES IT CIRCUMSCRIBE [means "LIMIT"] THE COURT'S JURISDICTION. [citing] Kubicki v. United States [the case directly above], ... '[the subject statute]... DOES NOT DEFINE THE UNITED STATES AS A FEDERAL CORPORATION FOR PURPOSES OF TAX COLLECTION [mush less a PRIVATE, FOR-PROFIT corporation].'" (at the 15th full paragraph at about 25% through the text).

    10). U.S. v. Smith, http://www.vawd.uscourts.gov/OPINION...-10MJ00061.PDF. (RULING AGAINST ALL OF THE DEFENDANT'S AMATEUR LEGAL THEORIES, including his amateur legal theory that the United States is a "CORPORATION". In this case, the court wrote, "... Smith [the Defendant/amateur legal theorist] stated: '... [I]n no way, shape or form am I an employee of the Federal government or am I an employee of the FEDERAL CORPORATION under the United States Code Title 28, Section 28 Section 3002, Subsection 15, Section A [discussed above] where THE UNITED STATES IS A CORPORATION AND IT'S A FOR PROFIT CORPORATION as spelled out there.'" (at the 1st paragraph on page 7 of this case as it appears in this link). But, the court held otherwise and called the Defendant's amateur legal theories, including this one, "OUTLANDISH" and actually required the Defendant to undergo an INPATIENT PSYCHIATRIC EXAMINATION (a psychiatric evaluation while a patient incarcerated in a mental institution). Note: Rod Class has been forced to undergo several such psychiatric examinations for similar reasons.

    11). Joiner v. Perry, https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. (RULING AGAINST ALL OF THE PRISONER'S AMATEUR LEGAL THEORIES, including the amateur legal theory that the United States is a CORPORATION). In this case, a prisoner/amateur legal theorist unsuccessfully sued a North Carolina state official. The court wrote, "He [the prisoner/amateur legal theorist] also testified that 'THE UNITED STATES IS A CORPORATION' to which he holds no 'allegiance', and that therefore the United States may not tax him." (at footnote 3 at the very end of the case). But, the court held otherwise and called the prisoner’s arguments "PATENTLY FRIVOLOUS" and NOT ONLY THREW THE CASE OUT OF COURT, but actually FINED THE PRISONER for making such ridiculous claims.

    12). State v. Hartsoe, https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. (RULING AGAINST ALL OF THE DEFENDANT'S AMATEUR LEGAL THEORIES, including his amateur legal theory that the United States is a "CORPORATION"). In this case, the court wrote, "Hartsoe's [the Defendant's] affidavit was based upon his belief that THE UNITED STATES IS A CORPORATION, which created 'straw men,' fictitious persons separate from real individuals, for each man and woman in order TO CONTROL the people of the United States. Hartsoe [the Defendant] refused to submit to the CORPORATE government and filed his affidavit denying his [own imaginary] 'straw man' or [imaginary] CORPORATE existence." But, the court ruled otherwise.

    13). Miles v. U.S.,
    https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. (RULING AGAINST ALL OF THE DEFENDANT'S AMATEUR LEGAL THEORIES, including his amateur legal theory that the United States is a "CORPORATION"). In this case the Defendant filed what amounted to a Motion For Relief From Conviction. The court wrote, "The grounds [in the Defendant's motion] include... that THE UNITED STATES IS A CORPORATION and does not have the power to prosecute individuals, and that citizens are not subject to statutory jurisdiction under the Constitution [a false claim that Rod Class also makes]." (at footnote 1). But, the court held otherwise and unceremoniously THREW THE CASE OUT OF COURT.

    14). U.S. v. Provost, https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. (RULING AGAINST ALL OF THE DEFENDANT'S AMATEUR LEGAL THEORIES, including his amateur legal theory that the United States is a "CORPORATION"). In this case, the court wrote, "... Defendant [the tax protester] filed a request to answer [the complaint], claiming that he had 'a good faith belief that the UNITED STATES IS A CORPORATION and that there was no parity with the flesh and blood man.'" But, the court ruled otherwise, DENIED the tax protester's request to file a delinquent answer and UPHELD THE DEFAULT JUDGMENT AGAINST HIM.

    15). Maxwell v. Snow, https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. (RULING AGAINST ALL THE TAX PROTESTER'S AMATEUR LEGAL THEORIES, including his amateur legal theory that the United States is a CORPORATION). In this case, a tax protester unsuccessfully sued a U.S. Treasury official and claimed that, "Texas is not part of the United States, and that the United States itself is unconstitutional because it is not a republican form of government", that THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS A "CORPORATION", that "the federal government’s jurisdiction is limited to [within] the ["CITY" limits of the] District of Columbia and [to within the borders of] other federally owned lands". But, the court held otherwise and held that such amateur legal theories were "WITHOUT MERIT", "PATENTLY FRIVOLOUS" and "LIKEWISE FRIVOLOUS."

    THE BOTTOM LINE:
    Note that ALL amateur legal theories (ex: "all governments are corporations") are always EXACTLY BACKWARDS AND OPPOSITE to what the REAL law actually is. There are NO EXCEPTIONS! Amateur legal theories ARE NOT REAL. They are FAKE. They are LIES. Amateur legal theories and the REAL law are the EXACT OPPOSITES of one another. Amateur legal theories are an IMAGINARY ALTERNATIVE to the REAL law that is actually used by the REAL legal system and the ENTIRE REST OF THE WORLD. Amateur legal theories have a 100% FAILURE RATE in court BECAUSE THEY ARE FAKE. They are NOT INTENDED TO WORK and they DO NOT WORK! They never have. They never will. Their SOLE PURPOSE is to attempt to discredit and delegitimize our REPUBLICAN form of government, the ELECTED representatives of "We the People" and to incite hatred and violence against innocent Americans. Nothing more.

    FACT:
    Just in case you do not already know, all FUTURE DECISIONS on the subject of whether governments are corporations WILL FOLLOW THE DECISIONS SHOWN ABOVE (CALLED "PRECEDENT"). So, the law on this subject will always be the same as reflected in the cases above.

    https://definitions.uslegal.com/b/binding-precedent/.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precedent.

    https://dictionary.thelaw.com/binding-precedent/.

    BONUS LAW:

    The cases linked to above did not just rule against the amateur legal theory that "all governments are corporations", the cases linked to above ALSO RULED AGAINST EVERY OTHER AMATEUR LEGAL THEORY RAISED IN THOSE CASES. These additional rulings are shown below. (The cases below appear in the same order they appear above.).

    1). Thompson v. Scutt, https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. This case (also linked to above) ALSO RULED AGAINST ALL OF THE FOLLOWING AMATEUR LEGAL THEORIES, all of which are also peddled by Rod Class (AND ALL OF WHICH FAILED HERE): claiming to be a "sovereign" and a "citizen/member of [the]... [his home state] Republic", claiming (under the UCC) to have "superior title and claim over the judgment against... [himself]", claiming that "the court’s use of... [a person's name] in capital letters... refers to a separate or fictitious entity, and is enforceable only against that entity", claiming that "the Michigan statutes under which... [he] was convicted do not apply to... [him] because he is 'sovereign' and not a 'person' within the meaning of those statutes", claiming that the "Michigan laws supporting... [his] conviction [for DUI and DWLS-3RD OFFENSE] violate his constitutional right to travel", claiming that "the state lacked jurisdiction because... [he] has a right to removal under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act [as if he was a foreign, sovereign, nation state] and the federal removal statute'' claiming that he "is being wrongfully imprisoned on behalf of another [imaginary] entity [also] called 'CHRISTOPHER BURNELL THOMPSON' [often called the split personality defense]", claiming that his "conviction [for DUI and DWLS-3rd OFFENSE] was the result of fraud and misconduct on the part of the state, the prosecution and defense counsel [as if they forced him to drive drunk—again]", claiming that the state and federal governments are "de facto governments".

    2). DuBose v. Kasich,
    https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. This case (also linked to above) ALSO RULED AGAINST ALL OF THE FOLLOWING AMATEUR LEGAL THEORIES, all of which are also peddled by Rod Class (AND ALL OF WHICH FAILED HERE): The Plaintiff (an amateur legal theorist) raised, "the relationship between the yellow fringe on the United States flag and ADMIRALTY jurisdiction and the effect of capitalizing the letters of his name. Plaintiff [an amateur legal theorist] ultimately maintains that he does not have a contract with either Ohio or the United States and, therefore, does not have to follow government laws [as if that would make any difference]." In response, the court wrote, "... [F]ederal courts have routinely recognized that such [amateur legal] theories are MERITLESS and WORTHY OF LITTLE DISCUSSION [read that phrase again]. 'Other courts have noted the sovereign citizen theory has been CONSISTENTLY REJECTED...' . [and citing another case which] '... REJECT[ED] AS FRIVOLOUS Defendant's argument that he was a 'private natural man and real person' and therefore not subject to the laws of the United States [and citing another case which] 'REJECT[ED] [this] sovereign citizen argument as FRIVOLOUS and UNDESERVING OF 'EXTENDED ARGUMENT [and finally citing another case which] 'h[eld] that a plaintiff's 'yellow fringe flag' arguments were 'INDISPUTABLY MERITLESS' [meaning amateur legal theories]."

    3). Florance v. Buchmeyer,
    https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. This case (also linked to above) ALSO RULED AGAINST ALL OF THE FOLLOWING AMATEUR LEGAL THEORIES, all of which are also peddled by Rod Class (AND ALL OF WHICH FAILED HERE): suing a judge despite that the judge cannot be sued under "absolute judicial immunity", filing a fraudulent lien against a judge as if the judge owed money to the filer of the lien, claiming that the eleventh amendment immunizes criminals from prosecution (despite that it actually prohibits suits against states in federal court), claiming that a government officer/official can be "personally liable" for official actions taken under "color of law", suing a prosecutor despite that the prosecutor cannot be sued "absolute prosecutorial immunity", suing a government official despite that the government official cannot be sued under "absolute [government] official immunity" and claiming that a county is a "commercial entity engaged in commerce".

    4). U.S. v. Petersen, https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. This case (also linked to above) ALSO RULED AGAINST ALL OF THE FOLLOWING AMATEUR LEGAL THEORIES, all of which are also peddled by Rod Class (AND ALL OF WHICH FAILED HERE): claiming that the entire federal government (rather than merely the CITY of Washington, D.C.) has no jurisdiction outside the borders of the CITY of Washington, D.C., claiming that the Act of 1871 (which created a CITY government for Washington, D.C.) converted the ENTIRE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT (something entirely different) into a commercialized, PRIVATE, FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION, claiming that the United States is a "foreign state" inside the borders OF ITSELF, claiming that the 11th amendment (which actually prohibits lawsuits against STATES in FEDERAL court) immunizes all criminals from prosecution, claiming that the professional title, "esquire" (a servant of a knight in battle) is a title of "NOBILITY" (a HEREDITARY title for those BORN OF "NOBLE" BLOOD, like the "KING" or "QUEEN"), claiming that the use of the professional title, "esquire" converts American attorneys into "agents of a foreign government", claiming that the "bar association" (referring to the ABA) is a monopoly, claiming that certain federal statutes were never enacted into positive law and claiming that judges have a "financial interest" in their cases.

    5). U.S. v. Wiggins,
    https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...en&as_sdt=4000.
    This case (also linked to above) ALSO RULED AGAINST ALL OF THE FOLLOWING AMATEUR LEGAL THEORIES, all of which are also peddled by Rod Class (AND ALL OF WHICH FAILED HERE): claiming that the case is subject to "MARITIME & ADMIRALTY JURISDICTION" in a case that does not actually involve maritime or admiralty, not "consenting" to the law or to the court's jurisdiction (as if that would make any difference), refusing to "stand under" the court's questions, claiming that his name is "his government name" and not his real name, purporting to file a CIVIL "counterclaim" against the government in a CRIMINAL case (which is impossible), attempting to disqualify a judge for a "personal interest" in case and for practicing law, claiming the imaginary right to be represented by a non-lawyer and attempting to use an "attorney in fact" as a substitute for an "attorney at law".

    6). Kitchens v. Becraft,
    https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006.
    This case (also linked to above) ALSO RULED AGAINST ALL OF THE FOLLOWING AMATEUR LEGAL THEORIES, all of which are also peddled by Rod Class (AND ALL OF WHICH FAILED HERE): claiming that there is "no lawful money for the payment of debts" because of the "[imaginary] national bankruptcy of 1933" and because of the "abolition of the gold standard", claiming that there is a "secret state of war" that exists between THE 'FEDERAL UNITED STATES,' WHICH IS A 'FEDERAL CORPORATION', and the people of the several states, claiming that "Federal Reserve Notes are not legal tender", claiming to be a "secured creditor" in a case which has NO "CREDITORS" AT ALL ("secured" or otherwise) and which imaginary "creditor" has no collateral allegedly "securing" the imaginary debt, claiming that "the Supreme Court has determined that all codes, rules, and regulations are for government authorities only, and not [for] human beings in accordance with God's laws", claiming that "all codes, rules and regulations are unconstitutional and lack due process", claiming that "the supreme law of the land is the Constitution for the united States, and not the Constitution of the United States [pretending that there are two different Constitutions]", claiming that the only "lawful money of the Constitution for the united States is gold or silver coin of specific fineness and weight [a Constitutional provision actually applies ONLY TO THE STATES and not to the United States itself]", claiming that "the only lawful jurisdiction of a de jure common law court is under the American flag of peace, and not the Vice ADMIRALTY Court, military jurisdiction, which the Magistrate is treasonously imposing", claiming that "the only lawful jurisdiction is under common law, and not under vice ADMIRALTY, as signified by the U.S. battle flag with gold fringe and eagle on the flagpole currently displayed within the CORPORATE de facto court," claiming to have already "lawfully exercised his remedy" under Public Law 73-10 by "redeeming his birth certificate bond" and "captur[ing] his [imaginary] straw man", claiming "not [to be] a party or signatory to, nor being named in, any statute, code, law, or rule, nor having the provided power of attorney to any government agent or employee to enter him into such compacts” (as if that would make any difference), claiming to be exempt from all laws except those to which he voluntarily assents (as if individual "assent" is required) and claiming that a "military tribunal exercising ADMIRALTY jurisdiction, lacks jurisdiction over his claims, which jurisdiction may only be exercised by a constitutional common law court under the American flag of peace."

    7). U.S. v. Beavers, https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. This case (also linked to above) ALSO RULED AGAINST ALL OF THE FOLLOWING AMATEUR LEGAL THEORIES, all of which are also peddled by Rod Class (AND ALL OF WHICH FAILED HERE): claiming that "CAPITAL LETTERS" refer only to CORPORATIONS and not to "flesh and blood persons", claiming that the court is just a division of THE UNITED STATES CORPORATION and therefore lacks jurisdiction, playing the "name game" as a defense ("split personality" and "corporate fiction" verses "flesh and blood" persons), claiming that the ”name game" can deprive the court of jurisdiction, doing the following in a futile effort to avoid the court's jurisdiction, denying citizenship, claiming sovereign citizenship, claiming foreign citizenship, claiming freeman status and claiming that the IRS is really a private, for-profit, Puerto Rican CORPORATION.

    8). Kubicki v U.S., https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. This case (also linked to above) ALSO RULED AGAINST ALL OF THE FOLLOWING AMATEUR LEGAL THEORIES, all of which are also peddled by Rod Class (AND ALL OF WHICH FAILED HERE): putting property owned by the tax protesters into the names of other people in an effort to avoid paying taxes, claiming that IRS tax laws do not apply outside the borders of Washington, D.C. and other federal territories, claiming that "wages are not income" for purposes of U.S. income tax laws, claiming sovereign and foreign state immunities as a defense and denying citizenship in an effort to avoid the jurisdiction of the court.

    CASE 9-15 (ABOVE IN THE TOP LIST OF CASES) DID NOT MAKE ADDITIONAL RULINGS OF THE TYPE LISTED IN CASE 1-8 HERE.
    ABOUT SNOOP4TRUTH:
    Snoop4truth is a legal expert and whistle blower who exposes online hoaxes. Snoop4truth did not reveal this information to harm Deborah Tavares or Rod Class. Had it not been for Deborah Tavares' and Rod Class' role in the "Judge DALE Hoax", Snoop4truth would not have exposed this information here.

    The message to all hoaxers and charlatans? Just tell the truth.

