Americans Squandered Their Birthright of Sovereignty

Things That May Make You Pee Yourself

Like most Americans, I had no clue as to the facts of our demise, having only been exposed to what I was "allowed" to know, thanks to the World's Greatest Propaganda Ministry bar none.

Only after READING LAW for myself, did I learn the truth.

If I told you what you will find in the law, you wouldn't believe me. Shucks, if I went back in time to 1990, and told myself, I wouldn't believe me, either. But if you do go to the courthouse law library, remember to wear knee pads and "Depends" (adult diapers) ... you may fall to your knees, weeping, or pee yourself.

So, you’re thinking, “What fact would make one pee oneself?”
Discovering shocking facts - many many shocking facts.
Discovering the lies we all have been indoctrinated to believe.
...
[] Governments instituted to secure rights cannot tax rights - only privileges they bestow. So what privileges did government grant that makes us liable to pay taxes to live, travel, work, buy, sell, own land and a house, enter occupations, run a business, own a car, own a gun, and so on?
[] All land is NOT real estate. Private property and real estate are mutually exclusive.
[] Dollar bills (paper) are not dollars (coin)
[] Legal tender is not lawful money
[] The public debt can never be repaid
[] The debt, denominated in dollars (gold coin) cannot be repaid with dollar bills (debt that’s part of the national debt). A minus added to a minus is more minus.
[] There is no law that compels one to enroll in FICA / Social Security before one can live or work in the USA.
[] No one born in the 50 united States was born within the jurisdiction of the “United States” nor was U.S. citizenship imposed on them. (Mandatory civic duties would mean they were born “slaves”)
[] Americans are endowed with the birthright of sovereignty, freedom and independence - and are swiftly tricked into signing it all away.
[] Americans were tricked into leaving the republican form of government and transferring to the socialist democratic form of government.
[] Americans were tricked into becoming servants to the servant government.
[] Via FICA, participants diminish to paupers at law, and status criminals, guilty until proven innocent.
[] Via FICA, Americans have become collateral on an impossible public debt, eternally enslaved to the creditors of the United States government.
[] Via FICA, recipients will never ever vote against increasing their own benefit, no matter what it costs the nation, nor support any candidate that will diminish their bribes.
[] A legal residence is not a legal home (domicile) but a transient abode, and residents are redefined to be synonymous with vagabonds - an excepted class - and status criminals.
[] Every president and congress, since 1933, has been socialist / collectivist and co-conspirators in the wholesale robbery of the American people. (Even Ronny Reagan was a left winger!)
[] Capitulation of the U.S. government to foreign usurers (international financial powers).
[] Capitulation of religious institutions to usurers, despite all scriptures condemning usury.
[] The Secretary of Treasury is the U.S. governor of the World Bank, IMF, and other financial institutions (usurers), and by law, shall not be paid by the U.S. government. (*Which means he doesn’t work for America - or at the least - has a conflict of interest!)
[] Confiscation of all privately held gold money, and the criminalization of the ownership of lawful money by “free” Americans (1933 - 1975).
[] Counterfeiting the coin of America, but only after reducing the penalty for counterfeiting in 1965 (thank you, CONGRESS!)
[] Transformation of the American military from a force to secure American liberty to an international mercenary force to protect the socialist-usurer alliance that rules the planet.
[] Every monument named after a socialist politician post-1933 is an insult to the founding generation and the sacrifices they made to endow their posterity with sovereignty, freedom and independence.
[] Worst of all, Americans have been tricked into giving consent to all this, so that the servant government can remain blameless. A host of interlocking self interest groups have thus conspired together to make it easy to become corrupted and perverted. And that’s enough to fill anyone’s diaper to the max.

And now, our only remedy is to withdraw consent, restore our status, and correct the record, where possible. After that hurdle, American nationals / American sovereigns have to endeavor to preserve the republican form and the perpetual union of 50 states, created to secure our rights. For if the union is dissolved by a civil war between socialist and usurer factions, the results will not be pleasant nor beneficial to the survivors. All this will take investigation, education and self-realization that without our consent, they cannot rule us. And by law, they have no power over us, without our consent.

...
Most states (and the federal government) only publish CODE on the internet. They do not publish the STATUTES. Those are usually only available in law libraries.
...
Never rely solely on the CODE. Always go back to the underlying STATUTE to verify what the nature and scope of the law is.

What may you do after you've researched the law?
You might decide to

[a] leave Social Security;
[b] cancel all interest bearing accounts and investments;
[c] withdraw from citizenship;
[d] acquire a domicile (private property, absolutely owned) and
[e] restore your status as an American national / free inhabitant / non-resident / sovereign.

There was a time when it was common knowledge that Americans were sovereign.
.................................................. ...............
ALIEN, n. An American sovereign in his probationary state.
- - - - “The Devil’s Dictionary” (1906), by Ambrose Bierce
.................................................. ...............
(available from Gutenberg.org)

His audience knew what an “American sovereign” was, to understand the joke.

To this day, the courtroom resounds with the language that recognizes that the government works for the sovereign people (not the citizens). The judge asks the prosecutor, "What do the people say on this matter?"
For the government is the servant of the sovereign people. Otherwise, the judge would ask, "What do the citizens say on this matter?"

If you were trained to pledge allegiance to "your" sovereign government, you were trained to be a subject. You were deliberately indoctrinated to surrender your birthright of sovereignty, freedom and independence, that your ancestors fought and died to endow you with. That is a tragedy.

We were born to be Kings and Queens, monarchs of our lives and destinies. Our enemies have perverted generations, and polluted our language so that we may not recognize our tormentors. But I hope that someday, enough Americans awaken to their lost heritage. For when that day arrives, the heavens will rock with their exultation.

Hi Ozmirage,

I think it is mighty fascinating that there exists a lawful exit out of the mess that the US people are in.

On a practical level, I do have some questions:

• I understand that you have withdrawn from citizenship.
  How does that work out in reality? Does the government leave you alone in every way?
  How does your life differ from people who are in the citizen matrix?
  
  
• What (in your opinion) would happen if more and more people would withdraw from citizenship? 20.000 over a time span of a month. Or one million in one day. :)
  How would the system react to that? (denial and brute force are the first things that come to mind here)

Thank you.

Quote:

---

Posted by Eram

Hi Ozmirage,

I think it is mighty fascinating that there exists a lawful exit out of the mess that the US people are in.

On a practical level, I do have some questions:

• I understand that you have withdrawn from citizenship.
  How does that work out in reality? Does the government leave you alone in every way?
  How does your life differ from people who are in the citizen matrix?
  
  
• What (in your opinion) would happen if more and more people would withdraw from citizenship? 20.000 over a time span of a month. Or one million in one day. :)
  How would the system react to that? (denial and brute force are the first things that come to mind here)

Thank you.

---

The servant government leaves American nationals alone, for the most part.

In the 1993 edition of the 1992 US Code (50 titles), I found only ONE reference to American nationals.

Title 8, USC Sec. 1502. Certificate of nationality issued by the Secretary of State for person not a naturalized citizen of the United States for use in proceedings of a foreign state.

“ The Secretary of State is authorized to issue, in his discretion and in accordance with rules and regulations prescribed by him, a certificate of nationality for any person not a naturalized citizen of the United States who presents satisfactory evidence that he is an American national and that such certificate is needed for use in judicial or administrative proceedings in a foreign state. Such certificate shall be solely for the use in the case for which it was issued and shall be transmitted by the Secretary of State through appropriate channels to the judicial or administrative officers of the foreign state in which it is to be used.”

That is ALL that the Federal government will say about American nationals.
(An American national is NOT synonymous with a U.S. national, defined in Title 8 of the U.S. code.)

P.S.- the State department will graciously issue passports for non-citizen American nationals.

TAXES

"The revenue laws are a code or system in regulation of tax assessment and collection. They relate to taxpayers, and not to nontaxpayers. The latter are without their scope. No procedure is prescribed for nontaxpayers, and no attempt is made to annul any of their rights and remedies in due course of law. With them Congress does not assume to deal, and they are neither of the subject nor of the object of the revenue laws..."
- - - Economy Plumbing & Heating v. U.S., 470 F2d. 585 (1972)

As the Declaration of Independence reminds us, governments are instituted to secure rights. They were never delegated power to infringe, tax or diminish those rights it was created to secure.

"The individual, unlike the corporation, cannot be taxed for the mere privilege of existing. The corporation is an artificial entity which owes its existence and charter powers to the state; but, the individual's rights to live and own property are NATURAL RIGHTS for the enjoyment of which an excise [tax] cannot be imposed."
Redfield vs Fisher, 292 P. 813, at 819.

" The right to labor and to its protection from unlawful interference is a constitutional as well as a common-law right. Every man has a NATURAL RIGHT to the fruits of his own industry."
48 Am Jur 2d, Section 2, p. 80

" Any claim that this statute is a taxing statute would be immediately open to severe constitutional objections. If it could be said that the state had the POWER TO TAX A RIGHT, this would enable the state to DESTROY RIGHTS guaranteed by the constitutions through the use of oppressive taxation. The question herein, is one of the state taxing the right of travel by the ordinary modes of the day, and whether this is a legitimate object of state taxation. The views advanced herein are neither novel nor unsupported by authority. The question of the taxing power of the states has been repeatedly considered by the High Court. The right of the states to impede or embarrass the constitutional operations of the the U.S. Government or the Rights which the citizens hold under it, has been uniformly denied."
McCulloch v. Maryland 4 Wheat 316.

Governments instituted to secure (endowed) rights have no power to tax rights. They can tax only government privileges.

Ask your public servant to explain exactly WHAT government privilege imposes an income tax on you.

‘The income tax is, therefore, not a tax on income as such. It is an excise tax with respect to certain activities and PRIVILEGES which is measured by reference to the income which they produce. The income is not the subject of the tax: it is the basis for determining the amount of the tax.’
- - - F. Morse Hubbard, Treasury Department legislative draftsman. House Congressional Record March 27th 1943, page 2580.

‘When a court refers to an income tax being in the nature of an excise, it is merely stating that the tax is not on the property itself, but rather it is a fee for the PRIVILEGE of receiving gain from the property. The tax is based upon the amount of the gain, not the value of the property.’
- - - John R. Luckey, Legislative Attorney with the Library of Congress, ‘Frequently Asked Questions Concerning The Federal Income Tax’ (C.R.S. Report for Congress 92-303A (1992)).

‘The terms ‘excise tax’ and ‘PRIVILEGE TAX’ are synonymous. The two are often used interchangeably.’
- - - American Airways v. Wallace 57 F.2d 877, 880

Nontaxpayers have rights. Taxpayers have privileges.

CONSEQUENCES

Assuming that 97% of Americans decide to WITHDRAW CONSENT, we can assume that the tax receipts would drop 97% (or more). Also, there would be a 97% reduction in the number of subject citizens to be governed. It's not all bad. A 97% reduction in government is better than a 100% reduction from total collapse.

The 3% of selfless civil servants delegated power to secure rights, would be hard pressed to get into mischief.

There are other consequences that are politically unpalatable. With the loss of "human resources" pledged as collateral on the debt, the Federal Reserve Notes (dollar bills) would cease to be legal tender, as unnumbered Americans could object to their tender. Voiding the public debt for fraud also voids government bonds and notes (dollar bills). This would have the effect of making billionaires into zero-aires overnight. As you can imagine, all socialist programs would be unfunded, including Social Security and pensions.

Based on the amount of gold in Fort Knox (assuming it is still there), there's only about $9 per capita, when coined. Silver is not stockpiled, so we'd have only a year's mining output, which comes out around $3 per capita. Obviously "something" would have to give with respect to the money system. Based on the current GDP, we may see a 5000:1 price reduction.
Ex: $250,000 house => $49.99 house
(Not too far off from "MONOPOLY" prices)

Remember, CONgress has no power to create money, nor give that power to anyone else. CONgress has the power to coin money (stamp bullion) - not create bullion. And if CONgress had the power to create money, why would it need the power to borrow money?

If no government nor bank can create a medium of exchange, guess WHO does have the power?
And when you figure that out, you will better understand their silence on the issue.

As to the fear of a civil war / martial law / violent reprisal, there is not much one can do to stop rogues and predators. However, the honorable public servants obedient to the law would not be enemies of the sovereign people.

Skeptics may wish to argue that "REALITY" matters more than "the LAW."

However, since most Americans have never read law - nor does CONgress, routinely enacting legislation unread - it is a common mistake to think the law is fouled up.

It is our own ignorance that trips us up.
. . .

“It may be laid down, as a primary position, and the basis of our system, that every citizen who enjoys the protection of a free government, owes not only a proportion of his property, but even of his personal services to the defence of it, and consequently that the Citizens of America (with a few legal and official exceptions) from 18 to 50 Years of Age should be borne on the Militia Rolls, provided with uniform Arms, and so far accustomed to the use of them, that the Total strength of the Country might be called forth at Short Notice on any very interesting Emergency.”
- - - George Washington; "Sentiments on a Peace Establishment" in a letter to Alexander Hamilton (2 May 1783); published in The Writings of George Washington (1938), edited by John C. Fitzpatrick, Vol. 26, p. 289.

[... Every citizen ... owes a portion of his property ... and services in defense ... in the militia ... from 18 to 50 years of age... ]

Make no mistake!
• The Declaration says : YOU have an endowed right to life.
• But citizens have no inalienable (endowed) right to life.
• The Declaration says : YOU have an endowed right to natural and personal liberty.
• But citizens have only civil and political liberty.
• The Declaration says : YOU have an endowed right to absolutely own private property (upon which you can pursue happiness without permission of a superior).
• But citizens have no private property, absolutely owned... a portion can be claimed by the government.

If you've consented to be a citizen, you have NO ENDOWED RIGHTS.
Zip. Nada. Bumpkiss. Empty Set. Nought.
Any presumption to the contrary is an error not supported by law nor court ruling.

The government can order you to train, fight, and die, on command.
The government can take a portion of your property -or wages - or whatever - as it sees fit.
All authorized by your consent to be a CITIZEN (state or U.S.).
(The USCON complies with this, too. People have rights and powers. Citizens have privileges and immunities. And they’re mutually exclusive.)
. . . . . . . . . .
The Supreme Court has held, in Butler v. Perry, 240 U.S. 328 (1916), that the Thirteenth Amendment does not prohibit "enforcement of those duties which individuals owe to the state, such as services in the army, MILITIA, on the jury, etc." In Selective Draft Law Cases, 245 U.S. 366 (1918), the Supreme Court ruled that the military draft was not "involuntary servitude".

Since the militia only include male CITIZENS, and not all people (who apparently retain their rights), citizenship must be voluntary. But once one volunteers, those civic duties become mandatory.

Now that we know it is our consent to be citizens that waives our right to life and liberty, it is futile to argue over the loss of other inconsequential rights.

Complaining about consent already given is as useful as a volunteer on a suicide mission, blurting out "They want me to do WHAT?! - That could get me KILLED!"
. . . . . . . . . .
>> No inalienable (endowed) right to life <<
>> No liberty nor private property <<
>> BECAUSE citizens are consenting subjects! <<
= = He who consents cannot complain - SHUT UP, sit down, and obey. = =

Of course, you were dutifully informed of your consent, in your government approved education, right?

OOPS.

Someone asked the question : Who is most responsible for the public debt?

"Most responsible?"
[] Usurers.
Usury and compound interest are responsible for the impossible to repay public debt.

“Next most responsible?”
[] Government Idiocy
... clause 4, 14th amendment forbids challenging the validity of the public debt - even when it is obviously fraudulent.

_Why fraudulent?_
[] Congress has no power to create money - only coin money (stamp bullion) or borrow money.
As of Mar 2016, the public debt is over 19 Trillion dollars - not "dollar bills."

