IS THERE REALLY A REAL REMEDY?
Is there really a real remedy to what has been done? Quite simply, yes! There is one way and one way only you can protect yourself, your family, and property from this public obligation. Only through an underlying Security Agreement and filing a UCC-1 Financing Statement can you gain this standing. Accepting For Value your Birth Certificate and executing a lien upon the governmentally created ALL-CAPITAL-LETTERS-NAME by you in your proper Birth given Name as the Secured Party, and listing anything and everything you own, will own, or possibly ever could own, as collateral in the Security Agreement, can you effectively and permanently remove yourself from the status of a DEBTOR to that of a CREDITOR, and actually own property, have access to enforceable Constitutional Rights.
By filing a UCC-1 Financing Statement, you become an actual CREDITOR with standing in law and acquire the ability to stake a claim upon which relief can be granted, and not have the fruits of your labor taxed simply following up the UCC-1 Financing Statement with a Public Notice and Declaration/Depositum Declaration, can you, as a CREDITOR, acquire and access actual Original Jurisdiction Constitutional rights, that can be enforced. Without a UCC-1 Financing Statement, and the underlying Security Agreement, everything you have is pledged and owned by the State. You merely are the user of the property and must use that property in strict compliance with all the rules and regulations established by the State. If acquiring actual Original Jurisdiction Constitutional Rights and having the ability to own property free from government controls, and the ability to earn a living without taxation interests you, you have nothing to lose and everything to gain by executing this document. Only through filing a UCC-1 Financing Statement and Security Agreement is it possible for anyone to legally access Constitutional Rights.
To try and break this down even further. Few people truly understand the words "slave and slavery." The biggest benefit in filing a UCC-I Financing Statement is that you will no longer be a slave. The fact is, most dictionaries fail to provide an accurate definition of the words "slave and slavery." Even Webster's 1828 edition of the English language dictionary fails in its attempt to define the true meaning of the word "slavery": "Slave: a person who is wholly subject to the will of another." Slavery is not a matter of being totally 100% subject to the will of another. Any person, who is to any degree involuntarily subject to the will of another, is still a slave. There are no degrees of slavery.
The second part of the 2nd definition of slave provided by Webster's 1828 Edition is: "One who surrenders himself to any power whatsoever," which is closer to the real point. The Uniform Commercial Code [UCC] governs ALL commercial transactions in the United States. Any "person" including government corporations, agencies, etc., involved in the "sales of goods, commercial paper, bank deposits and collections, letters of credit, bulk transfer, warehouse receipts, bills of lading, investment securities, and secured transactions" is governed by the UCC. The "A" form of Uniform Commercial Code is adopted by all States. To comply with the Uniform Commercial Code in your state, a UCC-1 Financing Statement must be filed with the Secretary of State [or by a private provider], by any "person" who makes a claim against any other "person" in the area of commerce. All government agencies, (city, county, state and federal), operate in commerce and all of them, including the Internal Revenue Service, are private corporations. All Courts operate in commerce. All Banks operate in commerce. All corporations operate in commerce and all of these "entities" exist financially because WE are their collateral. They borrow on our "credit."
At one time, our currency was backed by or given substance by gold or silver. It has been thought by many, since the United States took the substance of gold and silver away, that Federal Reserve Notes were simply worthless paper, backed by nothing at all. That is not correct! Today, real people, citizens of the several states, you, me, your children, etc., back Federal Reserve Notes, much the same way that gold and silver did in the past. In other words, the living, breathing people guarantee or provide the substance for ALL money that is created. The Federal Reserve Bank clearly states: "Federal Reserve Notes are backed by the Full faith and credit of the American People." Blind Faith sets forth that YOU trust THEM. Who? None other than the Federal Reserve!