  28. The Following User Says Thank You to snoop4truth For This Post:

    Akasha (12th February 2019)

  29. Link to Post #157
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    30th September 2015
    Age
    59
    Posts
    212
    Thanks
    147
    Thanked 412 times in 163 posts

    Default Re: The Hoaxes of Deborah Tavares

    COMMENT 7: PART I: DEBORAH TAVARES AND THE “BOMBSHELL: ROD CLASS HAS OBTAINED HIS FOURTH ADMINISTRATIVE RULING THAT ALL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES ARE ‘PRIVATE ENTITIES’ OR ‘PRIVATE CONTRACTORS’ HOAX” (A.K.A. “THE BOMBSHELL: FOURTH ADMINISTRATIVE RULING HOAX”)

    FIRST, SEE THE HOAX HERE:
    VIDEO
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Do3eTH-NtSk LISTEN FOR THE FOLLOWING FRAUDULENT CLAIMS IN THIS VIDEO. (NOTE CLASS' FRAUDULENT USE OF PLURAL TERMS, SOMETHING IMPORTANT TO THIS HOAX.). "When THEY came in and THEY declared THEIRSELVES (sic) to be PRIVATE entitIES out of the administrative court [an event that NEVER occurred], and the attorney general’s office had put in (sic) that THEY are PRIVATE contractorS [an event that NEVER occurred], and the city law director [said] THEY are PRIVATE contractorS [an event that NEVER occurred], that means that these POLICE OFFICERS out here in the road ARE PRIVATE contractorS [something that is not so]. THEY are NOT classified as PUBLIC officialS when THEY drag you into THEIR standard court in your community. Because the judge will sit here [and say] this is an upstanding public office. THESE are public officialS. Well, the administrative court says, "no THEY are not." THEY are a private contractor (sic). Now, we got a conflict." (at 7:10-8:00) "The court has classified THEM as PRIVATE contractorS. THEY are NOT PART OF THE STATE. This opens up a big law suit across this country." (at 8:20-8:35) "So, you have an administrative court coming in and defining THESE PEOPLE as PRIVATE contractorS, NON-PUBLIC officialS [an event that NEVER occurred]. Now, when THEY are classifying the Department Of Transportation as a NON-PUBLIC OFFICE [an event that NEVER occurred] the tag agency as a NON-PUBLIC OFFICE, then that means THEY are running EVERY SINGLE AGENCY through that state AS A PRIVATE CONTRACT SET UP, NON-PUBLIC officialS. Some of you are not aware, back in 2006 that there was a class action lawsuit against the court system [which Class LOST and which was THROWN OUT of district court and THROWN OUT of the court of appeals]. The 10th Circuit [Court of Appeals] ruled [when THROWING the case OUT of court] that ALL OF THESE public officialS were CORPORATE APPELLEES [a ruling that NEVER occurred]. THEY belong to the CORPORATION. THEY were NOT PUBLIC officialS. Therefore, the court cannot hold THEM to [a] violation of THEIR oath of office because THEY are NOT PUBLIC OFFICIALS... . THEY are sitting here saying, ‘THESE are NOT PUBLIC officerS. THEY are NOT PUBLIC officialS. But, THEY hold positionS as PRIVATE contractorS and therefore the administrative court has no subject matter jurisdiction over private PEOPLE.' They would only have it over PUBLIC OFFICIALS." (at 9:00-10:50) "Right now, I'm sitting on three documents. I'm sitting on the 10th Circuit [dismissal THROWING the case OUT of court] that admitted that these PEOPLE are CORPORATE APPELLEES [an admission that NEVER occurred]. We're sitting on the paperwork from this administrative court from this law judge sitting here saying that THEY are PRIVATE contractorS or PRIVATE entitIES [something the law judge did not say]. We're sitting on the paperwork from the attorney general’s office and the city law director sitting here saying THEY are PRIVATE contractorS [something the paperwork does not say]. THEY are NON-PUBLIC officialS. ... . I’ve got another case where another administrative law judge has come back in and again has stated that THE POLICE DEPARTMENT- that these PEOPLE are NOT PUBLIC officialS. They are PRIVATE contractorS. THEY don’t work for the state." (at 25:00-25:35) "I got three hearings where it is confirmed [that] THEY are PRIVATE contractorS. We got three hearings. We’ve got an administrative judge saying THEY are PRIVATE entitIES. NON-PUBLIC officialS. (at 36:40-37:00) "The fact that THEY are admitting that police officers are PRIVATE contractorS [something NEVER admitted to]... . THEY are classified as PRIVATE contractorS." (at 43:00-43:25) "Your honor. It is a proven fact that that police officer is NOT A PUBLIC OFFICIAL. It is a proven fact his is a PRIVATE CONTRACTOR. And, he cannot use the state to come into this court room and, he has NO AUTHORITY. As a PRIVATE CONTRACTOR, he only has jurisdiction over those that hire him and I did not hire this man. He has NO AUTHORITY over me." (at 50:35-51:05) "We got the 10th Circuit ruling [THROWING the case OUT of court which said] that THEY are CORPORATE APPELLEES [a ruling that NEVER occurred]. We got the administrative hearing out of North Carolina that THEY are PRIVATE entitIES [a ruling that NEVER occurred]. We got the paperwork form the attorney general’s office [that] THEY are PRIVATE contractorS [something paperwork does not say]. We got the paperwork from the city law director that THEY are PRIVATE contractorS [something paperwork does not say]." (at 53:05-53-20)

    FAKE PRESS RELEASES CO-WRITTEN BY DEBORAH TAVARES:
    http://fourwinds10.com/siterun_data/...p?q=1350315108;
    https://sherayx.wordpress.com/2013/0...e-contractors/;
    http://fromthetrenchesworldreport.co...tractors/23602.
    http://abundanthope.net/pages/True_U...tractors.shtml;
    https://www.scribd.com/document/1828...ublic-Notice-P;
    http://www.meetup.com/fr-FR/WE-ARE-C...ages/43090012/;
    https://www.meetup.com/es-ES/StLouis...ages/25275652/;
    http://gold-silver.us/forum/archive/...p/t-64278.html;
    http://nesaranews.blogspot.ca/search...-paginate=true (scroll down to 2nd article at about 15% through the text of the page);
    https://peoplestrustmilwaukee.wordpr...013/02/03/364/ (at the 4th full paragraph);.
    https://keystoliberty.wordpress.com/...em-fraudulent/ (at the 5th full paragraph);
    https://scannedretina.com/2012/10/15...es-are-vacant/;
    https://bbsradio.com/cgi-bin/webbbs/...=read;id=27745;
    https://newearth.media/private-attor...s-on-the-itnj/ (at the 1st full sentence).

    SIDE NOTE:
    NOTE THAT THE VERY FIRST WORD IN THE TITLE OF THIS HOAX IS THE "SIGNATURE" TERM, "BOMBSHELL" (SEE LINKS DIRECTLY ABOVE). THIS IS SIGNIFICANT BECAUSE DEBORAH TAVARES, JUDGE "DALE", RODNEY "DALE" CLASS AND THEIR CHARLATAN PARTNER ALL JUST HAPPEN TO ALL USE THE SAME, SHARED, COMMON, UNIQUE, "SIGNATURE" TERMS IN THE WORDING OF THEIR HOAXES, AN AMAZING COINCIDENCE. IN THIS PARTICULAR HOAX, THEY USE THE "SIGNATURE" TERM, "BOMBSHELL". IN OTHER HOAXES, THEY USE THE "SIGNATURE" TERM, "MATRIX" (see comment 3 above) ). BELOW ARE SOME EXAMPLES OF OTHER "BOMBSHELL" HOAXES BY ROD CLASS' CHIEF CHARLATAN PARTNER IN THE JUDGE "DALE" HOAX AND IN THIS VERY HOAX BEING EXPOSED HERE:
    http://www.leclife.com/index.php?ale...orah%20Tavares
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LIIw5xhG5Ho.
    http://legacy.staged.com/video?v=ROIh.
    http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative...s-2978738.html.
    http://meetnigerians.net/members/vid...hoTszlL_G6tQ6Q.
    http://trclip.com/video/LIIw5xhG5Ho/...h-tavares.html
    http://mp3yts.com/mp3/red-pill-repor...h-tavares.html (Scroll down to the 30th video at about 60-65% down the page).
    http://www.mp3xd-com.com/bajar-mp3/b...eborah-tavares.

    SIDE NOTE:
    In the following videos, Deborah Tavares and her CHARLATAN PARTNER put their own deceptive spin on this SAME BASIC ROD CLASS HOAX (that all federal and state governments and all of their agencies are PRIVATE, FOR-PROFIT CORPORATIONS). YOU MUST SEE THE VIDEOS BELOW! Note that NONE of the private, for-profit corporations referred to in any of the following videos HAVE ANY CONNECTION WHATSOEVER TO ANY FEDERAL OR STATE GOVERNMENT OR AGENCY. Instead, they are all ordinary, private, for-profit corporations with names that SOUND SIMILAR to governments or government agencies (like "Federal Express", for example). This means that contrary to the claims of Deborah Tavares and her CHARLATAN PARTNER, the ordinary, private, for-profit corporation named the "United States Corporation Company" (referred to at 2:00-3:10 in the FIRST video below) IS NOT actually the government of the "United States of America". http://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/Cor...ATES%201000090 (Scroll all the way down to the very bottom of this link and click on the FINAL document. Deborah Tavares and her CHARLATAN PARTNER refer this document later in the FIRST video below.). Instead, the "United States Corporation Company" is merely a "registered agent" which accepts "service of process" (civil lawsuits) for other corporations doing business in Florida and is actually listed as such by the Florida Secretary of State, Division of Corporations. http://search.sunbiz.org/Inquiry/Cor...0Company/Page1 (BE SURE TO SCROLL THROUGH ALL OF THE PAGES IN THIS LINK). (Note: Every corporation doing business in the state is required to have a "registered agent" inside the state to accept "service of process" (civil lawsuits) on its behalf. The "United States Corporation Company" is merely an ordinary, private, for-profit company provides that service to other such corporations (which are often out-of-state corporations that do not have an office in the state) for a fee. http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/...0607.0505.html.). Further, at 4:30-4:45 in the FIRST video below, Deborah Tavares and her CHARLATAN PARTNER also FRAUDULENTLY CHANGE THE NAME of one such ordinary, private, for-profit corporation TO MAKE IT SOUND EVEN MORE LIKE A GOVERNMENT AGENCY in order to INTENTIONALLY DEFRAUD the American people. Specifically, they "SWITCH" the name, "Internal Revenue Tax And Audit Service, Inc." (THE REAL NAME) with the name, "Internal Revenue Service" (THE FAKE NAME) in order to INTENTIONALLY DEFRAUD the American people. This is precisely the reason that they do not show an ACTUAL PHOTO of this particular corporation's "corporate charter" in their video as they do with other "corporate charters" of the other corporations referred to in their video (BECAUSE IT WOULD SHOW THE CORPORATION'S "REAL NAME" WHICH WOULD EXPOSE THEIR FRAUD). See the truth about this particular fraud here. https://www.dropbox.com/s/04tmhmd08w...0Inc..pdf?dl=0 (Note that this ordinary, private, for-profit corporation, the "Internal Revenue Tax And Audit Service, Inc.", WAS INCORPORATED IN DELAWARE.); http://www.hovindology.com/?p=80 (THIS LINK IS EXCELLENT. READ IT ALL.).

    VIDEOS BY DEBORAH TAVARES AND HER CHARLATAN PARTNER PEDDLING THIS SAME BASIC HOAX:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRnogqeqzxk (See the WHOLE VIDEO, but be especially certain to listen at 2:00-3:10 (for the "United States Corporation Company Hoax" EXPOSED ABOVE), 4:30-4:45 (for the "Internal Revenue Tax And Audit Service, Inc. Hoax" EXPOSED ABOVE), 4:45-4:55, 5:55-6:10, 6:20-6:45, 7:10-7:55, 9:05-9:45, 22:00-22:50, 24:10-24:25, 25:55-26:45.);
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=05o4CpB9I8g&t=260s (at 2:25-4:00, 5:25-6:15, 6:40-7:30, 7:55-8:50);
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTRPZD3_w5k (at 42:10-42:35, 47:50--49:00);
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRnogqeqzxk (at 6:20-6:45, 7:10-7:55, 25:55-26:45);
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQeazE8_Ipk (at 43:15-43:50, 52:30-53:00).

    THE HOAX:
    Deborah Tavares and Rod Class falsely claim that Class obtained “FOUR” “administrative rulings” to the effect that "ALL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES" (including all law enforcement agencies) are “private entitIES” or “private contractors”. But, this claim in not so.

    THE TRUTH:
    Rod Class NEVER obtained even one single ruling to that effect, much less “FOUR” of them.

    HOAX SIMPLIFIED:
    This HOAX arose out of TWO cases that Class LOST (and the LOSS of the appeals of BOTH of those two LOSSES). In BOTH of these two cases, Class sued BOTH private corporations AND government agencies IN THE SAME CASE. Like all of the cases that Class files, he LOST these two cases too. In their DISMISSALS of these two cases (throwing them out of court), the judges in BOTH OF THESE TWO CASES referred to the private corporations that Class had sued and to the government agencies that Class had sued SEPARATELY (one ruling DISMISSING the government agencies that Class had sued and a different ruling DISMISSING the private corporations that Class had sued). But, in trying to explain away these two LOSSES to his followers, Tavares and Class fraudulently “SWITCHED” the judges’ words about the private corporations that Class had sued with the judges’ words about the government agencies that Class had sued. By “SWITCHING” the judges’ words about the private corporations with the judges’ words about the government agencies, Tavares and Class fraudulently created the ILLUSION that when the judges were actually talking about the private corporations, they were instead talking about all of the government agencies. This fraudulent “SWITCH” of the judges words (from one group of defendants TO THE OTHER group of defendants) created the ILLUSION that when the judges were actually referring to THE PRIVATE CORPORATIONS that Class had sued as “corporate appellees” or as a SINGLE “private entitY” as applicable, they were instead referring to “ALL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES” that Class had sued as “corporate appelleeS” or as “private entitIES”, as applicable. But, that was not so.

    THE TRUTH IN THE FIRST CASE (The 10th Circuit LOSS):
    In this case, Class sued BOTH private corporations AND government agencies IN THE SAME CASE. In his DISMISSAL of the first case (throwing it out of court), the judge used the term, “Corporate Appellees”, when referring BY NAME (ONLY) to a private bank and to two private insurance companies that Class had sued. But, instead of telling their followers the truth, Tavares and Class fraudulently told their followers that in his DISMISSAL of this case (throwing it out of court), the judge was instead referring to “ALL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES" that Class had sued as “corporate appellees”. In the link below, scroll down to the BOLD, BLACK TYPE in the YELLOW-HIGHLIGHTED PARAGRAPH at about 35-40% through the text of this page. LOOK FOR THE TERM, "10th Circuit" IN BOLD TYPE. http://www.rayservers.com/blog/rod-c...ar-association (Remember, the BOLD, BLACK TYPE in the YELLOW-HIGHLIGHTED PARAGRAPH at about 35-40% through the text of this page and look for the term, "10th Circuit" IN BOLD TYPE). In the video below, listen to 9:35-10:50, 25:05-25:35, 43:00-44:10, 53:00-53:20. LISTEN FOR THE TERM, "10th Circuit". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Do3eTH-NtSk (Remember, 9:35-10:50, 25:05-25:35, 43:40-44:10, 53:00-53:20 and listen for the term, "10th Circuit"). This fraudulent “SWITCH” of the judge’s words (from one type of defendant TO THE OTHER type of defendant) is how Tavares and Class reached the desired (and entirely fictional) conclusion that the judge had ruled that "ALL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES" were “corporate appellees”. Unfortunately for Tavares and Class, the truth about this 10th Circuit DISMISSAL (throwing the case out of court) can be found here. In the link below, scroll down to page 6 at lines 13-15. Look for the following phrase, "Appellees Westfield Insurance Company, CNA Surety, and First National Bank ("Corporate Appellees") have filed a separate motion... ." https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCOUR...07-05026-0.pdf (Remember, page 6 at lines 13-15 and identify which defendants the court REALLY refers to as "corporate appellees"). After reading what the judge in this case actually said, ask yourself this. Did the judge in this case really refer to “ALL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES” that Class sued as “corporate appellees” OR instead, did the judge in this case actually refer BY NAME (ONLY) to the private bank and the two private insurance companies that Class used as “corporate appellees"?

    THE TRUTH IN THE SECOND CASE (The North Carolina Administrative Court LOSS):
    In this case, Class sued a STATE-WIDE government "agency", a “LOCAL unit of government” and a SINGLE “private entitY”, ALL IN THE SAME CASE. Specifically, Class filed an administrative suit against the North Carolina Department of Transportation (a STATE-WIDE government "agency" which was immune from suit by statute), against a “LOCAL” city police department (over which the administrative court had no jurisdiction because it was a "LOCAL" “UNIT OF GOVERNMENT", rather than a STATE-WIDE "agency" under the Governor) and against a SINGLE private contractor that sold vehicle license plates for the State of North Carolina (over which the administrative court had no jurisdiction because it was a SINGLE “private entitY”). In his DISMISSAL of this second case (throwing it out of court), the judge used the SINGULAR term, “private entitY” when referring BY NAME (ONLY) to that SINGLE “private entitY” that Class had sued. But, instead of telling their followers the truth, Tavares and Class fraudulently told their followers that in his DISMISSAL of the case (throwing it out of court), the judge used the PLURAL term, “private entitIES” and fraudulently told their followers that the judge was instead referring to ALL THREE DEFENDANTS that Class had sued as “private entitIES” (including the LOCAL city police department). In the link below, read the 2nd, 3rd and FINAL paragraphs. LOOK FOR THE FRAUDULENT (PLURAL) TERM, "entitIES" in that text. http://www.rvbeypublications.com/sit...licewarned.pdf (Remember, the 2nd, 3rd and FINAL paragraphs and LOOK FOR THE FRAUDULENT (PLURAL) TERM, "entitIES" in that text). In the video below, listen to 9:00-9:15, 25:15-25:35, 53:05-53:20. LISTEN FOR THE FRAUDULENT (PLURAL) TERMS, "entitIES" and "contractorS" in the video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Do3eTH-NtSk (Remember, 9:00-9:15, 25:15-25:35, 53:05-53:20 and LISTEN FOR THE FRAUDULENT (PLURAL) TERMS, "entitIES" and "contractorS" in the video.). This fraudulent “SWITCH” of the judge’s actual word, “entitY” (a SINGULAR term) to the FRAUDULENT word, “entitIES” (a PLURAL term) is how Class reached the desired (and entirely fictional) conclusion that the judge had ruled "ALL GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES" (including the LOCAL city police department) were “private entitIES” (a PLURAL term that does not appear anywhere in the DISMISSAL). Unfortunately for Tavares and Class, the truth about this North Carolina Administrative Court DISMISSAL (throwing the case out of court) can be found here. In the link below, scroll down to the document entitled “Conclusions Of Law” to the text actually numbered paragraph "4" and read the SECOND sentence of that 4th paragraph. Look for the following phrase, "[The] Respondent License Plate Agency [ONLY]... is a private entitY [A SINGULAR TERM]... [and not an agency of] state government." https://unmasker4maine.files.wordpre...y_complete.pdf (Remember, "Conclusions Of Law" in the text actually numbered paragraph "4" in the SECOND sentence of that 4th paragraph and look for the SINGULAR term, "entitY"). After reading what the judge in this case actually said in this case, ask yourself this. Did the judge in this case really refer to “ALL THREE DEFENDANTS” (including the LOCAL city police department) as “private entitIES”, a PLURAL term OR instead, did the judge in this case actually refer BY NAME (ONLY) to the SINGLE private contractor that sold license plates for the State of North Carolina as a SINGLE “private entitY”, a SINGULAR term?

