AFFIDAVITS

Ignorance of the Law does not excuse misconduct in anyone, least of all a sworn officer of the law. (Maxim of law)

No one is believed in court but upon his oath. (Maxim of law)

AFFIDAVITS

All Affidavits are TRUTH AFFIDAVITS-for they are the manner for the Sovereign People to address other Sovereign people or government. The Constitutions  state that all cases of Common Law will be tried by Affidavits. Affidavits state only the facts provable by the maker. 

Affidavits are mainly in COMMERCE and deal with COMMERCIAL MATTERS.

    Affidavits entered in the County Records/Public Records become PUBLIC POLICY and are established as the facts of the case/issue.

  Affidavits entered in the County Records/Public Records and not REBUTTED after 30 days becomes the Law of the (particular) Case/Issue.

    Affidavits establish the Law for the cases in COMMON LAW and through the County Recorder/Public Record they become PUBLIC POLICY. PUBLIC POLICY is not for the Sovereign People. It is for the PUBLIC (SERVANTS) OFFICIALS, OFFICERS, WORKERS, AGENTS, etc.

  Sovereign People are PRIVATE, the government is PUBLIC (including everything in the public corporations).

    After entering the AFFIDAVIT into the County Record/Public Record, three certified copies should be obtained from the Notary Public, if the case is in a CORPORATE COURT (which it always is).

  One copy is entered into the Records of the Court (file stamp into case) and take the other two copies to court.

Upon the court appearance, present one to the Plaintiff and give the other to the bailiff to hand to the Judge.

  From this point on you are the Creditor or Secured Party in the case and the case cannot proceed until your AFFIDAVIT has been rebutted.

  At that point simply notify the Judge (administrator), My AFFIDAVIT has not been rebutted, I am Creditor and Secured Party to this action and  I, Sui Juris, John, a competent natural man of the genealogy of Doe, on the Land do hereby choose to honor your offer and accept the constitutions of the United States of America and the State of Illinois and your mandated Oath of Office as the designated PUBLIC SERVANT, doing business as “Judge – Circuit Court Cook County,” as found filed and recorded in the official public records of Cook County Illinois, as instrument 2003023744 dated the 19 day of January 2012, successor, assigns and Court Clerks and all PUBLIC SERVANTs relating, as your open and binding offer of promise to form a firm and binding contract between the respective governments, their political instrumentalities and all the above so recognized PUBLIC SERVANTs and Me, in My private capacity.  Certified copy of instrument 2003023744 attached.  By My acceptance for "full acquittance and discharge" with prejudice and I am leaving.

If you do not want to go to the court-simply write an order to the court for Full Acquittance and Discharge with prejudice.

  Any papers received after this can be sent back refused for "failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted" in REBUTTAL of your Affidavit.

  Affidavits must be entered into the County Record/Public Record for it is here that PUBLIC POLICY LAW is established by the Sovereign People.

    If it is not put into the County Record/Public Record - it must be placed in the Newspaper for 3 weeks or posted on the court bulletin board for 3 weeks. or posted on the Internet.

COMMON LAW-THE FACTS

    Common Law is the beginning of all Law and in its perfection is the absence of all Law and in today's society it is known as PUBLIC POLICY. Common Law summed up in simple terms is the will of the people and will manifest itself in separate cases as people so rule with their conscience and a sense of fair play.

Common Law is a Law that is Common to all People.

    Common Law is Common Sense and is the Law of the Creator of this Universe - Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

  Common Law supersedes all Law and is Superior in all Cases to Statutory Law, Codified Law, and Rules and Regulations, Codes etc.

Common Law establishes Constitutions as all Power is inherent in the People.

  Common Law establishes through the Constitution all restrictions on the corporate government (public servants).

  Constitutions never give the corporate government power for legislating People.

  Government only has the power to Legislate the workings of the different functions of the various departments to allow the people Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of happiness.

  Constitutions can never establish Common Law...for then all Power would not be in the People, but would be in the Constitution and it is only a piece of paper, and the Peoples right to redress grievances or to amend, change, or address any problem could not be.

  The Creator created man... man (with help) created government, government started CORPORATIONS.

The Creator rules over man,

man rules over government,

and government rules over CORPORATIONS.

Governments are mere pieces of paper to be altered and changed to the whim of the living souls.

CORPORATIONS are mere pieces of paper that government can change and alter at their whim.

The Creator is Superior over Man,

government, and CORPORATIONS.

Man is superior to government and CORPORATIONS.

If man says they do not exist-they do not exist.

  Simply said, Common Law - PUBLIC POLICY - the Will of the People, a Law Common to all People.

Simply ask the public servant will you swear to that in writing signed under your commercial liability?

Simple say I will hold you personally liable for any injury, violation of rights to me, my family, my property.

What is a License?

The Definition a License is "A personal privilege to do some particular act or series of acts on Land without possessing any estate or interest therein", and is ordinarily revocable at the will of the licensor and is NOT assignable. The permission by competent authority to do an act which, without such permission, would be illegal TOTALLY or, a trespass, a tort, a clear violation of LAW and/or otherwise totally NOT ALLOWABLE UNDER ANY CONDITION!!! See People vs. Henderson, 391 Mich. 612, 218 N.W. 2nd 2 @4. A permit granted by an appropriate governmental body, generally for a consideration, A FEE, to a person, firm, or Corporation to pursue some occupation or to carry on some business subject to regulation under the POLICE POWER of Government. Please see 9th & 10th Amendments of THE U.S. CONSTITUTION. Pay special attention to the phrase "nor prohibited by it" or Rights previously guaranteed may not be enumerated away by addition onto the CONSTITUTION, or denied or disparaged away by adding onto it.

Now let us take a look at the following cartoon and see if you can pick out the Characters and who they actually represent in society today. It really has not changed much in 2,000 years but the names and the faces are changed and maybe the dress but the peasant/master relationship is the same. Now just how does that occur? IT OCCURS BECAUSE WE VOLUNTARILY ALLOW IT TO OCCUR!!! FACT!!!!!!!

Now once upon a time in a Land far, far, away, IN THE NEW WORLD, there lived a people, who were ALL Kings and or Queens in their OWN RIGHT. Now as such they were truly blessed by GOD with Sovereign Rights, as FREE MEN AND WOMEN, which they all agreed should be written down on paper to preserve for ALL TIME, that Sovereign STATUS and ALL THE RIGHTS to be protected. The Sovereign People, Kings and Queens, called the Document THE CONSTITUTION so ALL could see and know what was in fact done. The Kings and Queens hired trusted servants, ALL SWORN AND TRUE, TO ACT AS PROTECTORS OF THE CONSTITUTION. These FIDUCIARY TRUSTEES were to form a group of FIDUCIARY TRUSTEES, and were then SWORN TO PROTECT AND SERVE, and this was called THE GOVERNMENT, which was created entirely under the authority of THE CONSTITUTION. Now take NOTE OF WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO THAT HONEST AND NOBEL UNDERTAKING!!! Now follow along and learn how you can bring back that original CONTRACT, and get back your Sovereign Status and the PROTECTED RIGHTS GUARANTEED TO YOU IN THAT CONSTITUTION. CAN YOU PICK OUT THE CHARACTERS IN THIS LITTLE CARTOON??? What Changed????!!! HOW DID IT HAPPEN??????!!! HOW did the Sovereign Citizen's protected RIGHTS GET CONVERTED INTO A PRIVILEGE and a requirement for a LICENSE or FEE for the exercise of that RIGHT be required for the exercise of that PRIVILEGE? CLEARLY THIS IS FRAUD, PLAIN AND SIMPLE. FRAUD VISCHEATES THE MOST SACred CONTRACT OR COVENANT! !!!! Has a FRAUD been done here???? You DECIDE!!!

Now NO STATE may convert a RIGHT into a PRIVILEGE and require a LICENSE or FEE for the exercise of that RIGHT!!! Please see MURDOCK vs. PENNSYLVANIA, 319 U.S. 105, and if a STATE does erroneously do require A LICENSE OR FEE for exercise of the RIGHT, the Citizen may IGNORE THE LICENSE AND OR FEE and exercise the RIGHT WITH TOTAL IMPUNITY!!! Please see SCHUTTLESWORTH vs. BIRMINGHAM 373 U.S. 262. YOU CAN NOT BE PUNISHED FOR THE EXERCISE OF A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT!!! Please see MILLER vs. UNITED STATES 230 F2nd 486. You have a PERFECT DEFENSE TO THE ELEMENT OF WILLFULLNESS if you rely on the advice of Counsel or upon a DECISION OF THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT AS A DEFENSE. Please see U.S. vs. BISHOP, 412 U.S. 346. If the Prosecution who bears entirely the proofs beyond a TOTAL REASONABLE DOUBT can NOT prove WILLFUL INTENT TO AVOID AND KNOWN DUTY OR TASK UNDER THE LAW WITH A MORAL CERTAINTY, said Prosecutor does NOT HAVE A CAUSE OF ACTION FOR WHICH A COURT OF LAW MAY GRANT RELIEF TO HIM/HER, and thereby has NO CASE AT LAW!!!! FACT!!!!! See Michigan Court Rule 2.116 (c) (8) FAILURE TO STATE A CAUSE OF ACTION FOR WHICH RELIEF MAY BE GRANTED BY THE COURT.

