$14,000,000,000,000,000 Dollar UCC-1 lien filed against the Federal Reserve?

reply to post by flyswatter


That's the spirit!

Start with the link I posted on the first page. That will take awhile to get through. It is important to Google the various court decisions, statutes and events to gain a deeper understanding. U2U me with questions... I can point you in a great many directions, but without some context you will get lost quickly. By design, I should add!

Originally posted by kozmo
reply to post by flyswatter

 

That's the spirit!

Start with the link I posted on the first page. That will take awhile to get through. It is important to Google the various court decisions, statutes and events to gain a deeper understanding. U2U me with questions... I can point you in a great many directions, but without some context you will get lost quickly. By design, I should add!

I read some of that first link earlier. Still doesnt explain it all though.

But aside from that ... is it your contention that you can simply opt out of your citizenship and any benefits due it, thereby ridding yourself of any potential contracts with the government?

If that is the case, please take the time to point me to a single court case in this country where that argument has actually worked

Originally posted by Bildo

Originally posted by kozmo
reply to post by Bildo

 

Bingo! No more Allodial Title. Under the 14th Amendment you are entitled to the benefits of citizenship, but in exchange for the use of said benefits you are contractually obligated to fulfill their requirements. One of which is the surrender of all personal property. They don't confiscate it, of course. That would blow the illusion. They let you use it and create conditions and restrictions regarding its use.

"Driving" is a perfect example. "Driving" is an act of commerce under UCC and requires licensing, regulating and taxing. However, "Travelling" is a Constitutionally guaranteed right. The conflict comes in when a.) The Constitution has been suspended, b.) People willingly enter into a contract with the state to "Drive" and c.) Subject themselves willingly to the contractual terms outlined therein - in other words, you signed it all away!

Thank you. That's it exactly. I am not a 14th Ammendment citizen. I also demanded ALL contracts with THEM be put on the table so I could contest them. I refused the "benefit" of citizenship in their corporate democracy. I'm in the Republic. Most people have no clue what it means to be a "US citizen". You aren't born that way, you contract in to it. And benefits are not always a positive thing, they are, nowadays, mostly negative.

Even within the scope you are referring to, the issue becomes even more clouded as there is a definitive difference between being an American Citizen and a US Citizen.

Originally posted by flyswatter

Originally posted by kozmo
reply to post by flyswatter

 

That's the spirit!

Start with the link I posted on the first page. That will take awhile to get through. It is important to Google the various court decisions, statutes and events to gain a deeper understanding. U2U me with questions... I can point you in a great many directions, but without some context you will get lost quickly. By design, I should add!

I read some of that first link earlier. Still doesnt explain it all though.

But aside from that ... is it your contention that you can simply opt out of your citizenship and any benefits due it, thereby ridding yourself of any potential contracts with the government?

If that is the case, please take the time to point me to a single court case in this country where that argument has actually worked

edit on 23-1-2013 by flyswatter because: (no reason given)

I posted another link right above that also will help.

I can't assert that and I can't reference a single instance where it has been done. As I've stated repeatedly, this ship is tight! But if you want to understand what is happening and get angry enough to help defeat it, you have to understand it!

Originally posted by kozmo

Originally posted by flyswatter

Originally posted by kozmo
reply to post by flyswatter

 

That's the spirit!

Start with the link I posted on the first page. That will take awhile to get through. It is important to Google the various court decisions, statutes and events to gain a deeper understanding. U2U me with questions... I can point you in a great many directions, but without some context you will get lost quickly. By design, I should add!

I read some of that first link earlier. Still doesnt explain it all though.

But aside from that ... is it your contention that you can simply opt out of your citizenship and any benefits due it, thereby ridding yourself of any potential contracts with the government?

If that is the case, please take the time to point me to a single court case in this country where that argument has actually worked

edit on 23-1-2013 by flyswatter because: (no reason given)

I posted another link right above that also will help.

I can't assert that and I can't reference a single instance where it has been done. As I've stated repeatedly, this ship is tight! But if you want to understand what is happening and get angry enough to help defeat it, you have to understand it!

Well, the reason that you cant point me to anywhere that this argument has worked is because it has not ever worked and been seen as a valid legal argument If the beneficial case results and judgements were there, they would be paraded around on the flags of the Freemen.