Credit means something is due you! The Federal Reserve uses our credit to create ALL money. All of the money created belongs to the American People and the deceit of the Public and private corporations is so complete, they create it, charge it to us as a debt and then tack interest to it on top of that. How did the American People become collateral for the debt instruments known as Federal Reserve Notes? It was given to the Federal Reserve by a corporation called the United States, the very same corporation that created the Federal Reserve. As discussed previously, in 1933, when President Roosevelt declared a national emergency because the United States could no longer pay its debts. At least that was the spin given to the American People. All of the subsidiary States agreed to support the declared bankruptcy by "pledging" the energy of their "citizens." Their assets consisted only of State Citizens. The States in turn used the Birth Certificates to pledge the State Citizen as collateral to keep Government afloat. That is how the American People became collateral for the Federal Reserve Notes and so-called debts. The American People became warehouse receipts, like a warehouse full of any type of valuable goods. All of this, however, was a major fraud. Neither the Internal Revenue Service nor any other entity like Government files a UCC-1 Financing Statement into the Commercial Registry with the Secretary of State. If they did, they would instantly become subject to all the regulations of the Uniform Commercial Code. The Internal Revenue Service has done very nicely by bluffing and intimidation, as all others mentioned, by operating under "Public Policy" where there is in, reality "No Law" at all! The State Citizen is drawn "into commerce" when their Birth Certificate is registered and sent to the Commerce Department in Washington, D.C. This is where the American People became warehouse receipts upon which all of the money printed and circulated is created and guaranteed. In short, the American People became the collateral for all debts. They, "The People," allegedly are "Government" property! Government is a "fiction" and an artificial person and deals with us as a fiction or artificial persons only as stated before. To take this still to another level, let's use an example to explain and use the name of John Henry: Smith. When John Henry: Smith was born, his parents gave him the Christian name of John Henry and he shared the name of Smith with all the other members of his family. He was born a living, breathing being. When his Birth Certificate was sent to the Department of Commerce, it was registered and the Government, because it was bankrupt, turned his "real name" into a fiction. His new fictional name became JOHN H. SMITH or John H. Smith. His ALL-CAPITAL-LETTERS NAME was registered as a corporation at the Puerto Rico Department of State Corporations (Departamento de Estado - Division de Corporaciones) P.O. BOX 3271, SAN JUAN, PUERTO RICO, 00904-3271, making him liable for taxes. He is now a fiction or artificial person; a non-living, non-breathing "person." It is a "strawman" (Lat. stramineus homo) or "fiction" which government brings all its so-called charges against and NEVER against the real person. Just like "yours," his driver's license now reads JOHN H. SMITH or John H. Smith. When he signs a 1040 Tax Form, he dutifully fills out the form as John H. Smith and then signs his name "under penalty of perjury, " thereby admitting he will be responsible for all the taxes of JOHN H. SMITH, a fiction in law, corporation. Look at your driver's license and see whom it is issued to. How can government use a form of our name and turn it into a fiction (corporation) without our permission? They can't, we sign our name to all of their forms, which is purely voluntary "permission-in-ignorance." In short, we do it to ourselves!
However, for those who wish to control and own this fiction and prohibit government corporations, including the Internal Revenue Service from making so- called charges against it, a remedy is available: to do this by executing a UCC-1 Financing Statement! John Henry, Smith would simply do what Government and the Internal Revenue Service does not do: File your UCC-1 Financing Statement into the Commercial Registry with the Secretary of State [or private provider] and claim EVERYTHING related to JOHN H. SMITH or any derivative name, corporate fiction; i.e.: the Birth Certificate and Social Security Card and Number. The living, breathing, real person then owns and controls the fictitious entity, including all contracts related to the Birth Certificate and Social Security Number.
Thusly, the real John H. Smith secures all rights, interest and title in the fictitious entity. Now, government and the Internal Revenue Service has to deal with John Henry: Smith but they cannot!, because he is no longer subject to government control. Every living breathing person has both a Social Security Card and an Employer Identification Number (yes, there are exceptions). The Internal Revenue Service calls the Social Security Number our Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN). Never do they mention our Employer Identification Number (EIN). What, you are not an employer, so you do not have an EIN? But wait. Yes you do! We are all employers and every one of us has an EIN. If you apply for a new Social Security Card (not a new number), on the backside of the card written In Red is your Employer Identification Number. Government workers are all employees. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM! Government employees work for us!, we are their employer! That is why, when you read the Tax Code to find the definition of "employee," under Title 26 United States Code, at Section 3401(c), the term "employee" specifically includes officers and employees, whether elected or appointed, of the United States, a State (Federal State), Territory, or any other political subdivision thereof, or the District of Columbia, or any agency or instrumentality of any one or more of the foregoing. EVERY ONE OF THEM ARE EMPLOYEES - THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ARE THE EMPLOYER. Write to the Bureau of Vital Statistics in the Capital of the State where you were born and request a copy of your Birth Certificate. Request a Certified copy. Never mind that you have a copy right now. More likely than not it came from the County in which you were born. The number assigned to your Birth Certificate by the Vital Statistics Office is of primary importance when executing your UCC-I Financing Statement.