Pursuant to existing law, 19 Trillion dollars computes to 950 billion ounces of gold, stamped into coin.
Problem #1 : Fort Knox allegedly holds 147.4 million ounces.
Problem #2 : World wide supply (est) is only 5.6 billion ounces.
So exactly how did CONGRESS borrow the 944 billion ounces of gold dollars that do not exist?
[crickets chirping]
...
So if Congress didn't borrow 950 trillion ounces of gold stamped into DOLLARS, what did it borrow? At interest?
[crickets chirping]
...
I may be missing something, but it is obvious that Congress did not borrow 950 billion ounces of gold stamped into 19 trillion dollars, and anyone claiming to be a creditor is part of the fraud. They could not have lent "dollars" (gold) to Congress.
...
(Dollar bills are not dollars. They are worthless IOUs, since 1933.)
...
What do you think is really going on?
(wink, wink, nod, nod)

Hmm,

I notice that there is a gap between your writings and what I'm able to understand from it.
It's almost like two different languages that meet.
I'm not sure, but I'm willing to bet that this goes for the majority of the people who read this thread.

How can this be solved?

Is there a chance that you are willing to make an effort to choose your words in a manor that is becomes more easy to understand for people who are not used to law jargon?

I think it would improve the chances for a fruitful dialogue. :)

Quote:

---

Posted by Eram

Hmm,

I notice that there is a gap between your writings and what I'm able to understand from it.
It's almost like two different languages that meet.
I'm not sure, but I'm willing to bet that this goes for the majority of the people who read this thread.

How can this be solved?

Is there a chance that you are willing to make an effort to choose your words in a manor that is becomes more easy to understand for people who are not used to law jargon?

I think it would improve the chances for a fruitful dialogue. :)

---

Unfortunately, colloquial English does not match well with certain legal terms and principles. Worse, terms are often redefined.
Consider the confusion over "republic","constitutional republic" and "republican form of government."

In law, one has to be excruciatingly accurate.

I will try to make a simplified
READER’S DIGEST OF LAW (AMERICAN)
...
Law simplified into one sentence:
"All law is for the protection of property rights, all else is policy and policy requires consent."

★ Government recognizes and explicitly protects private property ownership.
★ Government recognizes and explicitly protects natural rights, natural liberty and personal liberty from trespass.

Declaration of Independence (1776):
=> Job #1 = secure rights (endowed by our Creator)
=> Job #2 = govern those who consent
. . . (Caveat - consent waives job #1)
=> All Americans are created equal before the law - no one has higher status. This is also the source of the Republican form of government and the sovereignty of the American national / free inhabitant.

PEOPLE : Have powers and are endowed with rights such as life, liberty (natural and personal), and absolute ownership of their private property. Americans are free to live, own, travel, work, and do not need permission (license) from servant government.

CITIZENS : Granted privileges and immunities, to exercise civil and political liberties, in exchange for surrendering endowed rights by consent. As subjects, they are not free to live, own, travel, work, and do need permission (license) from their master, the government.

GOVERNMENTS : Created by compact to secure rights - they do not have rights - they have delegated powers. They do not grant rights - they bestow privileges and immunities on those who consent to be governed.

ARTICLES OF CONFEDERATION (1777) :
=> Created a perpetual UNION of member states and their governments
=> Delegated certain powers to the United States, in Congress assembled

USCON (1787) :
=> The United States, in Congress assembled, was reorganized into three branches, allegedly to balance power, but required the State officers to swear an oath to the supremacy of the U.S. constitution.
=> People have rights and powers (protected by government)
=> Citizens have privileges and immunities (granted by government)

In other words, the institution of government was to secure rights, via prosecution of deliberate trespass and adjudication of accidental trespass. And govern (i.e., rule, regulate, restrict) only those who consent.
★ Anything more is suspect.
★ Anything less is unacceptable.

Offended by the current socialist democratic benevolent totalitarian police state that your consent empowers?
Until consent is withdrawn, no remedy exists.
After consent is withdrawn, no remedy is needed.
... ... .. .. ... ... .. .. ... ... .. ..
Note: The USCON guarantees a republican form, but the source of the republican form is the Declaration of Independence, ergo, the Declaration is incorporated into the USCON by reference, and is part of the SUPREME LAW of the LAND.

Do not believe me - I am not infallible. Go read the law (statutes) in the public record, available at any county courthouse law library. Verify that servant government has not violated the endowed rights of the sovereign people, and limits its governance to those who gave consent... the subject citizens, who have surrendered their sacred rights in exchange for political and civil liberties.

The whole subject is fascinating a complicated and so very simple all at the same time.I highly recommend looking up straw man as a starting point with reference to your birth certificate .

Quote:

---

Posted by samildamach

The whole subject is fascinating a complicated and so very simple all at the same time.I highly recommend looking up straw man as a starting point with reference to your birth certificate .

---

That's patriot mythology, debunked way back in the 1990s.

The real basis for alleged abuse is CONSENT of the governed.

Re-read what George Washington said about American citizens and mandatory militia duty... the obligation to train, fight, and die, on command.

- - - -

Articles of Confederation, VI. (1777)
...every State shall always keep up a well-regulated and disciplined MILITIA, sufficiently armed and accoutered, and shall provide and constantly have ready for use, in public stores, a due number of field pieces and tents, and a proper quantity of arms, ammunition and camp equipage.

Art. 1, Sec. 8, USCON (1789)
Congress shall have power ... To provide for calling forth the MILITIA to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;

Title 10 USC Sec. 311. Militia: composition and classes
(a) The MILITIA of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, CITIZENS of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

Title 50 USC Sec. 453. Registration (Selective Service)
(a)...it shall be the duty of every male CITIZEN of the United States, and every other male person RESIDING in the United States, who, on the day or days fixed for the first or any subsequent registration, is between the ages of eighteen and twenty-six, to present himself for and submit to registration at such time or times and place or places, and in such manner, as shall be determined by proclamation of the President and by rules and regulations prescribed hereunder.

Another reference about citizenship and the drop in status from mandatory civic duties.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Civil_War

“The great draft riot in New York City in July 1863 involved Irish immigrants who had been signed up as citizens to swell the vote of the city's Democratic political machine, not realizing it made them liable for the draft.”

The Supreme Court has held, in Butler v. Perry, 240 U.S. 328 (1916), that the Thirteenth Amendment does not prohibit "enforcement of those duties which individuals owe to the state, such as services in the army, MILITIA, on the jury, etc." In Selective Draft Law Cases, 245 U.S. 366 (1918), the Supreme Court ruled that the military draft was not "involuntary servitude".

Since 1777, the MILITIA were defined as all able bodied male citizens, between 17 and 45. They were obligated to train, fight, and die, on command. That is the reason why conscription (“the draft”) is 100% constitutional.

But citizenship MUST be voluntary, otherwise militia duty violates the Declaration of Independence, wherein all men are endowed with the right to LIFE and LIBERTY as well as the 13th amendment to the U.S. constitution.

Once you've waived your endowed rights to life and liberty, why grouse over the loss of other rights?

There was once a nation....

There was once a nation, founded on the ideal of self government. Not a participatory democratic form, mind you. But that each individual governed himself - as a sovereign - master of his own domain.

Of course, when beset by predators, it helps to cooperate and unite in mutual defense. A subset of civic minded folks offered their services to “help” secure rights - you know - prosecute deliberate trespass and adjudicate accidental trespass.

This subset, was drawn from not more than 3 to 5% of the populace, who had successfully revolted against their former sovereign. These “public servants” stepped down in status, accepted mandatory civic duties, in exchange for political liberty (voting and holding office). Not only were they oathbound to the compact (constitution), but they were held to a higher standard of behavior. Service is a privilege, not a right, and the people, the real masters, had the right to refuse service from those they disapproved of.

To insure that only genuine patriots served, volunteers had to register their property, pay taxes, serve in the militia between the ages of 17 and 45, and surrender their liberty and life, in defense of the country and the people. This made sense. If one is to decide on who and how the public funds are to be used to secure rights, ante up your share and your hide. Cowards need not apply.

America’s governments were thus instituted with two delegations of power : to secure rights (endowed by our Creator) and to govern those who consent (subjects).

Frankly, legislatures didn’t have much to do, after enacting the laws that secured rights, as in prosecute deliberate injury to person or property, and adjudicate civil cases. And with a small budget, limited taxing powers (remember, no government instituted to secure rights can tax rights), and few subjects to rule, government work was no way to get rich.

After only two generations, those selfless “patriots” realized that they had a “raw deal,” and decided to change the percentages in their favor. They ended the stringent prerequisites for voting, and extended suffrage to any warm blooded male, regardless. This had several beneficial consequences :

1. It reduced the odds for being called up for militia duty, as more were now bound to serve;
2. It increased the number of consenting subjects and taxpayers, that the “democratically elected” government could govern, rule, regulate, restrict, and skin alive;
3. It fostered partisanship, and the rise of “tax and bribe” politics; and
4. It shifted the character of a candidate from “public servant” to “panderer.”

Generations passed. Having erased the memory of the fall from sovereignty, that subjugation of citizenship entailed, the perverted government lured women into demanding the “right to vote.” Of course, political liberty is a government privilege, not a right, since it is dependent upon a government existing. Furthermore, the grant of suffrage was unequal, since the women were not equally obligated to serve and put their lives on the line. In other words, women kept their superior protected status, and were more than happy to grab as much corruption as they could.

Not surprising, soon after women’s suffrage, the government embarked on several disastrous violations of liberty (i.e., “Progressivism” and government meddling) of which the major one was Prohibition - the ban on the manufacture and sale of alcoholic beverages.

As stated before, the power of the government to govern those who consent, and to hold public servants to a higher standard of behavior did authorize the ban - if it was limited to “persons liable.” Of course, since the vast majority of Americans unknowingly had become “persons liable,” by their consent, no legal grounds existed to stop it.

Remember, in the organic documents that formed the nation’s governments, men were endowed with rights and liberties, which meant they had absolute ownership of themselves, their labor, their property and the liberty (natural and personal) that came with that status. The servant government had no delegation of power to tax, ban, proscribe, prohibit, or regulate any aspect of their private livelihood or enterprise as long as no one’s rights were trespassed... EXCEPT by their consent.

Which explains why “public education” seemed to have omitted the fact that Americans could not be “born citizens” without being “born subject slaves.” Citizens have mandatory civic duties. To be born a citizen, violates the 13th amendment, since such mandatory duties would be involuntary servitude.

Even the imposition of national socialism, via the Federal Insurance Contribution Act / Social Security Act of 1935, was by consent. No law compels participation, nor punishes those who do not participate.

Sadly, few Americans are cognizant of their consent in the matter. During the years of the Viet Nam unWar, many “Draft Dodgers” refused their voluntary obligation to train, fight and die, on command, part of militia duty that was law of the land since 1777. Of course, such duty was limited to citizens (volunteers) and residents (privileged transients). American nationals, domiciled within the boundaries of the U.S.A. were not so obligated, and the law does not presume to trespass upon their rights, powers, liberties, and immunities.

As we witness the collapse of the united States of America, preyed upon by internal forces of its own creation and sufferance, one might ask : “Could things have been different?”
I believe they could be different, and can be, too.

The laws in harmony with the republican form are still on the books. There are still protections for inhabitants with domiciles who are not consenting subjects. There are still no mandatory duties for non-citizen / non-resident American nationals. All the abusive laws appear to be strictly limited in scope and venue to those who have given consent. Granted, most Americans are clueless and ignorant of that fact, but there is still hope.

I am skeptical that enough minds can change before the outbreak of chaos, and am pessimistic as to the course of the conflagration. There won’t be any “winners” - just “losers.”

Even after the smoke and dust settles, on that day after the end of the final collapse, there is hope. If Americans can rediscover the fundamental principles that founded America, in 1776, there is a chance that the republican form of government will not perish from the face of the earth.

Yes, I understand that the law uses certain words and that it is a slippery slope to try and translate it into a more readably substance.

That is not really my issue.

If we assume (for the sake of arguments) that you and others who have done the hard labor of studying the law in this respect, are correct in the notion that one can withdraw citizenship, then I'd like to discuss the scenario's that we can derive from that. I'm certain that we can discuss such scenario's in a language that we can all understand.

In other words:
It is one thing to find a legal way out of the system that the US citizens live by and are subjected to. It is another thing to bring this into practice as a solution for all. Then we have to start thinking about every possible bump in the road.

Such a discussion could (and I think should) be held without constantly go back to legal, difficult to understand texts.

Quote:

---

Posted by Eram

Yes, I understand that the law uses certain words and that it is a slippery slope to try and translate it into a more readably substance.

That is not really my issue.

If we assume (for the sake of arguments) that you and others who have done the hard labor of studying the law in this respect, are correct in the notion that one can withdraw citizenship, then I'd like to discuss the scenario's that we can derive from that. I'm certain that we can discuss such scenario's in a language that we can all understand.

In other words:
It is one thing to find a legal way out of the system that the US citizens live by and are subjected to. It is another thing to bring this into practice as a solution for all. Then we have to start thinking about every possible bump in the road.

Such a discussion could (and I think should) be held without constantly go back to legal, difficult to understand texts.

---

If I may make an analogy to "1984" - American socialists have been indoctrinated to speak and think with DOUBLE BAD terminology that interferes with comprehension.

Translating legal speak into double bad language is not the remedy to ignorance of the law.

Reading law is initially painful and laborious. But, in time, you gain confidence and a better understanding.

Here’s an example of convoluted legalese:
From the Official Code of Georgia Annotated-

OCGA 40-2-1. As used in this chapter, the term:
(2) "Resident" means a person who has a permanent home or abode in Georgia to which, whenever he is absent, he has the intention of returning. For the purposes of this chapter, there is a rebuttable presumption that any person who, except for infrequent, brief absences, has been present in the state for 30 or more days is a resident.

--- This is a prime example of the art of legal word twisting.
Note how the phrasing sounds like the definition for domicile.

Resident = "a person" + "permanent home".

If you quickly read the section, you might presume that it means one who is in the state 30 or more days is a resident, for motor vehicle code purposes.

But if you dissect it, the meaning is just the opposite.
"A person" + "permanent home" + "present for 30 or more days" = rebuttable presumption that HE IS A RESIDENT.

In plain English, a Georgia resident is one who has a permanent home but is in the state LESS than 30 days out of a year (A transient). If one is present in the state 30 or more days out of a year, he can REBUT THE PRESUMPTION that he is a resident.

If one is NOT a resident, but has a legal and permanent home in Georgia, is he not an inhabitant (domiciled) at his permanent home?

And non-residents are not obligated to get permission (license).

D'Oh!

Here are the pertinent definitions

"INHABITANT - One who resides actually and permanently in a given place, and has his domicile there."
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p.782

"DOMICILE - A person's legal home. That place where a man has his true, fixed, and permanent home and principal establishment, and to which whenever he is absent he has the intention of returning."
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p.484

"RESIDENCE - Place where one actually lives ... Residence implies something more than physical presence and something less than domicile. The terms 'resident' and 'residence' have no precise legal meaning... [One can have many residences but only one domicile]
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p.1308, 1309

"RESIDENT - ...when used as a noun, means a dweller, habitant, or occupant; one who resides or dwells in a place for a period of more, or less duration...
Resident has many meanings in law, largely determined by statutory context in which it is used."
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p.1309

A "legal residence" is NOT a permanent legal home (domicile).

Why is being an inhabitant important?

"The better to secure and perpetuate mutual friendship and intercourse among the people of the different states in this union, the free inhabitants of each of these states ... shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of free citizens in the several states; ...."
[Article IV of the Articles of Confederation (1777)]

Free inhabitants - who are not subject citizens - are recognized as having endowed rights that government was instituted to secure. They are the sovereign people.