    In fairness to Class, who only has a high school education and who is functionally illiterate, CLASS MISTAKENLY BELIEVED THAT HE HAD SUED THREE GOVERNMENT AGENCIES in this case. That is why he sued all three defendants in state administrative court. (He mistakenly believed that all three defendants were state-wide government "agencies" under the governor over which state administrative courts usually have jurisdiction.). But, in fact in this case, Class had actually sued ONLY TWO GOVERNMENT AGENCIES (OR “UNITS”) and a SINGLE PRIVATE CONTRACTOR that sold vehicle license plates for the State of North Carolina. Class mistakenly believed that the SINGLE “private entitY” that he had mistakenly sued in this case was a government agency because he did not know that FOR MORE THAN HALF A CENTURY, THE STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA HAS USED PRIVATE CONTRACTORS TO SELL VEHICLE LICENSE PLATES TO NORTH CAROLINA VEHICLE OWNERS.

    If Class had bothered to do a little research before filing suit, he would have discovered that the SINGLE “private entitY” that he mistakenly sued (in the mistaken belief that it was a government agency) was a not a governmental agency at all. Unknown to Class, almost all of the vehicle license plate agencies in the State Of North Carolina (outside the Charlotte & Raleigh areas) are now owned and operated by private contractors of the type that he mistakenly sued in this case (in the mistaken belief that it was a government "agency"). But, despite that the State of North Carolina uses private contractors to sell its vehicle license plates, IT DOES NOT USE PRIVATE CONTRACTORS FOR ITS LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES OR IN CONNECTION WITH ANY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY-TYPE FUNCTION. It only uses private contractors to sell vehicle license plates (includes titling services). This has been PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE to everyone except Rod Class for over half a century.

    WHAT TAVARES AND CLASS DID NOT KNOW THEN (AND DO NOT KNOW NOW):

    http://www.ncleg.net/ped/reports/doc...ags_report.pdf (Scroll down to "BACKGROUND" on the 4th page, marked "page 2").

    http://www.wral.com/dmv-defends-syst...ices/11753455/

    http://myfox8.com/2015/01/15/dmv-see...stokes-county/

    http://www.journalnow.com/news/local...a4bcf6878.html

    https://nanopdf.com/download/isaacs-...lpa-office_pdf (Click on window and scroll down.).

    CLASS MAKES MISTAKES ON TOP OF MISTAKES: So, not knowing any better, when the judge in this case DISMISSED (threw out) Class' lawsuit against this SINGLE private contractor on the grounds that it was a SINGLE "private entitY" (and not a STATE-WIDE government "agency" over which the administrative court usually has jurisdiction), Tavares and Class mistakenly believed Class had "forced" the courts to "admit" that a SINGLE "private entitY" was a SINGLE "private entitY" (something that everybody except Tavares and Class have known for over half a century). This means that Tavares' and Class' own IGNORANCE (of the fact that North Carolina has used private contractors to sell vehicle license plates for more than half a century) led to them to each the mistaken conclusion that Class had miraculously become a "legal genius". To this very day, Tavares and Class do not know that the SINGLE “private entitY” that Class mistakenly sued (in the mistaken belief that it was a government agency) had actually been a SINGLE "private entitY" all along. It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

    CLOSING NOTE:
    Remember, Tavares and Class falsely claim to have obtained “FOUR” ADMINISTRATIVE rulings to the effect that “all government agencies” (including all law enforcement agencies) are “private entitIES” or “private contractorS”. Here is how they reache the IMAGINARY total of "FOUR" such IMAGINARY ADMINISTRATIVE rulings to that effect. According to Class, his two DISMISSALS (his two LOSSES) described above (throwing his two cases out of court) constituted TWO such IMAGINARY rulings to that effect (one of which was NOT an “ADMINISTRATIVE” ruling in the first place, the 10th Circuit DISMISSAL). According to Class, the ruling AGAINST HIM in his LOSS of his APPEAL of his DISMISSAL (LOSS) of the second case (described above) constituted the THIRD such IMAGINARY ruling to that effect (which was likewise NOT an ADMINISTRATIVE ruling either, it was a JUDICIAL ruling as well). (Class' LOSS of his APPEAL of his LOSS of the second case (above) is referred to in the 3rd paragraph in this link. http://www.rvbeypublications.com/sit...licewarned.pdf (Remember, the 3rd paragraph here.)). Finally, according to Tavares and Class, an ordinary “MOTION To Dismiss” filed by the state Attorney General’s Office in this second case (above) constituted the “FOURTH” such IMAGINARY ADMINISTRATIVE ruling to that effect (which was NOT A RULING OF ANY KIND, ADMINISTRATIVE or JUDICIAL). (In this "MOTION to Dismiss", the Assistant Attorney General, among other things, simply reminded the judge that Class has MISTAKENLY sued a private contractor that sold license plates for North Carolina in administrative court because he MISTAKENLY believed it was a government agency. The judge agreed and DISMISSED (threw out) Class' case and that court's DISMISSAL of the case was upheld on appeal.). In the video below, listen at 53:00-53:20 for Class' "LIST" of these IMAGINARY rulings. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Do3eTH-NtSk (Remember, at 53:00-53:20). (Note that contrary to Class' claims in this video, the city law director never claimed that the city police department was a "private contractor". Instead, the city law director actually said that the LOCAL city police department was not STATE-WIDE "agency" under the Governor and, therefore, the administrative court had no jurisdiction over it.). This means that of these "FOUR" IMAGINARY ADMINISTRATIVE rulings (allegedly to the effect that all government agencies are "private entitIES"), CLASS LOST EVERY SINGLE CASE and only ONE such LOSS (a DISMISSAL) was an "ADMINISTRATIVE" DISMISSAL (or "ruling") in the first place. This "FUZZY MATH" is how Tavares and Class reach the FRAUDULENT total of “FOUR” IMAGINARY "ADMINISTRATIVE rulings" to the effect that “ALL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES" (including all law enforcement agencies) are “private entitIES” or “private contractorS”.

    (CONTINUED BELOW)

    PART II: DEBORAH TAVARES, ROD CLASS & THE “A NORTH CAROLINA JUDGE HAS WARNED STATE POLICE OFFICERS TO PUT THEIR PROPERTY INTO OTHER PEOPLES' NAMES HOAX”

    FIRST, SEE THE HOAX HERE:
    http://hiddensecretsandlies.blogspot...police-to.html
    http://www.gloucestercounty-va.com/2...iable-for.html (at the 1st full paragraph);
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZe9-QDsqG4 (note the title of the video and the misspelled word therein);
    https://adask.wordpress.com/2011/10/...ne-elses-name/.
    http://www.rvbeypublications.com/sit...licewarned.pdf
    https://www.meetup.com/es-ES/StLouis...ages/25275652/ (at the 2nd full paragraph);
    http://2013rainbowroundtable.ning.co...=06v6zf7ohrnts;
    http://landrightsnfarming-landrightn...7_archive.html;
    http://www.city-data.com/forum/north...-patrol-2.html (at comment 8 at about 65% through the text of the page);
    https://www.godlikeproductions.com/f...age1684911/pg1 (click and enter the website if necessary);
    https://videos.peacefmonline.com/tgy...Vsc2UncyBOYW1l;
    http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthre...170&viewfull=1 (at 1st several comments)
    http://www.medialyrics.com/Judge-War...ro-rZe9-QDsqG4 (note misspelled word in title);
    http://www.thetreeofliberty.com/vb/s...n-this-be-true (at the 1st full comment);
    http://tuzmp3.download/mp3/judge-war...se-s-name.html.


    THE HOAX:
    This hoax is unique in that Tavares and Class created it to support another hoax, the “BOMBSHELL: FOURTH Administrative Ruling Hoax”. (Read that comment DIRECTLY ABOVE in this same comment first.). In this particular hoax, Tavares and Class falsely claim that, IN DIRECT RESPONSE to Class having obtained "FOUR" “Administrative Rulings” to the effect that "ALL GOVERNMENT AGENCIES” are “private entitIES" (imaginary rulings which Class NEVER obtained), a North Carolina judge “WARNED” ALL NORTH CAROLINA "POLICE OFFICERS" TO PUT THEIR PROPERTY INTO OTHER PEOPLES' NAMES (to protect their property from the consequences of lawsuits that the public would file against such "police officers" now that they would no longer be protected from such lawsuits by governmental immunity). http://www.rvbeypublications.com/sit...licewarned.pdf. But, these claims are not so.

    NOTE:
    First of all, if Tavares and Class had known ANYTHING at all about North Carolina law at the time, then they would have NEVER created the “Property Into Other People’s Names Hoax” in the first place, because doing so only demonstrates the extent of their own IGNORANCE of North Carolina law (explained below).

    THE TRUTH:
    1. No such “warning” was ever issued BECAUSE CLASS NEVER OBTAINED THE IMAGINARY UNDERLYING RULINGS THAT WOULD HAVE OTHERWISE NECESSITATED SUCH A “WARNING” IN THE FIRST PLACE. (See the "BOMBSHELL: Fourth Administrative Ruling Hoax" DIRCETLY ABOVE.). This is why Tavares and Class has never published a copy of this imaginary "warning" online (something that he would have certainly done if this imaginary warning had actually been real).

    2. FOR OVER A CENTURY, IT HAS BEEN AN ILLEGAL (AND A LEGALLY INEFFECTIVE) ACT IN NORTH CAROLINA FOR DEBTORS (like police officers facing future lawsuits) TO PUT THEIR PROPERTY INTO OTHER PEOPLES' NAMES IN AN EFFORT TO AVOID PAYING THEIR CREDITORS (like future lawsuit judgment creditors). Here's how the law actually works. In this case, the defendant lost a breach of contract lawsuit and owed the plaintiff $200,000. But, the defendant had no money, so the plaintiff could not collect it at the time. A year later, the defendant became the owner of valuable parcel of real property and, fearing the plaintiff would try to collect the debt by selling his real property, the defendant immediately PURPORTED (means "pretended") TO PUT THE REAL PROPERTY INTO THE NAME OF A TRUST (or, what Rod Class calls putting property "INTO OTHER PEOPLES' NAMES"). No money changed hands. But, the plaintiff moved to have the real property sold anyway and moved to have the sale proceeds applied to what the defendant owed him anyway. The court agreed and did exactly that! http://scholar.google.com/scholar_ca...=2&as_sdt=4,34. LOOK FOR THE FOLLOWING TEXT IN THIS CASE: "THE TRIAL COURT DETERMINED THAT THE [defendant's] CONVEYANCE [of the real property] TO THE TRUST WAS NOT VALID [not effective] IN THAT IT FAILED TO [legally] CONVEY TITLE [of the real property] TO THE TRUSTEE [of the trust]. THE TRIAL COURT ALSO CONCLUDED THAT EVEN IF THE CONVEYANCE WAS VALID, IT WOULD CONSTITUTE A FRAUDULENT TRANSFER [under the subject statute and under a century of case law] AND [that] IT [the transfer] COULD BE AVOIDED [means "legally undone" if it was ever done in the first place]." (The preceding text is in the 3rd full paragraph of the case.). Thus, any such pretended transfer of property "INTO OTHER PEOPLES' NAMES" in order to avoid paying future lawsuit judgment creditors WOULD BE BOTH "ILLEGAL" AND "WOULD NOT WORK" (to defeat those claims) ANYWAY. So, any such pretended transfer WOULD BE ABSOLUTELY POINTLESS IN THE FIRST PLACE. But, Class does not know enough to even realize this.

    THIS HAS BEEN THE LAW IN NORTH CAROLINA FOR MORE THAN A CENTURY:
    http://scholar.google.com/scholar_ca...=2&as_sdt=4,34. LOOK FOR THE FOLLOWING TEXT IN THIS CASE: "Aman v. Wlker, 165 N.C. 224, 81 S.E. 162 [a 1914 case from the Supreme Court of North Carolina] is a 'landmark case' on FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCES. It is therein stated: "... If the CONVEYANCE [the pretended transfer of property into other peoples' names] is VOLUNTARY and the grantor [the person pretending to put the property into other peoples' names] did not retain [means "keep"] [other] property fully sufficient and available TO PAY HIS DEBTS [like future lawsuit money judgments]... , it [the conveyance] IS INVALID [means "VOID", "INEFFECTIVE" and "DID NOT WORK"] [to defeat the claims of]... CREDITORS [like future lawsuit judgment creditors];... ." (The preceding text is in the 2nd full paragraph of the case and includes the block indented, quoted section.); "A CONVEYANCE [a pretended transfer of property into other peoples' names] IS VOLUNTARY when it is NOT FOR VALUE [means not "SOLD" to the transferee AT FULL PRICE]... ." (The immediately preceding text is in the 3rd full paragraph of the case, not including the block indented, quoted section.). Thus, any such pretended transfer of property "INTO OTHER PEOPLES' NAMES" in order to avoid paying future lawsuit judgment creditors WOULD BE BOTH "ILLEGAL" AND "WOULD NOT WORK" (to defeat those claims) ANYWAY. So, any such pretended transfer WOULD BE ABSOLUTELY POINTLESS IN THE FIRST PLACE. But, Class does not know enough to even realize this.

    http://scholar.google.com/scholar_ca...=2&as_sdt=4,34. LOOK FOR THE FOLLWING TEXT IN THIS CASE: "[Over a century ago] in Aman v. Walker, 165 N.C. 224, 81 S.E. 162 (1914), the North Carolina Supreme Court set forth the principles governing fraudulent conveyances as follows: ... ; (2) If the CONVEYANCE [the pretended transfer of property into other peoples' names] is VOLUNTARY, and the grantor [the person pretending to put property into other peoples' names] DID NOT RETAIN [means "keep"] [other] PROPERTY [that was] FULLY SUFFICIENT AND AVAILABLE TO PAY HIS DEBTS [like future lawsuit judgments] ... IT [the pretended transfer of property into other peoples' names] IS INVALID [means "VOID" and "DID NOT WORK" to defeat the claims of]... CREDITORS [like future lawsuit judgment creditors]. (3) If the CONVEYANCE [the pretended transfer of property into other peoples' names] is VOLUNTARY and MADE WITH THE ACTUAL INTENT ON THE PART OF THE GRANTOR [the person pretending to put the property into other peoples' names] TO DEFRAUD CREDITORS [like future lawsuit judgment creditors], IT [the pretended transfer of property into other peoples' names] IS VOID [means "INEFFECTIVE", "IT NEVER HAPPENED" and "IT DID NOT WORK" to defeat the claims of future lawsuit judgment creditors]... ." (The preceding test is in the 3rd full paragraph and includes the block indented quoted section.). Thus, any such pretended transfer of property "INTO OTHER PEOPLES' NAMES" in order to avoid paying future lawsuit judgment creditors WOULD BE BOTH "ILLEGAL" AND "WOULD NOT WORK" (to defeat those claims) ANYWAY. So, any such pretended transfer WOULD BE ABSOLUTELY POINTLESS IN THE FIRST PLACE. But, Class does not know enough to even realize this.

    3. In addition to having been illegal and ineffective for more than a century under case law (above), such FRAUDULENT TRANSFERS have also been illegal and ineffective FOR TWO DECADES, BY NORTH CAROLINA STATUTE. By statute, any attempt by creditors (like police officers facing future lawsuits) to put their property into other peoples' names in an effort to avoid paying their creditors (like future lawsuit judgment creditors) HAS BEEN ILLEGAL AND INEFFECTIVE, which, of course, defeats the purpose of putting property into other peoples' names in the first place (because doing so WOULD NOT protect a debtor’s property from lawsuit judgment creditors ANYWAY). Thus, any such pretended transfer of property "INTO OTHER PEOPLES' NAMES" in an effort to defeat the claims of lawsuit judgment creditors WOULD BE BOTH "ILLEGAL" AND "WOULD NOT WORK" (to defeat those claims) ANYWAY. So, any such pretended transfer WOULD BE ABSOLUTELY POINTLESS IN THE FIRST PLACE. But, Class does not know enough to even realize this.

    THIS IS THE CURRENT STATUTE ON THE SUBJECT IN NORTH CAROLINA:
    https://www.ncga.state.nc.us/Enacted...rticle_3A.html LOOK FOR THE FOLLOWING TEXT IN THIS STATUTE: "39-23.4. ... . (a) A TRANSFER [of property into other peoples' names] made ... by a DEBTOR [like a police officer facing a future lawsuit] is VOIDABLE [means can be legally "undone"] as to a CREDITOR [like a future lawsuit judgment creditor], whether the creditor's claim [the facts giving rise to the creditor's lawsuit] arose [occurred] BEFORE or AFTER the TRANSFER was made... , IF THE DEBTOR MADE THE TRANSFER... : (1) With the INTENT to HINDER, DELAY, DEFRAUD and CREDITOR of the DEBTOR; OR (2) Without RECEIVING... [FULL PRICE for the property]. (b) In determining INTENT under subdivision (a)(1) of this section [the immediately preceding section above], ... [the court may consider]... whether: (1) The TRANSFER... was made to an insider [like a friend or relative]; (2) [whether] The DEBTOR retained [means "kept"] POSSESSION or CONTROL of the property TRANSFERRED AFTER THE TRANSFER;... (4) [whether] BEFORE THE TRANSFER WAS MADE... , THE DEBTOR HAD BEEN SUED OR THREATENED WITH SUIT [read this phrase again]; (5) Whether the transfer was of SUBSTANIALLY ALL OF THE DEBTOR'S ASSETS [or only part of the debtor's assets]... ." (The preceding text is at section "39-23-4. (a) and (b) at about 45% through the text of the statute.). Thus, any such pretended transfer of property "INTO OTHER PEOPLES' NAMES" in order to avoid paying future lawsuit judgment creditors WOULD BE BOTH "ILLEGAL" AND "WOULD NOT WORK" (to defeat those claims) ANYWAY. So, any such pretended transfer WOULD BE ABSOLUTELY POINTLESS IN THE FIRST PLACE. But, Class does not know enough to even realize this.