Federal Children/through fraud and deception the federal corperation thinks they own you and your children.
In 1921, the federal Sheppard-Towner Maternity Act created the birth "registration" or what we now know as the "birth certificate." It was known as the "Maternity Act" and was sold to the American people as a law that would reduce maternal and infant mortality, protect the health of mothers and infants, and for "other purposes." One of those other purposes provided for the establishment of a federal bureau designed to cooperate with state agencies in the overseeing of its operations and expenditures. What it really did was create a federal birth registry which exists today, creating "federal children." This government, under the doctrine of "Parens Patriae," now legislates for American children as if they are owned by the federal government. Through the public school enrollment process and continuing license requirements for most aspects of daily life, these children grow up to be adults indoctrinated into the process of asking for "permission" from Daddy government to do all those things necessary to carry out daily activities that exist in what is called a "free country."
Before 1921 the records of births and names of children were entered into family bibles, as were the records of marriages and deaths. These records were readily accepted by both the family and the law as "official" records. Since 1921 the American people have been registering the births and names of their children with the government of the state in which they are born, even though there is no federal law requiring it. The state tells you that registering your child's birth through the birth certificate serves as proof that he/she was born in the united States , thereby making him/her a United States Citizen. For the past several years a social security number has been mandated by the federal government to be issued at birth.
In 1933, bankruptcy was declared by President Roosevelt. The governors of the then 48 States pledged the "full faith and credit" of their states, including the citizenry, as collateral for loans of credit from the Federal Reserve system. To wit:"Full faith and credit" clause of Const. U.S. article 4. sec. 1, requires that foreign judgement be given such faith and credit as it had by law or usage of state of it's origin. That foreign statutes are to have force and effect to which they are entitled in home state. And that a judgement or record shall have the same faith, credit, conclusive effect, and obligatory force in other states as it has by law or usage in the state from whence taken.Black's Law Dictionary, 4th Ed. cites omitted.
The state claims an interest in every child within it's jurisdiction. The state will, if it deems it necessary, nullify your parental rights and appoint a guardian (trustee) over your children. The subject of every birth certificate is a child. The child is a valuable asset, which if properly trained, can contribute valuable assets provided by its labor for many years. It is presumed by those who have researched this issue, that the child itself is the asset of the trust established by the birth certificate, and the social security number is the numbering or registration of the trust, allowing for the assets of the trust to be tracked. If this information is true, your child is now owned by the state. Each one of us, including our children, are considered assets of the bankrupt united states. We are now designated by this government as "HUMAN RESOURCES," with a new crop born every year."
In 1923, a suit was brought against federal officials charged with the administration of the maternity act, who were citizens of another state, to enjoin them from enforcing it, wherein the plaintiff averred that the act was unconstitutional, and that it's purpose was to induce the States to yield sovereign rights reserved by them through the federal Constitution's 10th amendment and not granted to the federal government, and that the burden of the appropriations falls unequally upon the several States, held, that, as the statute does not require the plaintiff to do or yield anything, and as no burden is imposed by it other than that of taxation, which falls, not on the State but on her inhabitants, who are within the federal as well as the state taxing power, the complaint resolves down to the naked contention that Congress has usurped reserved powers of the States by the mere enactment of the statute, though nothing has been, or is to be, done under it without their consent (Commonwealth of Massachusetts vs. Mellon, Secretary of the Treasury, et al.; Frothingham v. Mellon, Secretary of the Treasury et.al..) Mr. Alexander Lincoln, Assistant Attorney General, argued for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts . To wit:
I. The act is unconstitutional. It purports to vest in agencies of the Federal Government powers which are almost wholly undefined, in matters relating to maternity and infancy, and to authorize appropriations of federal funds for the purposes of the act.