If you are listed in the public records as a RESIDENT, you are NOT an inhabitant. And if you are a citizen, you are a subject.
Isn't it curious that only RESIDENTS are required or eligible to get permission (license)?

Does government make the distinction?
YES.

" No inhabitant of this state shall be molested in person or property ... on account of religious opinions..."
- - - Georgia Constitution, Article 1, Sec.1, Paragraph 4

"... private property shall not be taken or damaged for public purposes without just and adequate compensation being first paid.'
- - - Georgia Constitution, Article 1, Sec.3, Paragraph 1

No inhabitant, domiciled in Georgia, who believes that participation in socialism is a violation of his religious beliefs is to be molested, nor is his private property liable to be taken without compensation first being paid.

I think you can guess what is NOT mentioned as subject to being taxed in the Georgia constitution.

Oh, but what about RESIDENTS?

“ Citizens, protection of. All citizens of the United States, resident in this state, are hereby declared citizens of this state ; and it shall be the duty of the General Assembly to enact such laws as will protect them in the full enjoyment of the rights, privileges, and immunities due to such citizenship.”
- - - Georgia Constitution, Article 1, Sec.3, Paragraph 7

All U.S. citizens (subjects) resident in the state (not as inhabitants) are declared subject citizens of the state, as well. Isn't that SPECIAL?

I don't think that this is going to work out for me (and I imagine others as well).

I am seriously interested in this subject and the fact that you seem to be able to live outside the system of citizenship, but if all your posts are laced with this legal jargon, then I have to accept defeat and withdraw from the thread and (for now) the whole subject.

Last attempt.
If you would be so kind, please answer the questions that I asked in my first post in this thread in understandable language. :)

Quote:

---

Posted by Eram

• I understand that you have withdrawn from citizenship.
  How does that work out in reality? Does the government leave you alone in every way?
  How does your life differ from people who are in the citizen matrix?
  
  
• What (in your opinion) would happen if more and more people would withdraw from citizenship? 20.000 over a time span of a month. Or one million in one day. :)
  How would the system react to that? (denial and brute force are the first things that come to mind here)

---

I think when there is a wish, there is a way!

check this info :
(How do you Lawfully regain status as a Sovereign Human Being? Understand and Use Contracts)

http://reclaim-your-sovereignty.blog...lians-can.html

,,What are you? A Human Being with Infinite Potential

As a human being, you are charged with the responsibility of living your life somewhere within the limits of the Laws of Nature. Within these limits you have absolutely infinite creative potential to learn, live and love your way through the universe to become your best self and achieve your destiny whatever that may be. You literally can achieve most anything that any other human being has ever achieved before or something completely new. You are Unique and Eternal, so DREAM BIG!

Who are you? You are the Product of your Values, Beliefs, Actions and Contracts

Many of us currently define ourselves by the name given to us at birth, or by our job, or by being a member of a society, or by a single achievement, or even worse… by the size of our bank account. However, as Human Beings with infinite creative potential we are so much more than these simple definitions. So do yourself a favour and take some time to thoughtfully define yourself by identifying and listing your Core Values and Beliefs. Achieving the life you’ve always dreamt of starts here.

What is Sovereignty? Complete Responsibility for Yourself and the Consequences of Your Actions

All human beings are Sovereign entities, however the vast majority have been deceived into giving up their rights and Sovereign Power to access Government benefits, or to honour the memory of relatives and ancestors whom fought and died for the system, or simply because the government says so. Until you re-claim your Sovereignty you are subject to the statutes and rules of the society (Commonwealth) created by the Sovereign power people submit to. ''

and check this 2 pdf files for some more info on the topic.

http://www.yourstrawman.com/Strawman.pdf

https://exodus200.files.wordpress.co...3/strawman.pdf

:)

Sounds like the republic of Texas.....

Quote:

---

Posted by Eram

Hmm,

I notice that there is a gap between your writings and what I'm able to understand from it.
It's almost like two different languages that meet.
I'm not sure, but I'm willing to bet that this goes for the majority of the people who read this thread.

How can this be solved?

Is there a chance that you are willing to make an effort to choose your words in a manor that is becomes more easy to understand for people who are not used to law jargon?

I think it would improve the chances for a fruitful dialogue. :)

---

Thank you for this question.
I was close to leaving...I still cannot wrap my brain around such wording for law. Seems convoluted to the point to truly confuse the people. Words are very strategic and trickster in legal writings. These "laws" are not even true according to the writings here. Meaning: what the average "sovereign" Joes believe as truth and protection are twisted now for control and human ownership. Not the same.
Thanks OzMirage for such efforts, depth and scope . I do hope I can get the "Dummies" version......

Precisely why our founding fathers did not want lawyers to hold public office.

They are highly adept at confusion.:wizard:

Ozmirage, I would like to make an observation here. I have studied all of the stuff you are posting. I have read the USC The CFR, The UCC and delved into the law libraries so deep it has made me sick. I have all of the pertinent information at my fingertips all the time and here is what I have found after years of study. NONE OF THIS CRAP IS REAL LAW, THERE HAS NOT BEEN ANY REAL LAWS WRITTEN SINCE 1861. COMMON LAW WAS FOR THE PEOPLE The Constitution does not give us any rights it was not written to do that. It was written to give a government certain writes and to keep them in check. The Bill of rights was placed there for the people and to keep check on the government. Common law was brought over from England and given to the American Nationals, Actually the free inhabitants on the land of the continental states.

So that is just a taste, Our Republic government cruised along until king Lincoln became president. In 1861 the southern states walked out of congress Sine Die and the government (true government) could not re convene. So good old Lincoln created the first corporation and made the left over congress into a board of directors. That all went along during the Civil War and afterwards the reconstruction period happened where The king came up with the 14th amendment Illegally I might add and made everyone a UNITED STATES CITIZEN. Now we all got to be employees of the Corporation. How wonderful. So all those funky not LAWs called statutes, Codes, Policies are only written for Corporate employees. Check out the Act of 1871 and the continuation of the corporation. The Bankruptcy of 1933 and so on.

Yes there are ways to remove yourself from the corporation of the UNITED STATES INC. OR THE United States of America INC or whatever the criminals decide to call themselves/ But unless you completely stop doing commerce you will never get out. There are some things one can do and I have done some. So maybe we ought to be talking about what is real and what is not ???????????????

Steven

Quote:

---

Posted by Lost N Found

Ozmirage, I would like to make an observation here. I have studied all of the stuff you are posting. I have read the USC The CFR, The UCC and delved into the law libraries so deep it has made me sick. I have all of the pertinent information at my fingertips all the time and here is what I have found after years of study. NONE OF THIS CRAP IS REAL LAW, THERE HAS NOT BEEN ANY REAL LAWS WRITTEN SINCE 1861. COMMON LAW WAS FOR THE PEOPLE The Constitution does not give us any rights it was not written to do that. It was written to give a government certain writes and to keep them in check. The Bill of rights was placed there for the people and to keep check on the government. Common law was brought over from England and given to the American Nationals, Actually the free inhabitants on the land of the continental states.

So that is just a taste, Our Republic government cruised along until king Lincoln became president. In 1861 the southern states walked out of congress Sine Die and the government (true government) could not re convene. So good old Lincoln created the first corporation and made the left over congress into a board of directors. That all went along during the Civil War and afterwards the reconstruction period happened where The king came up with the 14th amendment Illegally I might add and made everyone a UNITED STATES CITIZEN. Now we all got to be employees of the Corporation. How wonderful. So all those funky not LAWs called statutes, Codes, Policies are only written for Corporate employees. Check out the Act of 1871 and the continuation of the corporation. The Bankruptcy of 1933 and so on.

Yes there are ways to remove yourself from the corporation of the UNITED STATES INC. OR THE United States of America INC or whatever the criminals decide to call themselves/ But unless you completely stop doing commerce you will never get out. There are some things one can do and I have done some. So maybe we ought to be talking about what is real and what is not ???????????????

Steven

---

I disagree.

Please re-read the quote from George Washington, written prior to the USCON.

If you do not perceive that a citizen has NO endowed rights, while American people are sovereigns with endowed rights, you will not understand.

The mythologists blame everything and everyone else but CONSENT of the GOVERNED.

The "State Citizens" made the same mistake.

[American] People have endowed rights and are sovereigns.
[American] Citizens have government privileges and are subjects.

That's the LAW OF THE LAND.

Non Taurus Cacas.

(P.S. - a "republic" is NOT synonymous with a "republican form of government.")

Quote:

---

Posted by Eram

Last attempt.
If you would be so kind, please answer the questions that I asked in my first post in this thread in understandable language. :)

Quote:

---

Posted by Eram

• I understand that you have withdrawn from citizenship.
  How does that work out in reality? Does the government leave you alone in every way?
  How does your life differ from people who are in the citizen matrix?
  
  
• What (in your opinion) would happen if more and more people would withdraw from citizenship? 20.000 over a time span of a month. Or one million in one day. :)
  How would the system react to that? (denial and brute force are the first things that come to mind here)

---

---

If I may reformat the questions - - -
How does not being a subject of government differ from being a subject of government?
_ My endowed rights are secure

Does the government trespass upon your rights and liberties?
_ No

How is life different?
_ Not a slave

If Americans withdraw consent, in large enough numbers, what happens to "the system"?
_ It collapses

Instead of trying to persuade people of the benefits of the republican form of government and the endowments of the Declaration of Independence, I will play Devil's Advocate and spell out what Americans consented to.

Declaration of Pauperization and Socialist Slavery

• We believe that governments are instituted among men so that the majority can outvote the minority and take their property.
• We believe in compulsory labor for the benefit of another because slavery is good.
• We believe that submission to the State will provide the highest standard of living for those whom the State rewards.
• We believe that no one has an absolute right to life, to liberty, to land, or any other property without permission of the State, administered by benevolent overseers that the majority votes into office.
• We believe power trumps morality, and protests supersede common sense.
• We believe that we owe allegiance, labor and obedience to the State, and that the people serve the State and its leaders. And we are ecstatic at the prospect of the People’s Democratic Socialist Republic of America, sans that pesky charter of negative liberties.
• We do not want a republican form of government where the people are sovereigns and the government serves them.
• We do not want natural liberty - absolute freedom - over our private property absolutely owned.
• We do not want personal liberty - the right to travel - without first getting permission (license) from the government.
• We do not want to endow our children with our property - we want to give it to the State and let them decide who is deserving of it.
• We believe that guns are dangerous, and by banning guns, people will be safe from criminals in or out of government.
• We believe that no one has the right to exclude others from his property, or prevent the deserving needy from taking what they need.
• We believe that one must get permission from the State and carry identification papers or other means to insure that the State can account for one’s activities.
• We believe that prior restraint and strict regulation is more convenient than only prosecuting deliberate injury after the fact.
• We believe that a common belief system that tolerates predation, imposed by incessant propaganda is superior to religious dogma that teaches the law of love is superior to the law of the jungle.
• We believe that the State knows best, and its legislated limits on poisoning is better than justice for injured parties, who suffered from legal levels of poisoning.
• We believe that no one has a right to life without the permission of the State and/or his fellow citizens, and misbehavior is to be punished with outlawry or death.
• We are too stupid, pity us.

War is peace - ignorance is strength - freedom is slavery - debt is money - censorship is security - lies are truth - facts don’t matter - only MY opinion matters (as long as it agrees with Big Brother!)

Huh? There's no valid need to reformat my questions! :P


Perhaps trickery was involved to create the state of "master- slave" that the US is now in, but I can't imagine that the people who own the power now will sit bye and watch when people withdraw consent.
Not in a million years.

The world's greatest propaganda ministry has almost eradicated any memory of America's unique republican form.

You will find that external references to the republican form lead one astray.
Ex: WIKIPEDIA - Search on republican form and WIKI links back to "republic."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic

A republic (from Latin: res publica) is a sovereign state or country which is organised with a form of government in which power resides in elected individuals representing the citizen body...

The "Free Dictionary" also redirects back to "republic."

That form of government in which the administration of affairs is open to all the citizens. A political unit or "state," independent of its form of government.

Under the illusion of democracy, Americans mindlessly embrace submission to the all powerful government, believing that by participation, they are the "bosses." (SMH)

Even the so-called "Opposition" is entirely enraptured by the notion that it is "THEIR" government to rule and control... and swallow historical revisions that vilify the honorable statesmen who served.

In reality, the sovereign people are not parties to the compacts that created the servant governments.

"But, indeed, no private person has a right to complain, by suit in Court, on the ground of a breach of the Constitution. The Constitution, it is true, is a compact, but he is not a party to it. The States are the parties to it. And they may complain...."
- - -Padelford, Fay & Co. vs. Mayor and Alderman, City of Savannah, 14 Ga. 438, 520 (1854) Supreme Court of Georgia

Caveat - the following represents over 20 years of research into "obscure" references to the [whispered] republican form of government.

REPUBLICAN FORM REFERENCE ARCHIVE

“The republican is the only form of government which is not eternally at open or secret war with the Rights of mankind.”
- - - Thomas Jefferson
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Thomas_Jefferson

“I firmly believe that the benevolent Creator designed the republican Form of Government for Man.”
- - - Samuel Adams;
Statement of (14 April 1785), quoted in The Writings of Samuel Adams (1904) edited by Harry A. Cushing
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Samuel_Adams

"What I do say is that no man is good enough to govern another man without that other's consent. I say this is the leading principle, the sheet-anchor of American republicanism. Our Declaration of Independence says: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."
- - - Abraham Lincoln, Speech at Peoria, Illinois (1854)
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Abraham_lincoln

As Lincoln reminds us, under the republican form, promised by the USCON, instituted by the Declaration of Independence, NO MAN (nor American government) is good enough to govern you without your consent. Without your consent, all that government is authorized to do is secure endowed (sacred) rights (prosecute trespass; adjudicate disputes; defend against enemies, foreign or domestic).

" When a change of government takes place, from a monarchial to a republican government, the old form is dissolved. Those who lived under it, and did not choose to become members of the new, had a right to refuse their allegiance to it, and to retire elsewhere. By being a part of the society subject to the old government, they had not entered into any engagement to become subject to any new form the majority might think proper to adopt. That the majority shall prevail is a rule posterior to the formation of government, and results from it. It is not a rule binding upon mankind in their natural state. There, every man is independent of all laws, except those prescribed by nature. He is not bound by any institutions formed by his fellowmen without his consent."
- - - CRUDEN v. NEALE, 2 N.C. 338 (1796) 2 S.E. 70.

Without consent, no majority can rule nor govern, only secure endowed rights.

All endowed rights and liberties are from the Creator, not government, and thus cannot be subject to a majority vote, or any other infringement.

" Personal liberty, or the Right to enjoyment of life and liberty, is one of the fundamental or natural Rights, which has been protected by its inclusion as a guarantee in the various constitutions, which is not derived from, or dependent on, the U.S. Constitution, which may not be submitted to a vote and may not depend on the outcome of an election. It is one of the most sacred and valuable Rights, as sacred as the Right to private property...and is regarded as inalienable."
- - - 16 Corpus Juris Secundum, Constitutional Law, Sect.202, p.987.

NATURAL RIGHTS - ... are the rights of life, liberty, privacy, and good reputation.
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Ed., p. 1324

Americans are endowed with natural rights and liberties (natural and personal) that are not subject to infringement by servant government, instituted to secure those rights.
- - -

“... at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people, and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects, and have none to govern but themselves. . .
“... In Europe, the sovereignty is generally ascribed to the Prince; here, it rests with the people; there, the sovereign actually administers the government; here, never in a single instance; our Governors are the agents of the people, and, at most, stand in the same relation to their sovereign in which regents in Europe stand to their sovereigns.”
- - - Justice John Jay, Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 U.S. 2 Dall. 419 419 (1793)
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremec...CR_0002_0419_Z

In America, however, the case is widely different. Our government is founded upon compact. Sovereignty was, and is, in the people.
- - - Glass vs The Sloop Betsey, 3 Dall 6 (1794)

- - -
In the republican form of government, the people are sovereigns (unless they consent otherwise) served by (not ruled by) servant government. Their rights and liberties existed before constitutional government (which is why the republican form is NOT a constitutional republic - nor can a constitutional government institute a republican form).