    In this case, the defendant was a millionaire whose most valuable asset was a parcel of real property. The defendant owned a company that borrowed money to buy an airplane and the defendant personally guaranteed repayment of the loan. But, neither the defendant or his company repaid the loan. Fearing a lawsuit, the defendant and his wife formed a new company and HE PUT HIS REAL PROPERTY INTO THE NAME OF THAT NEW COMPANY (or, what Rod Class calls putting property "INTO OTHER PEOPLES' NAMES"). No money changed hands. http://scholar.google.com/scholar_ca...=2&as_sdt=4,34. LOOK FOR THE FOLLOWING TEXT IN THIS CASE: "...[In sorting out the case, the court wrote] [O]UR LEGISLATURE [referring to the North Carolina legislature] ENACTED THE UNIFORM FRAUDULENT TRANSFERS ACT, LATER RENAMED THE UNIFORM VOIDABLE TRANSFERS ACT ("UVTA")... NEARLY TWO DECADES GO [note how long ago North Carolina passed this statute]." (The preceding text is in the 1st paragraph below the heading entitled, "B. Interpretation of 'Transfer'", at about 34-40% through the text of the case.).

    4. Unknown to Class, FOR CENTURIES, IT HAS BEEN AN ILLEGAL ACT in North Carolina (and for decades, a violation of the Judicial Code Of Conduct) FOR A JUDGE TO ILLEGALLY “WARN”, COUNSEL, ADVISE OR RECOMMEND that anyone (including police officers facing future lawsuits) "BREAK THE LAW" by putting their property into other peoples' names in an effort to avoid paying their creditors (AN ILLEGAL ACT that would not protect the debtor's property anyway). Any REAL judge who issued such an ILLEGAL "warning" would immediately be removed from office and disbarred. But, Class does not know this.

    ANALYSIS: Thus, in manufacturing the “Property Into Other People’s Names Hoax”, Class was so IGNORANT of North Carolina law that he did not know then and does not know now that ALL OF THE "FACTS" that he alleges in this hoax are LEGALLY IMPOSSIBLE UNDER NORTH CAROLINA LAW, which conclusively establish this lie as the hoax that it is. THIS IS BECAUSE NO REAL NORTH CAROLINA JUDGE WOULD "BREAK THE LAW" --- BY "ILLEGALLY" WARNING POLICE OFFICERS TO "BREAK THE LAW" --- BY DOING SOMETHING "ILLEGAL" (PUTTING THEIR PROPERTY INTO OTHER PEOPLES' NAMES IN AN EFFORT TO AVOID PAYING LAWSUIT JUDGMENT CREDITORS)--- IN ORDER TO PROTECT THEIR PROPERTY FROM LAWSUITS WHICH WILL "NEVER SUCCEED" (DUE TO IMMUNITY)--- OR FROM LAWSUIT JUDGMENT CREDITORS WHO WILL "NEVER EXIST" (DUE TO IMMUNITY) --- ESPECIALLY GIVEN THAT ANY SUCH "ILLEGAL " ACT IS "REVERSIBLE" ANYWAY AND THEREFORE WOULD NOT PROTECT THE DEBTOR'S PROPERTY FROM LAWSUIT JUDGMENT CREDITORS IN THE FIRST PLACE (MAKING SUCH AN EFFORT ABSOLUTELY POINTLESS). But, Class does not know enough to even realize this.

    5. If more be necessary, North Carolina law already makes the EQUITY IN A HOMESTEAD (a residential property occupied by the owners), VEHICLE AND CERTAIN OTHER PROPERTY “EXEMPT” (“protected”) from the claims of lawsuit judgment creditors up to a certain amount ANYWAY. THUS, IN MOST CASES, THIS EXEMPTION WOULD ELIMINATE THE NEED FOR POLICE OFFICERS TO "ILLEGALLY" PRETEND TO PUT THEIR PROPERTY INTO OTHER PEOPLES' NAMES, EVEN IF THAT "ILLEGAL" ACT WOULD PROTECT THEIR PROPERTY FROM LAWSUIT JUDGMENT CREDITORS (AND IT WOULD NOT). But, Class does not know this. Constitution of the State Of North Carolina Art. 16 § 1C-1601. http://www.ncleg.net/EnactedLegislat...Article_16.pdf

    For more information on the “Property In Other Peoples' Names Hoax”, see Class’ internet radio show, “Episode 966" on Talkshoe (spelled correctly) AIB radio, recorded or posted on 12-12-2015. http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web...=2&pageSize=15 or simply Google “Post Oak Public Relations”. https://www.linkedin.com/in/harvey-wharfield-0b56746. Further, be sure to look into William H. Gilpatric, IV of Middlesex County, Maine (address and contact information withheld). Gilpatric is aware of all the parties involved in the hoax and how it was manufactured and marketed.

    ANALYSIS:
    Suffice it to say, this is one of Tavares' and Class’ more embarrassingly-amateur hoaxes. (In order to manufacture a really good hoax, YOU HAVE TO KNOW WHAT YOU ARE LYING ABOUT --- AND TAVARES AND CLASS DO NOT.). Tavares and Class do not lie to people for whom they have respect. They only lie to people for whom he have no respect. The PATHOLOGICAL LIES reflected in this particular hoax speak volumes about what Tavares and Class REALLY think of the American people. Tavares and Class pretend to be a humble public servants who are only revealing the "hidden truth" about the law and the legal system to the down-trodden masses. But, this is not so. They are actually calculating and manipulative charlatans with no conscience whatsoever and no moral compass whatsoever. Their two missions in life are to glorify themselves and to incite hatred and violence against INNOCENT AMERICANS. If they have to lie to the American people and commit fraud upon the American people in the process of inciting this hatred, that is perfectly fine with them. They have no intention of telling you the truth. None.

    ABOUT ROD CLASS:
    Rod Class is a functionally-illiterate amateur legal theorist with barely a high school education WHO HAS LOST EVERY SINGLE CASE IN WHICH HE HAS EVER BEEN INVOLVED (OVER 76 CONSECUTIVE LOSSES IN A ROW, AND STILL COUNTING). Further, Class has a long history of PSYCHIATRIC PROBLEMS involving DELUSIONS, PATHOLOGICAL OPPOSITION/DEFIANCE of AUTHORITY FIGURES and PATHOLOGICAL LYING. Moreover, Class is a MULTI-CONVICTED, WEAPONS RELATED, CONVICTED FELON who also has SEVERAL ADDITIONAL MISDEMEANOR CONVICTIONS, as well. Because of Class’ well-publicized HATRED of our ELECTED representatives, their appointees and our REPUBLICAN form of government, because of his HISTORY OF PSYCHIATRIC PROBLEMS and because of his LENGTHY CRIMINAL HISTORY involving DEADLY WEAPONS, Class has been placed on the United States TERRORIST WATCH LIST. For more on Rod Class, CLICK HERE. http://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...61#post1175261.

    Most importantly, Class is a PROFESSIONAL HOAXER AND CHARLATAN who is behind a number of legal HOAXES which he created and peddles to INTENTIONALLY DEFRAUD the American people. (Google "Judge DALE Hoax", "Debra Jones Hoax", "Private Attorney General Hoax", "14th Amendment, Section 4 Bounty Hunter Hoax", "All Government Agencies Are 'Private Entities' or 'Private Contractors' Hoax" (A.K.A. the "BOMBSHELL: FOURTH Administrative Ruling Hoax"), "Property Into Other Peoples' Names Hoax", "Lawyers Have No Authority Hoax", "Right To Travel Hoax", "My Paperwork Would Have Overturned Every Prior Case Hoax", "The Supreme Court Loves My Paperwork Hoax", "The Private Attorney General 'Certificate' Hoax" (A.K.A. "Why Was Rod Class In Washington, D.C. In The First Place?"), "The Federal Reserve Notes Are Not Money Hoax" (A.K.A. "The Harold Stanley Case Hoax"), "The United States is a Private, For-Profit Corporation Hoax" (A.K.A. "Title 28 U.S.C 3002(15)(a) Proves That The United States Is A Private, For-Profit Corporation Hoax"), the "Court Registry Investment System Hoax" (A.K.A. The "C.R.I.S. Hoax"), the "Embezzling Federal Funds Hoax" and numerous other hoaxes.). For more on Rod Class, CLICK HERE. http://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...61#post1175261

    ABOUT SNOOP4TRUTH:
    Snoop4truth is a legal expert and whistle blower who exposes online hoaxes. Snoop4truth did not reveal this information to harm Deborah Tavares or Rod Class. Instead, Snoop4truth exposed this information solely to reduce the CATASTROPHIC DAMAGE that such INTENTIONAL FRAUD inflicts upon the American people every single day. Had it not been for Deborah Tavares' and Rod Class' role in the "Judge DALE Hoax", Snoop4truth would not have exposed this information here.

    The message to all hoaxers and charlatans? Just tell the truth.

  30. The Following User Says Thank You to snoop4truth For This Post:

    Akasha (12th February 2019)

  31. Link to Post #158
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    30th September 2015
    Age
    59
    Posts
    212
    Thanks
    147
    Thanked 412 times in 163 posts

    Default Re: The Hoaxes of Deborah Tavares

    COMMENT 8: DEBORAH TAVARES, ROD CLASS & THE "SOVEREIGN CITIZEN" HOAX

    FIRST SEE THE HOAX HERE:
    http://removingtheshackles.blogspot....udge-dale.html (contains 100% FAKE case law and a series of LIES written by Rodney DALE Class while pretending to "Judge DALE").

    THE HOAX:
    DEBORAH TAVARES, Rod Class and other amateur legal theorists mistakenly claim that a "SOVEREIGN" is an INDIVIDUAL and that the enemy of a "SOVEREIGN" is "We the People" COLLECTIVELY in the form of the GOVERNMENT of "We the People". But, this is not so.

    THE TRUTH:
    "We the People" COLLECTIVELY in the form OF THE GOVERNMENT of "We the People" IS THE "SOVEREIGN". The INDIVIDUAL IS NOT "SOVEREIGN".

    THE ACTUAL REAL LAW ITSELF ON WHETHER INDIVIDUALS ARE "SOVEREIGN"

    1). Lozano v. Bank of America Loans, https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. In this case, the plaintiff (an amateur legal theorist) sued a lender and claimed to be "SOVEREIGN". But, the court ruled otherwise and held, "First, SHE [the plaintiff] IS NOT A "SOVEREIGN". A SOVEREIGN IS THE GOVERNMENT, OR THE LEADER OF A GOVERNMENT [a Monarch]. SHE [the plaintiff] IS NIETHER [a government or a leader of a government]." TRANSLATION: UNDER U.S. LAW, ONLY "A GOVERNMENT" CAN BE "SOVEREIGN". UNDER U.S. LAW, NO INDIVIDUAL CAN EVER BE "SOVEREIGN" ("A GOVERNMENT").

    2). U.S. v. Crawford, https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. In this case, the court wrote, "Defendant [an amateur legal theorist] asserts in his motion that HE IS A... SOVEREIGN, and as such is ENTITLED TO SOVEREIGN [GOVERNMENTAL] IMMUNITY from prosecution." But, the court ruled otherwise and held, "Defendant... IS NOT A SOVEREIGN [meaning a GOVERNMENT], BUT [IS] AN INDIVIDUAL. As with ANY INDIVIUAL criminal defendant, Crawford [the INDIVIDUAL defendant] is NOT ENTITLED TO SOVEREIGN [GOVERNMENTAL] IMMUNITY despite his claims to the contrary [because he is NOT a GOVERNMENT]... ." TRANSLATION: UNDER U.S. LAW, ONLY "A GOVERNMENT" CAN BE "SOVEREIGN". UNDER U.S. LAW, NO INDIVIDUAL CAN EVER BE "SOVEREIGN" ("A GOVERNMENT").

    3). Cooper v U.S., https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...2&as_sdt=40006 (HOLDING THAT ONLY THE UNTIED STATES AND THE INDIVIDUAL STATES ARE "SOVEREIGN"). In this case, the court held, "It is fundamental that THE UNITED STATES EXISTS AS A SOVEREIGN of delegated powers; DELEGATED TO IT BY THE "SOVEREIGNS" MAKING UP THE UNITED STATES, THE INDIVIDUAL STATES [not individual human beings]." (in the 3rd to last paragraph of this case). TRANSLATION: UNDER U.S. LAW, ONLY "A GOVERNMENT" CAN BE "SOVEREIGN". UNDER U.S. LAW, NO INDIVIDUAL CAN EVER BE "SOVEREIGN" ("A GOVERNMENT").

    4). Chisolm v. Georgia, https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006 (HOLDING THAT ONLY THE STATES AND THE UNITED STATES ARE SOVEREIGN). The court wrote, "EVERY STATE IN THE UNION in every instance where ITS SOVEREIGNTY has NOT been delegated to THE UNITED STATES, [IS]... COMPLETELY SOVEREIGN, AS THE UNITED STATES ARE [SOVEREIGN] IN RESPECT TO THE POWERS SURRENDERED [TO THEM BY THE STATES]. THE UNITED STATES ARE SOVEREIGN AS TO ALL POWERS OF GOVERNMENT ACTUALLY SURRENDERED [TO THEM BY THE STATES]: EACH STATE IN THE UNION IS SOVEREIGN AS TO ALL POWERS RESERVED. " (at the 14th paragraph at about 15% through the text). TRANSLATION: UNDER U.S. LAW, ONLY "A GOVERNMENT" CAN BE "SOVEREIGN". UNDER U.S. LAW, NO INDIVIDUAL CAN EVER BE "SOVEREIGN" ("A GOVERNMENT").

    SIDE NOTE: Deborah Tavares, Rod Class and other amateur legal theorists mistakenly believe that the STATES are franchises or subsidiaries of the FEDERAL government. https://scannedretina.com/2014/11/27...erican-people/. But, this is exactly BACKWARDS and OPPOSITE to the truth. The FEDERAL government is a franchise and subsidiary of THE STATES. https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. This case reads, "The powers of the general [FEDERAL] Government ARE MADE UP OF CONCESSIONS [GIFTS] FROM THE STATES." (at the 24th paragraph at about 35% through the text).

    5). Parker v. Brown, https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006 (HOLDING THAT STATES ARE SOVEREIGN). The court wrote, "Under the Constitution, THE STATES ARE SOVEREIGN, SAVE ONLY [means "EXCEPT"] AS CONGRESS MAY CONSTITUTIONALLY [under Article 3, Section 8] SUBTRACT FROM THEIR AUTHORITY [their SOVEREIGNTY]." (at the 16th paragraph at about 30% through the text). TRANSLATION: UNDER U.S. LAW, ONLY "A GOVERNMENT" CAN BE "SOVEREIGN". UNDER U.S. LAW, NO INDIVIDUAL CAN EVER BE "SOVEREIGN" ("A GOVERNMENT").

    6). Feldman v. Gardner, https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. (HOLDING THAT THE STATES ARE SOVEREIGN). The court wrote, "Inherent in our system of government is the concept of DUAL [meaning FEDERAL and STATE] SOVEREIGNTY; EACH STATE IS SOVEREIGN, except to the extent that ITS SOVEREIGNTY is curtailed by the [United States] Constitution or validly restricted by Congress [as set forth in Article 3, Section 8]." (at the 1st paragraph in "Section B" at about 25% through the text). TRANSLATION: UNDER U.S. LAW, ONLY "A GOVERNMENT" CAN BE "SOVEREIGN". UNDER U.S. LAW, NO INDIVIDUAL CAN EVER BE "SOVEREIGN" ("A GOVERNMENT").

    7). Dred Scott v. Sandford (rev'd other grounds) https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. In this case, the Chief Justice of The United States Supreme Court held that the terms "SOVEREIGN" and "SOVEREIGNTY" refer ONLY to "We the People" COLLECTIVELY in the form of the GOVERNMENT and NOT TO INDIVIDUALS. He wrote, "The words 'people [a PLURAL term] of the United States' and 'citizens' [a PLURAL term] are synonymous terms, and mean the same thing. They both describe THE POLITICAL BODY [a SINGULAR term] who, according to our republican institutions, FORM THE SOVEREIGN [MEANING FORM THE GOVERNMENT], and who [COLLECTIVELY] hold the power and conduct the Government THROUGH THEIR [A PLURAL TERM] [ELECTED] REPRESENTATIVES [meaning the SOVEREIGNTY of "We the People" is exercised COLLECTIVELY through our ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES, not INDIVIDUALLY], They [a PLURAL term] are what we familiarly call the "SOVEREIGN PEOPLE [a PLURAL term]," and every [INDIVIDUAL] citizen is ONE of this [SOVEREIGN GROUP OF] PEOPLE [a PLURAL term], and a constituent member of this SOVEREIGNTY [the GOVERNMENT of "We the People" COLLECTIVELY]." (at the 24th paragraph at about 5% through the text). TRANSLATION: UNDER U.S. LAW, ONLY "A GOVERNMENT" CAN BE "SOVEREIGN". UNDER U.S. LAW, NO INDIVIDUAL CAN EVER BE "SOVEREIGN" ("A GOVERNMENT").

    8). Republic Of Panama v. BCCI Holdings, Inc. https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. In this case, the court wrote, "The rules of personal jurisdiction protect an INDIVIDUAL'S RIGHTS, NOT A SOVEREIGN'S RIGHTS [drawing a stark contrast between an INDIVIDUAL and a SOVEREIGN]." (in the 24th paragraph). Translation: An INDIVIDUAL has entirely DIFFERENT RIGHTS when compared to the rights of a SOVEREIGN. So, a SOVEREIGN cannot logically be an INDIVIDUAL.

    THE BOTTOM LINE: Note that ALL amateur legal theories (ex: "individuals, rather than governments, are sovereign") are always EXACTLY BACKWARDS AND OPPOSITE to what the REAL law actually is. There are NO EXCEPTIONS! Amateur legal theories ARE NOT REAL. They are FAKE. They are LIES. Amateur legal theories and the REAL law are the EXACT OPPOSITES of one another. Amateur legal theories are an IMAGINARY ALTERNATIVE to the REAL law that is actually used by the REAL legal system and the ENTIRE REST OF THE WORLD. Amateur legal theories have a 100% FAILURE RATE in court BECAUSE THEY ARE FAKE. They are NOT INTENDED TO WORK and they DO NOT WORK! They never have. They never will. Their SOLE PURPOSE is to attempt to discredit and delegitimize our REPUBLICAN form of government, the ELECTED representatives of "We the People" and intended to incite hatred and violence against innocent Americans. Nothing more.