Many examples may be given and were stated in the debates on the bill in Congress of regulations which may be imposed under the act. THE FORCED REGISTRATION OF PREGNANCY, GOVERNMENTAL PRENATAL EXAMINATION OF EXPECTANT MOTHERS, RESTRICTIONS ON THE RIGHT OF A WOMAN TO SECURE THE SERVICES OF A MIDWIFE OR PHYSICIAN OF HER OWN SELECTION, are measures to which the people of those States which accept its provisions may be subjected. There is nothing which prohibits the payment of subsidies out of federal appropriations. INSURANCE OF MOTHERS MAY BE MADE COMPULSORY. THE TEACHING OF BIRTH CONTROL AND PHYSICAL INSPECTION OF PERSONS ABOUT TO MARRY MAY BE REQUIRED.
By section 4 of the act, the Children's Bureau is given all necessary powers to cooperate with the state agencies in the administration of the act. Hence it is given the power to assist in the enforcement of the plans submitted to it, and for that purpose by its agents to go into the several States and to do those acts for which the plans submitted may provide. As to what those plans shall provide, the final arbiters are the Bureau and the Board. THE FACT THAT IT WAS CONSIDERED NECESSARY IN EXPLICIT TERMS TO PRESERVE FROM INVASION BY FEDERAL OFFICIALS THE RIGHT OF THE PARENT TO THE CUSTODY AND CARE OF HIS CHILD AND THE SANCTITY OF HIS HOME SHOWS HOW FAR REACHING ARE THE POWERS WHICH WERE INTENDED TO BE GRANTED BY THE ACT.
(1) The act is invalid because it assumes powers not granted to Congress and usurps the local police power. McCulloch v. Maryland , 4 Wheat. 316, 405; United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542, 549-551.
In more recent cases, however, the Court has shown that there are limits to the power of Congress to pass legislation purporting to be based on one of the powers expressly granted to Congress which in fact usurps the reserved powers of the States, and that laws showing on their face detailed regulation of a matter wholly within the police power of the States will be held to be unconstitutional although they purport to be passed in the exercise of some constitutional power. Hammer v. Dagenhart, 247 U.S. 251; Child Labor Tax Case, 259 U.S. 20; Hill v. Wallace, 259 U.S. 44.
The act is not made valid by the circumstance that federal powers are to be exercised only with respect to those States which accept the act, for Congress cannot assume, and state legislatures cannot yield, the powers reserved to the States by the Constitution. Message of President Monroe, May 4, 1822 ; 4 Elliot's Debates, p. 525; Pollard's Lessee v. Hagan, 3 How. 212; Escanaba Co. v. Chicago , 107 U.S. 678; Coyle v. Oklahoma , 221 U.S. 559; Cincinnati v. Louisville & Nashville R.R. Co., 223 U.S. 390.
(2) The act is invalid because it imposes on each State an illegal option either to yield a part of its powers reserved by the Tenth Amendment or to give up its share of appropriations under the act. A statute attempting, by imposing conditions upon a general privilege, to exact a waiver of a constitutional right, is null and void. Harrison v. St. Louis & San Francisco R.R. Co., 232 U.S. 318; Terral v. Burke Construction Co., 257 U.S. 529.
(3) The act is invalid because it sets up a system of government by cooperation between the Federal Government and certain of the States, not provided by the Constitution. Congress cannot make laws for the States, and it cannot delegate to the States the power to make laws for the United States . In re Rahrer, 140 U.S. 545; Knickerbocker Ice Co. v. Stewart, 253 U.S. 149; Opinion of the Justices, 239 Mass. 606.