Now look below, because this is exactly what is going on and you need to study this example and decide if you are willing to go along with this FRAUD!!!!!!!!! YES OR NO!!!! You think about it and make your decision, and the decision is: TO BE OR NOT TO BE KING OR QUEEN WITH ALL RIGHTS AND OR PROTECTIONS THAT GO WITH THAT!!! The Constitution is suppose to be interpreted in favor of YOU, "THE CITIZEN" BENEFICIARY, FOR THE PROTECTION OF RIGHTS AND PROPERTY!!!! Please see BYARS vs. UNITED STATES 273 U.S. 28 and 16th Am Juris Prudence 2nd Constitutional Section #97, so you got a right to have your idea or opinion of your Rights be protected in favor of YOU!!!! BUT FIRST YOU MUST KNOW YOUR RIGHTS!!! Do You know your RIGHTS??????? HOW THEN CAN YOU PROTECT THEM IF YOU DON'T KNOW THEM, SURELY GOVERNMENT IS NOT GOING TO TELL YOU WHAT YOUR RIGHTS ARE!!!! NO IT IS ENTIRELY UP TO YOU!!!! You must decide!

Constitutional Drivers License

County of______________

OFFICE OF THE CLERIC

______________ , Michigan

COMMON LAW VEHICULAR JUDICIAL NOTICE

CONSTITUTIONAL DRIVERS LICENSE

THE UNDERSIGNED Common Law Citizen John-Henry Doe, a man, do hereby Certify, by Rights Secured under provisions of the Constitution of the United States of America, the Constitution of the several states, Common Law, Nature and Laws of Nature, that these Rights are retained in FEE SIMPLE ABSOLUTE, and held and protected with special regard to Rights designated and/or set forth as follows: ALSO NOTE, Rights and Property are ONE AND THE SAME THING --the Honorable Justice LOUIS BRANDIS U.S. SUPREME COURT.

NOTICE AND ADVISORY OF RIGHTS CLAIMED INVIOLATE:

1) The Right to TRAVEL FREELY, UNENCUMBEred, and UNFETTEred is guaranteed as a RIGHT and not a mere privilege. That the Right to TRAVEL is such a BASIC RIGHT it does NOT even need to be mentioned for it is SELF-evident by Common Sense that the Right to TRAVEL is a BASIC CONCOMMITANT of a FREE Society to come and go from length and breath FREELY UNENCUMBEred and UNFETTEred distinguishes the characteristic required for a FREE PEOPLE TO EXIST IN FACT. Please see SHAPIRO vs. THOMSON, 394 U. S. 618. Further, the Right to TRAVEL by private conveyance for private purposes upon the Common way can NOT BE INFRINGED. No license or permission is required for TRAVEL when such TRAVEL IS NOT for the purpose of [COMMERCIAL] PROFIT OR GAIN on the open highways operating under license IN COMMERCE.

The above named Common Law Citizen listed IS NOT OPERATING IN COMMERCE and as such is thereby EXEMPTED FROM THE REQUIREMENT OF A LICENSE AS SUCH. Further, the _______________ state, is FORBIDDEN BY LAW from converting a BASIC RIGHT into a PRIVILEGE and requiring a LICENSE and or a FEE CHARGED for the exercise of the BASIC RIGHT. Please SEE MURDOCK vs. PENNSYLVANIA, 319 U.S. 105, and if _______________ state does ERRONIOUSLY convert BASIC RIGHTS into PRIVILEGES and require a License or FEE a Citizen may IGNORE THE LICENSE OR FEE WITH TOTAL IMMUNITY FOR SUCH EXERCISE OF A BASIC RIGHT. Please see Schuttlesworth vs. BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA, 373 U.S.262. Now if a Citizen exercises a BASIC RIGHT and a Law of ANY state is to the contrary of such exercise of that BASIC RIGHT, the said supposed Law of ANY state is a FICTION OF LAW and 100% TOTALLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL and NO COURTS ARE BOUND TO UPHOLD IT AND NO Citizen is REQUIred TO OBEY SUCH UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAW OR LICENSE REQUIREMENT.

Please see MARBURY vs. MADISON, 5 U.S. 137 (1803), which has never been overturned in over 194 years, see Shephard's Citations. Now further, if a Citizen relies in good faith on the advice of Counsel and or on the Decisions of the UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT that Citizen has a PERFECT DEFENSE to the element of WILLFULNESS and since the burden of proof of said WILLFULNESS is on the Prosecution to prove beyond a REASONABLE DOUBT, said task or burden being totally impossible to specifically perform there is NO CAUSE OF ACTION FOR WHICH RELIEF MAY BE GRANTED BY A COURT OF LAW. Please see U.S. vs. Bishop 412 U.S. 346. OBVIOUSLY THERE IS NO LAWFUL CHARGE AGAINST EXERCISING A BASIC Right to TRAVEL for a regular Common Law Citizen NOT IN COMMERCE on the common way Public HlGHWAY. THAT IS THE LAW!!! The above named Citizen IS IMMUNE FROM ANY CHARGE TO THE CONTRARY AND ANY PARTY MAKING SUCH CHARGE SHOULD BE DULY WARNED OF THE TORT OF TRESPASS!!! YOU ARE TRESPASSING ON THIS Common Law Citizen!

2) The original and Judicial jurisdiction of the United States Supreme Court is ALL actions in which a State may be party, thru subdivision, political or trust. This includes ALL state approved subdivisions and/or INCORPORATED Cities, Townships, Municipalities, and Villages, Et Al. Please see Article 3, Section 2, Para. (1) and (2), U.S. Constitution.

3) The undersigned has NEVER willingly and knowingly entered into ANY Contract or Contractual agreement giving up ANY Constitutional Rights which are secured by the CONSTITUTION, the SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND. This Common Law Citizen has NOT harmed any party, has NOT threatened any party, and that includes has NOT threatened or caused any endangerment to the safety or well being of any party and would leave any claimant otherwise to their strictest proofs otherwise IN A COURT OF LAW. The above named Citizen is merely exercising the BASIC RIGHT TO TRAVEL UNENCUMBEred and UNFETTEred on the Common public way or highway, which is their RIGHT TO SO DO!!! Please see Zobel vs. Williams, 457 U.S. 55, held the RIGHT TO TRAVEL is Constitutionally PROTECTED!

4) Conversion of the RIGHT TO TRAVEL into a PRIVILEGE and or CRIME is A FRAUD and is in clear and direct conflict with she UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND. LAWS made by any state, which are clearly in direct CONFLICT or REPUGNANCY are UNCONSTITUTIONAL and are NOT WITH STANDING IN LAW AND ARE BEING CHALLENGED AS SUCH HERE AND THEREBY ARE NULL AND VOID OF LAW ON THEIR FACE. NO COURTS ARE BOUND TO UPHOLD SUCH FICTIONS OF LAW AND NO Citizen is bound to obey such a FICTION OF LAW. SUCH REGULATION OR LAW OPERATES AS A MERE NULLITY OR FICTION OF LAW AS IF IT NEVER EXISTED IN LAW. No CITIZEN IS BOUND TO OBEY SUCH UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAW!!!!!

5) The payment for a privilege requires a benefit to be received As the RIGHT TO TRAVEL is already secured it is clearly unlawful to cite any charges without direct damage to the specific party. Nor may a Citizen be charged with an offense for the exercise of a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT, in this case the RIGHT TO TRAVEL. Please see Miller vs. UNITED STATES 230 F2d 486 . Nor may a Citizen be denied DUE PROCESS OF LAW or EQUAL PROTECTION UNDER THE LAW.

6) The undersigned does hereby claim, declare, and certify ANY AND ALL their CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS INVIOLATE from GOD and secured in THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION and the CONSTITUTION OF THE state wherein they abode as a SOVEREIGN, COMMON LAW CITIZEN existing and acting entirely AT THE COMMON LAW, and retains ALL BASIC RIGHTS under the CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, NATURE AND NATURE'S GOD AND UNDER THE LAWS OF GOD THE SUPREME LAW GIVER.

7) ANY VIOLATOR OF THE ABOVE CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE AND CLAIM IS CRIMINALLY TRESPASSING UPON THIS ABOVE NAMED COMMON LAW Citizen and WILL BE PROSECUTED TO THE FULLEST EXTENT UNDER THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND. BE WARNED OF THE TRESPASS AND THE ATTACHED CAVEATS. ALSO TAKE CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE; IGNORANCE OF THE LAW IS NOT AN EXCUSE!

SIGNATURE OF THE ABOVE NOTED Common Law Citizen is

signed_________________________________________

WITNESS________________________________________ Date_______________

WITNESS________________________________________ Date_______________

or

NOTARY PUBLIC_________________________________ MY COMMISSION

EXPIRES____________________________

---------------------------------

Form below use for County Clerk

State: Texas

County: _______________

I, _________________________, CLERK of the County of ___________________________________, thereof do hereby certify the Citizen above named has sworn to the contents of this document and that same is TRUE AND CORRECT.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereto set my hand and affixed the SEAL of said CIRCUIT COURT, at the City of __________________________________ , MICHIGAN

this ________________day of_______________________, AD.__________

____________________________Deputy County Clerk for__________________

_____________________________COUNTY CLERK

Commerce

The Random House College Dictionary defines Commerce as:

1. an interchange of goods or commodities; 2. engaged in commerce; 3. Sexual intercourse; 4. Intellectual or spiritual interchange; communion. (The root is Latin; to trade together; com plus marcari, from merc of merz, [Merchandise], goods). Then it says, See Trade.

Blacks :Law Dictionary, fifth Edition defines Commerce as:
to exchange goods, productions, or property of any kind; the buying, selling, and exchanging of articles. Intercourse by way of trade and traffic between different peoples or states and the citizens of inhabitants thereof, including not only the purchase, sale, and exchange of commodities, but also the instrumentalities and agencies by which it is promoted and the means and applications by which it is carried on, and the transportation of persons as well as goods, both by land and sea. The term “commerce” means trade, traffic, commerce, transportation, or communication among the several states.

The word Traffic is defined in Random House College Dictionary as:
Traffic (n) 8. trade or dealing in specific commodity or service, often of an illegal nature; 9. To carry on traffic , trade, or commercial dealings. 10. To trade or deal in a specific commodity or service, often of an illegal nature. Blacks Law, Sixth Edition defines Traffic as:
Traffic. Commerce, trade, sale or exchange of merchandise, bills, money, and the like.
The definition of Traffic from the original Hebrew Kenan;
to travel as a peddler; Canaan, merchant, traffic, to bend the knee in humiliation.
Now the word traffic leads us from the Hebrew into Greek; we must go to the Greek word whore, as in Whore of Babylon, the Greek word for Whore is Pornos.
Pornos: to traverse, to traffic, to sell, a prostitute, to dispose of as merchandise or into slavery. (slavery means to be security)
The Hebrew definition for Whore is:
Whore: highly fed and therefore wanton, to commit adultery, to commit idolatry.
Next we follow the root word of West, the direction, has a similar root meaning as whore.
The Hebrew definition for the word West means:West. To roar, a sea in breaking as a noisy surf. A large river, an artificial basin; shading the area as covering; evening shadow; to give or to be security; give pledges, mortgages.
Commerce is dependent upon two other words: Value and Scarcity. Without these two words commerce falls flat and is unable to function. Create scarcity of anything and its value tends to soar. Decrease scarcity (by increasing supply of a thing) and you decrease value. This is how the power elite control our actions – by the control of scarcity and value in commerce. Supply (scarcity) and demand (value).
The Greek definition of Value is:
Value: To prize, to revere, money paid, to pay a price as a penalty; be punished with.
When money is scarce, one generates a fear that one does not have any money. However, it is the lack of money that one fears, and therefore worship, giving worth to, i.e. value to, the god of fear.
The derivation of worship is to create worth.

Entitlement Order

(7) "Entitlement holder" means a person identified in the records of a securities intermediary as the person having a security entitlement against the securities intermediary. If a person acquires a security entitlement by virtue of Section 8-501(b)(2) or (3), that person is the entitlement holder.

(8) "Entitlement order" means a notification communicated to a securities intermediary directing transfer or redemption of a financial asset to which the entitlement holder has a security entitlement.

(9) "Financial asset," except as otherwise provided in Section 8-103, means:

(i) a security;

(ii) an obligation of a person or a share, participation, or other interest in a person or in property or an enterprise of a person, which is, or is of a type, dealt in or traded on financial markets, or which is recognized in any area in which it is issued or dealt in as a medium for investment; or

(iii) any property that is held by a securities intermediary for another person in a securities account if the securities intermediary has expressly agreed with the other person that the property is to be treated as a financial asset under this Article.

As context requires, the term means either the interest itself or the means by which a person's claim to it is evidenced, including a certificated or uncertificated security, a security certificate, or a security entitlement.



Entitlement Order

Before Abraham was, I AM; the Divine Spirit having a human experience. Each atom and cell of this physical vessel I inhabit to travel across this land is infused with the spark of the Creator; I AM one with the light, one with Creator, the alpha and the omega, without beginning nor end, without time.

This third dimensional vessel, called man, the original domicile of the Divine Spirit is known on this world and in this dimension as Jeffrey of the family Anderson, a living man, freeborn peaceful inhabitant, heir to the Divine Estate, Settler and Beneficiary to the Divine Trust, freeholder in fee simple absolute, one of the 'Posterity' as expressed in the Preamble of the United States Constitution, tribunal of the Court of Record and king of my sovereign nation state.

I came into this world an Heir to the Divine Estate as one of the 'Posterity' named in the Constitution. I was born into this illusion; a world of legal fictions where assumptions stand as fact; where the truth is hidden from man like a pirates treasure buried under layer upon layer of intertwining rules, regulations and codes; where opinions are treated as law; where one is held accountable for his ignorance for his inability to ferret out the truth.

On the day of my birth while still in recovery, my mother was compelled, without full disclosure, to place my estate in trust to be administrated by the civil administration UNITED STATES in accordance with the Constitution. Acting as intermediary agent and holder in due course of the Deed for the estate trust, the STATE OF CALIFORNIA established a Charitable Trust to facilitate the lease of the estate to the 14th Amendment congress and senate, for my benefit. Said fee has been held in abeyance, in expectation, remembrance, and contemplation in law there being no person in esse, in whom it can vest and abide: though the law has considered it as always potentially existing, and ready to vest whenever a proper owner appears.


        12928

I have been lost in the sea of illusion in which I was born, my estate placed in trust. I have awakened to the truth, so long hidden from man, and now claim and redeem my estate. I have acknowledged and accepted the deed establishing my entitlement right as lawful and proper owner of the estate, the appropriate person and entitlement holder within whom the estate shall vest and abidewith exclusive right of use of all land, tenements and heredimants thereof, to have and to hold in fee simple forever.

ELECTION TO TAKE AGAINST THE WILL

It is hereby decreed and established in fact that, as Heir, I reject the benefits under the will electing to enforce my contractual rights in the estate against the will. This estate, and/or the Heir thereof, are not subject to the jurisdiction of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, the congress and senate created therein, nor the codes, regulations or statutes thereof.

Acceptance of Oath of Office

Let it be known by these words that the Oaths and bonds of all public officers are hereby accepted and confirmed and I hereby bind them to it, who by fealty and homage bear faith in opposition to all men without any saving or exception, to protect the King and his property from belligerents. I bestow my sovereign immunity on them while administering my lawful orders. This public record under the seal of a competent court is guaranteed full faith and credit per Article 4 Section 1 of your Constitution. Any officer of the public who fails to immediately execute these lawful orders admits and acknowledges warring with the Constitution and committing treason. Any/all orders or writs issued by Jeffrey of the family Anderson tribunal of the Court of Record orally or witnessed under my hand and seal is binding on all officers, courts, corporations, agencies, individuals and/or persons. Failure to immediately execute said orders and/or writs constitutes a violation of said Oath of Office and an act of war against the Constitution.

DETERMINATION OF THE LEASE

This estate trust has been administrated under pledge/ lease to the 14th Amendment Congress and Senate since its creation. It has been established as a matter of fact that the UNITED STATES has exercised the lease, creating numerous negotiable instruments based on the value of the estate, adversely effecting the estate and the proper owner thereof.

It is herein determined and decreed, by my own act and deed, that any/all pledges and/or leases of this estate, past and/or present, express or implied are hereby and herein terminated. Any/all rights, power and/or authority granted therein is hereby terminated and withdrawn. All principal and interest shall be immediately returned to the owner and a full account shall be made thereof.

DEMAND FOR DELINQUENT RENT

This estate has been in abeyance awaiting the completion of conditions president. All conditions have now been met. Demand is herein made for all delinquent rent. Payment in full satisfaction is due immediately. All principal and interest shall be immediately returned to the owner and a full account shall be made thereof.

ADMINISTRATION OF THE ESTATE

From this moment forward this estate shall be administrated under the original Constitution for the United States and the Congress and Senate created thereunder, without the 14th Amendment. This estate shall be administrated in accordance with the original intent, as a Charitable Trust, under the direction of the Settler and Beneficiary of the estate.

PURPOSE AND INTENT

This estate shall be at peace with all nations and shall strive to be always in harmony with Mother Earth; to promote growth and healing to facilitate the transition into the new world; to assist the people of the world to grow beyond the want and lack; to grow beyond the fear and doubt to bring about the birth of a world of abundance and prosperity for all mankind; a world of love and compassion; a world without limitation.

THE DEMESNE PROPERTY

This estate trust holds the Demesne lands/ properties which are to be set aside for the use of the owner, his family and staff and shall be conveyed to his possession for his immediate use. Said property shall be maintained by the trust to maintain and preserve the estate. The body of the Heir, Jeffrey of the family Anderson, is a part and parcel of the Demesne property of this estate and is inviolable.

The intermediary shall appoint a fiduciary agent to administrate the estate. Said fiduciary shall immediately introduce him/her self to the entitlement holder and establish a time and location to sit down and identify and return the Demesne property to the entitlement holder; to discuss the collection of the delinquent rent and other issues as concerns the administration of this trust.

The securities intermediary:

shall comply with an entitlement order if the entitlement order is originated by the appropriate person.........

shall act at the direction of an entitlement holder to change a security entitlement into another available form of holding for which the entitlement holder is eligible......

has the same obligation to the holder as to the owner.................

shall exercise rights with respect to a financial asset if directed to do so by an entitlement holder...............to wit: the right to elect how the estate shall be administrated; if, and to whom the estate may or may not be leased.......

So it is written, so let it be done.

By my hand and seal by my freewill act and deed.







__________________________________________________ seal

Jeffrey      Entitlement holder

       Entitlement Order  12928

IRS DEBT Validation Letter and Affidavit

  IRS Debt Validation letter and affidavit by Jeff Anderson

Discharge Reversionary Interest

First off, no one is "accessing" any "estate". The financial markets essentially are clearing houses for "liens" ... those liens are placed against the "estate" of the INFANT, which is "represented" by that Name/NAME we all use.

The (Capitis Maximus ) INFANT is presumed dead, thus the State is now "employed" to act as "conservator", investing and managing the "assets" of the INFANT, but forbidden to actually use those assets, but can "leverage" (license) them for "loans" which result in "maritime liens" against the "estate" under conservator-ship by the State who is also "guardian" of those "interests" or "estate".

A "contract", since all "title" and "consideration" has been "re-moved" from "circulation", now exists as a "trust" and only "interests" are "exchanged" ... it is who has what interest that determines the "taxable value" or "income" from the "transaction".

trust = contract
corpus = object of contract
income = value of exchange
beneficiary = one who should receive either corpus or income
trustee = one who should have gotten paid or representative of such
grantor = owner of contract because the "rights" revert to the "estate" from which they originated

estate = interest in property

property = registered infant

birth = the act of a parent in exposing an infant of tender years (usually under seven) in any place, with intent wholly to desert it. [Birth Record = abandoned infant]



the "presumption of death" serves as the means by which the State adminsitrates the estate under a conservatorship the infant estate is always a ward ... it the terms of use one negotiates for a contractual nexus - that needs to occur and in every contract, there are actually two trusts operating side by side as the trustee of one trust is the beneficiary of the second. People forget about this "duality aspect".

You see that word "revert"? This is an "interest" of the "estate" and according to "tax law"


According to 26 USC § 2037 (b ) the term "reversionary interest" includes a possibility that property transferred by the decedent:

(1) may return to him or his estate, or

(2) may be subject to a power of disposition by him,

but such term does not include a possibility that the income alone from such property may return to him or become subject to a power of disposition by him.




26 USC § 673 - Reversionary interests
(a ) General rule
The grantor shall be treated as the owner of any portion of a trust in which he has a reversionary interest in either the corpus or the income therefrom, if, as of the inception of that portion of the trust, the value of such interest exceeds 5 percent of the value of such portion.

Reversionary Interest Definition:
Any interest, vested or contingent, the enjoyment of which is postponed.

Seisin in law …."Livery" (or delivery) by "seisin in law" occurred when the parties to the transaction went within sight of the land to be conveyed and the transferor declared to the recipient that possession had been granted. This constituted however only an incomplete conveyance. (such as "birth event registration”)

The phrase "to sue one's livery" refers to the formal recognition of a noble's majority, in exchange of payment, for conferring the powers attached to his title, and thereby freeing him from dependence as a ward.

"Reversionary Interest" is the "payment" to be "exchanged" to "confer the power attached to the title" and "free from dependence as a ward"

For thus saith the LORD, Ye have sold yourselves for nought; and ye shall be redeemed without money. - Isaiah 52:3


Since the “estate” of the INFANT, the entity created during the birth event, has been probated, there is an operational presumption that "decedent" (INFANT) could return, and the possibility gives rise to what is known and described as "reversionary interest" and because the "estate" of that INFANT has been held under "conservatorship" of which the State is "guardian", all transactions regarding the "estate" result in a "de facto" (in actual practice and operation) "maritime lien" against said estate. Federal Reserve Notes are "de facto" or "in fact" maritime liens against the property and assets of the people of the nation. Don't take my word for it, go look it up. It is right there in the Treasury website.

The "stocks, bonds, etc ..." being traded as the people in these groups like to chase via the CUSIP crap, are actually the result of the "monetization equation" regarding those liens in order to facilitate commerce as those "debts" have never been settled. As such, those liens remain attached to a "decedent's estate" and the only way those funds are "released" is by either A) a death certificate is issued (IE: via war, which the "liquidation" of the "delinquent creditors"; the people) or B) the "purchaser" of those interests settles up, which is us when we use the name because now a 'living man' or 'natural person' is using it, thus is either "purchaser" or "de facto nominee over the executor-ship of the estate"; either way, the "lien" becomes due because of that "reversionary interest".

Once the "decedent" comes forth, or at least the one who "purchased" those interests, the entirety of the estate "reverts" to the "purchaser", including all reversionary interests, which amount to the right, duty, and obligation to settle those liens against the estate to release the assets contained within. It is that interest, reversionary interest, of which must be “assigned to and for the account of the United States” which will allow 12 USC 95a(2) to kick in and also cause the State to release the funds from conservatorship and credit the "memory" or "reputation" of SSN account so any "transaction" utilizing that account will automatically zero out; acquitting the debt (payment) and discharging the property from duty (under martial law) allowing the "law" to fall away.

This is akin to the little old lady who gave 100% while the wealthy businessman gave 10% and while his actual contribution was much greater in quantity, the little lady gave 100%, uniting all jurisdictions and fulfilling the law, thus she was protected....one becomes an asset in commerce (by allowing for the fulfillment of contracts) by becoming a liability in capitalism (resulting no sin/debt for monetization (to make one salt of the earth or merchandise (chattel property))).

Think Lot and his wife ... can you be "one righteous man"? or will you look back?

It is the "last jot and tiddle" so one can finally "escape" "purgatory".

The trees will yield their fruit and the ground will yield its crops; the people will be secure in their land. They will know that I am the LORD, when I break the bars of their yoke and rescue them from the hands of those who enslaved them. - Ezekiel 34:27

For you know that it was not with perishable things such as silver or gold that you were redeemed from the empty way of life handed down to you from your ancestors - 1 Peter 1:18

 Revelation 2:10 "Be thou faithful unto death and I will give you a crown of life." Your wealth and your treasures I will give as plunder, without charge, because of all your sins throughout your country. - Jeremiah 15:13

The Power Of Commercial Liens (STOP THE PIRATES)

Asking Cops The Same Silly Questions They Ask Us, Cop Car Searched

America 'Dead Last' In Education

Trading With the Enemy Act

In 1917, under President Woodrow Wilson, the U.S. Congress passed legislation titled Trading With the Enemy Act.  The objective was to stop any American from trading with our enemies and the allies of our enemies, during  World War I.

Sec. 2(c) of the act defined "enemy" as foreigners and countries who were at war with the United States.  It specifically excluded American citizens as enemies.  Sec. 5(b) specifically excluded transactions of the American people. 

Public Law No. 65-91

(40 Stat. L. 411)

October 6, 1917

CHAP. 106. - An Act To define, regulate, and punish

trading with the enemy, and for other purposes.

Sec. 2(c) - Such other individuals, or body or class of individuals, as may be natives, citizens, or subjects of any nation with which the United States is at war, other than citizens of the United States, wherever resident or wherever doing business, as the President, if he shall find the safety of the United States or the successful prosecution of the war shall so require, may, by proclamation, include within the term "enemy."

Sec. 5(b) - That the President may investigate, regulate or prohibit, under such rules as he may prescribe by means of foreign exchange, export or earmarkings of gold or silver coin or bullion or currency, transfers of credit in any form other than credits relating to transactions to be executed wholly within the United States..."

The war powers were terminated following World War I, in 1921.  However, The Trading With the Enemy Act of 1917 was granted an exemption.

The "Roaring Twenties," then arrived, a decade of greed and decadence.  This culminated with the notorious stock market crash of '29.  Franklin D. Roosevelt was placed in the White House.   Speaking of the economic crisis during his inaugural address, Roosevelt said, "...I shall ask the Congress for the one remaining instrument to meet the crisis - broad Executive power to wage war against the emergency, as great as the power that would be given me if we were in fact invaded by a foreign foe."

On March 6, 1933, President Roosevelt relied on Sec. 5(b) of the Trading With the Enemy Act as authority for his Proclamation 2039 which closed all banks for five days. This was clearly a time of financial crisis, not of war, and hence was not within the literal terms and purposes of the Act.  Importantly, the Act was amended so as to include every citizen and every transaction and any form of national emergency.

Trading With the Enemy Act Sec. 5(b)

"During time of war or any other period of national emergency declared by the President, the President may, through any agency that he may designate, or otherwise, investigate, regulate, or prohibit, under such rules and regulations as he may prescribe, by means of licenses or otherwise, any transactions in foreign exchange, transfers of credit between or payments by banking institutions as defined by the President, and export, hoarding, melting, or earmarkings of gold or silver coin or bullion or currency by any person within the United States or any place subject to the jurisdiction thereof; and the President may require any person engaged in any transaction referred to in this subdivision to furnish under oath, complete information relative thereto, including the production of any books of account, contracts, letters or other papers in connection therewith in the custody or control of such person, either before or after such transaction is completed "

On March 9, 1933, Roosevelt issued Proclamation 2040.   It referred to the national emergency and again asserted Sec. 5(b) as authority for it.  Roosevelt then proclaimed that the Proclamation of March 6, 1933, would remain in full force and effect until proclamation by the president.  It remains in force to this day.

Therefore, an effectively permanent law exists that allows the president, by declaring an emergency, to assume the role of dictator.  He may designate agencies of his choice to investigate, regulate, and license any transaction of any person (enemy) within the United States, by means of rules and regulations he may prescribe.

In the event the reader has lingering doubt concerning the nature and effect of the Trading With the Enemy Act, it is suggested that he read Senate Report 93-549.

From Senate Report 93-549:

A majority of the people of the United States have lived all their lives under emergency rule. For almost 40 years, freedoms and governmental procedures guaranteed by the Constitution have, in varying degrees, been abridged by laws brought in force by states of national emergency.

The New World Order

The Tower of Basel The Secret Bank that Runs the World

Over the centuries there have been many stories, some based on loose facts, others based on hearsay, conjecture, speculation and outright lies, about groups of people who "control the world." Some of these are partially accurate, others are wildly hyperbolic, but when it comes to the historic record, nothing comes closer to the stereotypical, secretive group determining the fate of over 7 billion people, than the Bank of International Settlements, which hides in such plain sight, that few have ever paid much attention.





This is their story.

First unofficial meeting of the BIS Board of Directors in Basel, April 1930

* * *

The following is an excerpt from TOWER OF BASEL: The Shadowy History of the Secret Bank that Runs the World by Adam LeBor.  Reprinted with permission from PublicAffairs.

The world’s most exclusive club has eighteen members. They gather every other month on a Sunday evening at 7 p.m. in conference room E in a circular tower block whose tinted windows overlook the central Basel railway station. Their discussion lasts for one hour, perhaps an hour and a half. Some of those present bring a colleague with them, but the aides rarely speak during this most confidential of conclaves. The meeting closes, the aides leave, and those remaining retire for dinner in the dining room on the eighteenth floor, rightly confident that the food and the wine will be superb. The meal, which continues until 11 p.m. or midnight, is where the real work is done. The protocol and hospitality, honed for more than eight decades, are faultless. Anything said at the dining table, it is understood, is not to be repeated elsewhere.

Few, if any, of those enjoying their haute cuisine and grand cru wines— some of the best Switzerland can offer—would be recognized by passers-by, but they include a good number of the most powerful people in the world. These men—they are almost all men—are central bankers. They have come to Basel to attend the Economic Consultative Committee (ECC) of the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), which is the bank for central banks. Its current members [ZH: as of 2013] include Ben Bernanke, the chairman of the US Federal Reserve; Sir Mervyn King, the governor of the Bank of England; Mario Draghi, of the European Central Bank; Zhou Xiaochuan of the Bank of China; and the central bank governors of Germany, France, Italy, Sweden, Canada, India, and Brazil. Jaime Caruana, a former governor of the Bank of Spain, the BIS’s general manager, joins them.

In early 2013, when this book went to press, King, who is due to step down as governor of the Bank of England in June 2013, chaired the ECC. The ECC, which used to be known as the G-10 governors’ meeting, is the most influential of the BIS’s numerous gatherings, open only to a small, select group of central bankers from advanced economies. The ECC makes recommendations on the membership and organization of the three BIS committees that deal with the global financial system, payments systems, and international markets. The committee also prepares proposals for the Global Economy Meeting and guides its agenda.

That meeting starts at 9:30 a.m. on Monday morning, in room B and lasts for three hours. There King presides over the central bank governors of the thirty countries judged the most important to the global economy. In addition to those who were present at the Sunday evening dinner, Monday’s meeting will include representatives from, for example, Indonesia, Poland, South Africa, Spain, and Turkey. Governors from fifteen smaller countries, such as Hungary, Israel, and New Zealand are allowed to sit in as observers, but do not usually speak. Governors from the third tier of member banks, such as Macedonia and Slovakia, are not allowed to attend. Instead they must forage for scraps of information at coffee and meal breaks.

The governors of all sixty BIS member banks then enjoy a buffet lunch in the eighteenth-floor dining room. Designed by Herzog & de Meuron, the Swiss architectural firm which built the “Bird’s Nest” Stadium for the Beijing Olympics, the dining room has white walls, a black ceiling and spectacular views over three countries: Switzerland, France, and Germany. At 2 p.m. the central bankers and their aides return to room B for the governors’ meeting to discuss matters of interest, until the gathering ends at 5.

King takes a very different approach than his predecessor, Jean-Claude Trichet, the former president of the European Central Bank, in chairing the Global Economy Meeting. Trichet, according to one former central banker, was notably Gallic in his style: a stickler for protocol who called the central bankers to speak in order of importance, starting with the governors of the Federal Reserve, the Bank of England, and the Bundesbank, and then progressing down the hierarchy. King, in contrast, adopts a more thematic and egalitarian approach: throwing open the meetings for discussion and inviting contributions from all present.

The governors’ conclaves have played a crucial role in determining the world’s response to the global financial crisis. “The BIS has been a very important meeting point for central bankers during the crisis, and the rationale for its existence has expanded,” said King. “We have had to face challenges that we have never seen before. We had to work out what was going on, what instruments do we use when interest rates are close to zero, how do we communicate policy. We discuss this at home with our staff, but it is very valuable for the governors themselves to get together and talk among themselves.”

Those discussions, say central bankers, must be confidential. “When you are at the top in the number one post, it can be pretty lonely at times. It is helpful to be able to meet other number ones and say, ‘This is my problem, how do you deal with it?’” King continued. “Being able to talk informally and openly about our experiences has been immensely valuable. We are not speaking in a public forum. We can say what we really think and believe, and we can ask questions and benefit from others.”

The BIS management works hard to ensure that the atmosphere is friendly and clubbable throughout the weekend, and it seems they succeed. The bank arranges a fleet of limousines to pick up the governors at Zürich airport and bring them to Basel. Separate breakfasts, lunches, and dinners are organized for the governors of national banks who oversee different types and sizes of national economies, so no one feels excluded. “The central bankers were more at home and relaxed with their fellow central bankers than with their own governments,” recalled Paul Volcker, the former chairman of the US Federal Reserve, who at- tended the Basel weekends. The superb quality of the food and wine made for an easy camaraderie, said Peter Akos Bod, a former governor of the National Bank of Hungary. “The main topics of discussion were the quality of the wine and the stupidity of finance ministers. If you had no knowledge of wine you could not join in the conversation.”

And the conversation is usually stimulating and enjoyable, say central bankers. The contrast between the Federal Open Markets Committee at  the US Federal Reserve, and the Sunday evening G-10 governors’ dinners was notable, recalled Laurence Meyer, who served as a member of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve from 1996 until 2002. The chairman of the Federal Reserve did not always represent the bank at the Basel meetings, so Meyer occasionally attended. The BIS discussions were always lively, focused and thought provoking. “At FMOC meetings, while I was at the Fed, almost all the Committee members read statements which had been prepared in advance. They very rarely referred to statements by other Committee members and there was almost never an exchange between two members or an ongoing discussion about the outlook or policy options. At BIS dinners people actually talk to each other and the discussions are always stimulating and interactive focused on the serious issues facing the global economy.”

All the governors present at the two-day gathering are assured of total confidentiality, discretion, and the highest levels of security. The meetings take place on several floors that are usually used only when the governors are in attendance. The governors are provided with a dedicated office and the necessary support and secretarial staff. The Swiss authorities have no juridisdiction over the BIS premises. Founded by an international treaty, and further protected by the 1987 Headquarters Agreement with the Swiss government, the BIS enjoys similar protections to those granted to the headquarters of the United Nations, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and diplomatic embassies. The Swiss authorities need the permission of the BIS management to enter the bank’s buildings, which are described as “inviolable.”

The BIS has the right to communicate in code and to send and receive correspondence in bags covered by the same protection as embassies, meaning they cannot be opened. The BIS is exempt from Swiss taxes. Its employees do not have to pay income tax on their salaries, which are usually generous, designed to compete with the private sector. The general man- ager’s salary in 2011 was 763,930 Swiss francs, while head of departments were paid 587,640 per annum, plus generous allowances. The bank’s extraordinary legal privileges also extend to its staff and directors. Senior managers enjoy a special status, similar to that of diplomats, while carrying out their duties in Switzerland, which means their bags cannot be searched (unless there is evidence of a blatant criminal act), and their papers are inviolable. The central bank governors traveling to Basel for the bimonthly meetings enjoy the same status while in Switzerland. All bank officials are immune under Swiss law, for life, for all the acts carried out during the discharge of their duties. The bank is a popular place to work and not just because of the salaries. Around six hundred staff come from over fifty countries. The atmosphere is multi-national and cosmopolitan, albeit very Swiss, emphasizing the bank’s hierarchy. Like many of those working for the UN or the IMF, some of the staff of the BIS, especially senior management, are driven by a sense of mission, that they are working for a higher, even celestial purpose and so are immune from normal considerations of accountability and transparency.

The bank’s management has tried to plan for every eventuality so that the Swiss police need never be called. The BIS headquarters has high-tech sprinkler systems with multiple back-ups, in-house medical facilities, and its own bomb shelter in the event of a terrorist attack or armed conflagration. The BIS’s assets are not subject to civil claims under Swiss law and can never be seized.

The BIS strictly guards the bankers’ secrecy. The minutes, agenda, and actual attendance list of the Global Economy Meeting or the ECC are not released in any form. This is because no official minutes are taken, although the bankers sometimes scribble their own notes. Sometimes there will be a brief press conference or bland statement afterwards but never anything detailed. This tradition of privileged confidentiality reaches back to the bank’s foundation.

“The quietness of Basel and its absolutely nonpolitical character provide a perfect setting for those equally quiet and nonpolitical gatherings,” wrote one American official in 1935. “The regularity of the meetings and their al- most unbroken attendance by practically every member of the Board make them such they rarely attract any but the most meager notice in the press.”8 Forty years on, little had changed. Charles Coombs, a former foreign exchange chief of the New York Federal Reserve, attended governors’ meetings from 1960 to 1975. The bankers who were allowed inside the inner sanctum of the governors’ meetings trusted each other absolutely, he recalled in his memoirs. “However much money was involved, no agreements were ever signed nor memoranda of understanding ever initialized. The word of each official was sufficient, and there were never any disappointments.”

What, then, does this matter to the rest of us? Bankers have been gathering confidentially since money was first invented. Central bankers like to view themselves as the high priests of finance, as technocrats overseeing arcane monetary rituals and a financial liturgy understood only by a small, self-selecting elite.

But the governors who meet in Basel every other month are public servants. Their salaries, airplane tickets, hotel bills, and lucrative pensions when they retire are paid out of the public purse. The national reserves held by central banks are public money, the wealth of nations. The central bankers’ discussions at the BIS, the information that they share, the policies that are evaluated, the opinions that are exchanged, and the subsequent decisions that are taken, are profoundly political. Central bankers, whose independence is constitutionally protected, control monetary policy in the developed world. They manage the supply of money to national economies. They set interest rates, thus deciding the value of our savings and investments. They decide whether to focus on austerity or growth. Their decisions shape our lives.

The BIS’s tradition of secrecy reaches back through the decades. During the 1960s, for example, the bank hosted the London Gold Pool. Eight countries pledged to manipulate the gold market to keep the price at around thirty-five dollars per ounce, in line with the provisions of the Bretton Woods Accord that governed the post–World War II international financial system. Although the London Gold Pool no longer exists, its successor is the BIS Markets Committee, which meets every other month on the occasion of the governors’ meetings to discuss trends in the financial markets. Officials from twenty-one central banks attend. The committee releases occasional papers, but its agenda and discussions remain secret.

Nowadays the countries represented at the Global Economy Meetings together account for around four-fifths of global gross domestic product (GDP)— most of the produced wealth of the world—according to the BIS’s own statistics. Central bankers now “seem more powerful than politicians,” wrote The Economist newspaper, “holding the destiny of the global economy in their hands.” How did this happen? The BIS, the world’s most secretive global financial institution, can claim much of the credit. From its first day of existence, the BIS has dedicated itself to furthering the interests of central banks and building the new architecture of transnational finance. In doing so, it has spawned a new class of close-knit global technocrats whose members glide between highly-paid positions at the BIS, the IMF, and central and commercial banks.

The founder of the technocrats’ cabal was Per Jacobssen, the Swedish economist who served as the BIS’s economic adviser from 1931 to 1956. The bland title belied his power and reach. Enormously influential, well connected, and highly regarded by his peers, Jacobssen wrote the first BIS annual reports, which were—and remain—essential reading throughout the world’s treasuries. Jacobssen was an early supporter of European federalism. He argued relentlessly against inflation, excessive government spending, and state intervention in the economy. Jacobssen left the BIS in 1956 to take over the IMF. His legacy still shapes our world. The consequences of his mix of economic liberalism, price obsession, and dismantling of national sovereignty play out nightly in the European news bulletins on our television screens.

The BIS’s defenders deny that the organization is secretive. The bank’s archives are open and researchers may consult most documents that are more than thirty years old. The BIS archivists are indeed cordial, helpful, and professional. The bank’s website includes all its annual reports, which are downloadable, as well as numerous policy papers produced by the bank’s highly regarded research department. The BIS publishes detailed accounts of the securities and derivatives markets, and international banking statistics. But these are largely compilations and analyses of information already in the public domain. The details of the bank’s own core activities, including much of its banking operations for its customers, central banks, and international organizations, remain secret. The Global Economy Meetings and the other crucial financial gatherings that take place at Basel, such as the Markets Committee, remain closed to outsiders. Private individuals may not hold an account at BIS, unless they work for the bank. The bank’s opacity, lack of accountability, and ever-increasing influence raises profound questions— not just about monetary policy but transparency, accountability, and how power is exercised in our democracies.

* * *

WHEN I EXPLAINED to friends and acquaintances that I was writing a book about the Bank for International Settlements, the usual response was a puzzled look, followed by a question: “The bank for what?” My interlocutors were intelligent people, who follow current affairs. Many had some interest in and understanding of the global economy and financial crisis. Yet only a handful had heard of the BIS. This was strange, as the BIS is the most important bank in the world and predates both the IMF and the World Bank. For decades it has stood at the center of a global network of money, power, and covert global influence.

The BIS was founded in 1930. It was ostensibly set up as part of the Young Plan to administer German reparations payments for the First World War. The bank’s key architects were Montagu Norman, who was the governor of the Bank of England, and Hjalmar Schacht, the president of the Reichsbank who described the BIS as “my” bank. The BIS’s founding members were the central banks of Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Belgium, and a consortium of Japanese banks. Shares were also offered to the Federal Reserve, but the United States, suspicious of anything that might infringe on its national sovereignty, refused its allocation. Instead a consortium of commercial banks took up the shares: J. P. Morgan, the First National Bank of New York, and the First National Bank of Chicago.

The real purpose of the BIS was detailed in its statutes: to “promote the cooperation of central banks and to provide additional facilities for international financial operations.” It was the culmination of the central bankers’ decades-old dream, to have their own bank—powerful, independent, and free from interfering politicians and nosy reporters. Most felicitous of all, the BIS was self-financing and would be in perpetuity. Its clients were its own founders and shareholders— the central banks. During the 1930s, the BIS was the central meeting place for a cabal of central bankers, dominated by Norman and Schacht. This group helped rebuild Germany. The New York Times described Schacht, widely acknowledged as the genius behind the resurgent German economy, as “The Iron-Willed Pilot of Nazi Finance.” During the war, the BIS became a de-facto arm of the Reichsbank, accepting looted Nazi gold and carrying out foreign exchange deals for Nazi Germany.

The bank’s alliance with Berlin was known in Washington, DC, and London. But the need for the BIS to keep functioning, to keep the new channels of transnational finance open, was about the only thing all sides agreed on. Basel was the perfect location, as it is perched on the northern edge of Switzerland and sits al- most on the French and German borders. A few miles away, Nazi and Allied soldiers were fighting and dying. None of that mattered at the BIS. Board meetings were suspended, but relations between the BIS staff of the belligerent nations remained cordial, professional, and productive. Nationalities were irrelevant. The overriding loyalty was to international finance. The president, Thomas McKittrick, was an American. Roger Auboin, the general manager, was French. Paul Hechler, the assistant general manager, was a member of the Nazi party and signed his correspondence “Heil Hitler.” Rafaelle Pilotti, the secretary general, was Italian. Per Jacobssen, the bank’s influential economic adviser, was Swedish. His and Pilotti’s deputies were British.

After 1945, five BIS directors, including Hjalmar Schacht, were charged with war crimes. Germany lost the war but won the economic peace, in large part thanks to the BIS. The international stage, contacts, banking networks, and legitimacy the BIS provided, first to the Reichsbank and then to its successor banks, has helped ensure the continuity of immensely powerful financial and economic interests from the Nazi era to the present day.

* * *

FOR THE FIRST forty-seven years of its existence, from 1930 to 1977, the BIS was based in a former hotel, near the Basel central railway station. The bank’s entrance was tucked away by a chocolate shop, and only a small notice confirmed that the narrow doorway opened into the BIS. The bank’s managers believed that those who needed to know where the BIS was would find it, and the rest of the world certainly did not need to know. The inside of the building changed little over the decades, recalled Charles Coombs. The BIS provided the “the spartan accommodations of a former Victorian-style hotel whose single and double bedrooms had been transformed into offices simply by removing the beds and installing desks.”

The bank moved into its current headquarters, at 2, Centralbahnplatz, in 1977. It did not go far and now overlooks the Basel central station. Nowadays the BIS’s main mission, in its own words, is threefold: “to serve central banks in their pursuit of monetary and financial stability, to foster international cooperation in these areas, and to act as a bank for central banks.” The BIS also hosts much of the practical and technical infrastructure that the global network of central banks and their commercial counterparts need to function smoothly. It has two linked trading rooms: at the Basel headquarters and Hong Kong regional office. The BIS buys and sells gold and foreign exchange for its clients. It provides asset management and arranges short-term credit to central banks when needed.

The BIS is a unique institution: an international organization, an extremely profitable bank and a research institute founded, and protected, by international treaties. The BIS is accountable to its customers and shareholders—the central banks—but also guides their operations. The main tasks of a central bank, the BIS argues, are to control the flow of credit and the volume of currency in circulation, which will ensure a stable business climate, and to keep exchange rates within manageable bands to ensure the value of a currency and so smooth international trade and capital movements. This is crucial, especially in a globalized economy, where markets react in microseconds and perceptions of economic stability and value are almost as important as reality itself.

The BIS also helps to supervise commercial banks, although it has no legal powers over them. The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, based at the BIS, regulates commercial banks’ capital and liquidity requirements. It requires banks to have a minimum capital of eight percent of risk-weighted assets when lending, meaning that if a bank has risk-weighted assets of $100 million it must maintain at least $8 million capital. The committee has no powers of enforcement, but it does have enormous moral authority. “This regulation is so powerful that the eight percent principle has been set into national laws,” said Peter Akos Bod. “It’s like voltage. Voltage has been set at 220. You may decide on ninety-five volts, but it would not work.” In theory, sensible housekeeping and mutual cooperation, overseen by the BIS, will keep the global financial system functioning smoothly. In theory.

The reality is that we have moved beyond recession into a deep structural crisis, one fueled by the banks’ greed and rapacity, which threatens all of our financial security. Just as in the 1930s, parts of Europe face economic collapse. The Bundesbank and the European Central Bank, two of the most powerful members of the BIS, have driven the mania for austerity that has already forced one European country, Greece, to the edge, aided by the venality and corruption of the country’s ruling class. Others may soon follow. The old order is creaking, its political and financial institutions corroding from within. From Oslo to Athens, the far right is resurgent, fed in part by soaring poverty and unemployment. Anger and cynicism are corroding citizens’ faith in democracy and the rule of law. Once again, the value of property and assets is vaporizing before their owners’ eyes. The European currency is threatened with breakdown, while those with money seek safe haven in Swiss francs or gold. The young, the talented, and the mobile are again fleeing their home countries for new lives abroad. The powerful forces of international capital that brought the BIS into being, and which granted the bank its power and influence, are again triumphant.

The BIS sits at the apex of an international financial system that is falling apart at the seams, but its officials argue that it does not have the power to act as an international financial regulator. Yet the BIS cannot escape its responsibility for the Euro-zone crisis. From the first agreements in the late 1940s on multilateral payments to the establishment of the Europe Central Bank in 1998, the BIS has been at the heart of the European integration project, providing technical expertise and the financial mechanisms for currency harmonization. During the 1950s, it managed the European Payments Union, which internationalized the continent’s payment system. The BIS hosted the Governors’ Committee of European Economic Community central bankers, set up in 1964, which coordinated trans-European monetary policy. During the 1970s, the BIS ran the “Snake,” the mechanism by which European currencies were held in exchange rate bands. During the 1980s the BIS hosted the Delors Committee, whose report in 1988 laid out the path to European Monetary Union and the adoption of a single currency. The BIS midwifed the European Monetary Institute (EMI), the precursor of the European Central Bank. The EMI’s president was Alexandre Lamfalussy, one of the world’s most influential economists, known as the “Father of the euro.” Before joining the EMI in 1994, Lamfalussy had worked at the BIS for seventeen years, first as economic adviser, then as the bank’s general manager.

For a staid, secretive organization, the BIS has proved surprisingly nimble. It survived the first global depression, the end of reparations payments and the gold standard (two of its main reasons for existence), the rise of Nazism, the Second World War, the Bretton Woods Accord, the Cold War, the financial crises of the 1980s and 1990s, the birth of the IMF and World Bank, and the end of Communism. As Malcolm Knight, manager from 2003–2008, noted, “It is encouraging to see that—by remaining small, flexible, and free from political interference—the Bank has, throughout its history, succeeded remarkably well in adapting itself to evolving circumstances.”

The bank has made itself a central pillar of the global financial system. As well as the Global Economy Meetings, the BIS hosts four of the most important international committees dealing with global banking: the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, the Committee on the Global Financial System, the Committee on Payment and Settlement Systems, and the Irving Fisher Committee, which deals with central banking statistics. The bank also hosts three independent organizations: two groups dealing with insurance and the Financial Stability Board (FSB). The FSB, which coordinates national financial authorities and regulatory policies, is already being spoken of as the fourth pillar of the global financial system, after the BIS, the IMF and the commercial banks.

The BIS is now the world’s thirtieth-largest holder of gold reserves, with 119 metric tons—more than Qatar, Brazil, or Canada. Membership of the BIS remains a privilege rather than a right. The board of directors is responsible for admitting central banks judged to “make a substantial contribution to international monetary cooperation and to the Bank’s activities.” China, India, Russia, and Saudi Arabia joined only in 1996. The bank has opened offices in Mexico City and Hong Kong but remains very Eurocentric. Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Slovenia, and Slovakia (total population 16.2 million) have been admitted, while Pakistan (population 169 million) has not. Nor has Kazakhstan, which is a powerhouse of Central Asia. In Africa only Algeria and South Africa are members—Nigeria, which has the continent’s second-largest economy, has not been admitted. (The BIS’s defenders say that it demands high governance standards from new members and when the national banks of countries such as Nigeria and Pakistan reach those standards, they will be considered for membership.)

Considering the BIS’s pivotal role in the transnational economy, its low profile is remarkable. Back in 1930 a New York Times reporter noted that the culture of secrecy at the BIS was so strong that he was not permitted to look inside the boardroom, even after the directors had left. Little has changed. Journalists are not allowed inside the headquarters while the Global Economy Meeting is underway. BIS officials speak rarely on the record, and reluctantly, to members of the press. The strategy seems to work. The Occupy Wall Street movement, the anti-globalizers, the social network protesters have ignored the BIS. Centralbahnplatz 2, Basel, is quiet and tranquil. There are no demonstrators gathered outside the BIS’s headquarters, no protestors camped out in the nearby park, no lively reception committees for the world’s central bankers.

As the world’s economy lurches from crisis to crisis, financial institutions are scrutinized as never before. Legions of reporters, bloggers, and investigative journalists scour the banks’ every move. Yet somehow, apart from brief mentions on the financial pages, the BIS has largely managed to avoid critical scrutiny. Until now.

ACCESS YOUR UNLIMITED CREDIT 6-30-21

 

United States Tax Farm

NOTICE" TO PUBLIC SERVANTS intending to violate my free rights under law:

"NOTICE" TO PUBLIC SERVANTS intending to violate my free rights under law:

The Bearer, being an un-enfranchised Sovereign, is authorized under statute at large, First Congress 1789, Session 1, Chapters, page 52; Articles of Confederation, Article 4-3-1-1781; MC 38: Title 18, Section 241, USC Title 42, Section 1983, 1985, 1986, of the unhampered use of all navigable waters and all common law highways, roadways, and byways which are used for transport either private, public, or commerce anywhere in these United 50 States of America. Said driver/operator is affirmed in obedience for the protection of the Constitution for the United States of America and may be detained only upon sworn complaint of an injured party as per the Bill of Rights, Article IV, and common law. The undersigned claims his rights at law as a Sovereign citizen (NOT a resident) of Colorado state, and rejects, and is not subject to, the contract obligations in equity known as the Motor Vehicle Codes of the respective states, via U.C.C. 1.

Notice: The "driver’s license" demanded, and provided under duress, which is issued by the state of Colorado, is NOT legally issued to me as a secured party with respect to the named party on the license, JEFFREY T. MAEHR, in all caps.

Case Law: (Emphasis mine throughout)

Americans' "freedom to travel throughout the United States has long been recognized as a basic right under the Constitution," according to multiple cases including Williams v Fears, 179 US 270, 274; 21 S Ct 128; 45 L Ed 186 (1900); Twining v New Jersey, 211 US 78, 97; 29 S Ct 14; 53 L Ed 97 (1908), as listed in the case of United States v Guest, 383 US 745; 86 S Ct 1170; 16 L Ed 2d 239 (1968), a case involving criminally prosecuting people for obstructing the right (obstruction is a federal crime pursuant to federal criminal law 18 USC 241).

Case law shows that the "liberty" protected by the Fourteenth Amendment extends beyond freedom from bodily restraint and includes a much wider range of human activity, including but not limited to the opportunity to make a wide range of personal decisions concerning one's life, family, and private pursuits. See Meyer v, 262 US 390, 399; 43 SCt 625, 626; 67 L Ed 1043 (1923), and Roe v Wade, 410 US 113, 152-153; 93 S Ct 705, 726-727; 35 L Ed 2d 147 (1973). One of these life, family, private pursuits is obviously driving.

In effect, as per the Supreme Court decision in the case of Crandall v Nevada, 73 US 35; 18 L Ed (1867), speed limits and other traffic control devices, being non-fact-based, are simply an unlawful tax or impost on travel, and thus unconstitutional for the reason cited in Crandall. (Crandall involved a tax on travelers! which is what in essence speed limits, unscientific stop signs, etc., simply are, stripped of all the phony fraudulent politician folderol pretending them to relate somehow to safety, not to mention that are extortion violating the federal anti-racketeering act (RICO), 18 USC 1961 and the law against obstructing federal rights, 18 USC 241).

42-2-101. Licenses for drivers required.


(1) Except as otherwise provided in part 4 of this article for commercial drivers...

Colorado Article 42-2-101 clearly states, licensing is for commercial drivers, not private citizens..

"...For while a citizen has the right to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, that right does not extend to the use of the highways...as a place for private gain. For the latter purpose, no person has a vested right to use the highways of this state, but it is a privilege...which the (state) may grant or withhold at its discretion..." State v. Johnson, 245 P 1073.

"The right to travel is a part of the liberty of which a citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment."

"Undoubtedly the right of locomotion, the right to remove from one place to another according to inclination, is an attribute of personal liberty, and the right, ordinarily, of free transit from or through the territory of any State is a right secured by the l4th Amendment and by other provisions of the Constitution." - Schactman v Dulles, 96 App D.C. 287, 293.

"The right to travel is part of the Liberty of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment." Kent v. Dulles 357 U.S. 116, 125. Reaffirmed in Zemel v. Rusk 33 US 1.

"Where activities or enjoyment, natural and often necessary to the well being of an American citizen, such as travel, are involved, we will construe narrowly all delegated powers that curtail or dilute them... to repeat, we deal here with a constitutional right of the citizen..." Edwards v. California 314 US 160 (1941).

"Even the legislature has no power to deny to a citizen the right to travel upon the highway and transport his property in the ordinary course of his business or pleasure, though this right may be regulated in accordance with the public interest and convenience. - Chicago Motor Coach v Chicago, 169 NE 22 ("Regulated" here means stop lights, signs, etc. NOT a privilege that requires permission or unconstitutional taxation; i.e. - licensing, mandatory insurance, vehicle registration, etc., requiring financial consideration, which are more illegal taxes.)

"The right of the citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city may prohibit or permit at will, but a common right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."- Thompson v Smith, 154 SE 579.

"The right to travel is protected by the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment."

"Right to travel is constitutionally protected against private as well as public encroachment."

Volunteer Medical Clinic, Inc. V. Operation Rescue, 948 F2d 218; International Org. Of Masters, Etc. V. Andrews, 831, F2d 843; Zobel v. Williams, 457 US 55, 102 Sct. 2309.

"The right to make use of an automobile as a vehicle of travel along the highways of the state, is no longer an open question. The owners thereof have the same rights in the roads and streets as the drivers of horses or those riding a bicycle or traveling in some vehicle." House v. Cramer, 1 12 N. W. 3; 134 Iowa 374 (1907).

"License: In the law of contracts, is a permission, accorded by a competent authority, conferring the right to do some act which without such authorization would be illegal, or would be a trespass or tort." Blacks Law Dictionary, 2nd Ed. (1910).

"The license means to confer on a person the right to do something which otherwise he would not have the right to do." City of Louisville v. Sebree, 214 S.W. 2D 248; 308 Ky. 420.

"The object of a license is to confer a right or power which does not exist without it." Pavne v. Massev, 196 S.W. 2D 493; 145 Tex. 273; Shuman v. City of Ft. Wayne, 127 Indiana 109; 26 NE 560, 561 (1891); 194 So 569 (1940).

"A license is a mere permit to do something that without it would be unlawful." Littleton v. Buress, 82 P. 864, 866; 14 Wyo.173.

"A license, pure and simple, is a mere personal privilege...River Development Corp. V. Liberty Corp., 133 A. 2d 373, 385; 45 N.J. Super. 445.

"A license is merely a permit or privilege to do what otherwise would be unlawful, and is not a contract between the authority, federal, state or municipal granting it and the person to whom it is granted..."American States Water Services Co. Of Calif. V. Johnson, 88 P.2d 770, 774; 31 Cal. App.2d 606.

"A license when granting a privilege, may not, as the terms to its possession, impose conditions which require the abandonment of constitutional rights." Frost Trucking Co. V. Railroad Commission, 271 US 583, 589 (1924); Terral v. Burke Construction Company, 257 US 529, 532 (1922).

Public roads belong to the people, since we pay for them, therefore exercising one’s liberty upon them is a natural right. The right to travel, or to locomotion, is upheld in the constitution, and actually predate the constitution;

"These are rights which existed long before our constitution, and we have taken pride in their maintenance, making them a part of the fundamental law of the land."

"Personal liberty, which is guaranteed to every citizen under our constitution and laws, consists of the right to locomotion,—to go where one pleases, and when, and to do that which may lead to one's business or pleasure, only so far restrained as the rights of others may make it necessary for the welfare of all other citizens. . . .

"Any law which would place the keeping and safe conduct of another in the hands of even a conservator of the peace, unless for some breach of the peace committed in his presence, or upon suspicion of felony, would be most oppressive and unjust, and destroy all the rights which our Constitution guarantees." Pinkerton v Verberg, 78 Mich 573, 584; 44 NW 579, 582-583 (1889).

The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void and ineffective for any purpose, since its unconstitutionality dates from the time of its enactment... In legal contemplation, it is as inoperative as if it had never been passed... Since an unconstitutional law is void, the general principles follow that it imposes no duties, confers no right, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection and justifies no acts performed under it... A void act cannot be legally consistent with a valid one. An unconstitutional law cannot operate to supersede any existing law. Indeed insofar as a statute runs counter to the fundamental law of the land, (the Constitution JTM) it is superseded thereby. No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it." Bonnett v. Vallier, 116 N.W. 885, 136 Wis. 193 (1908); NORTON v. SHELBY COUNTY, 118 U.S. 425 (1886)

"The word privilege is defined as a particular benefit, favor, or advantage, a right or immunity not enjoyed by all, or it may be enjoyed only under special conditions." Knoll Gold Club v. U.S., 179 Fed Supp. 377, 380.

"...those things which are considered as inalienable rights which all citizens possess cannot be licensed since those acts are not held to be a privilege." City of Chicago v. Collins, 51 N.E. 907, 910

"Illegitimate and unconstitutional practices get their first footing in that way, by silent approaches and slight deviations from legal modes of procedure. This can only be obviated by adhering to the rule that constitutional provisions for the security of persons and property should be liberally construed." Boyd v. United States, 116 U.S. 616, 635 (1884); Exparte Rhodes, 202Ala. 68 71.

"The State cannot diminish rights of the people." Hertado v. California, 110 U.S. 516

"Statutes that violate the plain and obvious principles of common right and common reason are null and void." Bennett v. Boggs, 1 Baldw 60.

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof;...shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding. The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution..." Article VI of the U.S. Constitution:

"Under our system of government upon the individuality and intelligence of the citizen, the state does not claim to control him/her, except as his/her conduct to others, leaving him/her the sole judge as to all that affects himself/herself." Mugler v. Kansas 123 U.S. 623, 659-60.

"The assertion of federal rights, when plainly and reasonably made, is not to be defeated under the name of local practice."- Davis v. Wechsler, 263 U.S. 22, 24.

"Where rights secured by the constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." - Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 491.

"The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime." - Miller v. U.S., 230 F 2d 486, 489.

"For a crime to exist, there must be an injured party. There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of this exercise of Constitutional rights."- Sherar v. Cullen, 481 F. 945.

There is no question that there is NO injured party involved here, and a citation/ticket issued by a police officer, or jail/incarceration for any cause including no valid driver’s license, registration or insurance, and save for criminal activities involving an injured party, is a penalty or sanction, and is indeed "converting a Right into a crime."

"The use of the highway for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common and fundamental right which the public and individuals cannot be rightfully deprived." Chicago Motor Coach v. Chicago, 337 IIL200,169 NE 22, 66 ALR 834. Ligare v. Chicago 139 III. 46, 28 NE 934. Booney v. dark, 214 SW 607; 25 A M JUR (I'1) Highways, Sec. 163.

Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law. Yick Wo vs. Hopkins, U.S. 356 (1886)

"Our system of government, based upon the individuality and intelligence of the citizen, the state does not claim to control him, except as his conduct to others, leaving him the sole judge as to all that only affects himself." Mugler v. Kansas 123 U.S. 623, 659-6O.

"A State may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the Federal Constitution." Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105, at 113.

Compelling me, a sovereign individual, into a contract with Colorado by securing, for money, a "driver's" license or vehicle registration, or face fines or imprisonment for non-crimes, is a direct violation of my rights under law. My rights have been secured via my Uniform Commercial Code 1 filing with the Secretary of State of Colorado, and accepted.

The Claims will produce forensic evidence showing how the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CORPORATION issues LETTERS OF MARQUE via Colorable de facto Laws, Statutes, Public Policies, Codes, Rules Administrative Procedures etc., to Agencies and the Agents in turn function as the Insurgents committing hostile and warlike acts of blatantly, directly, forcible, employing intimidation, fear, threats, actions such as coercion, terrorism, racketeering, privateering under the Color of Law and Color of Right, conspiring against, abridging and depriving the Defendants, and access to the Rights and Constitutional Exemptions of the Defendants and that are Secured and Protected by Law from such actions.

1. Belligerency - the status of de facto statehood attributed to a body of insurgents, by which their hostilities are legalized. The international status assumed by a state (i.e. nation) which wages war against another.
2. Belligerent - One who is hostile or combative which as a state is hostile, combative and wages war hostilities and aggression against its own citizens by a body of insurgents by which their war hostilities are presumed legalized.
3. Privateer - A vessel owned, equipped, and armed by one or more individuals, and duly commissioned by a belligerent power to make war upon the enemy, usually by preying on his commerce. A vessel is commissioned by a state or a nation by the issue of a letter of marque to its owner to carry on all hostilities, presumably according to the laws of war. Formerly a state issued letters of marque to its own subjects, and to those of neutral states as well, but a privateersman who accepted letters of marque from both belligerents was regarded as a pirate. Piracy and Privateering are Federal offences 18 USCA 1692 et seq. See Black’s Law Dictionary 6th Edition page 1195
4. Letter of Marque - An authorization formerly granted in time of war by a government to the owner of a vessel to capture enemy vessels and goods. See Article I 8 US Constitution.
5. War - For there to be a war a sovereign or a quasi-sovereign must engage in hostilities. Pan American World Airways, Inc. v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., C.A.N.Y., 505 F.2d 989,1005.
6. Piracy - Those acts of robbery and depredation upon the high seas, which if committed on land, would have amounted to a felony. Whoever, on the high seas, commits the crime of piracy as defined by the law of nations, and is afterwards brought into or found in the United States, shall be imprisoned for life. 18 USCA 1651. Piracy and Privateering are Federal offences 18 USCA 1692 et seq. Blacks Law Dictionary

Further potential crimes:

-Title 28- Judiciary and Judicial Procedure, Chapter 13 Civil Rights, 241 Conspiracy against private property rights.

-Title 28- Judiciary and Judicial Procedure, Chapter 13 Civil Rights, 242 Deprivation of rights under color of law.
-The 4th Constitutional Amendment; Deprivation of security of the Private Property Right from government invasion.
-The 5th Constitutional Amendment Deprivation of Liberty and Private Property without Just Compensation.
-The Theft of the Personal Private Property by Taking without Just Compensation.
-The United States Code Title 42 Chapter 21 Subchapter I 1985-Conspiracy interfering with Private Property Rights.
-The United States Code Annotated Title 18 1651 et seq Piracy and Privateering activities conducted on vessels at dry dock under commercial law by a body of insurgent Privateers.
-The United States Code Title 18 152 and 3571 provides fine up to $500,000.00 or imprisonment for up to 5 years for the presenting of fraudulent claims, fraudulent indictment, fraudulent evidence.
-The United States Code Title 42 Chapter 21 Subchapter II obstructing the evidence in the witnesses through the modification of language creating Federal Racketeering; Influenced and Corrupt Organizations activities extorting financial means creating economical damage point beyond recovery.
-The United States Code Title 42 Chapter 21 Subchapter III deprivation of the evidence in the witnesses through modification of language creating acts of Federal Racketeering; Influenced and Corrupt Organizations; Terrorism; Privateering.
-The United States Code Title 42 1986 For knowledge and the right to stop and correct a wrong,
-The United States Code Title 28 USC 1746 and Title 18 1621 Perjury and conspiring to commit perjury.
-The United States Code Title 18 1001 and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 9(b). Extorting private property through the modification of language.
-The United States Code Title 18 Part I Chapter 95 1651 Interference with commerce by threats or violence.
-Acting without establishing as a matter of record, Proper Jurisdiction over me.
-Breach of Fiduciary Duty of Upholding the "Oath of Office" and Upholding the Office of Public Trust.
-Acts of War against the United States Government Treaties and Organic Constitution Constituting Treason.
-Violation of Substantive Rights and Private Property Rights Secured and Protection by Constitutional Law.
-Employing Intimidation to affect Identity, Nationality, Birthright. Thief Using a Fiction, Artificial Person Name to Impersonate and Steal the Sovereign De Jure Identity.

Federal law 18 USC 1961 bans engaging in a pattern of crime. When state and local officials in essence extort money, they are committing federal felonies and are in essence "racketeers" as per the law.

Under penalty of perjury, I affirm that the information contained in this document is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. All Specific Rights are explicitly reserved, without prejudice, U.C.C. 1-207, Common Law, Law of Nations.


Signed:_______________________________________________ Date: ________________

I declare under penalty of perjury that the identified Sovereign named above appeared before me with picture identification, and acknowledged this document before me as his personal testimony on;

Date: __________________ /s/ ____________________________________________

(NOTARY PUBLIC'S JURAT)