    FACT: Just in case you do not already know, all FUTURE DECISIONS on the subject of whether individuals rather than governments are "sovereign" WILL FOLLOW THE DECISIONS SHOWN ABOVE (CALLED "PRECEDENT"). So, the law on this same subject will always be the same as reflected in the cases above.
    https://definitions.uslegal.com/b/binding-precedent/.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precedent.
    https://dictionary.thelaw.com/binding-precedent/.


    FACT: Thus, Deborah Tavares, Rod Class and other amateur legal theorists who oppose their own government ACTUALLY OPPOSE THE VERY "SOVEREIGN" AND THE VERY "SOVEREIGNTY" THAT THEY CLAIM TO SUPPORT. This means that Deborah Tavares, Rod Class and other amateur legal theorists who oppose their own government ARE ACTUALLY THE ENEMIES of the "SOVEREIGN" and ACTUALLY THE ENEMIES of "SOVEREIGNTY", not their supporters. But, they do not know enough to even realize this. This is why many such amateur legal theorists (like Rod Class) find themselves on the United States TERRORIST WATCH LIST (because they actually oppose the "SOVEREIGN" and because they actually oppose "SOVEREIGNTY").

    This fundamental mistake (the mistaken belief that the INDIVIDUAL is "SOVEREIGN" and that the GOVERNMENT of "We the People" IS NOT "SOVEREIGN") reflects that the terms, "SOVEREIGN" and "SOVEREIGNTY" are perhaps the single most misused and misunderstood terms in all of amateur legal theory.

    ABOUT SOVEREIGNTY

    BACKGROUND: Originally in politics, a "SOVEREIGN" was a SINGLE "MONARCH" (King or Queen) GOVERNMENTAL HEAD OF STATE who GOVERNED a nation state and all of the INDIVIDUALS in the nation state. Originally, the RIGHT of a SINGLE "MONARCH" GOVERNMENTAL HEAD OF STATE to GOVERN his/her own nation state and all of the INDIVIDUALS in its own nation state WITHOUT OUTSIDE INTERFERENCE was that MONARCH's right of "SOVEREIGNTY".

    Then and now, a "SOVEREIGN" meant/means a "GOVERNMENT" OF ITS OWN NATION STATE and all of the individuals in its own nation state. Then and now, "SOVEREIGNTY," meant/means that GOVERNMENT’S RIGHT TO GOVERN ITS OWN NATION STATE and all of the individuals in its own nation state WITHOUT OUTSIDE INTERFERENCE.

    THE STATES: But, here in the United States, we rejected the notion of a SINGLE "MONARCH" GOVERNMENTAL HEAD OF STATE to GOVERN the state and all of the INDIVIDUALS in the state. Here in our country, we adopted a republican form of government whereby "We the People" COLLECTIVELY (not INDIVIDUALLY) GOVERNED our own states and all of the INDIVIDUALS in our own state COLLECTIVELY (not INDIVIDUALLY) through our ELECTED representatives of our own STATE.

    So, here in our country, THE STATE ITSELF, which consists of "We the People" COLLECTIVELY (not INDIVIDUALLY) became "SOVEREIGN" (which still means THE GOVERNMENT OF A STATE). This means that in our country THE STATE ITSELF legally stands in the shoes of the SINGLE MONARCH of yesteryear. So, in our country, THE STATE ITSELF GOVERNS the STATE and all of the INDIVIDUALS in the state (instead of the SINGLE MONARCH of yesteryear). But, the right, power and authority of THE STATE ITSELF as a "SOVEREIGN" and the right, power and authority of the MONARCH of yesteryear as a "SOVEREIGN" ARE EXACTLY THE SAME. In our country, a "SOVEREIGN" IS STILL A "GOVERNMENT" OF A STATE, but a "SOVEREIGN" is no longer a SINGLE MONARCH.

    Medvedieff v. Cities Service Oil Co., CLICK HERE: https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...40006&as_vis=1. This case reads, "The term`citizen,' as understood in our law, is precisely analogous to the term 'subject' in the common law [when MONARCHS ruled supreme], and the change of phrase [from "subject" to "citizen"] has entirely resulted from the change [in the form] of government [from a "MONARCHY" to a "REPUBLICAN" form of government]. The SOVEREIGNTY has been transferred from one man [a "MONARCH"] to the COLLECTIVE BODY OF THE PEOPLE [CALLED THE "STATE"] —and HE WHO BEFORE WAS A 'SUBJECT' OF A KING 'IS NOW A CITIZEN OF THE STATE.'" [CLICK HERE http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictiona...overeign.aspx; https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/...lish/sovereign]. TRANSLATION: SOVEREIGNTY (THE RIGHT TO RULE) HAS BEEN TRANSFERRED FROM ONE MAN (A "MONARCH") TO THE COLLECTIVE BODY OF THE PEOPLE AS A WHOLE (CALLED THE "STATE") —AND HE WHO BEFORE WAS A "SUBJECT" OF A SOVEREIGN MONARCH IS NOW A CITIZEN OF THE SOVEREIGN "STATE.'"

    DEFINITION OF "SOVEREIGN":

    http://www.duhaime.org/LegalDictionary/S/Sovereign.aspx

    https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/...lish/sovereign

    THE BOTTOM LINE: Thus, In our country, the term, "SOVEREIGN" is a term THAT ONLY APPLIES TO A GOVERNMENT OF "WE THE PEOPLE" COLLECTIVELY (AS A WHOLE) AND NOT TO A SINGLE "CITIZEN", INDIVIDUAL OR PERSON INDIVIDUALLY. But, Deborah Tavares, Rod Class and other amateur legal theorists do not know enough to even realize this.

    Here in the United States, the INDIVIDUAL did not become a "GOVERNMENT" OF A STATE. So, here in the United States, the INDIVIDUAL did not become a "SOVEREIGN" (a GOVERNMENT OF A STATE). As a result, here in the United States, the INDIVIDUAL does not GOVERN the STATE or any of the INDIVIDUALS in the state.

    THE UNITED STATES: The United States ITSELF is also a SOVEREIGN nation state consisting of a union of MEMBER SOVEREIGN STATES. So, here in the United States, THE STATES and the United States are both "SOVEREIGN" GOVERNMENTAL HEADS OF STATE (WITHIN THEIR RESPECTIVE JURISDICTIONS AS DIFFERENTIATED BY SUBJECT MATTER IN THE FEDERAL CONSTITUTION).

    This means that here in the United States, THE STATE AND THE UNITED STATES OCCUPY THE SAME EXACT LEGAL POSITION (AND HAVE THE SAME LEGAL RIGHT, POWER AND AUTHORITY TO GOVERN THE STATE AND ALL OF THE INDIVIDUALS IN THE STATE) AS DID THE SINGLE MONARCH OF YESTERYEAR, except that the powers of the United States (as distinguished from the individual STATES) are limited to those powers expressly delegated to it BY THE STATES in the United States Constitution (a tiny list of subjects), whereas the powers of the individual STATES (as distinguished from the United States) have no such limitation.

    Cooper v U.S., https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...2&as_sdt=40006. In this case, the court held, "It is fundamental that THE UNITED STATES EXISTS AS A SOVEREIGN of delegated powers; delegated to it BY THE "SOVEREIGNS" MAKING UP THE UNITED STATES, THE INDIVIDUAL STATES [not individual human beings]." (in the 3rd TO LAST paragraph of this case).


    Here in the United States, "We the People" exercise our "SOVEREIGNTY" COLLECTIVELY (NOT INDIVIDUALLY) through our VOTES. ---Thomas Jefferson (see below). Thus, "We (a PLURAL term) the People (also a PLURAL term)" exercise our "SOVEREIGNTY" (COLLECTIVELY, not INDIVIDUALLY) through our ELECTIONS.

    Jenkins v. Williamson-Butler, https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. The court quoted Thomas Jefferson and wrote, "IT IS BY THEIR [a PLURAL term] VOTES [also a PLURAL term] THAT THE PEOPLE [also a PLURAL term] EXERCISE THEIR [also a PLURAL term] SOVEREIGNTY [AND NOT BY ANY OTHER MEANS]. ---Thomas Jefferson." (at the 12th paragraph, not including block indented portions, at about 60% through the text). TRANSLATION: UNDER U.S. LAW, ONLY "WE THE PEOPLE" COLLECTIVELY IN THE FORM OF "THE GOVERNMENT" CAN BE "SOVEREIGN". UNDER U.S. LAW, NO INDIVIDUAL ACTING OUTSIDE THE GOVERMENT CAN EVER BE "SOVEREIGN" ("A GOVERNMENT").

    Note that the term "the governed' (below) IS A PLURAL TERM (not an INDIVIDUAL term).

    https://www.dictionary.com/browse/co...f-the-governed

    But, as INDIVIDUALS, none of us are “SOVEREIGN” (which still means the GOVERNMENT of a state) and as INDIVIDUALS, none of us can exercise any "SOVEREIGNTY" (which still means the right to GOVERN the state and all of the INDIVIDUALS in the state). In our country, we no longer recognize a SINGLE INDIVIDUAL (or “MONARCH”) as “SOVEREIGN”. In our country, no single INDIVIDUAL is the GOVERNMENT OF A STATE. This is why, in our country, no INDIVIDUAL can be "SOVEREIGN" (WHICH STILL MEANS A GOVERNMENT OF A STATE).

    Lozano v. Bank of America Loans, https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. The court held, "First, she [the plaintiff] IS NOT A "SOVEREIGN". A SOVEREIGN IS THE GOVERNMENT, OR THE LEADER OF A GOVERNMENT [such as the Queen Of England]. She [the plaintiff] is neither [a government or a leader of a government]." TRANSLATION: UNDER U.S. LAW, ONLY "A GOVERNMENT" CAN BE "SOVEREIGN". UNDER U.S. LAW, NO INDIVIDUAL CAN EVER BE "SOVEREIGN" ("A GOVERNMENT").

    APPLICATION: This is why every amateur legal theorist who claims to be "SOVEREIGN" (a GOVERNMENT) ALWAYS LOSES on that issue with ALL law enforcement officers and with ALL courts. This is why ALL law enforcement officers and ALL courts ALWAYS treat such amateur legal theorists as the mere INDIVIDUALS that they really are. Amateur legal theorists who claim to be "SOVEREIGN" (a GOVERNMENT) to law enforcement officers and in court do nothing but demonstrate their IGNORANCE of the law and their IGNORANCE of history--- AND THEY ALWAYS LOSE!

    WHAT YOU CAN DO: If you do not like the laws, the ELECTED legislators, the ELECTED executive officers or the ELECTED judges or the ELECTED prosecutors, then do something about it. VOTE OR RUN FOR OFFICE. Pretending to be an INDIVIDUAL, GOVERNMENT OF A STATE (a “SOVEREIGN” MONARCH) has never, and will never work for you as a “defense” to the application of any law, the jurisdiction of any law enforcement officer or court or to the consequences any arrest, charge or conviction.

    CONCLUSION: IN OUR COUNTRY, NO INDIVIDUAL CAN BE A "SOVEREIGN CITIZEN" (OR OTHERWISE "SOVEREIGN"). HERE, AND ELSEWHERE, ONLY A GOVERNMENT CAN BE A "SOVEREIGN".

    THE ACTUAL REAL LAW ON WHETHER AN "INDIVIDUAL" CAN BE "SOVEREIGN" AND THEREFORE BE "IMMUNE" FROM PROSECUTION FOR VIOLATING STATUTES WRITTEN BY LAWMAKERS ELECTED BY "WE THE PEOPLE":

    1. U.S. v. Benabe,https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. In this case, several defendants (all of whom were amateur legal theorists) falsely claimed to be "SOVEREIGN" and therefore claimed that they were not subject to the court's jurisdiction. But, the court held otherwise and wrote, "We [the courts] have REPEATEDLY REJECTED their [referring to amateur legal theorists'] theories of INDIVIDUAL [rather than collective] SOVEREIGNTY, immunity from prosecution, and their ilk." (citations omitted). The court then cited a number of other decisions with approval which. " ... REJECT[ED] the 'shop worn' argument that a[n] [INDIVIDUAL] DEFENDANT IS A SOVEREIGN [a GOVERNMENT] and is beyond the jurisdiction bounds of the district court. (citation omitted)... [and another case] describing defendant's proposed 'SOVEREIGN CITIZEN defense as having 'NO CONCEIVABLE VALIDITY IN AMERICAN LAW' (citation omitted)... [and another case] DISMISSING [SOVEREIGN CITIZEN] jurisdiction arguments as FRIVOULOUS... ." In the case at bar, the court held, "Regardless of an INDIVIDUAL'S claimed status of descent, be it as a 'SOVEREIGN CITIZEN,' a 'secured-party creditor,' or a 'flesh-and-blood human being [rather than a corporate fiction],' THAT [INDIVIDUAL] PERSON IS NOT BEYOND THE JURISDICTION OF THE COURTS. These [amateur legal] theories SHOULD BE REJECTED summarily [means "without any delay"], however they are presented." (at paragraph 23 at about 50% through the text). TRANSLATION: Claiming to be "SOVEREIGN" ("a GOVERNMENT") WILL NOT BENEFIT YOU IN ANY WAY IN ANY TYPE OF CASE. This is because under U.S. law, no INDIVIDUAL is a GOVERNMENT (a "SOVEREIGN").

    2. Williams v, Georgia Dept. Of Corrections, https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. In this case, the court wrote, "[The Plaintiff's]... claims are brought under a 'SOVEREIGN CITIZEN' [amateur legal] theory. THIS IS A FRIVOLOUS [AMATEUR LEGAL] LEGAL THEORY THAT IS CONSISTENTLY REJECTED BY... [THE] COURTS [read this phrase again]." (citations omitted). The court went on to cite the holdings of other courts in support, "The ... [amateur legal] theories of `SOVEREIGN CITIZENS' are NOT ESTABLISHED LAW IN THIS COURT OR ANYWHERE IN THIS COUNTRY'S VALID LEGAL SYSTEM (citations omitted)... [and another decision] finding the SOVEREIGN CITIZEN argument to be to 'WHOLLY INSUBSTANTIAL AND FRIVOLOUS' (citation omitted)... [and another decision which] REJECT[ED] THE SOVEREIGN CITIZEN ARGUMENT as 'SHOP WORN' and FRIVOLOUS.'" In the case at bar, the court held, "The Court [referring to itself] therefore finds that [the Plaintiff's SOVEREIGN CITIZEN]... LEGAL THEORY is also 'INDISPUTABLY MERITLESS' [read this phrase again]." (at paragraph 8 in this case at about 90% through the text). TRANSLATION: Claiming to be "SOVEREIGN" ("a GOVERNMENT") WILL NOT BENEFIT YOU IN ANY WAY IN ANY TYPE OF CASE. This is because under U.S. law, no INDIVIDUAL is a GOVERNMENT (a "SOVEREIGN").

    3. Paul v. State Of New York, https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. This case reads, "It is clear [that the Plaintiff]... is an adherent of the 'SOVEREIGN CITIZENS' movement (citations omitted) which the Second Circuit has described as 'a loosely affiliated group who [mistakenly] believe that the state and federal governments [of "We the People"] lack constitutional legitimacy and therefore have no authority to regulate their behavior.'" (citations omitted)... . The court cited other cases with approval and continued, "So-called SOVEREIGN CITIZENS [mistakenly] believe that they are not subject to government authority [of "We the People"] and [UNSUCCESSFULLY] employ various tactics in an attempt to, among other things, avoid paying taxes, extinguish debts, and derail criminal proceedings. (citation omitted). The `SOVEREIGN CITIZEN MOVEMENT' is well documented. The Federal Bureau of Investigation has classified`SOVEREIGN CITIZENS' as domestic terror threats BECAUSE THEY ARE ANTI-GOVERNMENT [of "We the People"] EXTREMISTS... ." In the case at bar, the court wrote, "The gravamen [core of] of plaintiff's amended complaint is that as a SOVEREIGN CITIZEN, he is not subject to the jurisdiction of the ... courts... . [But] contrary to plaintiff's contentions, 'SOVEREIGN CITIZENS,' like ALL... [INDIVIDUALS in] the United States, ARE SUBJECT TO THE LAWS OF THE JURISDICTION IN WHICH THEY [FIND THEMSELVES]... ." (citations omitted). The court cited other decisions with approval which found "similar [SOVEREIGN CITIZEN] claims by Moorish Nationals... [to the effect] that they are not subject to... state laws, to be 'MERITLESS'. Plaintiff's purported [means "pretended"] status as a 'SOVEREIGN CITIZEN' 'does NOT enable him to violate state and federal laws [of "We the People"] without consequence.'" (citations omitted). Since... plaintiff's factual allegations in the amended complaint are CLEARLY BASELESS, and "[t]he conspiracy and legal revisionist [amateur legal] theories of 'SOVEREIGN CITIZENS' are NOT ESTABLISHED LAW IN THIS COURT OR ANYWHERE IN THIS COUNTRY'S VALID LEGAL SYSTEM,"... , plaintiff's amended complaint is both FACTUALLY AND LEGALLY FRIVOLOUS. Accordingly, the amended complaint is sua sponte [means "on the court's own motion"] DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS." (at paragraph 10 at about 75% through the text of the case.). TRANSLATION: Claiming to be "SOVEREIGN" ("a GOVERNMENT") WILL NOT BENEFIT YOU IN ANY WAY IN ANY TYPE OF CASE. This is because under U.S. law, no INDIVIDUAL is a GOVERNMENT (a "SOVEREIGN").

    4. Frye v. Barbour, https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. In this case, an amateur legal theorist unsuccessfully sued various government officials who he mistakenly blamed for his many criminal convictions and incarcerations. The court wrote, "[The]... Plaintiff [claims]... that this court lacks jurisdiction over him [because]... he is a SOVEREIGN CITIZEN, not subject to the laws of the United States of America... . However, the courts that have [already] considered such 'SOVEREIGN' CITIZEN' claims have found them to be FRIVOLOUS." The court cited other decisions is support which held, "[C]ourts ROUTINELY REJECT "SOVEREIGN CITIZEN' claims as FRIVOLOUS. (citation omitted). 'Regardless of an individual's claimed status of descent, be it as a `SOVEREIGN CITIZEN' , a `secured-party creditor,' or a `flesh-and-blood human being [rather than as a corporate fiction],' that person is not beyond the jurisdiction of the courts. These [amateur legal] theories SHOULD BE REJECTED summarily, however they are presented.' (citation omitted). '[S]OVEREIGN CITIZEN claims are WHOLLY FRIVOLOUS [read that phrase again].'" (at the 12th paragraph, not including block indented portions, at about 85% through the text). TRANSLATION: Claiming to be "SOVEREIGN" ("a GOVERNMENT") WILL NOT BENEFIT YOU IN ANY WAY IN ANY TYPE OF CASE. This is because under U.S. law, no INDIVIDUAL is a GOVERNMENT (a "SOVEREIGN").