But hey, thats not your fault. I'll give you at least some credit - at least you do not come across as a rabid foaming-at-the-mouth anti-government and anti-corporation fear monger, like some of the sovereign citizen or Freemen people do.

**EDIT**

Check your latest link there. Doesnt work. Hover over it and you will see why

reply to post by flyswatter


Same book that I recommended to Wrabbit, earlier : Cracking the Code, 3rd Edition. Could be wrong but I think it might have been written by Maxwell Jordan, I wouldn't swear by it, but I did receive it packaged in a torrent of his other items.

Here is a Scribd link; but if you can not download from there, U2U me and I will send you my copy.

www.scribd.com...

reply to post by flyswatter
You happened to mention "legal" argument. There is a big difference between legal and lawful.
In 1937/1938 they went from Public Law to Public Policy. Law=law. Policy=statutes. A bankrupt entity has no standing in law. So they were forced to go to "color of law", statutes. Corporation policy. They need you to consent to their jurisdiction and authority.

Originally posted by Bildo
reply to post by flyswatter

 

You happened to mention "legal" argument. There is a big difference between legal and lawful.
In 1937/1938 they went from Public Law to Public Policy. Law=law. Policy=statutes. A bankrupt entity has no standing in law. So they were forced to go to "color of law", statutes. Corporation policy. They need you to consent to their jurisdiction and authority.

Give me the specifics of a time when this argument has been made in court. I'm going to guess that most of what you'll find will be people being smacked down in court, but gotta give you a chance.

reply to post by flyswatter

Well, the reason that you cant point me to anywhere that this argument has worked is because it has not ever worked and been seen as a valid legal argument If the beneficial case results and judgements were there, they would be paraded around on the flags of the Freemen.

That is incorrect; I am friends with a few people on Facebook that I know rather well. They don't have driver's license, are tax exempt, and a few other things. They have been stopped for the Driver's license, but the case is always thrown out by the judge...After all the cop's are just like you guys; they don't know the law either.

Example : In Tennessee where I live, when I'm out walking after 12, cops will stop me and ask if I have an ID, and when I refuse to show it to them, they try to throw the whole "It's state law to carry an ID."

Yes, you ditz, but it doesn't require me to show it to you, unless you have reasonable suspicion that I am breaking the law. Which I have the right to ask which law that would be, and also love pointing out the fact that Tennessee, is not a stop and identify state...

They always threaten to haul me to jail, but I'm always let go every time when I tell them to call their superior officer. He knows I'm right...They also don't like being video taped either, and try to lie saying it is illegal....First circuit court has ruled it legal to record cops, and TN is a single party state; as long as I'm the one doing the recording, and am a party to it, I'm free to record whoever I wish.





www.worldstarhiphop.com...







These are just a few videos of cops not knowing the laws they are supposed to uphold....

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
They have been stopped for the Driver's license, but the case is always thrown out by the judge..

So how about a cite for these 'court cases" - I guess you are unable to, no surprise there.

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
reply to post by flyswatter

 

Well, the reason that you cant point me to anywhere that this argument has worked is because it has not ever worked and been seen as a valid legal argument If the beneficial case results and judgements were there, they would be paraded around on the flags of the Freemen.

That is incorrect; I am friends with a few people on Facebook that I know rather well. They don't have driver's license, are tax exempt, and a few other things. They have been stopped for the Driver's license, but the case is always thrown out by the judge...After all the cop's are just like you guys; they don't know the law either.

If it has gone to court, then it is on the court records. Many states have public repositories online where these can be viewed. Give me a case number or a name and I'll look at the cases myself. Mind you, being thrown out does not mean that it was thrown out because they are not required to have a license.

As far as the rest of your post, I think we can all agree that cops can be fools at times. Your point of being required to have an ID vs. being required to show it is not an argument of this whole ideology, it is an argument of common sense, and one that I actually happen to agree on.

reply to post by hellobruce


And you think all of it is uploaded to google right?

For instance, I was brought to court twice, once when I was a minor for aggravated domestic assault with a deadly weapon, and the second time for a matter I won't mention; neither of these are online...You are trying to play the card that if I can't prove a negative, it's false...Whatever bud...

reply to post by flyswatter


You miss the analogy....If cops don't know the laws they are meant to uphold, and blatantly LIE about those laws, what makes you think judges are any different, hmm?

reply to post by flyswatter


Link fixed! Thanks!

Also, please keep in mind. There is a BIG difference in educating yourself where the country went off the rails and advocating for some type of magic elixir to fix it. Like I said earlier, I'm not a proponent of the Freeman Movement. There is no simple fix. The only way to beat it is to defeat it - like as in overthrow it!

Originally posted by VeritasAequitas
reply to post by flyswatter

 

You miss the analogy....If cops don't know the laws they are meant to uphold, and blatantly LIE about those laws, what makes you think judges are any different, hmm?

I didnt miss the analogy, I just dont agree with it.

Cops can be twits at times. Same goes for judges. They are no different than any other human being in that respect. But I'm not going to pass judgement on someone just because they are a cop or a judge. Each case should be judged on its own merits.

What I am looking for (case, name, etc) would allow me to see your proof of the argument working. If you're not able to provide it, why should anyone simply take your word for it?

Originally posted by kozmo
reply to post by flyswatter

 

Link fixed! Thanks!

Also, please keep in mind. There is a BIG difference in educating yourself where the country went off the rails and advocating for some type of magic elixir to fix it. Like I said earlier, I'm not a proponent of the Freeman Movement. There is no simple fix. The only way to beat it is to defeat it - like as in overthrow it!

There is a difference, but the lines get a bit crossed here because a good portion of what you are arguing here also happens to form some of the basis of the whole Freemen argument.

There are things that this country does that I dont necessarily agree with, and things that I do not think are right. Doesnt mean they are illegal (unfortunately). But everyone has an opinion, right? My issue is that a lot of people (here and elsewhere) try to take their opinion of things and parade it off as law or fact. Not saying that you have personally done that, but it's just something that others HAVE done and its wrong.

reply to post by VeritasAequitas
One reason they are asking for State ID is to verify that you are under their jurisdiction and authority. Same goes with the drivers license. When people start looking into this type of thing they will find that there are two states. One is dejure and the other is defacto. I carry no defacto ID. Alot of people cave because of their intimidation tactics. They throw us in jail, huff and puff and stomp around jingling their handcuffs, unsnap and resnap their weapon, yell alot. Heh, just sit there and keep saying "I do not consent". But, again, don't try this if you don't know who you are and who you're not.
I wonder if flyswatter will call you a liar because you know people who are tax exempt. Like me. I don't know how to prove it though.

reply to post by flyswatter

Cops can be twits at times. Same goes for judges. They are no different than any other human being in that respect. But I'm not going to pass judgement on someone just because they are a cop or a judge. Each case should be judged on its own merits. What I am looking for (case, name, etc) would allow me to see your proof of the argument working. If you're not able to provide it, why should anyone simply take your word for it?

If the cops and judges don't know the law, how would we know that this is all fake, if they just do what they want anyways? Yes, you very much missed it....The cops and judges do whatever they want; why would you think that they would easily let something like this fly? I have no reason to lie; why would I try to get people in trouble? All you can do is ask me to prove something, that isn't even going to be online?

I can't even find MY cases online; what makes you think every single court case in the world is uploaded to google?

Another analogy for ya; if I said that I dreamt last night about anything doesn't even matter, how could I prove that to you? Instead of asking for proof, how about just debunking it, hmm?

reply to post by Bildo


He's failing to see that Google doesn't contain information on everything like people think it does...I can't even find my own court cases online, let alone some joe I know on Facebook...

Ya Veritas, I noticed that. He called me a liar about my tax exempt status. How the hell can I prove that? Even if I could scan in my paystub and put it up here, I'd be accused of photoshopping it.
reply to post by flyswatter
I'm not part of any "movement" but you will begin to see why the freeman movement is doing what they are doing. Like you said, it seems that alot of what we are saying is used in the freeman argument. Ummm, yeah, because from what I've seen, it's true. They understand the underlying fraud that is being committed by the public officials that pretend to know the law. And it really sucks when someone is brutally beaten for questioning a cop about the law, and the cop lies about it, or is totally ignorant of what the law is.
How can a crime exist without a victim?