DEFINITIONS

Here are THREE definitions that describe aspects associated with the REPUBLICAN FORM
...

COMMONWEALTH - ...It generally designates, when so employed, a republican form of government, - one in which the welfare and rights of the entire mass of people are the main consideration, rather than the privileges of a class or the will of the monarch...
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, P. 278

SUBJECT - One that owes allegiance to a sovereign and is governed by his laws.
...Men in free governments are subjects as well as citizens; as citizens they enjoy rights and franchises; as subjects they are bound to obey the laws. The term is little used, in this sense, in countries enjoying a republican form of government.
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 1425

GOVERNMENT (Republican Form of Government)- One in which the powers of sovereignty are vested in the people and are exercised by the people... directly...
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, P. 695

...
Restating, in the references to a “republican form” we can see the following characteristics of it:
[] People directly exercise sovereignty (over themselves and their private property, absolutely owned)
[] People are not subjects of a sovereign (citizens are subjects, by definition)
[] The welfare and rights of the entire mass of people are the main consideration

RELATED TO SOVEREIGN PEOPLE (non-citizen Nationals)

"The better to secure and perpetuate mutual friendship and intercourse among the people of the different states in this union, the free inhabitants of each of these states, ... shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of free citizens in the several states ..."
[Article IV of the Articles of Confederation (1777)]

“Free inhabitants” = sovereigns

“The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion. . .”
- - - United States Constitution, Article 4, Section 4.

“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the PEOPLE.”
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the PEOPLE.”
- - - Ninth and Tenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution

What rights and what powers?

"We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."
- - - Declaration of Independence, 1776

Note: PEOPLE (sovereigns) have rights and powers (endowed by our Creator).
Citizens (subjects) have privileges and immunities (granted by the government).

Citizens are NOT sovereigns

CITIZEN - ... Citizens are members of a political community who, in their associative capacity, have established or SUBMITTED themselves to the dominion of government for the promotion of the general welfare and the protection of their individual as well as collective rights.
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Ed. p.244

"... the term 'citizen,' in the United States, is analogous to the term "SUBJECT" in the common law; the change of phrase has resulted from the change in government. ... he who before was a "subject of the King" is now a citizen of the State."
- - - State v. Manuel, 20 N.C. 144 (1838)

Article 4, Section 2 - State citizens
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

- - - - - -

REPUBLICAN GOVERNMENT. . . The fourth section of the fourth article of the constitution, directs that "the United States shall guaranty to every state in the Union a republican form of government." The form of government is to be guarantied, WHICH SUPPOSES A FORM ALREADY ESTABLISHED, and this is the republican form of government the United States have undertaken to protect.
- - - Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 6th edition, 1856
. . .
The republican form existed BEFORE the USCON, thus it cannot be a “constitutional republic.”
. . .
Under the subsection: CONSTITUTION
Sec. 4. The guarantee of a republican form of government to every "state" means to its people and not to its government: Texas v. White. 7 Wall. (U. S.) 700, 19 L. Ed. 227. Where it was also held that this clause was sufficient authority for the reconstruction, after the Civil War of the governments of the states included within the Confederacy. No precise definition of what constitutes a republican government under this clause has been judicially declared; . . . Minor v. Happersett, 21 Wall. (U. S.) 162, 22 L. Ed. 027
- - - Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 8th ed. (1914), P.635

The republican form is guaranteed to the PEOPLE (sovereigns) not to the state governments (oath bound subjects of the U.S. government).
- - - -
As long as the republican form is guaranteed, the form of the servant government is immaterial.
- - - -
The day when there are no longer any sovereign Americans, is the day that the republican form is eradicated from the face of the earth.


RESTATEMENT

REPUBLICAN FORM - that form of government wherein the people directly exercise sovereignty, and are served -not ruled- by government (and its subject citizens). The sovereign people retain possession of all their endowed and inalienable rights, powers, and liberties, and no democratic majority can vote them away. The servant government exercises power to secure rights, and only by special delegation via consent, may it govern. Though not perfect, it is the best form, securing the maximum liberty and freedom to its sovereign people.

Under the republican form of government, the American is endowed with (natural) rights, (natural and personal) liberties, absolute ownership (private property), and government was instituted to secure those endowed rights... unless he consents to be governed under the constitutionally limited indirect democratic form of government. Then all bets are off, for if he consents, then he waives endowed rights in exchange for government’s privileges and immunities, and voluntarily accepts mandatory civic duties that would otherwise violate endowed rights, liberties, and powers.

Quote:

---

Posted by ozmirage

Quote:

---

Posted by Lost N Found

Ozmirage, I would like to make an observation here. I have studied all of the stuff you are posting. I have read the USC The CFR, The UCC and delved into the law libraries so deep it has made me sick. I have all of the pertinent information at my fingertips all the time and here is what I have found after years of study. NONE OF THIS CRAP IS REAL LAW, THERE HAS NOT BEEN ANY REAL LAWS WRITTEN SINCE 1861. COMMON LAW WAS FOR THE PEOPLE The Constitution does not give us any rights it was not written to do that. It was written to give a government certain writes and to keep them in check. The Bill of rights was placed there for the people and to keep check on the government. Common law was brought over from England and given to the American Nationals, Actually the free inhabitants on the land of the continental states.

So that is just a taste, Our Republic government cruised along until king Lincoln became president. In 1861 the southern states walked out of congress Sine Die and the government (true government) could not re convene. So good old Lincoln created the first corporation and made the left over congress into a board of directors. That all went along during the Civil War and afterwards the reconstruction period happened where The king came up with the 14th amendment Illegally I might add and made everyone a UNITED STATES CITIZEN. Now we all got to be employees of the Corporation. How wonderful. So all those funky not LAWs called statutes, Codes, Policies are only written for Corporate employees. Check out the Act of 1871 and the continuation of the corporation. The Bankruptcy of 1933 and so on.

Yes there are ways to remove yourself from the corporation of the UNITED STATES INC. OR THE United States of America INC or whatever the criminals decide to call themselves/ But unless you completely stop doing commerce you will never get out. There are some things one can do and I have done some. So maybe we ought to be talking about what is real and what is not ???????????????

Steven

---

I disagree.

Please re-read the quote from George Washington, written prior to the USCON.

If you do not perceive that a citizen has NO endowed rights, while American people are sovereigns with endowed rights, you will not understand.

The mythologists blame everything and everyone else but CONSENT of the GOVERNED.

The "State Citizens" made the same mistake.

[American] People have endowed rights and are sovereigns.
[American] Citizens have government privileges and are subjects.

That's the LAW OF THE LAND.

Non Taurus Cacas.

(P.S. - a "republic" is NOT synonymous with a "republican form of government.")

---

Well I might agree with you somewhat but I don't think we can use the term "THE LAW OF THE LAND" today simply because that has and was taken away from us when the UCC laws or here again not real law but commercial codes and statutes, were enforced on us through deceit and lies. Admiralty and Maritime laws , which are of the Sea is what replaced Common Law which is the law of the land. Our birth certificates are placed into trusts and turned into security instruments by the State government and the federal government which are really not governments for the people by the people and of the people.

Here are the 4 great laws supposedly still in play but not followed in this country
1. The Declaration of Independence 1776
2. The Northwest Ordinance Treaty
3. The Articles of Confederation
4. The Constitution for the united states of America

Notice I say the "The Constitution for instead of. The Constitution of the UNITED STATES is nothing more than a charter for a corporation that was all changed in 1871.

Now you speak of George Washington, Well sure he said alot of things about Americans and he even called us citizens and way back then we were citizens of few states of America. But then again George was a british agent and created the regional districts rather than free united states and you can look that one up also.

Question, You talk about how we give our CONSENT. How do we give our consent? is it freely given or is it deceitfully taken from us through lies by the corporation?
Yes we are sovereigns and the rights we inherent are God Given and no man can take those away.
To call ones self a Sovereign Citizen is an oxymoron. One cannot be a sovereign and Citizen both

You are right in saying that a Citizen has no rights simply because to be a citizen today is to be an employee or slave to the District of Columbia. Now if you fill out one of those forms to VOTE you actually are consenting to be one of the citizens are you not. Okay that's one form of consent and you are not told what that really means now are you. Another form of consent is buying a drivers License. Paying a third party for a Marriage License. Filling out any government form can give your consent to the Corporation. This stuff permeates our society and it all happened without us ever knowing what was happening. So FRAUD had been perpetuated upon us and we are Oblivious are we not?

So your comment about blaming everything and everyone else but CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED should be maybe reworded to the fact that we or our consent is taken by deceit and Lies and if we knew what was happening we would not give that consent now would we?

For those who would rather remain enslaved.

“Contemplate the mangled bodies of your countrymen, and then say 'what should be the reward of such sacrifices?' Bid us and our posterity bow the knee, supplicate the friendship and plough, and sow, and reap, to glut the avarice of the men who have let loose on us the dogs of war to riot in our blood and hunt us from the face of the earth? If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!”
- - - Samuel Adams

For those who would not remain enslaved.

“Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!”
- - - Patrick Henry

Quote:

---

Posted by Lost N Found

Quote:

---

Posted by ozmirage

Quote:

---

Posted by Lost N Found

Ozmirage, I would like to make an observation here. I have studied all of the stuff you are posting. I have read the USC The CFR, The UCC and delved into the law libraries so deep it has made me sick. I have all of the pertinent information at my fingertips all the time and here is what I have found after years of study. NONE OF THIS CRAP IS REAL LAW, THERE HAS NOT BEEN ANY REAL LAWS WRITTEN SINCE 1861. COMMON LAW WAS FOR THE PEOPLE The Constitution does not give us any rights it was not written to do that. It was written to give a government certain writes and to keep them in check. The Bill of rights was placed there for the people and to keep check on the government. Common law was brought over from England and given to the American Nationals, Actually the free inhabitants on the land of the continental states.

So that is just a taste, Our Republic government cruised along until king Lincoln became president. In 1861 the southern states walked out of congress Sine Die and the government (true government) could not re convene. So good old Lincoln created the first corporation and made the left over congress into a board of directors. That all went along during the Civil War and afterwards the reconstruction period happened where The king came up with the 14th amendment Illegally I might add and made everyone a UNITED STATES CITIZEN. Now we all got to be employees of the Corporation. How wonderful. So all those funky not LAWs called statutes, Codes, Policies are only written for Corporate employees. Check out the Act of 1871 and the continuation of the corporation. The Bankruptcy of 1933 and so on.

Yes there are ways to remove yourself from the corporation of the UNITED STATES INC. OR THE United States of America INC or whatever the criminals decide to call themselves/ But unless you completely stop doing commerce you will never get out. There are some things one can do and I have done some. So maybe we ought to be talking about what is real and what is not ???????????????

Steven

---

I disagree.

Please re-read the quote from George Washington, written prior to the USCON.

If you do not perceive that a citizen has NO endowed rights, while American people are sovereigns with endowed rights, you will not understand.

The mythologists blame everything and everyone else but CONSENT of the GOVERNED.

The "State Citizens" made the same mistake.

[American] People have endowed rights and are sovereigns.
[American] Citizens have government privileges and are subjects.

That's the LAW OF THE LAND.

Non Taurus Cacas.

(P.S. - a "republic" is NOT synonymous with a "republican form of government.")

---

Well I might agree with you somewhat but I don't think we can use the term "THE LAW OF THE LAND" today simply because that has and was taken away from us when the UCC laws or here again not real law but commercial codes and statutes, were enforced on us through deceit and lies. Admiralty and Maritime laws , which are of the Sea is what replaced Common Law which is the law of the land. Our birth certificates are placed into trusts and turned into security instruments by the State government and the federal government which are really not governments for the people by the people and of the people.

Here are the 4 great laws supposedly still in play but not followed in this country
1. The Declaration of Independence 1776
2. The Northwest Ordinance Treaty
3. The Articles of Confederation
4. The Constitution for the united states of America

Notice I say the "The Constitution for instead of. The Constitution of the UNITED STATES is nothing more than a charter for a corporation that was all changed in 1871.

Now you speak of George Washington, Well sure he said alot of things about Americans and he even called us citizens and way back then we were citizens of few states of America. But then again George was a british agent and created the regional districts rather than free united states and you can look that one up also.

Question, You talk about how we give our CONSENT. How do we give our consent? is it freely given or is it deceitfully taken from us through lies by the corporation?
Yes we are sovereigns and the rights we inherent are God Given and no man can take those away.
To call ones self a Sovereign Citizen is an oxymoron. One cannot be a sovereign and Citizen both

You are right in saying that a Citizen has no rights simply because to be a citizen today is to be an employee or slave to the District of Columbia. Now if you fill out one of those forms to VOTE you actually are consenting to be one of the citizens are you not. Okay that's one form of consent and you are not told what that really means now are you. Another form of consent is buying a drivers License. Paying a third party for a Marriage License. Filling out any government form can give your consent to the Corporation. This stuff permeates our society and it all happened without us ever knowing what was happening. So FRAUD had been perpetuated upon us and we are Oblivious are we not?

So your comment about blaming everything and everyone else but CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED should be maybe reworded to the fact that we or our consent is taken by deceit and Lies and if we knew what was happening we would not give that consent now would we?

---

It is not the job of the SERVANT to instruct the MASTER, nor prevent him from foolishness.
(wink, wink, nod, nod)

AS to the other nonsense (and patriot mythology), it is wholly off point. Ignorance of the law is no defense.

Stop and think - if one has militia duty, one has no RIGHT to life, liberty, etc, etc.
And militia duty was part of the law since DAY ONE.
(Read the early constitutions)

The law still supports the republican form - for those who have the standing to claim it.

Government is not a sovereign, but a servant to the sovereign people.

"In common usage, the term 'person' does not include the sovereign, [and] statutes employing the [word] are ordinarily construed to exclude it."
Wilson v. Omaha Indian Tribe, 442 U.S. 653, 667, 61 L.Ed2. 153, 99 S.Ct. 2529 (1979)
(quoting United States v. Cooper Corp. 312 U.S. 600, 604, 85 L.Ed. 1071, 61S.Ct. 742 (1941)).

"A Sovereign cannot be named in any statute as merely a 'person' or 'any person'".
Wills v. Michigan State Police, 105 L.Ed. 45 (1989)

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

City of Dallas v. Mitchell, 245 S.W. 944, 945-46
(Tex.Civ.App.-Dallas 1922):

“The rights of the individual are not derived from governmental agencies, either municipal, state or federal, or even from the Constitution. They exist inherently in every man, by endowment of the Creator, and are merely reaffirmed in the Constitution, AND RESTRICTED ONLY TO THE EXTENT THAT THEY HAVE BEEN VOLUNTARILY SURRENDERED BY THE CITIZENSHIP to the agencies of government. The people's rights are not derived from the government, but the government's authority comes from the people. The Constitution but states again these rights already existing, and when legislative encroachment by the nation, state, or municipality invade these original and permanent rights, it is the duty of the courts to so declare, and to afford the necessary relief. The fewer restrictions that surround the individual liberties of the citizen, except those for the preservation of the public health, safety, and morals, the more contented the people and the more successful the democracy.”
- - - City of Dallas v. Mitchell, 245 S.W. 944, 945-46; (Tex.Civ.App.-Dallas 1922)
...

NOW, in support of the point that government certainly knows that there are subject “persons” versus “everybody” please note these samples of laws from Title 18.