    5. Dudley v. Eggert, https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. In this case, an amateur legal theorist unsuccessfully sued a government official for "seeking to incarcerate a SOVEREIGN and NATURAL FREE-MAN of the land [referring to himself] and extort [his] money without a contract threatening [his] liberty [as if a contract were necessary]." The court held that "[courts have]... "REPEATEDLY REJECTED... [such amateur legal] theories of INDIVIDUAL [rather than collective] SOVEREIGNTY, immunity from prosecution, and their ilk." (citation omitted). SOVEREIGN CITIZEN [amateur legal] theories are typically raised by defendants in criminal prosecutions or by tax protestors, but courts in this Circuit HAVE [ALSO] SUMMARILY REJECTED THEM in other contexts as well. (citation omitted). The court cited another case in support which "REJECT[ED] the plaintiff's SOVEREIGN CITIZEN challenge to state child support proceedings as "SHOP WORN" and "FRIVOLOUS." (at the 3rd to last paragraph at about 85% through the text). TRANSLATION: Claiming to be "SOVEREIGN" ("a GOVERNMENT") WILL NOT BENEFIT YOU IN ANY WAY IN ANY TYPE OF CASE. This is because under U.S. law, no INDIVIDUAL is a GOVERNMENT (a "SOVEREIGN").

    6. Hoglund v. Indiana, https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. In this case, a prisoner (and amateur legal theorist) unsuccessfully sued various state agencies and officials for imaginary misconduct that he mistakenly claimed resulted in his convictions. He alleged that government officials created laws "meant to control the people a as [fictional] legal entities, but not the SOVEREIGN man [referring to himself]... ." But, the court held otherwise and wrote, "The court of appeals has "REPEATEDLY REJECTED... [amateur legal] theories of INDIVIDUAL [rather than collective] SOVEREIGNTY, immunity from prosecution, and their ilk." (citation omitted). Even if an individual claims the status of "a `SOVEREIGN CITIZEN,' a `secured-party creditor,' or a `flesh-and-blood human being,' that person is not beyond the jurisdiction of the courts. These [amateur legal] theories SHOULD BE REJECTED summarily, however they are presented." (citation omitted). The court also cited another case in support which "describe[ed] defendant's 'SOVEREIGN CITIZEN' defense as having "NO CONCEIVABLE VALIDITY IN AMERICAN LAW.'" The court ruled, "Because all three of Plaintiff's claims rest on his [amateur legal] theories of SOVEREIGN CITIZENSHIP, this complaint must be DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS." (at the 3rd and 4th paragraph at about 85% through the text). TRANSLATION: Claiming to be "SOVEREIGN" ("a GOVERNMENT") WILL NOT BENEFIT YOU IN ANY WAY IN ANY TYPE OF CASE. This is because under U.S. law, no INDIVIDUAL is a GOVERNMENT (a "SOVEREIGN").

    7. U.S. v. Johnson, https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. In this case, the Defendant was charged with filing a fraudulent lien against a federal employee. The Defendant filed a motion to dismiss the charges and claimed to be "a SOVEREIGN CITIZEN" and thus [claimed] the court ha[d] no jurisdiction over him." But the court held otherwise and wrote, "[T]he Seventh Circuit HAS READILY REJECTED such arguments alleging the SOVEREIGNTY OF [INDIVIDUAL] CITIZENS, finding such arguments to be FRIVOLOUS." (citation omitted). The court also cited other cases in support, one of which, "REJECT[ED] the 'SHOP WORN' argument that a defendant is a SOVEREIGN ["a GOVERNMENT"] and is beyond the jurisdiction bounds of the district court'... [and another case which] "DISMISS[ED] [a] lack of personal jurisdiction argument as FRIVOLOUS because [federal district] COURTS HAVE JURISDICTION OVER [ALL] DEFENDANTS [charged with]... VIOLATIONS OF FEDERAL LAW. A [FEDERAL] DISTRICT COURT HAS PERSONAL JURISDICTION OVER A DEFENDANT WHO 'IS WITHIN THE TERRITORY OF THE UNITED STATES.' (citation omitted). Thus [A] DEFENDANT... WITHIN THE TERRITORY OF THE UNITED STATES [IS] ...SUBJECT TO THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES.' (citation omitted)... . Therefore, the Court REJECTS Defendant's argument that he is somehow a SOVEREIGN ["a GOVERNMENT"]... WHO IS NOT SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THIS COURT." TRANSLATION: Claiming to be "SOVEREIGN" ("a GOVERNMENT") WILL NOT BENEFIT YOU IN ANY WAY IN ANY TYPE OF CASE. This is because under U.S. law, no INDIVIDUAL is a GOVERNMENT (a "SOVEREIGN").

    8. U.S. v Schneider, https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. In this case, the Defendant was convicted and sentenced to prison for five years for mailing a threatening letter to a judge (just like Rod Class routinely does). His sole defense to the charges was that "he is a FREE, SOVEREIGN CITIZEN and as such not subject to the jurisdiction of the federal courts." But, the court disagreed and wrote, "[T]hat defense has NO CONCEIVABLE VALIDITY IN AMERICAN LAW... ." (at the 2nd paragraph at about 40% through the text). TRANSLATION: Claiming to be "SOVEREIGN" ("a GOVERNMENT") WILL NOT BENEFIT YOU IN ANY WAY IN ANY TYPE OF CASE. This is because under U.S. law, no INDIVIDUAL is a GOVERNMENT (a "SOVEREIGN").

    9. Bey v. Indiana, https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. In this case, an amateur legal theorist sued the state to stop it from taxing his real property. This case reads, "Bey says he's a 'SOVEREIGN CITIZEN' and therefore can't lawfully be taxed by Indiana or its subdivisions in the absence of a contract between them and him [as if a contract were necessary]." (citations omitted). But, the court wrote, "We have REPEATEDLY REJECTED such claims. (citations omitted). We do so [REJECT SUCH CLAIMS] in this case as well... ." (at the 2nd paragraph at about 35% through the text). TRANSLATION: Claiming to be "SOVEREIGN" ("a GOVERNMENT") WILL NOT BENEFIT YOU IN ANY WAY IN ANY TYPE OF CASE. This is because under U.S. law, no INDIVIDUAL is a GOVERNMENT (a "SOVEREIGN").

    10. Osoria v. Connecticut" https://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...n&as_sdt=40006. In this case, an amateur legal theorist who was convicted for sexually molesting a child sued the state that convicted and imprisoned him. The court wrote, "... Plaintiff's complaint MUST BE DISMISSED as... FAILING TO STATE A PLAUSIBLE CLAIM... and AS "FRIVOLOUS"... because it is based on an "INDISPUTABLY MERITLESS LEGAL THEORY [referring to SOVEREIGN CITIZEN THEORY]. (citation omitted). Given the language of Plaintiff's Complaint — declaring himself a "real flesh and blood man," "a natural born, free, living, breathing, flesh and blood human with SENTIENT [a term also used DYNAMO] and more existence... upon the soil, and "the living man,"... Plaintiff appears to consider himself a 'SOVEREIGN CITIZEN'... . Numerous Circuits have ... REJECTED [the]... underlying premise [of SOVEREIGN CITIZENS to the effect] that federal courts lack jurisdiction over all 'LIVING MEN.'" (citations omitted). In support, the court cited a number of holdings from other cases as follows, "[T]o the extent that the plaintiff argues that he is a SOVEREIGN CITIZEN and not subject to... [state] laws, [such an argument is]`WHOLLY INSUBSTANTIAL AND FRIVOLOUS.' (citations omitted). Defendants claiming to be 'SOVEREIGN CITIZENS' assert that the federal government [of "We the People"] is illegitimate and insist that they are not subject to its jurisdiction. [But] [t]he [SOVEREIGN CITIZEN] defense has `NO CONCEIVABLE VALIDITY IN AMERICAN LAW.'... ." The court then wrote, "[Federal and state courts]... have SIMILARLY DISMISSED "SOVEREIGN CITIZEN" claims." Then, in citing those other courts, the court wrote, "...[A]rguments common to the "SOVEREIGN CITIZEN" movement[]... have been CONSISTENTLY REJECTED by federal courts." (citation omitted). The court then cited another case which held, "This Court adds its voice TO THE JUDICIAL CHORUS [means hundreds of other courts] REJECTING, AS LEGALLY UNSUPPORTABLE, SOVEREIGN-CITIZEN-BASED challenges to federal law." (citation omitted). The court cited another case which held, "The`SOVEREIGN CITIZEN' BELIEF SYSTEM has been described by other courts as `COMPLETELY WITHOUT MERIT, 'PATENTLY FRIVOLOUS', and HAVING 'NO CONCEIVABLE VALIDITY IN AMERICAN LAW. (citations omitted)... ." In the case at bar, the court wrote, "[t]he crux of Osorio's Complaint is that [courts]... have no 'jurisdiction over living men.' [He argues that]... because... SOVEREIGN [CITIZENS]... are not named in the codes, [they]... are not subject to the codes... . He explicitly asserts that he, the "Secured Party/Plaintiff is not a subject of, or to . . . the United States Constitution, its Ordinances, Statutes, Codes, or Regulations... . Because Plaintiff's claims are ALL PREMISED on this "SOVEREIGN CITIZEN"... theory, THEY [ALL] FAIL TO STATE A PLAUSIBLE CLAIM UPON WHICH RELIEF CAN BE GRANTED. (citation omitted). Accordingly, they [the Plaintiff's claims] are "FRIVOLOUS" and WILL BE DISMISSED... ." (at the 25th, 26th, and 27th paragraph beginning at about 75% through the text, and at the 2nd to LAST paragraph at about 95% through the text). TRANSLATION: Claiming to be "SOVEREIGN" ("a GOVERNMENT") WILL NOT BENEFIT YOU IN ANY WAY IN ANY TYPE OF CASE. This is because under U.S. law, no INDIVIDUAL is a GOVERNMENT (a "SOVEREIGN").

    THE BOTTOM LINE: Note that ALL amateur legal theories (ex: "individuals are sovereign and exempt from the law") are always EXACTLY BACKWARDS AND OPPOSITE to what the REAL law actually is. There are NO EXCEPTIONS! Amateur legal theories ARE NOT REAL. They are FAKE. They are LIES. Amateur legal theories and the REAL law are the EXACT OPPOSITES of one another. Amateur legal theories are an IMAGINARY ALTERNATIVE to the REAL law that is actually used by the REAL legal system and the ENTIRE REST OF THE WORLD. Amateur legal theories have a 100% FAILURE RATE in court BECAUSE THEY ARE FAKE. They are NOT INTENDED TO WORK and they DO NOT WORK! They never have. They never will. Their SOLE PURPOSE is to attempt to discredit and delegitimize our REPUBLICAN form of government, the ELECTED representatives of "We the People" and intended to incite hatred and violence against innocent Americans. Nothing more.

    FACT: Just in case you do not already know, all FUTURE DECISIONS on the subject of whether individuals are "sovereign" an exempt from the law WILL FOLLOW THE DECISIONS SHOWN ABOVE (CALLED "PRECEDENT"). So, the law on this same subject will always be the same as reflected in the cases above. https://definitions.uslegal.com/b/binding-precedent/. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precedent. https://dictionary.thelaw.com/binding-precedent/.

    HOW THIS MISTAKE CAME ABOUT:

    Deborah Tavares, Rod Class and other amateur legal theorists are unable to distinguish between PLURAL terms and SINGULAR terms. This inability results in much of their confusion about the law. In a republican form of government, such as ours, "WE" (a PLURAL term) the "PEOPLE" (also a PLURAL term) exercise our power and control over our own government COLLECTIVELY (not INDIVIDUALLY). But, as INDIVIDUALS, we exercise no such power or control. In a republican form of government, such as ours, the authority of a government depends on the COLLECTIVE (not INDIVIDUAL) "consent" of the "governed" (also a PLURAL term) COLLECTIVELY. But, as INDIVIDUALS, our "consent" to our government (contractual or otherwise), to its jurisdiction or to our laws IS NOT REQUIRED.

    7TH GRADE CIVICS: In a republican form of government such as ours, there are THREE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT. This prevents tyranny from any single branch of government. This legal principle is called the "SEPARATION OF POWERS DOCTRINE" which is found in the constitution of every state and in the constitution of the United States. Our three branches of government are the ELECTED LEGISLATIVE branch (the ELECTED statutory law makers), the ELECTED EXECUTIVE branch (the ELECTED law enforcement officials and their appointees) and the ELECTED JUDICIAL branch (the ELECTED judges, the ELECTED prosecutors and the ELECTED public defenders of the courts). Through the ELECTION process, "We the People" COLLECTIVELY (not INDIVIDUALLY) control ALL THREE BRANCHES of our own government. But, as INDIVIDUALS, we have no such control.

    In a republican form of government such as ours, if "We the People" COLLECTIVELY (not INDIVIDUALLY) do not like our state statutes, then "We the People" COLLECTIVELY (not INDIVIDUALLY) have the power and ability to ELECT DIFFERENT ELECTED state LEGISLATIVE REPRESENTATIVES to change or repeal the state statutes that we do not like. This ELECTION process works the same way with our nationally ELECTED LEGISLATORS (our SENATORS and CONGRESS MEN & WOMEN) as well as our locally ELECTED law/ordinance makers (county commissioners, city commissioners and city council members, etc.).

    In a republican form of government such as ours, if "We the People" COLLECTIVELY (not INDIVIDUALLY) do not like our ELECTED state law enforcement officials, their appointees or their practices, then "We the People" COLLECTIVELY (not INDIVIDUALLY) have the power and ability to ELECT DIFFERENT state ELECTED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS to change the appointees and/or practices that we do not like (different Governor, different County Sheriffs, different City Police Chiefs, etc.). This ELECTION process works the same way with our nationally ELECTED law enforcement officer (our PRESIDENT ).

    In a republican form of government such as ours, if "We the People" COLLECTIVELY (not INDIVIDUALLY) do not like our ELECTED state judges, their practices or their rulings , then "We the People" COLLECTIVELY (not INDIVIDUALLY) have the power and ability to ELECT different ELECTED state JUDGES (different Supreme Court Justices, different appellate judges, different circuit judges, different county judges, different city judges, etc.). This ELECTION process works the same way with respect to our ELECTED state prosecutors (state attorneys and district attorneys) and our ELECTED state public defenders. NOTE: In the federal courts, judges are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate, both of which are ELECTED by "We the People". But, those ELECTED representatives of "We the People" (who do the nominating and confirming of our federal judges) can be removed from office by the ELECTION process as well. The ELECTED President also appoints the federal prosecutors. But, the President can be removed from office by the ELECTION process too. Some state jurisdictions even use a combination of BOTH systems whereby judges are first APPOINTED to the bench by ELECTED representatives of "We the People", but then must withstand a "retention" vote by "We the People" every single ELECTION cycle thereafter in order to remain on the bench.

    Regardless, EVERY single person in EVERY single branch of our STATE and FEDERAL government is put into office DIRECTLY or INDIRECTLY by "We the People" COLLECTIVELY through the ELECTION process.

    The fundamental mistake made by ALL AMATEUR LEGAL THEORISTS is their inability to comprehend the difference between the power of "We the People" COLLECTIVELY (which is almost absolute) and the ABSENCE of power of the SINGLE INDIVIDUAL (which is almost nothing) when opposing the power of "We the People" COLLECTIVELY (which is almost absolute). Every single amateur legal theory ever promoted reflects a basic misunderstanding of this simple legal principle, "THE MAJORITY RULES and the INDIVIDUAL DOES NOT." All amateur legal theorists get this simple legal principle exactly BACKWARDS (or OPPOSITE) to what the law really is (a common problem in amateur legal theory).

    It is the power of "We the People" COLLECTIVELY (not INDIVIDUALLY) that empowers our ELECTED state LAW MAKERS to pass our state statutes and to make them binding upon all of the INDIVIDUALS in the state without the INDIVIDUAL'S "consent" (“contractual” or otherwise), etc.

    It is the power of "We the People" COLLECTIVELY (not INDIVIDUALLY) that empowers our ELECTED state LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS to ticket, arrest and charge any INDIVIDUAL in the state who violates our state statutes without the INDIVIDUAL'S "consent" (“contractual” or otherwise), etc.

    It is the power of "We the People" COLLECTIVELY (not INDIVIDUALLY) that empowers our ELECTED state JUDGES to preside over state court proceedings of such an INDIVIDUAL without that INDIVIDUAL’S "consent" (“contractual or otherwise”).

    This means that in a republican form of government such as ours, an INDIVIDUAL'S "consent” (“contractual” or otherwise) is NOT REQUIRED in such matters. Instead, in a republican form of government such as ours, "CONSENT” TO THE LAW COMES FROM “WE THE PEOPLE” COLLECTIVELY, AS A WHOLE, THROUGH THE ELECTION PROCESS, NOT FROM THE SINGLE INDIVIDUAL OUTSIDE THE ELECTION PROCESS.

    THROUGH THE ELECTION PROCESS, OUR THREE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT ALREADY HAVE THE COLLECTIVE “CONSENT” OF “WE THE PEOPLE” TO MAKE OUR LAW, TO ENFORCE OUR LAW AND TO PUNISH FOR VIOLATIONS OF OUR LAW.

    Under our federal and state constitutions, OUR THREE BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT DO NOT ALSO NEED THE INDIVIDUAL “CONSENT” OF ANY INDIVIDUAL TO CARRY OUT THOSE FUNCTIONS.