The Maternity Act was eventually repealed, but parts of it have been found in other legislative acts. What this act attempted to do was set up government by appointment, run by bureaucrats with re-delegated authority to tax, which is in itself unconstitutional. What was once declared as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of this nation in the past should be upheld in a court challenge today. The constitution hasn't changed. What has changed is the way this government views human life. Today we are defined as human resources, believed to be owned by government. The government now wants us, as individuals, to be tagged and tracked. Government mandated or legislated National I.D. is unconstitutional anyway you look at it. Federal jurisdiction to legislate for the several states does not exist and could never survive a court challenge as shown above. Writing letters to elected public servants won't save us when we all know their agenda does not include serving those who placed them in power. Perhaps the 10th amendment of the federal constitution guaranteeing states rights will, if challenged, when making it known that we as individuals of the several states will not be treated as chattel of the U.S. government. If the federal government believes they own us, and as such have the right to demand national I.D. cards, and health I.D. cards, which will in truth tag us as we tag our animals, then let them bring forth the documents to prove their authority to legislate for it. If our G-D given rights to liberty and freedom, which were the foundation upon which this nation was created do not exist, and liberty and freedom is only an illusion under which the American people suffer, then let the governments of this nation come forward and tell the people. But...if we are indeed free, then we should not have to plead or beg before our elected public servants to be treated as such. If, in truth we are not free, then perhaps it's time to let the final chapter of the Great American Revolution be written..........
Before 1921 the records of births and names of children were entered into family bibles, as were the records of marriages and deaths. These records were readily accepted by both the family and the law as "official" records. Since 1921 the American people have been registering the births and names of their children with the government of the state in which they are born, even though there is no federal law requiring it. The state tells you that registering your child's birth through the birth certificate serves as proof that he/she was born in the united States , thereby making him/her a United States Citizen. For the past several years a social security number has been mandated by the federal government to be issued at birth.
In 1933, bankruptcy was declared by President Roosevelt. The governors of the then 48 States pledged the "full faith and credit" of their states, including the citizenry, as collateral for loans of credit from the Federal Reserve system. To wit:"Full faith and credit" clause of Const. U.S. article 4. sec. 1, requires that foreign judgement be given such faith and credit as it had by law or usage of state of it's origin. That foreign statutes are to have force and effect to which they are entitled in home state. And that a judgement or record shall have the same faith, credit, conclusive effect, and obligatory force in other states as it has by law or usage in the state from whence taken.Black's Law Dictionary, 4th Ed. cites omitted.
The state claims an interest in every child within it's jurisdiction. The state will, if it deems it necessary, nullify your parental rights and appoint a guardian (trustee) over your children. The subject of every birth certificate is a child. The child is a valuable asset, which if properly trained, can contribute valuable assets provided by its labor for many years. It is presumed by those who have researched this issue, that the child itself is the asset of the trust established by the birth certificate, and the social security number is the numbering or registration of the trust, allowing for the assets of the trust to be tracked. If this information is true, your child is now owned by the state. Each one of us, including our children, are considered assets of the bankrupt united states. We are now designated by this government as "HUMAN RESOURCES," with a new crop born every year."
In 1923, a suit was brought against federal officials charged with the administration of the maternity act, who were citizens of another state, to enjoin them from enforcing it, wherein the plaintiff averred that the act was unconstitutional, and that it's purpose was to induce the States to yield sovereign rights reserved by them through the federal Constitution's 10th amendment and not granted to the federal government, and that the burden of the appropriations falls unequally upon the several States, held, that, as the statute does not require the plaintiff to do or yield anything, and as no burden is imposed by it other than that of taxation, which falls, not on the State but on her inhabitants, who are within the federal as well as the state taxing power, the complaint resolves down to the naked contention that Congress has usurped reserved powers of the States by the mere enactment of the statute, though nothing has been, or is to be, done under it without their consent (Commonwealth of Massachusetts vs. Mellon, Secretary of the Treasury, et al.; Frothingham v. Mellon, Secretary of the Treasury et.al..) Mr. Alexander Lincoln, Assistant Attorney General, argued for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts . To wit:
I. The act is unconstitutional. It purports to vest in agencies of the Federal Government powers which are almost wholly undefined, in matters relating to maternity and infancy, and to authorize appropriations of federal funds for the purposes of the act.
Many examples may be given and were stated in the debates on the bill in Congress of regulations which may be imposed under the act. THE FORCED REGISTRATION OF PREGNANCY, GOVERNMENTAL PRENATAL EXAMINATION OF EXPECTANT MOTHERS, RESTRICTIONS ON THE RIGHT OF A WOMAN TO SECURE THE SERVICES OF A MIDWIFE OR PHYSICIAN OF HER OWN SELECTION, are measures to which the people of those States which accept its provisions may be subjected. There is nothing which prohibits the payment of subsidies out of federal appropriations. INSURANCE OF MOTHERS MAY BE MADE COMPULSORY. THE TEACHING OF BIRTH CONTROL AND PHYSICAL INSPECTION OF PERSONS ABOUT TO MARRY MAY BE REQUIRED.