Coincidentally, when government wishes a law to be applicable to everyone, it uses the phrase, "Whoever ...". When the law is not applicable to everyone, it uses the phrase, "Any person who ....".

U.S. Code › Title 18 › Part I › Chapter 51 › § 1111
18 U.S. Code § 1111 - Murder
WHOEVER is guilty of murder in the first degree shall be punished by death or by imprisonment for life;
WHOEVER is guilty of murder in the second degree, shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life.

U.S. Code › Title 18 › Part I › Chapter 7 › § 113
18 U.S. Code § 113 - Assaults within maritime and territorial jurisdiction
(a) WHOEVER, within the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States, is guilty of an assault shall be punished as follows:
{list of variations of assault}

Title 18 USC § 111. Assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain
officers or employees
(a) In General.-- WHOEVER--
(1) forcibly assaults, resists, opposes, impedes, intimidates, or interferes with any person designated in section 1114 of this title while engaged in or on account of the performance of official duties;

Does government KNOW the difference?

Title 18 USC § 228. Failure to pay legal child support obligations
(a) Offense.-- ANY PERSON WHO--
(1) willfully fails to pay a support obligation with respect to a child who resides in another State, if such obligation has remained unpaid for a period longer than 1 year, or is greater than $5,000...

“Person” does not include the “sovereign.”
The average person (indoctrinated serf) would not know that the second law had limited applicability to subject persons who had enrolled into national socialism and thus gave their consent to be bound to obedience.

Another cogent example is the "GUN FREE SCHOOL ZONE."
"Everybody" knows that "it's against the law" to have a gun in a school zone.

Here's the pertinent code cite - - -
...

Title 18 USC Sec. 922 (q)(2)
(A) It shall be unlawful for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm that has moved in or that otherwise affects INTERSTATE OR FOREIGN COMMERCE at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone.
(B) Subparagraph (A) does not apply to the possession of a firearm
(i) on PRIVATE PROPERTY not part of school grounds;

...
First off, the FEDERAL law only restricts possession of guns involved in INTERSTATE commerce - buying and selling of firearms on or near school grounds.
Secondly, if YOUR body is private property (unattached to school grounds) carrying a firearm, you are not in violation of this law. Your RIGHT to bear arms is not infringed. (If you do not absolutely own yourself, who does?)
Third, the "arms sale criminal" has to know or believe he's on "school grounds."

Yet "everybody knows" that there's a gun ban on school grounds.

Do not believe me - READ THE LAW YOURSELF.

All American statutes are riddled with exceptions, exclusions, and trap doors so government does not ACCIDENTALLY trespass upon the sovereign people's rights and liberties.

Even when not explicitly stated, the law allows the sovereign people a remedy.

SHALL - As used in statutes, contracts, or the like, this word is generally imperative or mandatory... But it may be construed as merely permissive or directory (as equivalent to "may"), to carry out the legislative intention and in cases where no right or benefit depends on its being taken in the imperative sense, and where no public or private right is impaired by its interpretation in the other sense.
- - - Blacks Law dictionary, Sixth ed., p.1375

MAY - Word "may" usually is employed to imply permissive, optional or discretional, and not mandatory action or conduct... In construction of statutes and presumably of federal rules word "may" as opposed to "shall" is indicative of discretion or choice between two or more alternatives, but context is which word appears must be controlling factor.
- - - Blacks Law dictionary, Sixth ed., p.979

If a law states, "It shall be unlawful..." and you can show that if the law was mandatory in your case it would violate a PRIVATE RIGHT, the law can be construed to mean "It may be unlawful..." and merely optional, permissive or directory, without penalty for disobedience.

(This exclusion is in addition to exemptions, exclusions, and clauses based on the law not violating endowed rights and liberties of the sovereign people. Of course, if one has waived rights by CONSENT, this remedy does not apply.)

Okay, OZMirage I am going to say this once and only once. You have a rich knowledge in the CODES, STATUTES AND REGULATIONS of the UNITED STATES INC. The Corporation that controls the STATES which are nothing more than Franchises of the UNITED STATES INC Corporation. For some reason you have brought forth the idea that CODE means LAW.

Once again I have to state this clearly, NO REAL LAW HAS BEEN ENACTED SINCE 1861. There has not been a Lawful congress since the southern states walked out Sine die. Again According to The Constitution for the united states of America only Congress can make LAWs. So if we only have a board of directors acting as a congress under color of law then no real LAWs can be enacted so all those CODES, STATUTES, RULES AND REGULATIONS, POLICIES are nothing more than CORPORATION RULES FOR THEIR OWN EMPLOYEES TO GO BY. Let me take this just a bit further McDonalds is a Corporation, I am sure they have rules, policies and regulations for their employees to work by. Am I right at this point? Okay here is another example SEARS, is a CORPORATION They also have rules and regulations, policies or CODES if you will for there employees to go by. Do they then send a jackbooted police force with the word Sears on their vest to steal your property and force you to pay a fee for protection (taxes)? Hey I am sure they have plenty of BAR attorneys that write their regulations for the CORPORATION.

OH HERE IS A REAL GOOD ONE, you actually thing that "Ignorance of the law is no excuse"? I ask What Law? Do you actually think that any acting judge or lawyer today knows the 62 million codes and regulations and statutes and policies Here is another pee in your pants thing to know, There are no real Judges or lawyers, The police are nothing more than a force of jackboot working for the Corporation They are all actors in this illusion we all live in.

USC stands for United States CODE. I do not see the word LAW in that. CFR stands for CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS again I do not see the word LAW in that either. UCC stands for UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE. no word such as LAW their either. Here are some more misnomers for all Local crap PLANNING AND ZONING CODES. see any word that says LAW there? BUILDING CODES where is the word LAW. Now go to the State franchise and what do we get to see STATE STATUTES STATE CODES STATE POLICIES. Oh my no word about LAW.

Now as I said once before we have no new laws and haven't had any since 1861 because we haven't had a lawful congress according to the Constitution For the United States of America. There is no remedy in these codes and statutes and for everyone I have known to try and find one no one has ever found one.Sure it is said that FDR after declaring bankruptcy for the UNITED STATES INC in 1933 and then stealing all of our gold and committing our labor and property to the banks by the way the Federal Reserve bank which is a private banking system, supposedly gave us remedy with HJR 192 but that is a fallacy also because I have never known anyone to get remedy. So ignorance of the Law does not really work simply because we have no law today. Common Law was the real Law and it was simple and to the point.

Now here is what I totally agree with you on. I will stand with anyone and never bow my knees to this criminal organization that pretends to be in control. I will always have reverence for the men and women that have fought for our freedoms, I am one of those myself. And I will fight for any ones right to speak freely no matter what they may have to say. I just want to help open folds eyes and hearts.
We all need to stand together or we die individually. Just a paraphrase.

What you say brother is right for where you are and what you have learned so don't get me wrong please, I just been there and then there and then there over and over until it burned holes and I did pee myself and still do when I see new stuff. We all need to know so that is the real ignorance is no excuse to me when there are so many out here trying to give as much as they can.

Thank you brother
Steven

There is literally so much information here, it's going to take some time for me to do some research and process all of it.

Many thanks my friend, this actually ties in to the website/app crossover I am building to free humanity.

I look forward to working with you in the future.

Wes

Quote:

---

Posted by Lost N Found

Okay, OZMirage I am going to say this once and only once. You have a rich knowledge in the CODES, STATUTES AND REGULATIONS of the UNITED STATES INC. The Corporation that controls the STATES which are nothing more than Franchises of the UNITED STATES INC Corporation. For some reason you have brought forth the idea that CODE means LAW.

OZ: No, I haven't stated any such thing. Some of my examples from Title 18 - which is positive law - match the underlying statutes.

Once again I have to state this clearly, NO REAL LAW HAS BEEN ENACTED SINCE 1861. There has not been a Lawful congress since the southern states walked out Sine die.

OZ: That's "patriot mythology." Nonsense. Untrue. Heifer dung.

Again According to The Constitution for the united states of America only Congress can make LAWs. So if we only have a board of directors acting as a congress under color of law then no real LAWs can be enacted so all those CODES, STATUTES, RULES AND REGULATIONS, POLICIES are nothing more than CORPORATION RULES FOR THEIR OWN EMPLOYEES TO GO BY. Let me take this just a bit further McDonalds is a Corporation, I am sure they have rules, policies and regulations for their employees to work by. Am I right at this point? Okay here is another example SEARS, is a CORPORATION They also have rules and regulations, policies or CODES if you will for there employees to go by. Do they then send a jackbooted police force with the word Sears on their vest to steal your property and force you to pay a fee for protection (taxes)? Hey I am sure they have plenty of BAR attorneys that write their regulations for the CORPORATION.

OZ: Mythologists peddled the nonsense that "United States" changed into a corporation. All American governments were corporations, based on compacts (constitutions). AS to the fact that government does TAKE from its subject citizens, I refer you back to GEOWASH, and his statement that all citizens owe a portion of their property to the government. Citizens have no private property rights. If they did, they wouldn't owe a portion to the government.


OH HERE IS A REAL GOOD ONE, you actually thing that "Ignorance of the law is no excuse"? I ask What Law? Do you actually think that any acting judge or lawyer today knows the 62 million codes and regulations and statutes and policies Here is another pee in your pants thing to know, There are no real Judges or lawyers, The police are nothing more than a force of jackboot working for the Corporation

OZ: All American governments are corporations. . . based on compact . . . from day one. And they were not sovereigns, but servants to the sovereign people. As to the other claims - those are fabrications.

They are all actors in this illusion we all live in.

OZ: I sense you are upset. That is a common reaction. But as GeoWash stated, if you've given consent to be a subject citizen, all bets are off. And if you signed up with FICA, you're toast.

USC stands for United States CODE. I do not see the word LAW in that. CFR stands for CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS again I do not see the word LAW in that either. UCC stands for UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE. no word such as LAW their either. Here are some more misnomers for all Local crap PLANNING AND ZONING CODES. see any word that says LAW there? BUILDING CODES where is the word LAW. Now go to the State franchise and what do we get to see STATE STATUTES STATE CODES STATE POLICIES. Oh my no word about LAW.

OZ: That is because the STATUTES at LARGE are published yearly, from which is gleaned portions codified for convenience. If you only read CODE, and not STATUTES, you may get the wrong impression.


Now as I said once before we have no new laws and haven't had any since 1861 because we haven't had a lawful congress according to the Constitution For the United States of America.

OZ: There is no such requirement in the USCON to support your assertion. And it has no bearing on the guarantee of the republican form of government.

There is no remedy in these codes and statutes and for everyone I have known to try and find one no one has ever found one.

OZ: Looking for the republican form in the rules and regulations of the democracy is a futile task. Might as well look for the Magna Carta in the CFR or Georgia Statutes.

Sure it is said that FDR after declaring bankruptcy for the UNITED STATES INC in 1933 and then stealing all of our gold and committing our labor and property to the banks by the way the Federal Reserve bank which is a private banking system, supposedly gave us remedy with HJR 192 but that is a fallacy also because I have never known anyone to get remedy. So ignorance of the Law does not really work simply because we have no law today. Common Law was the real Law and it was simple and to the point.

OZ: Many "New Patriots" have a mistaken view about the "Common Law."
I do not have the reference at my disposal, but I recall one (paraphrased) "The common law is too harsh for a democracy." In another, I found a reference in the Federalist Papers, that before the USCON, Georgia had common law courts. But at the ratification of the USCON, all common law courts in Georgia were abolished. The only promise is the RULES of the common law (7th amendment) and that requires the value in controversy to exceed 20 dollars (not bills). Since 1933, no "dollars" have circulated and no one with a SocSec account is worth more than $20. (See Pauper's Oath).


Now here is what I totally agree with you on. I will stand with anyone and never bow my knees to this criminal organization that pretends to be in control. I will always have reverence for the men and women that have fought for our freedoms, I am one of those myself. And I will fight for any ones right to speak freely no matter what they may have to say. I just want to help open folds eyes and hearts.
We all need to stand together or we die individually. Just a paraphrase.

What you say brother is right for where you are and what you have learned so don't get me wrong please, I just been there and then there and then there over and over until it burned holes and I did pee myself and still do when I see new stuff. We all need to know so that is the real ignorance is no excuse to me when there are so many out here trying to give as much as they can.

Thank you brother
Steven

---

When I first got into the "New Patriot Movement," there were plenty of disinformation agents as well as sincere folks. Frankly, what you were led to believe is NOT in the law (statutes).

One thing that most new patriot folks don't understand is the nasty status of "EXCEPTED CLASSES."

Way back in time - before socialism - before FICA - before 1935, there was the dreaded PAUPER'S OATH.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauper%27s_oath

Historically, especially during the Great Depression, the pauper's oath was required as a prerequisite for receiving welfare or other forms of government relief in the United States.

One pauper's oath used when establishing indigent status under United States Federal law is as follows:
“ I do solemnly swear that I have not any property, real or personal, exceeding $20, except such as is by law exempt from being taken on civil process for debt; and that I have no property in any way conveyed or concealed, or in any way disposed of, for my future use or benefit. So help me God."

.............
In case you did not catch all the subtle ramifications, allow me to expound:
1. Exceeding $20 parallels the 7th amendment's requirement for the value in controversy to EXCEED $20 in order to trigger access to the RULES of the common law. (Common law is nice to free peoples. )
2. Recipients of public charity had to swear that they owned NOTHING more than $20 worth or they were ineligible.
3. As paupers, they were also "status criminals," excepted from constitutional protections.

Coincidentally, after FICA, FDR abolished the Pauper's oath for recipients of "Relief" and other "benefits."
Of course, the people didn't realize that by signing up for FICA, they were pauperized, literally owning nothing more than $20. As "contributors," all their labor and property were pledged as collateral on the public debt.

Government is so nice - they let us keep the stuff - as long as we make a "return of income" and pay skim to the D.C. lords. But ultimately, "they" have first dibs on everything... by our consent.

http://www.treasury.gov/resource-cen...al-tender.aspx

" Federal Reserve notes are not redeemable in gold, silver or any other commodity, and receive no backing by anything. This has been the case since 1933. The notes have no value for themselves, but for what they will buy. In another sense, because they are legal tender, Federal Reserve notes are "backed" by all the goods and services in the economy."

[The site coyly avoids mentioning that FICA is the means by which all YOUR goods and labor back their worthless IOUs.]

So, do you think that folks in the 1930s would have willingly signed up with FICA if FDR didn't lie and say that "Relief is not charity!"

(In reply to my query, the Congressional Research Service stated that entitlements are synonymous with gifts from the public treasury. That's legal speak for "we're not going to admit that recipients are paupers at law.")

STATUS CRIME - A class of crime which consists not in proscribed action or inaction, but in the accused's having a certain personal condition or being a person of a specified character. An example of a status crime is VAGRANCY. Status crimes are constitutionally suspect.
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, 6th ed., p.1410

(Such crimes were instituted by the ARTICLES of CONFEDERATION, not the USCON. But since the Articles are incorporated by reference into the USCON, they are still binding on CONgress. Likewise, via the promise of the republican form, the Declaration of Independence is incorporated into the “Supreme Law of the Land.”)

" VAGRANT - At common law, wandering or going about from place to place by idle person who has no lawful or visible means of support and who subsisted on CHARITY and did not work, though able to do so.... One who is apt to become a PUBLIC CHARGE through his own laziness."
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, 6th ed., p. 1549

Coincidentally, most if not all STATES define "resident" to be synonymous with transient / vagrant. And if you're signed up with FICA / Socialist InSecurity, you're eligible for PUBLIC CHARITY (entitlements), thus making you a STATUS CRIMINAL.

D'Oh!

MORE INFO:
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/.../messages/2228


Mythology Retrospective
. . .
Back in the day, there was a gentleman named Phil Marsh, selling a book, titled "The Compleat Patriot." I personally heard him explain how "compleat" meant "completely complete" - a most auspicious adjective.

Of course, that was not true. Mr Marsh, like most mythologists, concocted plausible explanations to cover the lack of facts in their bold and brash claims about law in these united States. They rely on our ignorance or apathy and let such things pass unchallenged.

FYI : Compleat is merely an archaic spelling of complete.
...
Do not fall for mythology. Do not believe me. Check and verify claims, references, definitions, authorities, and laws. No one is infallible. Mistakes can permeate even the best presentation.
Strive for 100% veracity and accuracy.

COMMON LAW
A lot of old timers pushed the notion that Americans had lost their Common law. Unfortunately, few understood what the common law was.
One citation mentioned that it was the prerogative of a sovereign.
OKAY.
American governments are not sovereigns.
OOPS.
. . .
COMMON LAW REFERENCES

“The general theory of the common law is, that all wrongs are divisible into two species; first, civil or private wrongs; secondly, criminal or public wrongs. The former are to be redressed by private suits, or remedies instituted by the parties injured. The latter are redressed by the state, acting in its sovereign capacity. The general description of private wrongs is, that they comprehend those injuries which affect the rights and property of the individual, and terminate there; that of public wrongs of offences is, that they comprehend such acts as injure, not merely individuals, but the community at large, by endangering the peace, the comfort, the good order, the policy, and even the existence of society.”
- - - - Joseph Story and the Theory of the Common Law, from the Encyclopedia Americana

COMMON LAW -"The system of jurisprudence, which originated in England and was later applied in the United States, which is based on judicial precedent rather than legislative enactments; it is contrasted with civil law (the descendent of Roman Law prevalent in other western [European] countries). ... generally derived from principles rather than rules; it does not consist of absolute, fixed, and inflexible rules, but rather the broad and comprehensible principles based on justice, reason and common sense."
Ballantine’s Law dictionary, p.37

LAW OF THE LAND -"Phrase first used in MAGNA CARTA referring to the then established law of the Kingdom as opposed to Roman or civil law. Refers today to fundamental principles of justice commensurate with due process of law those rights which the legislature cannot abolish or significantly limit, because they are so fundamental to our system of liberty and justice; The United States Constitution establishes itself, and the laws made under its authority, and treaties of the United States, as the supreme Law of the land [U.S. Constitution: Art.6 Sec.2]."
Ballantine’s Law dictionary, p.117

Note: Both the Declaration of Independence, and the Articles of Confederation are incorporated by reference into the USCON, thus making them part of the supreme Law of the Land.

LAW, COMMON. The common law is that which derives its force and authority from the universal consent and immemorial practice of the people. It has never received the sanction of the legislature, by an express act, which is the criterion by which it is distinguished from the statute law. It has never been reduced to writing; by this expression, however, it is not meant that all those laws are at present merely oral, or communicated from former ages to the present solely by word of mouth, but that the evidence of our common law is contained in our books of Reports, and depends on the general practice and judicial adjudications of our courts.
2. The common law is derived from two sources, the common law of England, and the practice and decision of our own courts. In some states the English common law has been adopted by statute. There is no general rule to ascertain what part of the English common law is valid and binding.
- - - Bouvier's Law Dictionary, 1856 ed.

" Personal liberty, or the Right to enjoyment of life and liberty, is one of the fundamental or natural Rights, which has been protected by its inclusion as a guarantee in the various constitutions, which is not derived from, or dependent on, the U.S. Constitution, which may not be submitted to a vote and may not depend on the outcome of an election. It is one of the most sacred and valuable Rights, as sacred as the Right to private property...and is regarded as inalienable."
- - - 16 Corpus Juris Secundum, Constitutional Law, Sect.202, p.987.

The servant government is delegated power to secure endowed rights, via prosecution of those who injure others.
There is no law that says : “You shall not injure in this or that manner.” The law simply punishes those who deliberately injure the person, liberty or property of others, regardless of the means or mode. These punitive laws are the ones derived from the English common law. (Malum in Se - evil in of itself)

But the government has power to govern those who consent, and who have waived rights as part of that consent. Consenting persons are liable for laws that may involve strict obedience to rules, and resemble the civil law of European countries. (Malum Prohibitum) And for those who descended to status criminals, via FICA and contracts with usurers, they may be mistreated and presumed guilty until proven innocent. (Ezekiel 18:13 KJV)

Now, a brief reference to a genuine sovereign prerogative of the American - the power to inflict capital punishment without benefit of trial.

Please recall that posted private property can be defended with DEADLY FORCE and not be punishable as a felony.
"Private property - No Trespassing - Trespassers will be Shot" is prima facie evidence of the HARSHNESS of the common law.
Obviously, we do not want our public servants to act in such a manner. They are constrained by due process to ascertain guilt or innocence, and proceed accordingly, in compliance with the statutes enacted.
Or do you wish the servant to be HARSH and just shoot trespassers without due process?

FYI:
TRESPASS

TRESPASS v. - (Law) To commit an unlawful injury to the person, property, or rights of another, with actual or implied force or violence, especially to enter onto another's land wrongfully.

TRESPASS n. 2. (Law)
a. The act of trespassing.
b. A suit brought for trespassing.

TRESPASS - An unlawful interference with one's person, property, or rights... Any unauthorized intrusion or invasion of private premises or land of another. Antkiewicz v. Motorists Mut. Ins. Co., 91 Mich. App. 389, 283 N.W. 2d 749, 753
- - - Black's Law dictionary, Sixth Ed. P. 1502

Trespass is the CRIMINAL injury to the person, property, or rights (which include natural and personal liberties) of another.

I hope this helps clarify things.

Well thank you brother for such a well researched explanation of how we got to this point in such a wonderful country. I still see that you are using all the corporation rhetoric and such a very well explained anthology it is. Now that you have accused me of being a Mythologist I suppost that there is no hope for any of us in this tyrannical, socialist, communistic, and lets not forget Nazi-est government we all live under. Remember now The government was created by the people but according to your research we have all given our consent for them to steal our life, liberty and pursuit of happiness

Yes here is some truth you do give. It we sign up for the social security or FICA as you call it we are giving our consent to be a slave on the plantation. As I have said you have quite a rich study of the Codes and possible some history. We all seem to be searching for the truth and maybe you are right in a way of saying that all government are incorporated but we did start with an unincorporated government and that my friend is where we should go back to. Now Mythology or not, My studies lead me in a slightly different direction from yours but then again they may be in the same direction. So I will post something for all to read hear it is a bit long but it does give a good explanation and it gives one places to look for yourself So thanks again OZmirage for your input to this thread. I am glad to see this kind of stuff. Here you all go.

US Legal History

U.S. Law is Private Merchant Law, leaving the people as Surety and Debtor on the bankruptcy.
Law is contract, universally and in the U.S., so we must follow the progression of contractual agreements which constitute the underlying U.S. Law. (We cannot address all individual laws and cases or you would not have time in a life to review it, even though ignorance of the millions of laws, statutes, codes, etc… is no excuse in Private Admiralty Jurisdictions.)
In basically chronological order, the following progression of contracts, and our interpretation of them follows:
1. The USA, a corporation of the English Crown, is bankrupt, and has been since at least 1788. The Articles of Confederation states in Article 12: “All bills of credit emitted, monies borrowed, and debts contracted by, or under the authority of Congress, before the assembling of the United States, in pursuance of the present confederation, shall be deemed as considered a charge against the United States, for payment and satisfaction whereof the said United States, and the public faith are hereby solemnly pledged.” The “Founding Fathers,” as constitutors, acknowledged and reorganized the debt in the US Constitution 1787, Article VI, hence “constitution.” Bankruptcy occurred on January 1, 1788 based on 21 loans that the United States of America received from the King of England dating from February 28, 1778 through July 5, 1782, the repayment of which had been ratified by Congress on January 22, 1783. The United States Bank, created in 1791, was a private bank, with 18,000 of 25,000 shares owned by England.
2. No de jure, constitutional Congress has existed since March 27, 1861 when seven (7) Southern States walked out of Congress leaving Congress without a quorum for adjourning and therefore ending sine die. That which is called “Congress” today assembles and acts under the authority of the President acting in capacity of being Commander-In-Chief of the Armed Forces, under emergency war-powers rule, i.e. “law of necessity,” i.e. no law (see 12 Stat 319, which has never been repealed and exists in Title 50 USC §§ 212, 213, 215, Appendix 16, 26 CFR Chapter 1 § 303.1-6(a), and 31 CFR Chapter 5 § 500.701 Penalties).
3. Since the above-referenced date, March 27, 1861, Americans have been under Fascist rule via presidential executive order under the aforementioned Emergency War Powers, 12 USC 95 a,
b. Every “citizen of the United States” is now “legally” established as an “enemy” via the Amendatory Act of March 9, 1933, 48 Stat. 1, amending Trading With Enemy Act of October 6, 1917, H.R. 4960, Public Law No. 91.
4. December 6th, 1865, the 14th Amendment was proclaimed as ratified (even though it never properly was, see below). The 14th Amendment, (which is private Roman Catholic Ecclesiastical Trust Law), constitutes a constructive, cestui que trust, a public charitable trust, “PCT,” that was expressly designed to bring every corporate franchise artificial person called a “citizen of the United States” into an inseparable merging with the government until the two are united (with the power inhering in the government, not the people). A cestui que trust is fundamentally different from a regular trust, which is express in nature and consists of a contractual indenture involving three (3) parties: Grantor (Creator or Trustor), Trustee, and Beneficiaries. In an express trust, legal ownership is transferred by written contract between Grantor and Trustee in which the Grantor surrenders ownership of property to the legal person, the Trust, to be managed by the Trustee on behalf of those who are to benefit from the arrangement, the Beneficiaries. A cestui que trust, on the other hand, differs from an express trust in several crucial ways:
a. It is not formed by express contract, i.e. overt agreement expressed in writing, but by legal construction, i.e. fiat.
b. A cestui que trust has no Grantor, but, being a constructive trust created by operation of law, i.e. by make-believe, has only co-trustees and co beneficiaries. The co-trustees are the parties with the duties for managing property for the “public good,” i.e. for the benefit of those designated as co beneficiaries.
5. The Legislative Act of February 21, 1871, Forty-first Congress, Session III, Chapter 62, page 419, chartered a Federal company entitled “United States,” a/k/a “US Inc.,” a “Commercial Agency” originally designated as “Washington, D.C.,” in accordance with the so-called 14th Amendment, which the record indicates was never ratified (see Utah Supreme Court Cases, Dyett v Turner, (1968) 439 P2d 266, 267; State v Phillips, (1975) 540 P 2d 936; as well as Coleman v. Miller, 307 U.S. 448, 59 S. Ct. 972; 28 Tulane Law Review, 22; 11 South Carolina Law Quarterly 484; Congressional Record, June 13, 1967, pp. 15641-15646). A “citizen of the United States” is a civilly dead entity operating as a co-trustee and co-beneficiary of the PCT, the constructive, cestui que trust of US Inc. under the 14th Amendment, which upholds the debt of the USA and US Inc. in Section 4.
6. In conformity with the above-referenced creation of United States (1871) and the 14th Amendment, the Legislature of each State created a limited-liability corporation, chartered in a private, military, international, commercial, admiralty/maritime jurisdiction, entitled “STATE OF…” e.g. “STATE OF CALIFORNIA,” as evidenced by, inter alia, the change in the seal and the creation of a new constitution, e.g. Constitution of the State of California (1879), concerning which, re California:
a. A general partnership agreement, hereinafter “General Partnership,” exists between the California Republic (1849), and STATE OF CALIFORNIA (1879), with STATE OF CALIFORNIA acting as governmental controller.
b. STATE OF CALIFORNIA now acts as an agent/instrumentality of United States, collecting whole life insurance premiums, known as “taxes,” for the International Monetary Fund, based, inter alia, upon the Limited Liability Act of 1851 and the bankruptcy of United States of 1933, (see House Joint Resolution 192 of June 5, 1933; Public Law 73-10; Perry v. U.S. (1935), 294 U.S. 330-381, 79 L Ed 912; 31 USC 5112, 5119).
7. Inasmuch as all law is contract, the contract involved in a constructive trust is an implied contract. An implied contract can be ratified by two (2) means:
a. Acquiescence by silence, i.e. the “government” asserts its intentions concerning your life, rights, and property and you assent, don’t rebut, and compliantly go along with what they claim. In 1871 the Government changed the nature of its contract with the people from law as defined by the original Constitution of 1787 that recognizes law (common law), admiralty (on the sea only), and equity (functioning by voluntary contract between all participating parties), and began relating to people as if they were “citizens of the Unites States” within/under the private, commercial, international, military jurisdiction of the new de facto corporation, i.e. US Inc. They offered people a “new deal,” and almost everyone bought it (based on naïve and foolish trust and assuming that everything was OK).
The people were thereby denied access to law and placed on the ship of state of US Inc. where the captain’s word is law and no one has any rights. As Jefferson phrased the matter, “As government grows, liberty recedes.”
b. You expressly accept “benefits” offered by the government, and thereby finalize the contract by deed. This is similar to finalizing a contract with a restaurant by sitting down at a table, reading a menu, and then ordering and consuming a meal. By your deeds you affirm to the restaurant that you will pay for the meal in accordance with the price stated on the menu. No written contract is signed, but a contract is formed nevertheless.
8. By the above two (2) means people give implied assent that they are bound by an alleged contract with US Inc. in accordance with the terms and conditions that inhere in being treated as a “citizen of the United States” under the 14th Amendment, and are therefore placed into permanent legal status as a Debtor and Surety for U.S. Inc.. In such a position, people leave the ground of sovereignty and all capacity for asserting their unalienable rights in favor of being presumed as having exercised their sovereignty and free-will autonomy for the purpose of going along with the government’s assertion that they sacrifice everything for the “public good,” (i.e. the PCT). By so doing people lose their standing in law, (i.e. they “die a civil death in the law.”) They are placed in the legal position of mortmain (i.e. as if deceased) and are shorn of capacity for asserting their rights, since the presumption is that they have already exercised those rights for the purpose of being placed in the position they are in, i.e. property of the government with a lien against you and everything your life labor could ever create, including your children. The private being (the real individual) is sacrificed for the good of the public (the imaginary collective).
9. When people die such a civil death in they law they are like ghosts, and thereby incapable of managing their own affairs and enjoying their unalienable rights. Like the estate of a decedent, they are then managed by the executors/administrators of the estate, in probate. Such is the condition of every “citizen of the United States” today in law, managed by the government agencies acting as executors/administrators of their estates in bankruptcy, legal incapacity, and civil death as assets of the bankrupt US. The US is property of the private Real Parties of Interest, the Creditors in bankruptcy.
10. The 14th Amendment was allegedly established for the purpose of creating a citizenship for the liberated blacks, and other disenfranchised people, who otherwise had no citizenship because they could not comply with the requirements for state citizenship. What actually happened was that the blacks were taken off of the Southern slave plantations and placed into the slave plantation of US Inc., a far worse lot. The government then gradually absorbed everyone else — including state citizens — into the same condition.
11. 1871-1913. Officers of the actual government held office in dual capacity, (i.e. in both USA and US Inc. status).
12. 1912. Bonds issued by US Inc. came due but US Inc. did not have the resources for paying their creditors (the seven families that founded the Federal Reserve Bank), so US Inc.’s owner (the actual government) was required to pay the balance. The national government was also without sufficient funds to meet US Inc.’s obligations, so the creditors settled for all of the assets of both US Inc. and the national government instead of foreclosure on and liquidation of the entire country. By so doing, they expropriated the nation — both USA and US Inc. Sic transit America.
13. 1912. US Inc. forms an agreement with the Federal Reserve Bank (It is important to note that both of these entities are private corporations which removes the general allegations of treason or fraud from this relationship). Through this agreement, US Inc. must function in debt, even though they have neither funds nor resources for financing their operation.
14. 1912. The first corporate only Senators are seated in the next election year by popular vote of the US Inc. registered voters. The original-jurisdiction national Senators of the States did not assume office that year and at least one third of the nation’s Senators seats were lawfully and voluntarily vacant.
15. February 3rd, 1913. US Inc. passes its 16th Amendment and Congress orders the Secretary of State to enter it as ratified even though the States had not ratified it according to Law. The Secretary complied. It should be noted that this would not have been lawful if it were a national Constitution amendment, however it was perfectly legal within the colorable, de facto corporation. It should also be noted that where the national Constitution already had a 16th Amendment and where the Supreme Court says that the new 16th Amendment did not do anything, this corporate Amendment must simply be a space filler entered such that US Inc.’s Constitution (1871) would have the same number of Amendments as that of the national Constitution (1787).
16. April 8th, 1913. US Inc. passes its 17th Amendment and Congress orders it to be entered as ratified in the exact same manner as they did with US Inc.’s 16th Amendment. This Amendment changes where US Inc.’s Senators are elected. This Amendment is not even lawfully possible as a national Constitution Amendment for several reasons, not the least of which is that the Amendment would have required that Congress first pass an Amendment that stated that they had the power to say where Senators are elected before they could even deliberate on such a subject matter, after which they would then have to have competent ratifications performed on such Amendments in accord with Constitutional limits, not as was done with US Inc.’s 16th Amendment.
17. December 23, 1913. The Congress, (late at night with only a small cadre of supporters present), passed the Federal Reserve Act, surrendering the creation and management of the nation’s currency into the hands of a cartel of private — and mostly foreign — bankers. Currency is the single most essential and critical commodity in the world, embodying more law and principles of commerce than any other. Since all interactions are “commerce,” and the medium of doing business in commerce is currency, money is in a very significant sense the measure of all things.
By abandoning control and management of the money supply, the nation surrendered all capacity for claiming sovereignty. The government lost its independent treasury (one of the requirements in law for national sovereignty). The United States Government became a mere fiefdom, or administrative arm, of the bankers, who now owned the store.
Passage of the Federal Reserve Act was a major milestone on the “road to serfdom” that this entire progression outlines. The conspiratorial nature of matters is exemplified in comments by one of the major actors in the triumph of the Federal Reserve, Edward Mandell House, who had this to say in a private meeting with President Woodrow Wilson:
“[Very] soon, every American will be required to register their biological property in a national system designed to keep track of the people and that will operate under the ancient system of pledging. By such methodology, we can compel people to submit to our agenda, which will effect our security as a chargeback for our fiat paper currency. Every American will be forced to register or suffer being able to work and earn a living. They will be our chattel, and we will hold the security interest over them forever, by operation of the law merchant under the scheme of secured transactions. Americans, by unknowingly or unwittingly delivering the bills of lading to us will be rendered bankrupt and insolvent, forever to remain economic slaves through taxation, secured by their pledges. They will be stripped of their rights and given a commercial value designed to make us a profit and they will be none the wiser, for not one man in a million could ever figure our plans and, if by accident one or two should figure it out, we have in our arsenal plausible deniability. After all, this is the only logical way to fund government, by floating liens and debt to the registrants in the form of benefits and privileges. This will inevitably reap to us huge profits beyond our wildest expectations and leave every American a contributor to this fraud which we will call “Social Insurance.” Without realizing it, every American will insure us for any loss we may incur and in this manner, every American will unknowingly be our servant, however begrudgingly. The people will become helpless and without any hope for their redemption and, we will employ the high office of the President of our dummy corporation to foment this plot against America.”
18. 1917. Corporate-only Senators begin participating in all matters with those Senators who still had original jurisdiction government capacity, as a result of which all activities of the government were performed in corporate capacity only.
19. 1917. President Wilson was re-elected by the Electoral College, but only US Inc.’s Senate performed the Senate confirmation necessary for seating the national President. There was no national government Senate confirmation; no national seats were seated and all remained vacant.
Note: the national President is also the Military’s Commander in Chief, and under the nation’s status of being ruled by the private, commercial, martial law rule of the Bankers and English Crown, the business needs of the nation have remained under US Inc. control since 1871, (i.e. ever since US Inc. was incorporated and made operational over such matters).
20. 1917-1944. All national government seats are and remain vacant, and US Inc. continues maintaining the business needs of the government under martial-law rule.
21. June 5, 1933. US Inc. declares bankruptcy under House Joint Resolution, “HJR,” 192.
22. 1935. The Social Security Act is passed.
23. On application, the new Social Security Administration (hereinafter “SSA”) creates a private Trust with a trust name that sounds like the name of the applicant except the Trust’s name is spelled with all capital letters. SSA makes the applicant a co-trustee of the namesake Trust, designates the SSA General Trust Fund as the Beneficiary of the namesake trust, and assigns the Trust a Social Security General Trust Fund Account number regarding the applicant for accounting and identification purposes.
24. 1938. In Erie Railroad v. Tompkins, 1938, 304 U.S. 64-92, the U.S. Supreme Court sets the presumption re the status and capacity of an individual as that of General Capacity/General Partnership relationship with the namesake Trust, as if the two (2) entities — individual and namesake Trust — were one-in-the-same person.
25. 1944. In the Bretton Woods Agreement, US Inc. is quit-claimed into the newly formed International Monetary Fund (hereinafter “IMF”) in exchange for the power allowing US Inc.’s President the right of naming (seating and controlling) the governors and general managers of the International Monetary Fund, The World Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and the Inter-American Bank also formed in that agreement (codified at United States Code Title 22 § 286). It must be noted that this Act created an unlawful conflict of interest between US Inc. (with its new foreign owner) and its purpose of carrying out the business needs of the national government. This is the cause of our use of the term “original-jurisdiction” government. With the new foreign owner of US Inc. a conflict of interest is created between the national government and US Inc., even though the contracted purpose of US Inc. has not changed on its face.
26. Since 1953 – 1975 at least, MKULTRA (Mind Control, etc.), CIA, and Military are unlawfully engaging in human experimentation with and without the knowledge of the subjects. Military airborne toxins are sprayed on large cities without warning for the purpose of studying distribution and effect patterns, and other more sinister purposes (see numerous cites on the Internet re “chem-trails”). Cite: Joint Hearing before the US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, 95th Congress, 1st Session, August 3, 1977.
27. 1962. At the National Governor’s Conference in Lexington, Kentucky; US Inc. informs the governors (under the guise of “public necessity”) that they must all form, or reform existing, private corporations under US Inc. (in their State’s interest), so that the people will not discover what the State governments are doing with the people’s money (dabbling in foreign notes, i.e. Federal Reserve Notes (FRNs), bonds, and evidences of debt), which activity is forbidden from State governments by their own State Constitutions, which information would likely cause a people’s revolt ending in the State official’s being, at worst, killed and at least replaced. The proposed incorporation deadline was 1968.
28. 1970. By this time, each State revised its Constitution and Statutes and formed private corporate entities of the name “STATE OF (X)” (where “(X)” is representative of the common State name), and then vacated their original jurisdiction government seats in favor of foreign ownership and control under the mandate of US Inc.
29. It appears that this was all done so a General Partnership could be presumed as existing between “The State” (of the national Union of States) and “STATE OF (X)”, a private corporation. Said STATE OF (X), as General Partner, then assumes the role of governmental operator/controller. This scenario is further proven by the fact that these corporate entities cannot handle gold and silver coin of the United States of America in commercial transactions without violating the Par Value Modifications Act and the Foreign Currency Exchange Act.
30. September 5, 1996, U.S. Patent & Trademark Office application number 709471 is filed, consisting of a plan for marking the alleged “human property” of US Inc., (i.e. every “citizen of the United States”) reminiscent of the Biblical reference in the nature of the Mark of the Beast. This plan is a violation of foundational law.
31. April 19th, 1994. Federal agents attack, burn, and raze the compound, killing approximately 100 of the members of the sect, without any lawful cause for the action.
32. 50 USC 1520 et seq. demonstrates that there exists an agenda for using Americans (Sovereign and otherwise) as biological test subjects. This is a fundamental breach of an alleged Constitutional contract.
33. President Clinton pushes for a mandatory Health Care Bill for the purpose of placing the physical bodies of all Americans under control of US Inc., with international identification attached, for the purpose of tagging the populace, as per the Biblical prophesy of the Mark of the Beast. The computer that would handle the tracking is even identified with the acronym: B.E.A.S.T.
What the above progression depicts is the systematic growth of the power, scope, and pervasive control of Government exercised against the American people by foreign, criminal, and hostile powers.
This same dreary gestalt constitutes the nature of man’s history on this planet as far back as the eye can see. Civilizations rise, fall, and disappear, replaced by new ones that — based upon being founded on, and functioning in accordance with, wrong principles — are foredoomed for extinction, as were all of their predecessors and as all future civilizations will be until mankind finally learns and ceases “beating a dead horse” by structuring law, commerce, religion, and social organization in general on principles that are existentially impossible.
The above progression has proceeded in America by implementing such strategy as:
1. Relentlessly instilling in people the foundational idea that governments in general are absolutely essential in the society of man and that the Government in America is the people’s friend and servant, (i.e. a “government of the people, by the people, and for the people.”) These premises are untrue — self-serving cons by those who want the power.
2. Creating governmentally owned corporate franchises, such as a “citizen of the United States” and one’s all-capital-letter name, with which people are deceived into identifying.
3. Regarding every citizen of the United States as contractually being:
a. A corporate citizen, i.e. a corporate franchise;
b. A co-trustee (with duties) and co-beneficiary (with privileges) of the 14th Amendment Public Charitable cestui que Trust;
c. Pledged as an asset in the bankruptcy of US Inc., and therefore a co-surety for the debts of US Inc.;
d. An enemy of the Creditors;
e. Chattel property of the Bankers and Power Elite;
f. A slave with no capacity for asserting any rights, no standing in law, and no capacity for contracting.
4. Functioning on the presumption that the individual being, with autonomy and free will, knowingly, intentionally, and voluntarily contracted into the situation of being united — like heads and tails of a coin — with a corporate entity created and owned by the Government.
As per the established maxim of law, “As a thing is bound, so it is unbound,” the way out of the problem is within and through the problem. This is accomplished by understanding what the problem is, (i.e. its structure and character, just as solving the problem of a plugged drain is accomplished by realizing that the problem is the plugged drain, whereby the solution consists of unplugging the drain.) “Know the truth and the truth shall make you free.”
The United States Library of Congress now has between 2,000,000 and 3,000,000 books on law. Any law library is a daunting place, possessing row after row of shelves with books full of fine print. Making knowledge of such “law” even more unattainable is not only that what passes for law today perpetually changes, altered by every new Court Case/Opinion, Legislative enactment, and all of the ever-changing Policies, Rules, and Regulations of Administrative Agencies, but an immense amount of the world’s law today (as actually implemented) is unwritten and inaccessible.
This is not only because Judges operate in General Equity in which the ultimate Arbiter of a matter is the “conscience of the court” (i.e. how the judge feels about something that day), but because almost all of the world’s law is the private Law Merchant of the Creditors in bankruptcy of the world’s Nations, essentially all of which are insolvent and in receivership to the Bankers. [3] This private Law Merchant is of ancient origin, and is implemented today by men whose identities are unknown to the mass of mankind.
In the face of this undependability of law we may ask some fundamental and ingenuous questions:
1. Is there such a thing as genuine law that is timeless, stable, and dependable?
2. If so, can such universal law be effectively invoked and utilized in practice today? How can I use it to ensure my inalienable sovereign birth rights to life and happiness?
3. If genuine law exists, why is it not taught and uniformly utilized instead of the chaotic and colorable charade that dominates the legal field today?
4. Can we integrate said universal law with the ephemeral, desultory “law” that now enslaves the overwhelming majority of people on this planet?
Fortunately, affirmative answers regarding all of the above questions. Answering them, and providing clear understanding and effective, practical ways for utilizing genuine law, is the subject of this website.
[3] All wars of the 20th Century, in fact the last 100 years or so, are the result of the losing country's not having had an Articles of Agreement with the International Bankers. Phrased another way. Before a war, the country that was the eventual loser of the war did not have such Agreement and after the country was defeated, it did.

For those who want to get started, but can't get to a courthouse law library, consider writing polite questionnaires to one's "public servants."
(congresscritters, state attorney generals, etc)

SAMPLE QUESTIONS
1. What law compels all Americans in the USA to enroll and participate in FICA?

2. What law punishes any American in the USA who does not participate in FICA?

3. What law punishes any American business that hires unnumbered Americans?

4. What is the official procedure to volunteer out of FICA?

5. What revenue taxable privileges am I exercising when I do not participate in FICA that would incur an income tax on my wages?

6. When and how did I give consent that waived my endowed rights, imposed mandatory civic duties, and made me a subject, because it would be unconstitutional to impose them at birth, via involuntary U.S. citizenship, in the 50 states united or in any place subject to their jurisdiction?

7. If fraud was used to acquire my consent to be governed, is it not my right to denounce that fraud, and withdraw consent?

8. If Federal Reserve Notes are worthless, how are they underwritten by 300+ million “human resources”, and who will the creditor foreclose upon when sufficient number of Americans withdraw consent from FICA?

9. If all Americans are endowed by their Creator with inalienable rights and liberties that government was instituted to secure, what should the servant government do to its officers guilty of complicity in fraudulently abolishing endowed rights in exchange for government privileges and public charity?

10. If the U.S. Constitution guarantees a republican form of government, whose source is the Declaration of Independence, then the Declaration is the supreme law of the land, by reference. By what delegated power or authority does constitutional government violate the natural rights, liberties, and absolute ownership rights of the American people, endowed by their Creator?

11. Is absolute ownership of private property still recognized?

12. What constitutes enough evidence to support and defend private property ownership?

13. What is the minimum amount of private property to qualify as a domicile?

. . .
Their stock replies usually are: "We will get back to you when we find the law."
I've been waiting over 20 years.

. . .
SHORT VERSION - - -
Ask for copies of any laws that:
1. Govern you without your consent;
2. Impose involuntary servitude in the 50 states united;
3. Require enrollment into FICA;
4. Impose an excise tax on any endowed right; and
5. Restrict or regulate personal liberty.

Thanks Ozmirage !. All you put above sounds like our government is actually breaking the law big time, the question here is: for a regular folk who live check by check like millions around, how can us protect ourselves from the phony govt. we have in order to be free again? like the tax issue, I'm very piss off about the income tax (more I work the more they take) and the property tax. Why should I pay taxes on my own property, or isn't mine? if I totally paid for?

Quote:

---

Posted by Lost N Found

The government was created by the people but according to your research we have all given our consent for them to steal our life, liberty and pursuit of happiness... [remainder snipped for convenience]

---

If you misunderstood me, let me clarify things.
The republican form of government was not "created" by the people... it was an endowment of our Creator.
The constitutionally limited indirect democratic form of government was created by the "people of the United States" - not the private people nor the "people of the States united."

The "People of the United States" in the Preamble, did not refer to the people of the United States of America.
---

"But, indeed, no private person has a right to complain, by suit in Court, on the ground of a breach of the Constitution. The Constitution, it is true, is a compact, but he is not a party to it. The States are the parties to it. And they may complain...."
- - -Padelford, Fay & Co. vs. Mayor and Alderman, City of Savannah, 14 Ga. 438, 520 (1854) Supreme Court of Georgia

---

"The Constitution was ordained and established by the people of the United States for themselves, for their own government and not for the government of the individual States."
- - -John Barron v. The Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, 7 Peters 204, (1822).

---
Remember, not all Americans could vote, and ratify that constitution. Those who could not vote, could not be presumed to give consent. Therefore, if we are the "private people" we're not parties to that compact, and if we are people of the individual States, we are not the "people of the United States" who are the authors of that compact. The terms only can be applied to those who consent (and make an oath to it).

Articles of Confederation (1777)

• I. The Stile of this Confederacy shall be "The United States of America".
• II. Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.

---
The authors of the U.S. constitution and obligated parties were NOT the American people, but a subset, and by consent, bound to obedience.

" When a change of government takes place, from a monarchial to a republican government, the old form is dissolved. Those who lived under it, and did not choose to become members of the new, had a right to refuse their allegiance to it, and to retire elsewhere. By being a part of the society subject to the old government, they had not entered into any engagement to become subject to any new form the majority might think proper to adopt. That the majority shall prevail is a rule posterior to the formation of government, and results from it. It is not a rule binding upon mankind in their natural state. There, every man is independent of all laws, except those prescribed by nature. He is not bound by any institutions formed by his fellowmen without his consent."
- - - CRUDEN v. NEALE, 2 N.C. 338 (1796) 2 S.E. 70.

I lack the time and inclination to debunk the mythology posted, but simply point out that beyond securing rights, the servant government can not act without explicit consent of the governed.

The republican form of government is not dependent upon the form of the servant government. The republican form is satisfied by the guarantee that endowed rights would be secured.

Those who consented to be part of the democratic form may have an issue with the points you raised, but they are immaterial with respect to the sovereign Americans who have not consented to be governed.

WHAT RIGHTS?
As George Washington pointed out, citizens have no endowed rights to life, liberty nor property. . . BY CONSENT.

So, no, they didn't "steal our life, liberty and pursuit of happiness..."

The law, since 1777, was clear on those points.
That Americans did not bother to read their own laws nor comprehend what their consent entailed is a whole different issue.

The fact remains, that within the vast body of statutes, etc, you will not find a violation of the republican form of government.

In particular, you will not find a violation of PRIVATE PROPERTY;
nor of the unconditional sovereignty of the FREE INHABITANT, domiciled within the borders of the united States of America;
nor of the endowed rights, liberties, and powers retained by the people who did not consent to be governed.
(and restated in the 9th and 10th amendments)

But if one is a citizen, a resident, enrolled in FICA, holding qualified ownership of estate and contracting with usurers, all bets are off. Sit down. Shut up. And obey.

FOUNDERS' WISDOM - - -

http://www.nhinet.org/ccs/docs/va-1776.htm
For a glimpse into the understanding of “representatives” in the Founders' generation:
Virginia Constitution, 1776.

SEC. 6. That elections of members to serve as representatives of the people, in assembly, ought to be free; and that all men, having sufficient evidence of permanent common interest with, and attachment to, the community, have the right of suffrage, and cannot be taxed or deprived of their property for public uses, without their own consent, or that of their representatives so elected*, nor bound by any law to which they have not, in like manner, assembled, for the public good.

● All men ... cannot be taxed without their own consent.
● All men ... cannot be deprived of their property for public uses without their own consent.
● All men ... cannot be bound by any law that is not for the public good.

{*only tax paying property owners could vote, ergo, not all Virginians gave consent to be bound by all laws.}

To this day, the government is careful to craft laws that don't trespass upon the liberties and private property rights of the sovereign people - what few remain. And anyone of the sovereign people in full possession of all endowed rights, powers and liberties is not injured by the lack of “representation” in servant government.

Quote:

---

Posted by Yetti

Thanks Ozmirage !. All you put above sounds like our government is actually breaking the law big time, the question here is: for a regular folk who live check by check like millions around, how can us protect ourselves from the phony govt. we have in order to be free again? like the tax issue, I'm very piss off about the income tax (more I work the more they take) and the property tax. Why should I pay taxes on my own property, or isn't mine? if I totally paid for?

---

Your consent, via citizenship, FICA, and bank accounts, is what has put you into perpetual servitude in the glorious socialist paradise / aka / benevolent totalitarian police state we all know and love.

If you check your own state's constitution and statutes, you should find that :
a) private property is explicitly protected but qualified ownership of estate is subject to taxation and regulation;
b) free inhabitants domiciled in the state (non-residents) are not obligated to get permission (licenses) nor register their private property;
c) non consenting people retain their endowed (natural) rights and liberties (natural and personal), and all related powers.

But those who are consenting citizens / residents / human resources, it's a rough time for you.

THE DIRT ON "DIRT"
=\=\=\=
Land is something we all need to live. From the land, we take our water, food, and build shelter. Without land, we would not survive. There are those who argue that ephemeral man cannot "own" land, but that is a lie.

What they want you to surrender is your right to land, and your right to exclude others from your land, and the exclusive right to the fruits of your labor on that land.

HOW?
The biggest con in America.

All land is NOT real estate.
..................

LAND. ... The land is one thing, and the estate in land is another thing, for an estate in land is a time in land or land for a time.
- - -Black's Law dictionary, sixth ed., p.877

.................

Estate in land is "another thing". Estate is time in land or land for a time. Remember that.

................

"OWNERSHIP - ... Ownership of property is either absolute or qualified. The ownership of property is absolute when a single person has the absolute dominion over it... The ownership is qualified when it is shared with one or more persons, when the time of enjoyment is deferred or limited, or when the use is restricted."
- - -Black's Law dictionary, sixth ed., p. 1106

................

Ownership is qualified (not absolute) when it is shared, or time is limited, or use is restricted.

Remember, estate is land for a time.

What is estate?

...................

"ESTATE - The degree, quantity, nature and extent of interest which a person has in real and personal property. An estate in lands, tenements, and hereditaments signifies such interest as the tenant has therein."
Black's Law dictionary, sixth ed., p.547

"REAL ESTATE .... is synonymous with real property"
Black's Law dictionary, sixth ed., p.1263

"REAL PROPERTY ... A general term for lands, tenements, heriditaments; which on the death of the owner intestate, passes to his heir."
Black's Law dictionary, sixth ed., p.1218

.......................
Estate is interest in "real and personal property", which boils down to qualified ownership.

What is NOT qualified ownership?
.....................

PRIVATE PROPERTY - As protected from being taken for public uses, is such property as belongs absolutely to an individual, and of which he has the exclusive right of disposition. Property of a specific, fixed and tangible nature, capable of being in possession and transmitted to another, such as houses, lands, and chattels.
- - Black's Law dictionary, sixth ed., p.1217

.....................

Land and house that is absolutely owned is private property.

What Is Interest?
........................

INTEREST - ...More particularly it means a right to have the advantage of accruing from anything ; any right in the nature of property, but LESS THAN TITLE.
Black's Law dictionary, sixth ed., p.812

........................

TITLE - "The formal right of ownership of property..."
Black's Law dictionary, sixth ed., p.1485

.......................

Real estate / Real property refers to "lands, tenements, heriditaments" a person or tenant has NO formal right of ownership of property - only the advantages from it.

..................

PROPERTY TAX - "An ad valorem tax, usually levied by a city or county, on the value of real or personal property that the taxpayer owns on a specified date."
Black's Law dictionary, sixth ed., p.1218

.................

Hmmm ... real property = real estate = estate.

Unpaid taxes on "real estate" can result in confiscation, whereas private property is defined as being protected from being taken for public use without just compensation. Sadly, most Americans record their "title deed" with the Real Estate registry. Coincidentally, there is no law compelling the recording of private property. But all "real estate" transactions may be recorded!

Ironically, most folks are misled to assume that they can only trade in real estate.
..............

FEE SIMPLE - ... an absolute estate... Black's Law dictionary, sixth ed., p. 615

DEED - A conveyance of realty. Black's Law dictionary, sixth ed., p.414

REALTY - A brief term for real property or real estate. Black's Law dictionary, sixth ed., p.1264

..............

A "Title Deed" refers to realty, or real estate, which is an interest in real property, but only for a time, and is not a title to private property held absolutely.

To illustrate further:

From the Texas Constitution:

ARTICLE 8 - TAXATION AND REVENUE
Sec. 1. EQUALITY AND UNIFORMITY; TAX IN PROPORTION TO
VALUE; TAXATION OF TANGIBLE AND INTANGIBLE PROPERTY;
OCCUPATION TAXES; INCOME TAX; EXEMPTION OF HOUSEHOLD GOODS.

(a) Taxation shall be equal and uniform.

(b) All real property and tangible personal property in this State, unless exempt as required or permitted by this Constitution, whether owned by natural persons or corporations, other than municipal, shall be taxed in proportion to its value, which shall be ascertained as may be provided by law.

The Texas constitution states that all real and personal property is subject to their taxing power.
...................

PROPERTY TAX - An ad valorem tax, usually levied by a city or county, on the value of real or personal property that the taxpayer owns on a specified date.
Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth ed., p.1218

..................

That definition agrees with the Texas constitution.

In short, the constitutional government of Texas has never, ever infringed upon the private property rights of the people. The constitution specifically lists estate as the property type subject to their power, their rules, and their taxes.

When I did a computer search on the words "private property", the only place private property is mentioned, is in the section dealing with water works. In Article 11- Sec.12, Texas Constitution
................

Sec. 12. EXPENDITURES FOR RELOCATION OR REPLACEMENT OF SANITATION SEWER OR WATER LATERALS ON PRIVATE PROPERTY.

The legislature by general law may authorize a city or town to expend public funds for the relocation or replacement of sanitation sewer laterals or water laterals on PRIVATE PROPERTY if the relocation or replacement is done in conjunction with or immediately following the replacement or relocation of sanitation sewer mains or water mains serving the property. The law must authorize the city or town to affix, with the CONSENT OF THE OWNER of the PRIVATE PROPERTY, a lien on the property for the cost of relocating or replacing the laterals on the property and must provide that the cost shall be assessed against the property with repayment by the property owner to be amortized over a period not to exceed five years at a rate of interest to be set as provided by the law. The lien may not be enforced until after five years have expired since the date the lien was affixed.

............

Without consent of the owner, the State or local government cannot affix a lien, nor assess against the property, nor compel repayment.
But you can bet that "real estate" would have a lien on it, in a New York minute.

In short, private property is still protected by government.

NOTE: Do not be fooled by mythology regarding "allodial title" and "allodium."
No constitution protects allodial title - only private property.
Ditto, for the "Land patent" scammers.

.............
Addendum

Pennsylvania Constitution,
Article 1, Section 1,
Inherent Rights of Mankind

All men are born equally free and independent, and have certain inherent and indefeasible rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty, of acquiring, possessing and protecting property and reputation, and of pursuing their own happiness.

Section 10.
...nor shall private property be taken or applied to public use, without authority of law and without just compensation being first made or secured.

Sub-chapter TT. LAND USE PLANNING, Sec. 7.771. Commonwealth land use policies.
sub-section (c) The constitutional private property rights of Pennsylvanians must be preserved and respected.
...............................

" No inhabitant of this state shall be molested in person or property ... on account of religious opinions..."
- - - Georgia Constitution, Article 1, Sec.1, Paragraph 4

"... private property shall not be taken or damaged for public purposes without just and adequate compensation being first paid.'
- - - Georgia Constitution, Article 1, Sec.3, Paragraph 1
..............................

As always, check your own state constitution and statutes to verify that private property is still protected, and inhabitants (non-residents) are in full possession of their endowed rights, liberties, and powers.

Just wanted to isolate this by quote for skim readers. Deserves a round of applause imo.

Quote:

---

This same dreary gestalt constitutes the nature of man’s history on this planet as far back as the eye can see. Civilizations rise, fall, and disappear, replaced by new ones that — based upon being founded on, and functioning in accordance with, wrong principles — are foredoomed for extinction, as were all of their predecessors and as all future civilizations will be until mankind finally learns and ceases “beating a dead horse” by structuring law, commerce, religion, and social organization in general on principles that are existentially impossible.

---

When I first saw the title of the thread I did not take it very seriously. Thought it was probably frivolous, in a moment of boredom I decided to have a look. Glad I did.

Just wanted to say thanks for a well thought out thread. Everything I have read (so far) makes a lot of sense. I will have to save the link and read it in-depth when I have time.

That's a good point. I too ignored the topic initially. You might want to consider a title change Ozmirage?

How do you edit a title ?

Reply from Bill: Just PM the mods with the title change you'd like. It's super-easy for us to do, and we're always happy to do that, but members don't have the access to edit titles themselves. (A moment's thought will tell you why... it could easily create chaos. :) )

Quote:

---

Posted by Lost N Found

Now that you have accused me of being a Mythologist.

OZ: Being a victim of mythologists is not the same as BEING a mythologist (fabricating nonsense).

[NOT] US Legal History

U.S. Law is Private Merchant Law, leaving the people as Surety and Debtor on the bankruptcy.

OZ: Typical mythology - state a conclusion without facts in support.
And NO, "People" are not sureties.
Consenting "Citizens" are sureties.


Law is contract, universally and in the U.S., so we must follow the progression of contractual agreements which constitute the underlying U.S. Law.

OZ: No, all law is not contract. A statute that punishes a murderer does not require consent of the murderer.

LAW - A set of rules or principles of a legal system.


In basically chronological order, the following progression of contracts, and our interpretation of them follows:
1. The USA, a corporation of the English Crown, is bankrupt, and has been since at least 1788.

OZ: typical myth format - state a bogus conclusion without supporting facts.
>> No evidence of incorporation under English law
>> No evidence of outstanding debt

then add some snippet of data / fact, as if that supports the previous fraud

The Articles of Confederation states in Article 12: “All bills of credit emitted, monies borrowed, and debts contracted by, or under the authority of Congress, before the assembling of the United States, in pursuance of the present confederation, shall be deemed as considered a charge against the United States, for payment and satisfaction whereof the said United States, and the public faith are hereby solemnly pledged.”


OZ: Next fraud:
The “Founding Fathers,” as constitutors, acknowledged and reorganized the debt in the US Constitution 1787, Article VI, hence “constitution.”

OZ: There is no evidence that the term “constitutors” has any connection with “constitution.”

Playing word games is a tactic of mythologists.

CON - To swindle (a victim) by first winning his or her confidence; dupe.

CONSTITUTOR, civil law. He who promised by a simple pact to pay the debt of another; and this is always a principal obligation.

CONSTITUTION - The system of fundamental laws and principles that prescribes the nature, functions, and limits of a government or another institution.

CONSTITUTE - To set up or establish according to law or provision.

CONSTITUTION - Constitution. The organic and fundamental law of a nation or state, which may be written or unwritten, establishing the character and conception of its government, laying the basic principles to which its internal life is to be conformed, organizing the government, and regulating, distributing, and limiting the functions of its different departments, and prescribing the extent and manner of the exercise of sovereign powers. A charter of government deriving its whole authority from the governed.
- - - Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Ed., p. 311


Bankruptcy occurred on January 1, 1788 based on 21 loans that the United States of America received from the King of England dating from February 28, 1778 through July 5, 1782, the repayment of which had been ratified by Congress on January 22, 1783.

OZ: What 21 loans? Where are the records? What sums?

The only reference I could find regarding a loan to the USA, was in 1783:
http://www.britannia.com/history/docs/contractg3.html
But it is from the FRENCH KING... unless England uses livres and has its Treasury in Paris.



The United States Bank, created in 1791, was a private bank, with 18,000 of 25,000 shares owned by England.

OZ: And this supports what claim? And where else would America get its bullion for its coinage if not European banks? There were no domestic sources of gold and silver sufficient for "constitutional" money. The first gold strike was in Dahlonega, Georgia, in 1828.

---

Must I go on and on?
Mythologists state fabricated claims, and then create convoluted explanations to support them.

I wasted years being misled by mythologists.
Don't be fooled, too.

CHECK EVERY CLAIM AND SUPPORTING REFERENCE.