    So, every single legal burden placed on the INDIVIDUAL in a republican form of government such as ours is a legal burden that is placed upon the INDIVIDUAL directly or indirectly by the majority of "We the People" COLLECTIVELY through the ELECTION process.

    In a republican form of government such as ours, the power of the INDIVIDUAL is limited to VOTING, RUNNING FOR OFFICE and to enforcing what few INDIVIDUAL rights and protections that "We the People" COLLECTIVELY (not INDIVIDUALLY) allow the INDIVIDUAL to have (such as those INDIVIDUAL rights and protections listed in the Bill Of Rights). In a republican form of government such as ours, these INDIVIDUAL rights and protections of the INDIVIDUAL are determined by the majority of "We the People" COLLECTIVELY (NOT BY THE INDIVIDUAL). This is why in a republican form of government, such as ours, ELECTIONS ARE SO IMPORTANT. In a republican form of government such as ours, ELECTIONS (which reflect the will of the majority of "We the People" COLLECTIVELY) DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY CONTROL EVERYTHING ABOUT OUR OWN GOVERNMENT. THESE ELECTIONS DETERMINE WHAT OUR LAWS ARE, WHO OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS ARE, WHO OUR JUDGES ARE, WHO OUR PROSECUTORS ARE, WHO OUR PUBLIC DEFENDERS ARE AND THEY DETERMINE WHAT ANY DESIRED CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS OR REPEALS MIGHT BE.

    FACT: THESE ELECTIONS BY "WE THE PEOPLE" MAKE OUR STATUTES VALID. THESE ELECTIONS BY "WE THE PEOPLE" MAKE OUR LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS VALID. THESE ELECTIONS BY "WE THE PEOPLE" MAKE OUR COURTS VALID, OUR JUDGES VALID, OUR PROSECUTORS VALID AND OUR PUBLIC DEFENDERS VALID.

    FACT: In a republican form of government such as ours, every conviction of a single INDIVIDUAL involves the efforts of ALL THREE ELECTED BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT (the ELECTED LAW MAKERS who write the statutes, the ELECTED LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS whose appointees make the arrests and who file the charges, the ELECTED JUDGES who preside over proceedings in court AND the ELECTED PROSECUTORS who attempt to convict the statutory violators in court). In a republican form of government such as ours, NO SINGLE ELECTED BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT CAN CONVICT AN INDIVIDUAL WITHOUT THE PARTICIPATION OF THE OTHER TWO ELECTED BRANCHES OF GOVERNMENT.

    FACT: The people who oppose, defy and seek the overthrow our ELECTED government, our ELECTED legislatures, our ELECTED executive (law enforcement) officials, our ELECTED judges, our ELECTED prosecutors and our ELECTED public defenders ACTUALLY OPPOSE, DEFY AND SEEK THE OVERTHROW OF OUR REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT ITSELF and in so doing, SEEK TO OVERTHROW THE WILL OF THE MAJORITY OF "WE THE PEOPLE" OURSELVES. This desire to overthrow our ELECTED republican form of government and the will of the majority of "We the People " COLLECTIVELY, along with his long history of PSYCHIATRIC PROBLEMS and his MULTIPLE weapons-related FELONIES are the reasons that Rod Class, has been placed on the United States "TERRORIST WATCH LIST".

    ABOUT ROD CLASS:
    Rod Class is a functionally-illiterate amateur legal theorist with barely a high school education WHO HAS LOST EVERY SINGLE ADMINISTRATIVE AND JUDICIAL CASE IN WHICH HE HAS EVER BEEN INVOLVED (OVER 76 CONSECUTIVE LOSSES IN A ROW, AND STILL COUNTING). Further, Class has a long history of PSYCHIATRIC PROBLEMS involving DELUSIONS, PATHOLOGICAL OPPOSITION/DEFIANCE of AUTHORITY FIGURES and PATHOLOGICAL LYING. Moreover, Class is a MULTI-CONVICTED, WEAPONS RELATED, CONVICTED FELON who also has SEVERAL ADDITIONAL MISDEMEANOR CONVICTIONS, as well. Because of Class’ well-publicized HATRED of our ELECTED representatives, their appointees and our ELECTED REPUBLICAN form of government, because of his HISTORY OF PSYCHIATRIC PROBLEMS and because of his LENGTHY CRIMINAL HISTORY involving DEADLY WEAPONS, Class has been placed on the United States TERRORIST WATCH LIST. For more on Rod Class, CLICK HERE. http://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...61#post1175261.

    More importantly, Class is a PROFESSIONAL HOAXER AND CHARLATAN who is behind a number of legal HOAXES which he created and peddles to INTENTIONALLY
    DEFRAUD the American people. For more on Rod Class, CLICK HERE. http://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...61#post1175261.


    ABOUT SNOOP4TRUTH:
    Snoop4truth is a legal expert and whistle blower who exposes online hoaxes. Snoop4truth did not reveal this information to harm Deborah Tavares or Rod Class. Instead, Snoop4truth exposed this information solely to reduce the CATASTROPHIC DAMAGE that such INTENTIONAL FRAUD inflicts upon the American people every single day. Had it not been for Deborah Tavares' and Rod Class' role in the "Judge DALE Hoax", Snoop4truth would not have exposed this information here.

    The message to all hoaxers and charlatans? Just tell the truth.

  32. The Following User Says Thank You to snoop4truth For This Post:

    Akasha (12th February 2019)

  33. Link to Post #159
    United States Avalon Member onawah's Avatar
    Join Date
    28th March 2010
    Posts
    11,127
    Thanks
    27,056
    Thanked 47,650 times in 9,706 posts

    Default Re: The Hoaxes of Deborah Tavares

    I don't have the time or the inclination to read even a tenth of all the reams of information about Tavares's claims that you have posted on this forum, Snoop, and I doubt very much that anyone else here has either.
    And I never claimed otherwise, nor do I see any reason to.
    I've not been trying to fool anybody, and from the feedback that I've been getting from other members, they don't think I am trying to fool them, but apparently there IS support for me that is not being voiced because people just don't want to get involved in this debate.
    I think they are finding your threads to be generally tedious and way too time consuming.
    Are there forums for comparing notes for lawyers who are trying to prepare for a lawsuit?
    Something like that might be a better venue for this project of yours.

    As stated repeatedly, I don't contest your claims that Tavares and her cohorts have falsified information and made false claims, and I have not demanded proof about that.
    (You wrote: "For, your information, ALL OF THE PROOF THAT YOU DEMAND IS ALREADY ON THIS VERY THREAD IN THE POSTS THAT YOU HAVE REFUSED TO READ!")
    But if I WERE demanding anything, which I'm not, I would demand that you prove that conspiracies are not being committed by the elite.
    It would be great if you could--I would much rather live in a reality where that wasn't the case, but since I know that you can't possibly prove that, I haven't and won't bother to read all that you've written, even if you've written a whole encyclopedia.
    You cannot possibly refute evidence that researchers/ whistleblowers/insiders from many walks of life have spent years and years compiling in great detail, at great risk and sometimes paying with their very lives.

    I don't really care that much if you've proven that Tavares has lied because looking at the whole picture, it's not that important.
    Please read that again--I didn't say it's not important, I said it's not THAT important when you look at the whole picture, the whole, vile picture of heinous crimes against humanity that the elite families have been perpetrating for centuries.

    I don't pretend to know what your only purpose is on this thread, because I am not a mind reader.
    And you plainly aren't either because you have so completely misread my intentions, so please don't try to tell me what I know or what I don't know.
    Or that I am pretending to know something or not know something.
    I have not been pretending about anything on this thread, least of all my concern that the truth comes out.

    But it hasn't taken whole pages of this forum for me to put forth quite simply and briefly my one bone of contention with YOU, that even though you may have proven that documents have been forged and false claims made about certain conspiracies that are being committed against the people of this planet by Tavares et al, that DOES NOT prove that said conspiracies are not being committed by those in power.

    In view of that, all that I have been pointing out were the specific places in your text where your wording was in contradiction of that, where you seemed to imply that such conspiracies were not being committed at all.
    Whether or not that was your intention, I cannot say, anymore than you can say what my intention was in pointing that out.
    But I considered it was something that needed to be pointed out, for the sake of accuracy.

    Even though you've painstakingly written long versions and short versions and in-between versions of those allegations against Tavares, and even though in almost the same breath you have admitted that such conspiracies are quite possibly being committed, you STILL kept on leaving in one or two sentences here and there which made it sound like you WERE saying that such conspiracies are NOT being committed.
    ...Your reasoning seeming to be that because you have proven that Tavares lied, therefore such conspiracies do not exist.
    Which of course, doesn't follow at all.

    My biggest concern is that people understand that conspiracies ARE being committed against them by factions within their own governments.
    Because that is far and away how the most harm is being done.
    Your biggest immediate concern seems to be that the lies from Tavares and her cohorts are exposed.
    Which is fine, that does need to happen, and I also hope that if it does, that it will serve the purpose which I consider to be more important, that the people understand they have been conspired against by the elite.
    (And I really hope that she and her cohorts will receive both justice AND some effective psychiatric treatment (if there actually is such a thing anymore), because if they are as demented as you have portrayed them, they certainly need it.)

    You wrote: " Everything in the law is in writing. I can obtain it in seconds. So, any claim you make, I can debunk (with proof) in seconds. Trust me. You do not want to go there."

    You are SO right!
    I certainly don't want to go there, because what is actually happening in the world and has been happening for centuries is in direct contradiction to written laws.
    Quote your laws all you want; the rulers of our planet don't obey the laws, and quoting laws until you are blue in the face won't disprove that conspiracies are being committed by them constantly.
    If exposing Tavares comes one step closer to stopping that from happening, I'm all for it.
    So good luck with that!

    Quote Posted by snoop4truth (here)
    Quote Posted by onawah (here)
    Better. But to be clear, there was no confusion on my part about what you had written previously.
    What there was, was illogical and faulty reasoning, and inaccurate conclusions on your part.

    In the subsequent post where you wrote
    :

    " 'The Rod Class Has Obtained His Forth Administrative Ruling That All Government Agencies Are 'Private Entities' Hoax'. This hoax involves several FAKE press releases (co-authored by Deborah Tavares) and false videos. Note that this hoax was actually created in support of the hoax above to the effect that all governments are private, for-profit corporations (a Deborah Tavares hoax). The purpose of this hoax was to make Americans think that our state and local government agencies (including the DMV and local police departments) are completely illegal, invalid, illegitimate, corrupt & diabolical and to incite hatred and violence against innocent Americans."

    ...You have offered no proof that the allegations made were false. Nor do you offer any proofs regarding the allegations made in the other documents that you cited (whether they were forged or not). Such as here where you wrote:

    "The Sovereign Citizen Hoax". This hoax involves a FAKE and FORGED document written by Rodney "DALE" Class while pretending to be "Judge DALE". This FAKE document was posted on the website of Al Whitney (real name "Anita Larin") who, like Rod Class, is also Deborah Tavares' partner in these hoaxes. The purpose of this hoax was to make Americans think that ONLY INDIVIDUALS ARE "SOVEREIGN" and that "WE THE PEOPLE" (a plural term) collectively, as a whole (in the form of our elected government) ARE NOT "SOVEREIGN" (exactly backwards to the truth), such that our laws do not apply to INDIVIDUALS (the pretend "sovereigns"). But, none of this is so."

    You are basing the claim that "none of this is so" here on your opinions about the document in question, but you offer no proofs that at least some of the allegations in that document might actually be true, and may have been held to be so by other whistleblowers and researchers. ( I am not an expert on this subject, but I know there are controversies.)
    ...Those who have closely studied Constitutional Law and the hold that the English royals still believe they have over US citizens (on paper, at least) --whom they consider to be property.
    Or other researchers and whistleblowers who have studied the issues surrounding Social Security numbers and similar issues which have been shown to make similar claims about our sovereignty, and who would likely disagree.

    Without proof, your opinions don't really mean as much as you seem to feel they do.
    You may be an expert on documents that Tavares and her associates have published, but that doesn't mean that you have proven everything they've claimed is false or without some basis in fact.
    Onawah,

    YOUR COMMENT: Better [referring to my "Concise Summaries" which are no longer "concise"]. But to be clear, there was no confusion on my part about what you had written previously. What there was, was illogical and faulty reasoning, and inaccurate conclusions on your part.

    MY RESPONSE: Agreed. There was no real confusion on your part. You were only pretending to be confused so as to manufacture a pretext to complain about something, imaginary inconsistencies, imaginary illogical and faulty reasoning and imaginary conclusions that do not exist. To be clear, you aren't fooling anybody.

    Even you are capable of understanding that that my sole conclusion is that "The documents that Deborah Tavares herself says support of her claims do not support her claims". Even you can comprehend that simple premise. I actually have pets that can understand that simple premise. So, I know that you can. Do not pretend otherwise. You are not fooling anybody.

    There is nothing inconsistent, illogical or faulty about that single conclusion ("The documents that Deborah Tavares uses in support of her claims do not support her claims".). Indeed, the reverse is true. That is perfectly clear. That is perfectly logical. That is perfectly reasonable. That is perfectly rational. That same FACTUALLY CORRECT premise has been repeated on this thread over and over again. And, you know it. So does every one else on this thread. (See Post 58, 74). So you aren't fooling anybody. What's more, that premise has already been proven, something that even you, to your credit, actually admit too. So, case closed.

    Because of you, there are THREE (3) different versions of the truth on this thread, "Concise Summaries", "Detailed Summaries" and "Full Length Explanations" of these hoaxes. They cannot all be the wrong length! Pick one and stick to it.

    YOUR COMMENT: In the subsequent post where you wrote:" 'The Rod Class Has Obtained His Forth Administrative Ruling That All Government Agencies Are 'Private Entities' Hoax'. This hoax involves several FAKE press releases (co-authored by Deborah Tavares) and false videos. Note that this hoax was actually created in support of the hoax above to the effect that all governments are private, for-profit corporations (a Deborah Tavares hoax). The purpose of this hoax was to make Americans think that our state and local government agencies (including the DMV and local police departments) are completely illegal, invalid, illegitimate, corrupt & diabolical and to incite hatred and violence against innocent Americans."

    ...You have offered no proof that the allegations made were false. Nor do you offer any proofs regarding the allegations made in the other documents that you cited (whether they were forged or not).

    MY REPONSE: There is a very good reason for the absence of proof in the "Concise Summaries" (which you quote above). You refused to even read any of the "Full Length Explanations" of these hoaxes (which contained all the proof) because you complained that they were too long. You also refused to even read any of the "Detailed Summaries" (which contained some of the proof) because you also complained that they were also too long.

    So, I wrote the "Concise Summaries" (which you quoted above) to reduce every single hoax to its simplest possible form so that you (and others) would read them be able to understand the basics of every single hoax in seconds, not hours. In Post 86, you effectively stated that this simplicity, this conciseness was a good thing.

    But, you have since done an "about face" and now you complain that the "Concise Summaries" (which you quoted above) are too short because they do not contain the proof that you complained made the "Detailed Summaries" and the "Full-Length Explanations" too long. Thus, you cannot even keep your own stories straight. You cannot keep your own complaints straight. You cannot even keep your own false pretenses straight. And, everybody knows it. So, you're not fooling anybody.

    Your own "PATTERN" of conduct described above (as reflected by Posts, 26, 30, 41, 56, 86, 116, 125, 126, 128, 133, 139) proves that I had you pegged in Post 44. You do not oppose the truth because of any of your fake, fabricated, phony, false pretenses about which you complain. You actually oppose the truth precisely because it is the truth. And, for no other reason. So, you aren't fooling anybody.

    Regardless, I will post the whole truth below (with proof) anyway, not because you will actually read it, because you will not, but to show everyone else on this thread just how completely lost you are with your fake, phony pretensions. You aren't fooling anybody.

    YOUR COMMENT: Such as here where you wrote: "The Sovereign Citizen Hoax". This hoax involves a FAKE and FORGED document written by Rodney "DALE" Class while pretending to be "Judge DALE". This FAKE document was posted on the website of Al Whitney (real name "Anita Larin") who, like Rod Class, is also Deborah Tavares' partner in these hoaxes. The purpose of this hoax was to make Americans think that ONLY INDIVIDUALS ARE "SOVEREIGN" and that "WE THE PEOPLE" (a plural term) collectively, as a whole (in the form of our elected government) ARE NOT "SOVEREIGN" (exactly backwards to the truth), such that our laws do not apply to INDIVIDUALS (the pretend "sovereigns"). But, none of this is so."

    You are basing the claim that "none of this is so" here on your opinions about the document in question, but you offer no proofs that at least some of the allegations in that document might actually be true, and have been held to be so by other whistleblowers and researchers.

    MY RESPONSE: Refer to my comment above. It applies directly to this comment too. But, I will post the whole truth below (with proof) anyway, not because you will actually read it, because you will not, but to show everyone else on this thread just how completely lost you are with your fake, phony pretensions. You aren't fooling anybody.

    YOUR COMMENT: ...People who have closely studied Constitutional Law and the hold that the English royals still believe they have over US citizens (on paper, at least) --whom they consider to be property. Or other researchers and whistleblowers who have studied the issues surrounding Social Security numbers and similar issues which have been shown to make similar claims about our sovereignty, and who would likely disagree.

    MY RESPONSE: Do yourself a favor. Stay out of the law, government and history. You are way, way, way out of your league. That is precisely what got Deborah Tavares and Rod Class into trouble here in the first place. Everything in the law is in writing. I can obtain it in seconds. So, any claim you make, I can debunk (with proof) in seconds. Trust me. You do not want to go there.

    Regardless, I will post the whole truth below (with proof) anyway, not because you will actually read it, because you will not, but to show everyone else on this thread just how completely lost you are with your fake, phony pretensions. You aren't fooling anybody.

    YOUR COMMENT: Without proof, your opinions don't really mean as much as you seem to feel they do.

    MY RESPONSE: If I did not have proof, I would not have created this thread. For, your information, ALL OF THE PROOF THAT YOU DEMAND IS ALREADY ON THIS VERY THREAD IN THE POSTS THAT YOU HAVE REFUSED TO READ! I will post that proof below just to show everyone else on this thread just how completely lost you are with these fake, phony pretensions.