By section 4 of the act, the Children's Bureau is given all necessary powers to cooperate with the state agencies in the administration of the act. Hence it is given the power to assist in the enforcement of the plans submitted to it, and for that purpose by its agents to go into the several States and to do those acts for which the plans submitted may provide. As to what those plans shall provide, the final arbiters are the Bureau and the Board. THE FACT THAT IT WAS CONSIDERED NECESSARY IN EXPLICIT TERMS TO PRESERVE FROM INVASION BY FEDERAL OFFICIALS THE RIGHT OF THE PARENT TO THE CUSTODY AND CARE OF HIS CHILD AND THE SANCTITY OF HIS HOME SHOWS HOW FAR REACHING ARE THE POWERS WHICH WERE INTENDED TO BE GRANTED BY THE ACT.
(1) The act is invalid because it assumes powers not granted to Congress and usurps the local police power. McCulloch v. Maryland , 4 Wheat. 316, 405; United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542, 549-551.
In more recent cases, however, the Court has shown that there are limits to the power of Congress to pass legislation purporting to be based on one of the powers expressly granted to Congress which in fact usurps the reserved powers of the States, and that laws showing on their face detailed regulation of a matter wholly within the police power of the States will be held to be unconstitutional although they purport to be passed in the exercise of some constitutional power. Hammer v. Dagenhart, 247 U.S. 251; Child Labor Tax Case, 259 U.S. 20; Hill v. Wallace, 259 U.S. 44.
The act is not made valid by the circumstance that federal powers are to be exercised only with respect to those States which accept the act, for Congress cannot assume, and state legislatures cannot yield, the powers reserved to the States by the Constitution. Message of President Monroe, May 4, 1822 ; 4 Elliot's Debates, p. 525; Pollard's Lessee v. Hagan, 3 How. 212; Escanaba Co. v. Chicago , 107 U.S. 678; Coyle v. Oklahoma , 221 U.S. 559; Cincinnati v. Louisville & Nashville R.R. Co., 223 U.S. 390.
(2) The act is invalid because it imposes on each State an illegal option either to yield a part of its powers reserved by the Tenth Amendment or to give up its share of appropriations under the act. A statute attempting, by imposing conditions upon a general privilege, to exact a waiver of a constitutional right, is null and void. Harrison v. St. Louis & San Francisco R.R. Co., 232 U.S. 318; Terral v. Burke Construction Co., 257 U.S. 529.
(3) The act is invalid because it sets up a system of government by cooperation between the Federal Government and certain of the States, not provided by the Constitution. Congress cannot make laws for the States, and it cannot delegate to the States the power to make laws for the United States . In re Rahrer, 140 U.S. 545; Knickerbocker Ice Co. v. Stewart, 253 U.S. 149; Opinion of the Justices, 239 Mass. 606.
The Maternity Act was eventually repealed, but parts of it have been found in other legislative acts. What this act attempted to do was set up government by appointment, run by bureaucrats with re-delegated authority to tax, which is in itself unconstitutional. What was once declared as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of this nation in the past should be upheld in a court challenge today. The constitution hasn't changed. What has changed is the way this government views human life. Today we are defined as human resources, believed to be owned by government. The government now wants us, as individuals, to be tagged and tracked. Government mandated or legislated National I.D. is unconstitutional anyway you look at it. Federal jurisdiction to legislate for the several states does not exist and could never survive a court challenge as shown above. Writing letters to elected public servants won't save us when we all know their agenda does not include serving those who placed them in power. Perhaps the 10th amendment of the federal constitution guaranteeing states rights will, if challenged, when making it known that we as individuals of the several states will not be treated as chattel of the U.S. government. If the federal government believes they own us, and as such have the right to demand national I.D. cards, and health I.D. cards, which will in truth tag us as we tag our animals, then let them bring forth the documents to prove their authority to legislate for it. If our G-D given rights to liberty and freedom, which were the foundation upon which this nation was created do not exist, and liberty and freedom is only an illusion under which the American people suffer, then let the governments of this nation come forward and tell the people. But...if we are indeed free, then we should not have to plead or beg before our elected public servants to be treated as such. If, in truth we are not free, then perhaps it's time to let the final chapter of the Great American Revolution be written..........
www.stopthepirates.blogspot.com
Birth certificates are a form of securities called “warehouse receipts.”
Birth certificates are a form of securities called “warehouse
receipts.” The items included on a warehouse receipt, as descried at
§7-202 of the Uniform Commercial Code, the law which governs commercial
paper and transactions, which parallel a birth certificate are:
Once a state has registered a birth document with the U.S. Department of Commerce, the Department notifies the Treasury Department, which takes out a loan from the Federal Reserve. The Treasury uses the loan to purchase a bond (the Fed holds a purchase money security interest in the bond) from the Department of Commerce, which invests the sale proceeds in the stock or bond market. The Treasury Department then issues Treasury securities in the form of Treasury Bonds, Notes, and Bills using the bonds as surety for the new securities.
This cycle is based on the future tax revenues of the legal person whose name appears on the Birth Certificate. This also means that the bankrupt, corporate U.S. can guarantee to the purchasers of their securities the lifetime labor and tax revenues of every citizen of the United States/American with a Birth Certificate as collateral for payment. This device is initiated simply by converting the lawful, true name of the child into a legal, juristic name of a person.
Legally, you are considered to be a slave or indentured servant to the various Federal, State and local governments via your STATE-issued and STATE-created Birth Certificate in the name of your all-caps person. Birth Certificates are issued so that the issuer can claim exclusive title to the legal person created thereby.
- the location of the warehouse where the goods are stored…(residence)
- the date of issue of the receipt…..(“Date issued”)
- the consecutive number of the receipt…(found on back or front of the certificate, usually in red numbers)
- a description of the goods or of the packages containing them…(name, sex, date of birth, etc.)
- the signature of the warehouseman, which may be made by his authorized agent…(municipal clerk or state registrar’s signature)
- Birth certificates now appear to at least qualify as “warehouse receipts” under the Uniform Commercial Code. Black’s Law Dictionary, 7th ed. defines:
- Warehouse Receipt. “…A warehouse receipt, which is considered a document of title, may be a negotiable instrument and is often used for financing with inventory as security.”
Once a state has registered a birth document with the U.S. Department of Commerce, the Department notifies the Treasury Department, which takes out a loan from the Federal Reserve. The Treasury uses the loan to purchase a bond (the Fed holds a purchase money security interest in the bond) from the Department of Commerce, which invests the sale proceeds in the stock or bond market. The Treasury Department then issues Treasury securities in the form of Treasury Bonds, Notes, and Bills using the bonds as surety for the new securities.
This cycle is based on the future tax revenues of the legal person whose name appears on the Birth Certificate. This also means that the bankrupt, corporate U.S. can guarantee to the purchasers of their securities the lifetime labor and tax revenues of every citizen of the United States/American with a Birth Certificate as collateral for payment. This device is initiated simply by converting the lawful, true name of the child into a legal, juristic name of a person.
Legally, you are considered to be a slave or indentured servant to the various Federal, State and local governments via your STATE-issued and STATE-created Birth Certificate in the name of your all-caps person. Birth Certificates are issued so that the issuer can claim exclusive title to the legal person created thereby.
Americans pay a percentage of their taxes to the King of England via the IRS.
Americans pay a percentage of their taxes to the Queen of
England via the IRS. The IRS is not an agency of the Federal Government.
It is an agency of the International Monetary Fund which is an agency of the United Nations. No law has ever been passed legalizing the charging of income tax. The 1040 tax form is the payment of a foreign tax to the King/Queen of England.
It is an agency of the International Monetary Fund which is an agency of the United Nations. No law has ever been passed legalizing the charging of income tax. The 1040 tax form is the payment of a foreign tax to the King/Queen of England.
American citizens have been in financial servitude to the British Monarch since the Treaty of 1783 and the War of Dependence.
All tax payers have an Individual Master File and are held liable for a tax via a treaty between the U.S. and the U.K. and payable to the U.K. Prior to 1991, the Business Master File in 6209 was U.S.-U.K.
Tax Claims, non-refile DLN. That means that everyone is considered a business and involved in commerce.
THE VIRGINIA COMPANY IS THE USA
Its main stockholder was British King James I.
The Virginia Company owned most of the land that is now called the USA.
The Virginia Company of the British Crown had rights to 50%, yes 50%, of all gold and silver mined on its lands, plus percentages of other minerals and raw materials, and 5% of all profits from other ventures.
Virginia company exporting overseas
The Virginia Company owned most of the land that is now called the USA.
The Virginia Company of the British Crown had rights to 50%, yes 50%, of all gold and silver mined on its lands, plus percentages of other minerals and raw materials, and 5% of all profits from other ventures.
Virginia company exporting overseas
The lands of the British owned Virginia Company were granted to the American colonies under a Deed of Trust (lease) and therefore – they could not claim ownership of the land.
They could pass on the perpetual use of the land to their heirs or sell the perpetual use of the land, but they could NEVER own it.
The Virginia Company formed two companies. The “Virginia Company of London” and the “Virginia Company of Plymouth” operating with identical charters but covering different territories.
The Plymouth Company never fulfilled its charter and its territory became New England.
A successor company to the Plymouth Company eventually established a permanent settlement in Plymouth, Massachusetts in 1620 in what is now New England.
In 1624, the King dissolved the London Company and made Virginia a “royal colony”.
Silver & Oil ~ Get Ready Folks: Without Paper Money We’d All Be Rich.
THE BRITISH FUNDED THE WAR OF ( IN ) DEPENDENCE
In 1773, the United States ratified a contract in which loans were owed to the British Crown.
The purpose of the loans were to fund both sides of the War of Independence.
“All bills of credit omitted, monies borrowed and debts contracted by or under the authority of congress before the assembling of the US in pursuance of the present confederation, shall be deemed and considered a charge against the US for payment and satisfaction where of the US and public and public faith are hereby solemnly pledged”.
After 1776, the Virginia royal colony became the Commonwealth of Virginia, one of the original thirteen states of the United States, adopting as its official slogan “The Old Dominion”.
After the United States was formed, the entire states of West Virginia, Kentucky, Indiana and Illinois, and portions of Ohio were all later created from the territory encompassed earlier by the Colony of Virginia.
Ownership was retained by the British Crown.
"MOTHER OR OTHER INFORMANT"
Today, almost all mothers, black or white, unknowingly inform on their own babies. Take a look at the so-called "Birth Certificate" CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH where the mother signs and you will see the title of the box stating in small print:
"MOTHER OR OTHER INFORMANT".
The word "OTHER" makes the mother "an informant." By signing the "Birth Certificate" as an informer, she contracts with the government putting her child and her child's future labor as collateral for the national debt (servitude--slavery). The father or mother can rescind the contract within three business days (Truth-in-Lending).
Since the Birth Certificate neither lists the father as the husband nor lists the wife's acceptance of the father's surname as her own but has the mother's maiden name instead, the baby is considered a BASTARD. Bastards are therefore under the care and control of the Priest Rule (democracy) and can be taken from the mother at any time.
The hospitals receive a fairly large monetary benefit ($3,000, more or less, per child) from the corporate government for having Birth Certificates filled out and signed.
"The primary control and custody of infants is with the government"
--Tillman V. Roberts. 108 So. 62
"MOTHER OR OTHER INFORMANT".
The word "OTHER" makes the mother "an informant." By signing the "Birth Certificate" as an informer, she contracts with the government putting her child and her child's future labor as collateral for the national debt (servitude--slavery). The father or mother can rescind the contract within three business days (Truth-in-Lending).
Since the Birth Certificate neither lists the father as the husband nor lists the wife's acceptance of the father's surname as her own but has the mother's maiden name instead, the baby is considered a BASTARD. Bastards are therefore under the care and control of the Priest Rule (democracy) and can be taken from the mother at any time.
The hospitals receive a fairly large monetary benefit ($3,000, more or less, per child) from the corporate government for having Birth Certificates filled out and signed.
"The primary control and custody of infants is with the government"
--Tillman V. Roberts. 108 So. 62
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)