    YOUR COMMENT: You may be an expert on documents that Tavares and her associates have forged, but that doesn't mean that you have proven everything they've claimed is false or without some basis in fact.

    MY RESPONSE: Let's divide this into two parts, legal claims and non-legal claims. As to legal claims, I am not only an expert in forgeries, I am also an expert in the law itself. I have already posted ON THIS THREAD AND ON THE ROD CLASS THREAD actual proof that ALL of the claims that Deborah Tavares, Al Whitney (real name "Anita Larin") and Rodney "DALE" Class have ever made about the law are false. If you had bothered to read the "Full-Length Explanations" of these hoaxes above, you would already know this. But, you do not.

    As to non-legal claims, I have only investigated THE DOCUMENTS (only) that Deborah Tavares herself uses in support of her non-legal claims. I do not investigate the claims that might be supported by these documents (whether NASA is actually killing us all with diabolical weapons, whether the Bildebergs are actually killing us all with silent weapons, whether the U.S. government is actually killing us all with FAKE "engineered" environmental calamites, whether, the U.N is driving us out of our rural and suburban homes to kill us all in Kill Cities or Smart Cities, whether PG&E is killing us all with lasers on satellites in space, whether the U.S. government is killing us in connection with the Genocide Agreement). I have repeatedly said this. And, everybody knows this. That subject (conclusions that might be supported by those documents) is irrelevant to the question of whether the document that Deborah Tavares uses in support of her claims actually supports the claim or not. And, that is as far as I go in these non-legal claims. And, everybody knows it. Right now, my sole focus is on whether the document that Deborah Tavares uses in support of her claims actually does so. Nothing more. And everybody knows this, including you.

    Because of my expertise in forgeries and my expertise in reading comprehension and critical thinking skills, I have determined that every single DOCUMENT that Deborah Tavares uses in support of her non-legal claims does not actually support her claims. That is the purpose of this thread. Nothing more. And you know it. Do not pretend otherwise.

    Snoop
    Last edited by onawah; 8th February 2019 at 09:23.
    Each breath a gift...
    _____________

  34. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to onawah For This Post:

    Ascension (10th February 2019), Hazelfern (14th February 2019), Philippe (8th February 2019)

  35. Link to Post #160
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    30th September 2015
    Age
    59
    Posts
    212
    Thanks
    147
    Thanked 412 times in 163 posts

    Default Re: The Hoaxes of Deborah Tavares

    Quote Posted by onawah (here)
    I don't have the time or the inclination to read even a tenth of all the reams of information about Tavares's claims that you have posted on this forum, Snoop, and I doubt very much that anyone else here has either.
    And I never claimed otherwise, nor do I see any reason to.
    I've not been trying to fool anybody, and from the feedback that I've been getting from other members, they don't think I am trying to fool them, but apparently there IS support for me that is not being voiced because people just don't want to get involved in this debate.
    I think they are finding your threads to be generally tedious and way too time consuming.
    Are there forums for comparing notes for lawyers who are trying to prepare for a lawsuit?
    Something like that might be a better venue for this project of yours.

    As stated repeatedly, I don't contest your claims that Tavares and her cohorts have falsified information and made false claims, and I have not demanded proof about that.
    (You wrote: "For, your information, ALL OF THE PROOF THAT YOU DEMAND IS ALREADY ON THIS VERY THREAD IN THE POSTS THAT YOU HAVE REFUSED TO READ!")
    But if I WERE demanding anything, which I'm not, I would demand that you prove that conspiracies are not being committed by the elite.
    It would be great if you could--I would much rather live in a reality where that wasn't the case, but since I know that you can't possibly prove that, I haven't and won't bother to read all that you've written, even if you've written a whole encyclopedia.
    You cannot possibly refute evidence that researchers/ whistleblowers/insiders from many walks of life have spent years and years compiling in great detail, at great risk and sometimes paying with their very lives.

    I don't really care that much if you've proven that Tavares has lied because looking at the whole picture, it's not that important.
    Please read that again--I didn't say it's not important, I said it's not THAT important when you look at the whole picture, the whole, vile picture of heinous crimes against humanity that the elite families have been perpetrating for centuries.

    I don't pretend to know what your only purpose is on this thread, because I am not a mind reader.
    And you plainly aren't either because you have so completely misread my intentions, so please don't try to tell me what I know or what I don't know.
    Or that I am pretending to know something or not know something.
    I have not been pretending about anything on this thread, least of all my concern that the truth comes out.

    But it hasn't taken whole pages of this forum for me to put forth quite simply and briefly my one bone of contention with YOU, that even though you may have proven that documents have been forged and false claims made about certain conspiracies that are being committed against the people of this planet by Tavares et al, that DOES NOT prove that said conspiracies are not being committed by those in power.

    In view of that, all that I have been pointing out were the specific places in your text where your wording was in contradiction of that, where you seemed to imply that such conspiracies were not being committed at all.
    Whether or not that was your intention, I cannot say, anymore than you can say what my intention was in pointing that out.
    But I considered it was something that needed to be pointed out, for the sake of accuracy.

    Even though you've painstakingly written long versions and short versions and in-between versions of those allegations against Tavares, and even though in almost the same breath you have admitted that such conspiracies are quite possibly being committed, you STILL kept on leaving in one or two sentences here and there which made it sound like you WERE saying that such conspiracies are NOT being committed.
    ...Your reasoning seeming to be that because you have proven that Tavares lied, therefore such conspiracies do not exist.
    Which of course, doesn't follow at all.

    My biggest concern is that people understand that conspiracies ARE being committed against them by factions within their own governments.
    Because that is far and away how the most harm is being done.
    Your biggest immediate concern seems to be that the lies from Tavares and her cohorts are exposed.
    Which is fine, that does need to happen, and I also hope that if it does, that it will serve the purpose which I consider to be more important, that the people understand they have been conspired against by the elite.
    (And I really hope that she and her cohorts will receive both justice AND some effective psychiatric treatment (if there actually is such a thing anymore), because if they are as demented as you have portrayed them, they certainly need it.)

    You wrote: " Everything in the law is in writing. I can obtain it in seconds. So, any claim you make, I can debunk (with proof) in seconds. Trust me. You do not want to go there."

    You are SO right!
    I certainly don't want to go there, because what is actually happening in the world and has been happening for centuries is in direct contradiction to written laws.
    Quote your laws all you want; the rulers of our planet don't obey the laws, and quoting laws until you are blue in the face won't disprove that conspiracies are being committed by them constantly.
    If exposing Tavares comes one step closer to stopping that from happening, I'm all for it.
    So good luck with that!

    Quote Posted by snoop4truth (here)
    Quote Posted by onawah (here)
    Better. But to be clear, there was no confusion on my part about what you had written previously.
    What there was, was illogical and faulty reasoning, and inaccurate conclusions on your part.

    In the subsequent post where you wrote
    :

    " 'The Rod Class Has Obtained His Forth Administrative Ruling That All Government Agencies Are 'Private Entities' Hoax'. This hoax involves several FAKE press releases (co-authored by Deborah Tavares) and false videos. Note that this hoax was actually created in support of the hoax above to the effect that all governments are private, for-profit corporations (a Deborah Tavares hoax). The purpose of this hoax was to make Americans think that our state and local government agencies (including the DMV and local police departments) are completely illegal, invalid, illegitimate, corrupt & diabolical and to incite hatred and violence against innocent Americans."

    ...You have offered no proof that the allegations made were false. Nor do you offer any proofs regarding the allegations made in the other documents that you cited (whether they were forged or not). Such as here where you wrote:

    "The Sovereign Citizen Hoax". This hoax involves a FAKE and FORGED document written by Rodney "DALE" Class while pretending to be "Judge DALE". This FAKE document was posted on the website of Al Whitney (real name "Anita Larin") who, like Rod Class, is also Deborah Tavares' partner in these hoaxes. The purpose of this hoax was to make Americans think that ONLY INDIVIDUALS ARE "SOVEREIGN" and that "WE THE PEOPLE" (a plural term) collectively, as a whole (in the form of our elected government) ARE NOT "SOVEREIGN" (exactly backwards to the truth), such that our laws do not apply to INDIVIDUALS (the pretend "sovereigns"). But, none of this is so."

    You are basing the claim that "none of this is so" here on your opinions about the document in question, but you offer no proofs that at least some of the allegations in that document might actually be true, and may have been held to be so by other whistleblowers and researchers. ( I am not an expert on this subject, but I know there are controversies.)
    ...Those who have closely studied Constitutional Law and the hold that the English royals still believe they have over US citizens (on paper, at least) --whom they consider to be property.
    Or other researchers and whistleblowers who have studied the issues surrounding Social Security numbers and similar issues which have been shown to make similar claims about our sovereignty, and who would likely disagree.

    Without proof, your opinions don't really mean as much as you seem to feel they do.
    You may be an expert on documents that Tavares and her associates have published, but that doesn't mean that you have proven everything they've claimed is false or without some basis in fact.
    Onawah,

    YOUR COMMENT: Better [referring to my "Concise Summaries" which are no longer "concise"]. But to be clear, there was no confusion on my part about what you had written previously. What there was, was illogical and faulty reasoning, and inaccurate conclusions on your part.

    MY RESPONSE: Agreed. There was no real confusion on your part. You were only pretending to be confused so as to manufacture a pretext to complain about something, imaginary inconsistencies, imaginary illogical and faulty reasoning and imaginary conclusions that do not exist. To be clear, you aren't fooling anybody.

    Even you are capable of understanding that that my sole conclusion is that "The documents that Deborah Tavares herself says support of her claims do not support her claims". Even you can comprehend that simple premise. I actually have pets that can understand that simple premise. So, I know that you can. Do not pretend otherwise. You are not fooling anybody.

    There is nothing inconsistent, illogical or faulty about that single conclusion ("The documents that Deborah Tavares uses in support of her claims do not support her claims".). Indeed, the reverse is true. That is perfectly clear. That is perfectly logical. That is perfectly reasonable. That is perfectly rational. That same FACTUALLY CORRECT premise has been repeated on this thread over and over again. And, you know it. So does every one else on this thread. (See Post 58, 74). So you aren't fooling anybody. What's more, that premise has already been proven, something that even you, to your credit, actually admit too. So, case closed.

    Because of you, there are THREE (3) different versions of the truth on this thread, "Concise Summaries", "Detailed Summaries" and "Full Length Explanations" of these hoaxes. They cannot all be the wrong length! Pick one and stick to it.

    YOUR COMMENT: In the subsequent post where you wrote:" 'The Rod Class Has Obtained His Forth Administrative Ruling That All Government Agencies Are 'Private Entities' Hoax'. This hoax involves several FAKE press releases (co-authored by Deborah Tavares) and false videos. Note that this hoax was actually created in support of the hoax above to the effect that all governments are private, for-profit corporations (a Deborah Tavares hoax). The purpose of this hoax was to make Americans think that our state and local government agencies (including the DMV and local police departments) are completely illegal, invalid, illegitimate, corrupt & diabolical and to incite hatred and violence against innocent Americans."

    ...You have offered no proof that the allegations made were false. Nor do you offer any proofs regarding the allegations made in the other documents that you cited (whether they were forged or not).

    MY REPONSE: There is a very good reason for the absence of proof in the "Concise Summaries" (which you quote above). You refused to even read any of the "Full Length Explanations" of these hoaxes (which contained all the proof) because you complained that they were too long. You also refused to even read any of the "Detailed Summaries" (which contained some of the proof) because you also complained that they were also too long.

    So, I wrote the "Concise Summaries" (which you quoted above) to reduce every single hoax to its simplest possible form so that you (and others) would read them be able to understand the basics of every single hoax in seconds, not hours. In Post 86, you effectively stated that this simplicity, this conciseness was a good thing.

    But, you have since done an "about face" and now you complain that the "Concise Summaries" (which you quoted above) are too short because they do not contain the proof that you complained made the "Detailed Summaries" and the "Full-Length Explanations" too long. Thus, you cannot even keep your own stories straight. You cannot keep your own complaints straight. You cannot even keep your own false pretenses straight. And, everybody knows it. So, you're not fooling anybody.

    Your own "PATTERN" of conduct described above (as reflected by Posts, 26, 30, 41, 56, 86, 116, 125, 126, 128, 133, 139) proves that I had you pegged in Post 44. You do not oppose the truth because of any of your fake, fabricated, phony, false pretenses about which you complain. You actually oppose the truth precisely because it is the truth. And, for no other reason. So, you aren't fooling anybody.

    Regardless, I will post the whole truth below (with proof) anyway, not because you will actually read it, because you will not, but to show everyone else on this thread just how completely lost you are with your fake, phony pretensions. You aren't fooling anybody.

    YOUR COMMENT: Such as here where you wrote: "The Sovereign Citizen Hoax". This hoax involves a FAKE and FORGED document written by Rodney "DALE" Class while pretending to be "Judge DALE". This FAKE document was posted on the website of Al Whitney (real name "Anita Larin") who, like Rod Class, is also Deborah Tavares' partner in these hoaxes. The purpose of this hoax was to make Americans think that ONLY INDIVIDUALS ARE "SOVEREIGN" and that "WE THE PEOPLE" (a plural term) collectively, as a whole (in the form of our elected government) ARE NOT "SOVEREIGN" (exactly backwards to the truth), such that our laws do not apply to INDIVIDUALS (the pretend "sovereigns"). But, none of this is so."

    You are basing the claim that "none of this is so" here on your opinions about the document in question, but you offer no proofs that at least some of the allegations in that document might actually be true, and have been held to be so by other whistleblowers and researchers.

    MY RESPONSE: Refer to my comment above. It applies directly to this comment too. But, I will post the whole truth below (with proof) anyway, not because you will actually read it, because you will not, but to show everyone else on this thread just how completely lost you are with your fake, phony pretensions. You aren't fooling anybody.

    YOUR COMMENT: ...People who have closely studied Constitutional Law and the hold that the English royals still believe they have over US citizens (on paper, at least) --whom they consider to be property. Or other researchers and whistleblowers who have studied the issues surrounding Social Security numbers and similar issues which have been shown to make similar claims about our sovereignty, and who would likely disagree.

    MY RESPONSE: Do yourself a favor. Stay out of the law, government and history. You are way, way, way out of your league. That is precisely what got Deborah Tavares and Rod Class into trouble here in the first place. Everything in the law is in writing. I can obtain it in seconds. So, any claim you make, I can debunk (with proof) in seconds. Trust me. You do not want to go there.

    Regardless, I will post the whole truth below (with proof) anyway, not because you will actually read it, because you will not, but to show everyone else on this thread just how completely lost you are with your fake, phony pretensions. You aren't fooling anybody.

    YOUR COMMENT: Without proof, your opinions don't really mean as much as you seem to feel they do.

    MY RESPONSE: If I did not have proof, I would not have created this thread. For, your information, ALL OF THE PROOF THAT YOU DEMAND IS ALREADY ON THIS VERY THREAD IN THE POSTS THAT YOU HAVE REFUSED TO READ! I will post that proof below just to show everyone else on this thread just how completely lost you are with these fake, phony pretensions.

    YOUR COMMENT: You may be an expert on documents that Tavares and her associates have forged, but that doesn't mean that you have proven everything they've claimed is false or without some basis in fact.

    MY RESPONSE: Let's divide this into two parts, legal claims and non-legal claims. As to legal claims, I am not only an expert in forgeries, I am also an expert in the law itself. I have already posted ON THIS THREAD AND ON THE ROD CLASS THREAD actual proof that ALL of the claims that Deborah Tavares, Al Whitney (real name "Anita Larin") and Rodney "DALE" Class have ever made about the law are false. If you had bothered to read the "Full-Length Explanations" of these hoaxes above, you would already know this. But, you do not.

    As to non-legal claims, I have only investigated THE DOCUMENTS (only) that Deborah Tavares herself uses in support of her non-legal claims. I do not investigate the claims that might be supported by these documents (whether NASA is actually killing us all with diabolical weapons, whether the Bildebergs are actually killing us all with silent weapons, whether the U.S. government is actually killing us all with FAKE "engineered" environmental calamites, whether, the U.N is driving us out of our rural and suburban homes to kill us all in Kill Cities or Smart Cities, whether PG&E is killing us all with lasers on satellites in space, whether the U.S. government is killing us in connection with the Genocide Agreement). I have repeatedly said this. And, everybody knows this. That subject (conclusions that might be supported by those documents) is irrelevant to the question of whether the document that Deborah Tavares uses in support of her claims actually supports the claim or not. And, that is as far as I go in these non-legal claims. And, everybody knows it. Right now, my sole focus is on whether the document that Deborah Tavares uses in support of her claims actually does so. Nothing more. And everybody knows this, including you.

    Because of my expertise in forgeries and my expertise in reading comprehension and critical thinking skills, I have determined that every single DOCUMENT that Deborah Tavares uses in support of her non-legal claims does not actually support her claims. That is the purpose of this thread. Nothing more. And you know it. Do not pretend otherwise.

    Snoop
    Onawah,

    My sole focus is on whether the documents that Deborah Tavares uses in support of her claims actually support her claims. Nothing more. And, everybody knows this, including you.

    But, you repeatedly pretend that I am focusing on the conclusions instead. Then, you spend your life ATTACKING IMAGINARY CONCLUSIONS THAT YOU KNOW I NEVER MADE! That is truly bizarre.

    You act as if I am supposed to DEFEND IMAGINARY CONCLUSIONS THAT YOU KNOW I NEVER MADE! That is absolute madness. How am I supposed to respond to that? I just shake my head in utter disbelief. Get a grip.

    You act as if I am supposed to ARGUE WITH YOU ABOUT IMAGINARY CONCLUSIONS THAT YOU KNOW I NEVER MADE. Are you OK?

    Regardless, back to the DOCUMENTS. I have determined that every single DOCUMENT that Deborah Tavares uses in support of her claims does not actually support her claims.

    That is the sole purpose of this thread. Nothing more. And you know it. Do not pretend otherwise. You aren't fooling anybody.

    Snoop
    Last edited by snoop4truth; 15th February 2019 at 21:40.

  36. The Following User Says Thank You to snoop4truth For This Post:

    Akasha (12th February 2019)

+ Reply to Thread
Page 8 of 20 FirstFirst 1 8 18 20 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts