Birth Certificate Explained


Since the early 1960's, State governments — themselves specially created, juristic, corporate persons signified by all caps — have issued Birth Certificates to "persons" with legal fiction all-caps names. This is not a lawful record of your physical birth, but rather the birth of the juristic, all-caps name. It may appear to be your true name, but since no proper name is ever written in all caps (either lawfully or grammatically) it does not identify who you are. The Birth Certificate is the government’s self-created document of title for its new “property,” i.e. the deed to the juristic-name artificial person whose all-caps name “mirrors” your true name. The Birth Certificate brings the new all-caps name into colorable admiralty/maritime law, the same way a ship (and ship of state) is berthed.

When a child is born, the hospital sends the original, not a copy, of the record of live birth to the "State Bureau of Vital Statistics," sometimes called the "Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services" (HRS). Each STATE is required to supply the UNITED STATES with birth, death, and health statistics. The STATE agency that receives the original record of live birth keeps it and then issues a Birth Certificate in the corrupted, all-caps version of the baby’s true name, i.e. JAMES WILBER SMITH.
cer-tif-i-cate, noun. Middle English certificat, from Middle French, from Medieval Latinceruficatum. from Late Latin, neuter of certificatus, past participle of certificare, to certify, 15th century. 3: a document evidencing ownership or debt.-- Merriam Webster Dictionary (1998). 

The Birth Certificate issued by the State is then registered with the U.S. Department of Commerce -- the Executive Office -- specifically through their own sub-agency, the U.S. Census Bureau, which is responsible to register vital statistics from all the States. The word "registered," as it is used within commercial or legal based equity law, does not mean that the all-caps name was merely noted in a book for reference purposes. When a Birth Certificate is registered with the U.S. Department of Commerce, it means that the all-caps legal person named thereon has become a surety or guarantor, a condition and obligation that is automatically and unwittingly assumed unless you rebut the presumption by effectively noticing them: “It ain’t me.”

Surety. The person who has pledged him or herself to pay back money or perform a certain action if the principal to a contract fails, as collateral, and as part of the original contract. -- Duhaime's Law Dictionary.

1: a formal engagement (as a pledge) given for the fulfillment of an undertaking.
2: one who promises to answer for the debt or default of another.
Under the Uniform Commercial Code, however, a surety includes a guarantor, and the two terms are generally interchangeable.
Merriam Webster's "Dictionary of Law" (1996).
Guarantor. A person who pledges collateral for the contract of another, but separately, as part of an independently contract with the obligee of the original contract.
Duhaime's Law Dictionary.

It is not difficult to see that a state-created Birth Certificate, with an all-caps, name is a document evidencing debt the moment it is issued. 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.

Dubuque rei potissinia pars prineipium est — The principal part of everything is in the beginning. (“Well begun is half done.”) 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. This is further compounded when one voluntarily obtains a Driver’s License or a Social Security Account Number. The state even owns your personal and private life through your STATE-issued marriage license/certificate issued in the all-caps names. You have no rights in birth, marriage, or even death. The state holds title to all legal persons the state creates via Birth Certificates until the rightful owner, i.e. you, reclaims/redeems it by becoming the holder in due course of the instrument." 

And this pic shows a REGISTRATION of a Record of Birth, which would tend to support the claims about the BC in the above article. Why the heck would a record of birth need to be REGISTERED? And with a Department of Commerce? Record alone is all that's needed to prove that the birth happened, as long as it's certified (stamped and signed by a proper officer of a State)




Discharge Almost Any Debt with Proper Use of the UCC ?

You can discharge Secured Loans, Credit Card Debt, Student Loans, Auto Loans, Assessments, Citations, Debts, Demands, Fines, Penalties, Tax Liens and Judgments. Debt Discharge and "Accepted for Value” is based on understanding how you've been mislead and learning what to do about it. You just have to know How to Do It! On April 5, 1933, then President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, under Executive Order, issued April 5, 1933, declared: "All persons are required to deliver on or before May 1, 1933 all Gold Coin, Gold Bullion, and Gold Certificates now owned by them to a Federal Reserve Bank, branch or agency, or to any member bank of the Federal Reserve System."

The order (proclamation) issued by Roosevelt was an undisciplined act of treason. Two months after the Executive Order, on June 5, 1933, the Senate and House of Representatives, 73d Congress, 1st session, at 4:30 P.M. approve House Joint Resolution 192 (HJR-192) A Joint Resolution to suspend the Gold Standard and abrogate the Gold Clause, Joint resolution to assure uniform value to the coins and currencies of the United States.

HJR-192 states, in part, that "Every provision contained in or made with respect to any obligation which purports to give the oblige a right to require payment in gold or a particular kind of coin or currency, or in any amount of money of the United States measured thereby, is declared to be against public policy, and no such provision shall be contained in or made with respect to any obligation hereafter incurred. Every obligation, heretofore or hereafter incurred, whether or not any such provisions is contained therein or made with respect thereto, shall be discharged upon payment, dollar for dollar, in any such coin or currency which at the time of payment is legal tender for public and private debts."

HJR-192 goes on to state: "As used in this resolution, the term 'obligation' means an obligation (including every obligation of and to the United States, excepting currency) payable in money of the United States; and the term 'coin or currency' means coin or currency of the United States, including Federal Reserve notes and circulating notes of Federal Reserve banks and national banking associations."

HJR-192 superseded Public Law (that which passes as law today is only "color of law"), replacing it with public policy. This eliminated our ability to PAY our debts, allowing only for their DISCHARGE. When we use any commercial paper (checks, drafts, warrants, federal reserve notes, etc.), and accept it as money, we simply pass the unpaid debt attached to the paper on to others, by way of our purchases and transactions. This unpaid debt, under public policy, now carries a public liability for its collection. In other words, all debt is now public.

The United States government, in order to provide necessary goods and services, created a commercial bond (promissory note), by pledging the property, labor, life and body of its citizens, as payment for the debt (bankruptcy). This commercial bond made chattel (property) out of every man, woman and child in the United States. We became nothing more than "human resources" and collateral for the debt. The United States government -actually the elected and appointed administrators of government -took (and still do, to this day) certified copies of all our birth certificates and placed them in the United States Department of Commerce ... as registered securities. These securities, each of which carries an estimated $1,000,000 (one million) dollar value, have been (and still are) circulated around the world as collateral for loans, entries on the asset side of ledgers, etc., just like any other security. There's just one problem, we didn't authorize it. The United States is a District of Columbia corporation. In Volume 20: Corpus Juris Section 1785 we find "The United States government is a foreign corporation with respect to a State"

(see: NY re: Merriam 36 N.E. 505 1441 S. 0.1973, 14 L. Ed. 287). Since a corporation is a fictitious "person" (it can not speak, see, touch, smell, etc.), it can not, by itself, function in the real world. It needs a conduit, a transmitting utility, a liaison of some sort, to "connect" the fictional person, and fictional world in which it exists, to the real world.

LIVING people exist in a real world, not a fictional, virtual world. But government does exist in a fictional world, and can only deal directly with other fictional or virtual persons, agencies, states, etc. In order for a fictional person to deal with real people there must be a connection, a liaison, and a go-between. This can be something as simple as a contract. When both "persons," the real and the fictional, agree to the terms of a contract, there is a connection, intercourse, dealings, there is a communication, an exchange. There is business! But there is another way for fictional government to deal with the real man and woman: through the use of a representative, a liaison, and the go-between. Who is this go-between, this liaison that connects fictional government to real men and women? It's a government created shadow, a fictional man or woman ... with the same name as ours.

STRAMINEUS HOMO: Latin: A man of straw, one of no substance, put forward as bail or surety. This definition comes from Black's Law Dictionary, 6th. Edition, page 1421. Following the definition of STRAMINEUS HOMO in Black's we find the next word, Strawman. STRAWMAN: A front, a third party who is put up in name only to take part in a transaction. Nominal party to a transaction; one who acts as an agent for another for the purposes of taking title to real property and executing whatever documents and instruments the principal may direct. Person who purchases property for another to conceal identity of real purchaser or to accomplish some purpose otherwise not allowed. Webster's Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary defines the term "strawman" as: 1: a weak or imaginary opposition set up only to be easily confuted 2: a person set up to serve as a cover for a usually questionable transaction. The Strawman can be summed up as an imaginary, passive stand-in for the real participant; a front; a blind; a person regarded as a nonentity. The Strawman is a "shadow", a go-between. For quite some time a rather large number of people in this country have known that a man or woman's name, written in ALL CAPS, or last name first, does not identify real, living people. Taking this one step further, the rules of grammar for the English language have no provisions for the abbreviation of people's names, i.e. initials are not to be used. As an example, John Adam Smith is correct. ANYTHING else is not correct. Not Smith, John Adam or Smith, John A. or J. Smith or J. A. Smith or JOHN ADAM SMITH or SMITH, JOHN or any other variation. NOTHING, other than John Adam Smith identifies the real, living man. All other appellations identify either a deceased man or a fictitious man: such as a corporation or a STRAWMAN.

Over the years government, through its "public" school system, has managed to pull the wool over our eyes and keep US ignorant of some very important facts. Because all facets of the media (print, radio, television) have an ever-increasing influence in our lives, and because media is controlled (with the issuance of licenses, etc.) by government and its agencies, we have slowly and systematically been led to believe that any form/appellation of our names is, in fact, still us: as long as the spelling is correct. WRONG!

Everything, Since June 1933, Operates in COMMERCE! Commerce is based on agreement, on contract. Government has an implied agreement with the STRAWMAN (government's creation) and the STRAWMAN is subject to government rule, as we illustrated above. But when we, the real flesh and blood man and woman, step into their "process" we become the "surety" for the fictitious

STRAWMAN. Reality and fiction are reversed. We then become liable for the debts, liabilities and obligations of the STRAWMAN, relinquishing our real (protected) character as we stand up for the fictional STRAWMAN. So that we can once again place the STRAWMAN in the fictional world and ourselves in the real world (with all our "shields" in place against fictional government) we must send a nonnegotiable (private) "Charge Back" and a nonnegotiable "Bill of Exchange" to the United States Secretary of Treasury, along with a copy of our birth certificate, the evidence, the MCO, of the STRAWMAN. By doing this we discharge our portion of the public debt, releasing us, the real man or woman, from the debts, liabilities and obligations of the STRAWMAN. Those debts, liabilities and obligations exist in the fictional commercial world of "book entries", on computers and/or in paper ledgers. It is a world of "digits" and "notes", not of money and substance. Property of the real man once again becomes tax exempt and free from levy, as it must be in accord with HJR-192.



Sending the nonnegotiable Charge Back and Bill of Exchange accesses our Treasury Direct Account (TDA). What is our Treasury Direct Account? According to one theorist, it is a pledge that was made for each birth certificate in the amount of $630,000 (another pegs it at $1,000,000). Thus everybody and everything in the United States is simply collateral for the bonds issued by the U.S. government.

This $1,000,000 (one million) account is for the STRAWMAN, the fictional "person" with the name in all caps and/or last name first. It is there for the purpose of making book entries, to move figures, "digits" from one side of ledgers to the other. Without constant movement a shark will die and quite ironically, like the shark, there must also be constant movement in commerce, or it too will die. Figures, digits, the entries in ledgers must move from asset side to debit side and back again, or commerce dies.

The fictional person of government can only function in a fictional commercial world, one where there is no real money, only fictional funds ... mere entries, figures, and digits.

A presentment from fictional government - whether traffic citation or criminal charges - is a negative, commercial "claim" against the

STRAWMAN. This "claim" takes place in the commercial, fictional world of government. "Digits" move from one side of your STRAWMAN account to the other, or to a different account. This is today's commerce. Playing the Commerce Game In the past we have addressed these "claims" by fighting them in court, with one "legal process" or another, and failed. We have played the futile, legalistic, dog-and-pony show - a very clever distraction - while the commerce game played on. But what if we refused to play dog-and-pony, and played the commerce game instead? What if we learned how to control the flow and movement of entries, figures, and digits, for our own benefit? Is that possible? How can the real man in the real world, function in the fictional world in which the commerce game exists?

When in commerce do as commerce does, use the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC). The UCC-1 Financing Statement is the one contract in the world that can NOT be broken and it's the foundation of the Accepted for Value process. The power of this document is awesome.



Since the TDA exists for the STRAWMAN -who, until now, has been controlled by government - We can gain control (and ownership) of the STRAWMAN by first activating the TDA and then filing an UCC-1 Financing Statement. This does two things for us. First, by activating the TDA we gain limited control over the funds in the account. This allows us to also move entries, figures, and digits ... for our benefit. Secondly, by properly filing an UCC-1 Financing Statement we can become the holder in due course of the STRAWMAN. This gives us virtual ownership of the government created entity. Remember earlier we mentioned that a presentment from government or one of its agents or agencies was a negative commercial claim against the STRAWMAN (and the STRAWMAN's account, the TDA)? Remember we told you entries, figures, and digits moved from one side of the account to the other, or to a different account? Well now, with the STRAWMAN under our control, government has no access to the TDA and they also lose their go-between, their liaison, their "connection" to the real, living man and woman. From now on, when presented with a "claim" (presentment) from government, we will agree with it (this removes the "controversy") and we will ACCEPT IT FOR VALUE. By doing this we remove the negative claim against our account and become the "holder in due course" of the presentment. As holder in due course you can require the sworn testimony of the presenter of the "claim" (under penalty of perjury) and request the account be properly adjusted.

It's a commercial undertaking, and the basic procedure is not complicated. In fact, it's fairly simple. We just have to remember a few things, like: this is commerce, and we play by the rules of commerce. We accept the "claim", become the holder in due course, and challenge whether or not the presenter of the claim had/has the proper authority (the Order) to make the claim (debit our account) in the first place. When they cannot produce the Order (they never can, it was never issued) we request the account be properly adjusted and the charge, the "claim” is discharged and goes away.

If they don't adjust the account a request is made for the bookkeeping records showing where the funds in question were assigned. This is done by requesting the Fiduciary Tax Estimate and the Fiduciary Tax Return for this claim. Since the claim has been accepted for value and is prepaid, and our TDA account is exempt from levy, the request for the Fiduciary Tax Estimate and the Fiduciary Tax Return is valid because the information is necessary in determining who is delinquent and/or making claims on the account. If there is no record of the Fiduciary Tax Estimate and the Fiduciary Tax Return, we then request the individual tax estimates and individual tax returns to determine if there is any delinquency.

If we receive no favorable response to the above requests, we will then file a currency report on the amount claimed/assessed against our account and begin the commercial process that will force them to either do what's required or lose everything they own - except for the clothing they are wearing at the time. This is the power of contracts (commerce) and it should be mentioned, at least this one time, that a contract overrides the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and any other document other than another contract. We should also mention that no process of law - "color" of law under present codes, statutes, rules, regulations, ordinances, etc. - can operate upon you, no agent and/or agency of government (including courts) can gain jurisdiction over you, WITHOUT YOUR CONSENT. You, (we) are not within their fictional commercial venue.

The Accepted for Value process, however, gives us the ability to deal with "them" -through the use of our transmitting utility/go-between, the Strawman -and hold them accountable in their own commercial world, for any action(s) they attempt to take against us. Without a proper Order, and now we know they're not in possession of such a document, they must leave us alone ... or pay the consequences. Yes, this process IS powerful -- and one had better learn it well - should one choose to utilize it.



Not one single Properly filed UCC Form has been turned down or prosecuted under any criminal laws.

During the year 1933 the Congress handed over control of all the Post Offices to the Secretary of the Treasury. Why would they do this? That is why the revenue is delivered to the Government on April Fifteenth.   When an Application and Certificate of Live Birth is delivered to the Department of the Treasury in Washington, D.C. that Certificate becomes Bonded, there is an account produced which we know as the Social Security Number, this means there are funds borrowed against these accounts.
The credit approved on paper is then invested in stocks and bonds. The Bureau of Engraving states that even the Federal Reserve uses the Bond Number which is stamped on the Certificate of Live Birth as it is also stamped on the Federal reserve Notes themselves. The Bond Number has one letter from (A-N) which is followed by eight numbers. You will notice recently printed Social Security Cards are now also printed with the Bond Number on the back in red ink. It is a fact that every single living, breathing human being in the United States is Bonded and used in Commercial Activities by the Corporation of the United States which has received them.


There have been IMF's that track commercial activity in the billions attached to individuals earning around fifty thousand dollars a year. The Government is utilizing both their name and assets to be used to trade in the drug, crude oil and various other commodities. This just proves that all property, both real and private property of every living, breathing American, is entrusted by Congress to provide collateral for the National Debt.
The Government states that well over twenty -five million UCC Financing statements have already been filed with UCC offices throughout the United States. Related Commercial Documents have been forwarded to the Secretary of the Treasury. These facts have been gathered through information acquired through the CID of the IRS, FBI, Secret Service, Justice Department, the Department of the Treasury and the Secretary of State. They have all confessed that not one single Properly filed UCC Form has been turned down or prosecuted under any criminal laws.

You are now officially “Dead”


We are born on the land and are considered heirs of the land assets of our country.

But within hours undeclared agents of the federal “State” franchise get our Mothers to sign Certificates of Live Birth. These documents are misrepresented as simple recordings of the baby’s birth. Instead, they are registrations of commercial “vessels” using the baby’s name, and serving to make the “State” franchise the beneficiary of the baby’s estate on the land.

However many days, weeks, or months later as determined by “State” law, your “vessel in commerce” is reported “missing, presumed dead” to the probate court, which then doctors the civil records and converts your living estate to a trust ESTATE benefiting the perpetrators of this scheme.

You are now officially “dead” with respect to the land jurisdiction and unless you take action to correct the probate court records, you and your assets are permanently trapped in the international jurisdiction of the sea. You are therefore unable to take recourse to your holdings on the land or the law forms of the land that you are owed. Ever heard the Constitution called the “Law of the Land”?

This is why your constitutional guarantees don’t apply. There’s no version of “you” operating on the land as a result of this fraud.


And it is all based on identity theft and unilateral adhesion contracts that are obtained under conditions of deceit while you are still just a baby. There’s no way that you could ever know that this was going on or have any opportunity to object to it.

You are kidnapped and press-ganged into the international jurisdiction of the sea and your ESTATE is claimed and pillaged before you leave grade school.

And the monsters doing this to you? The IMF and FEDERAL RESERVE and other criminal international banking cartels and organizations like the American Bar Association that have participated in and profited from this lurid fraud scheme.

The IMF does business as the “UNITED STATES, INC.” and has franchises doing business as the “STATE OF OHIO” and so on. These franchises are no different than the franchises of Dairy Queen, Inc.

The FEDERAL RESERVE (reconfigured as a United Nations owned and operated corporation) is doing business as THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, INC. — they are just now setting up franchises operated simply as “OHIO” and “WISCONSIN” and so on.

None of these corporations has any lawful or even legal authority over you and your assets, but, thanks to their fraud scheme, they do have control of “your” ESTATE and now, “your” public transmitting utility which have both been created using your given name without your knowledge or permission.

JOHN QUINCY ADAMS = federal STATE estate trust owned and operated by the IMF, a UN agency dba UNITED STATES.

JOHN Q. ADAMS = federal public transmitting utility owned and operated by the new United Nation’s version of FEDERAL RESERVE doing business as THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

Isn’t it time to take back control of your property? [ . . . your flesh and blood human body and the fruits of your labor?]

1099-OID and Your Federal Withholding








The 1099 is for reporting gambling proceeds won or lost at casinos. When we look at the Federal Reserve Note we find that is a promise to pay, but it is not payment, but is a future event, and a future event that has not happened yet amounts to speculation whether or not the promise to pay would actually occur. Thus the use of Federal Reserve Notes themselves are gambling proceeds and thereby a Suspicious Activity reportable on 1099-OID and other means of reporting. Thus whoever is getting a paycheck in US dollars is receiving an ISSUE that is reportable on 1099-OID, because; the Federal Reserve Note otherwise referred to as US dollars are evidence of speculation on a future event, (promise to pay), that is gambling on the future event, as one does not know if that promise to pay will return to the source or not. It seems that it will not return to the “Source” unless it is reported on Federal Tax Form 1099 to enable the ISSUE to enter the Electronic Circuit in a journey to the “SOURCE”. Without entry therein it is doubtful that the promise to pay can occur. (The Tax Return).
So it seems that wherever a check is issued, is the “ISSUE” reportable on 1099-OID; or, where a cash item in a Federal Reserve Note is given and/or received, or a bond or other type security given in commercial paper that is payable in Federal Reserve Notes or US dollars, is the gambling proceeds reportable on 1099-OID.




The 1099 OID filing instructions refer to the “ISSUE” as the reportable item, and that is the check at the source that has not yet returned to the source. It can’t return to the source until it enters the closed circuit via the Federal Tax Form 1099 in its journey back to the “source”. One could say that the first issue, the check, being the “Source”, is the venue, and after filing 1099 on that issue, the item returning to the “source” I suppose the difference in the Source of issue and the item returning to source, (a tax), is the returning item, is charged electronically and travels in a CLOSED circuit back to the source for settlement in exchange!


When you receive a bill for a product you have used, and there was no check, therewith, for you to pay the bill, the amount of that bill is Withholding and is a Federal Withholding in possession of the person who gave you the bill without a check to pay it. Thus, the action for settlement is to report a tax liability assessed in a 1040 tax return, and tax the same as income tax on a 1099-OID filed, therewith. It is the IRS, then, who will tell the bill collector that the amount of the bill is a Federal Withholding. (the withholding in the bill is the amount of Federal Withholding admitted in the bill). The bill is evidence of that amount withheld, and without a check or money order to accompany the bill sent to you, the absence of the check or money order is the admission of Withholding for that amount.

So, there you have the reason to tell the bill collector the amount billed to you is a Federal Withholding, withheld by the sender of the bill, and is cause to assess the same on 1040 and [to] tax the assessment on a 1099-OID, therewith, for settlement and closing in exchange Treasury Direct #(SSN-yours)


What is said above should be all you need to take care of your bills. When you get the bill that did not include a check for you to pay [that] bill, that should be sufficient information for you to report the same on a 1040 and 1099-OID without any further correspondence. (the bill was given for the cost of a product your personal credit was used to create…by assuming the use [of the ghost account]. The 1040 is the assessment of that taxable income debt and the 1099-OID is the Tax Return to the source of your credit for settlement and closing in exchange Treasury Direct #(SSN-yours).
So, it is the tax refund that is the remedy and that makes the action in Small Claims Court unnecessary. I suppose it could be made a Court of Record by putting copies of the 1040/1099 into the court record, but it is the IRS Forms 1040/1099 that makes an Administrative Court the Court of Record with a remedy. The Administrative Court is that of the IRS. That is what the tax court record will consist of, and that is probably the only Article III Court of Record bound with Revenue in the New Venue.


The Bill gives information that makes it obvious the actual payment is withheld, so it is that Withholding that is your taxable income! The requests for the billing agency to file 1099-OID on the issue(s) seems to be alright, but so far the requests have been met with silence and that silence is taken as a Refusal and Dishonor and therefore cause to go ahead and file both the 1040 and the 1099-OID. The tax assessment (1040) can be done on receipt of the bill…when the bill did not include a check, therewith, to enable you to pay the amount due. The fact exists that the funds have been Withheld from you, expressed in the bill, because it requests you to pay those absent funds. Obviously, they have been Withheld and the Withholding is Federal
because of the Public Policy HJR-192. So, I think the funds can be reported as a Federal Withholding in possession of the named recipient on the 1099-OID.
It is your credit they use to pre-pay any plan to use the agency services. So, you might ask for the plan to use their services, and provide you the papers to file Federal Tax Form 1099-OID on the issues, to enable you to pre-pay the available services used to make settlement for closing in exchange Treasury Direct #(SSN-yours).


Request the plan to enable us to use their services pre-paid. That will require the use of 1099-OID. Maybe, when one gets a bill from a company or agency one can accept the bill and return it asking for the plan to enable him to make settlement by set-off or report the item/issue as taxable income and request your tax refund from IRS in tax recovery.
When we focus our attention on the Withholding, we see it as, in fact, Federal Withholding, by virtue of HJR-192 and subsequent legislation thereon; and we can report it as such when we get a bill, and there is no check therewith. Thus, they have withheld the payment, and the same is Federal Withholding. (They probably obtained use of the Withheld credit by assuming the use of the amount used and Withheld from us, and admitted the same was prepaid when they sent us a bill for the product of our own credit (the ghost)-That was identity theft!)





“United States Citizen” SCAM!

All of our governments are corporations and are responsible for the creation of
about 800 thousand laws called statutes, which are designed to control the
Sovereign people of America. Just like the King, these statutes cannot be
enforced against the Source of Law, which are the living, breathing, flesh and
blood Sovereign people. All of the Agents in power beginning with the King, the
Vatican, the Founding Fathers and now our presumed public officials, wanted to
obtain power and control over America, and the Constitution pretty much
prohibited them from achieving those ends. So they began to devise ways to
change the Sovereign Americans into corporate fictions.



These Agents also decided and reasoned that they cannot educate the masses
without exposing their treachery, and so our private and public education must be
controlled. Without any real Constitutional basis, the U. S. Department of
Education was created. The Constitution made it the responsibility of each state
to educate its people and several states challenged the Congress in the courts.
The matter was eventually heard by the U. S. Supreme Court, which has never
been a Constitutional Article III Court from its inception, which I will explain. The
Supreme Court ruled that the federal government was entitled to oversee the
educational requirements of “United States Citizens” by virtue of their
Constitutional powers to regulate Commerce! Bad law is bad law, no matter how
you turn the paper and that ruling gave the federal government the green light to
initiate its “brainwashing” process of the American public.
Let me explain how the Court arrived at its ruling because these are not ignorant
men. On every form you file to receive “government benefits” and even the “voter
registration form” there is a question that asks: Are you a United States Citizen?
YES / NO and everyone circles the YES answer. Didn’t you? Now look up the
definition of a “United States Citizen” in a reputable law dictionary. You will
discover that a United States Citizen is a phrase designed to identify a “corporate
fiction.” Clever, isn’t it? You and every other American had no idea that you were
admitting you were a corporate fiction when you circled that YES answer, and you
did it under penalty of perjury!
The sovereign states had been abolished in 1790 by the adoption of Article 1 of
the Statutes at Large, which converted all the sovereign states into federal
districts and gave the federal government lawful jurisdiction everywhere. In
consideration of the fact that the federal government is a corporation and that
corporations can lawfully own other corporations and all the American subjects to
be educated have admitted under penalty of perjury that they are corporations,
the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the corporate federal government. [See how
sneaky and tricky lawyers can be? And all the more reason why lawyers should
never be allowed to serve in government or in judgment of us.]

WHY THE UCC FILING? --- THE ENSLAVEMENT OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE BY LAWYERS:



Short Explanation as is Understood at this Time
(Subject to further clarification)

Around the time of the war between the United States and the southern states of the American union, the United States was busy putting together a plan that would increase the jurisdiction of the United States. This plan was necessary because the United States had no subjects and only the land ceded to it from the states, ie. the District which was only ten miles square and such land as was necessary for forts, magazines, arsenals, etc.

Between the 1860’s and the early 1900’s, banking and taxing mechanisms were changing through legislation. Cunning people closely associated with the powers in England had great influence on the legislation being passed in the United States. Of course such legislation did not apply to the states or to the people in the states, but making the distinction was not deemed to be a necessary duty of the legislators. It was the responsibility of the people to understand their relationship to the United States and to the laws that were being passed by the legislature. This distinction between the United States and the states was taught in the homes and the schools and churches. The early admiralty courts did not interpret legislation as broadly at that time because the people knew when the courts were overstepping their jurisdiction.
The people were in control because they knew who they were and where they were standing in relation to the United States.

In 1913 the United States added numerous private laws to its books that facilitated the increase of subjects and property for the United States. The 14th Amendment provided for a new class of citizens – United States citizens, that had not formerly been recognized. Until the 14th Amendment in 1868, there were no persons born or naturalized in the United States. They had all been born or naturalized in one of the several states. United States citizenship was a result of state citizenship. After the Civil War, a new class was recognized, and was the beginning of the democracy sited in the District of Columbia. The American people in the republic sited in the several states, could choose to benefit as one of these new United States citizens BY CHOICE. The new class of citizens was given the right to vote in the democracy in 1870 by
the 15th Amendment. All it required was an application. Benefits came with this new citizenship, but with the benefits,came duties and responsibilities that were totally regulated by the legislature for the District of Columbia. Edward Mandell House is attributed with giving a very detailed outline of the plans to be implemented to enslave the American people. (1) The 13th Amendment in 1865 opened the way for the people to volunteer into slavery to accept the benefits offered by the United States. Whether House actually spoke the words or not , is really irrelevant because the scenario detailed in the statement attributed to him has clearly been implemented. Central banking for the United States was legislated with the Federal Reserve Act in 1913. The ability to decrease the currency in circulation through taxation was legislated with the 16th Amendment in 1913. Support for the presumption that the American people had volunteered to participate in the United States democracy was legislated with the 17th Amendment in 1913. The path was provided for the control of the courts, with the creation of the American Bar Association in 1913.

In 1917 the United States legislature passed the Trading with the Enemy Act and the Emergency War Powers Act,opening the doors for the United States to suspend limitations otherwise mandated in the Constitution. Even in times of peace, every contrived and created social, political, or financial emergency was sufficient authority for the officers of the United States to overstep its peace time powers and implement volumes of “law” that would increase the coffers of the United States. There is always a declared emergency in the United States and its States, but it only applies to their subjects.

In the 1920’s the States accelerated the push for mothers to register their babies. Life was good and people were not paying attention to what was happening in government. The stock market crashed, and those who were not on the inside were not warned to take their money out before they lost everything.

In the 1930’s federal legislation provided for registration of babies through applications for birth certificates, so government workers could get maternity leave with pay. The States pushed for registration of cars through applications for certificates of title, and for registration of land through registration of deeds of trust. Constructive trusts secretly were created as each of the people blindly walked into the United States democracy, thereby agreeing to be sureties for the debts of the United States. The great depression supplied the diversion to keep the people’s attention off what government was doing. The Social Security program was implemented, along with numerous other United States programs that invited the American people to volunteer to be the sureties behind the United States’ new registered property and adhesion contracts through the new United States subjects.

The plan was well on its path by 1933. Massive registration of property through United States agencies, including the State of _______ subdivisions, was assuring the United States and its officers would get rich beyond their wildest expectations, as predicted by Mendall House. All of this was done without disclosure of the material facts that accompanied each application for registration – fraud. The fraud was a sufficient reason to charge all the United States officers with treason, UNLESS a remedy could be supplied for the people to recoup their property and collect for the damages they suffered as a result of the fraud.

If a remedy were available, and the people chose not to or failed to use their remedy, no charge of fraud could be sustained even in a common law court. The United States only needed to provide the remedy. It was not required to explain it or even tell the people where the remedy could be found. The attorneys did not even have to be taught about the remedy. That gave them plausible deniability when the people struggled to understand the new laws. The legislators did not have to have the intricate details of the law explained to them regarding the bills they were passing. That gave them plausible deniability. If the people failed to use their remedy, the United States came out the winner every time. If the people did discover their remedy, the United States had to honor it and release the registered property back to the people, but only if the people knew they had a remedy, and only if they requested it in the proper manner. It was a great plan.

With plausible deniability, even when the people knew they had a remedy and pursued it, the attorneys, judges, and legislators could act like they did not understand the people’s claims. Requiring the public schools to teach civics,government, and history classes out of approved politically correct text books also assured the people would not find the remedy for a long time. Passing new State and Federal laws that appeared to subject the people to rules and regulations,added another level of protection against the people finding their remedy. The public media was molded to report politically correct, though substantially incorrect, news day after day, until few people would even think there could be a remedy available to them. The people could be separated from their money and their time to pursue the remedy long
enough for the solutions to be lost in the pages of millions of books in huge law libraries across the country. So many people know there is something wrong with all the conflicts in the laws with the “facts” taught in the schools. How can the American people be free and subject to a sovereign governments whims at the same time? Who would ever have thought the people would be resourceful enough to actually find the remedy? BUT they did!

In 1933 the United States put its insurance policy into place with House Joint Resolution 192 (2) and recorded it in the Congressional Record. It was not required to be promulgated in the Federal Register. An Executive Order issued on April 5, 1933 paving the way for the withdrawal of gold in the United States. Representative Louis T. McFadden brought formal charges on May 23, 1933 against the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve Bank system, the Comptroller of the Currency, and the Secretary of the United States Treasury (Congressional Record May 23, 1933 page 4055-4058). HJR 192 passed on June 3, 1933. Mr. MaFadden claimed on June 10, 1933: “Mr. Chairman, we have in this country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Banks…” HJR 192 is the insurance policy that protects the legislators from conviction for fraud
and treason against the American people. It also protects the American people from damages caused by the actions of the United States.

HJR 192 provided that the one with the gold paid the bills. It removed the requirement that the United States subjects and employees had to pay their debts with gold. It actually prohibited the inclusion of a clause in all subsequent contracts that would require payment in gold. It also cancelled the clause in every contract written prior to June 5, 1933, that required an obligation to be paid in gold – retroactively. It provided that the United States subjects and employees could use any type of coin and currency to discharge a public debt as long as it was in use in the normal course of business in the United States. For a time, United States Notes were the currency used to discharge debts, but later the Federal Reserve and the United States provided a new medium of exchange through paper notes, and debt instruments that could be passed on to a debtor’s creditors to discharge the debtor’s debts. That same currency is available to us to use to discharge public debts.

In the 1950’s the Uniform Commercial Code was presented to the States as a means of unifying the generally accepted procedures for handling the new legal system of dealing with commercial fictions as though they were real. Security instruments replaced substance as collateral for debts. Security instruments could be supported by presumptive contracts. Debt instruments with collateral, and accommodating parties, could be used instead of money. Money and the need for money was disappearing, and a uniform system of laws had to be put in place to allow the courts to uphold the security instruments that depended on commercial fictions as a basis for compelling payment or performance. All this was accomplished by the mid 1960’s.

The commercial code is merely a codification of accepted and required procedures all people engaged in commercial activities must follow. The basic principles of commerce had been settled thousands of years ago, but were refined as commerce become more sophisticated over the years. In the 1900’s the age-old principles of commerce shifted from substance to form. Presumption became a big part of the law. Without giving a degree of force to presumption, the new direction in enforcing commercial claims could not be supported in courts. If the claimants were required to produce their claims every time they tried to collect money or time from the people, they would seldom be successful. The principles expressed in the code combine the means of dealing with substantive commercial activities with the means of dealing with presumptive commercial activities. These principles work as well for the people as they do for the
deceivers. The rules do not respect persons.

Those who enticed the people to register their things with the United States and its sub-divisions, gained control of the substance through the registrations. The United States became the Holder of the titles to many things. The definition of “property” is the interest one has in a thing. The thing is the principal. The property is the interest in the thing. Profits (interest) made from the property of another, belong to the owner of the thing. Profits were made by the deceivers by pledging the registered property in commercial markets, but the profits do not belong to the deceivers. The profits belong to the owners of the things. That is always the people. The corporation only shows ownership of paper – titles to things. The substance cannot appear in the fiction. [[Watch the movie Last Action Hero and watch the confusion created
when they try to mix substance and fiction.]] Sometimes the fiction is made to look very much like substance, but fiction can never become substance. It is an impossibility.

The profits from all the registered things had to be put into trust (constructive) for the benefit of the owners. If the profits were put into the general fund of the United States and not into separate trusts for the owners, the scheme would represent fraud. The profits for each owner could not be commingled. If the owner failed to use his available remedy (fictional credits held in a constructive trust account, fund, or financial ledger) to benefit from the profits, it would not be the fault of the deceivers. If the owner failed to learn the law that would open the door to his remedy, it would not be the fault of the deceivers. The owner is responsible for learning the law, so he understands that the profits from his things are available for him to discharge debts or charges brought against his public person by the United States.

If the United States has the “gold”, the United States pays the bills (from the trust account, fund, or financial ledger). The definition of “fund” is money set aside to pay a debt. The fund is there to discharge the public debts attributed to the United States subjects, but ultimately back to the accommodating parties – the American people. The national debt that is owed is to the owners of the registered things – the American people, as well as to other creditors.

If the United States owes a debt to the owner of the thing, and the owner is presumed (by accommodation) to owe a public debt to the United States, the logical thing is to ask the United States to discharge that public debt from the trust fund. The way for the United States to get around having to pay the public debts for the people is to claim the owner cannot be an owner if he agreed to be the accommodating party for a debtor person. If the people are truly the principle,then they know how to handle their financial and political affairs, ULNESS they have never been taught. If the owner admits by his actions out of ignorance, that he is an accommodating party, he has taken on the debtor’s liabilities without getting consideration in exchange. Here lies the fiction again. The owner of the thing does not have to knowingly agree to be the accommodating party for the debtor person; he just has to act like he agreed. That is easy if he has a choice of going to jail or signing for the debtor person. The presumption that he is the accommodating party is strong enough for
the courts to hold the owner of the thing liable for a tax on the thing he actually owns.

Debtors may have the use of certain things, but the things belong to the creditors. The creditor is the master. The debtor is the servant. The Uniform Commercial Code is very specific about the duties and responsibilities a debtor has. If the owner of the thing is presumed to be a debtor because of his previous admissions and adhesion contracts, he is going to have a difficult time convincing the United States that it has a duty to discharge public debts for him. In addition, the courts are staffed with loyal judges who will look for every mistake the people make when trying to use their remedy.

WHY THE UCC FILING?


Short Explanation as is Understood at this Time
(Subject to further clarification)

Around the time of the war between the United States and the southern states of the American union, the United States was busy putting together a plan that would increase the jurisdiction of the United States. This plan was necessary because the United States had no subjects and only the land ceded to it from the states, ie. the District which was only ten miles square and such land as was necessary for forts, magazines, arsenals, etc. 




Between the 1860’s and the early 1900’s, banking and taxing mechanisms were changing through legislation. Cunning people closely associated with the powers in England had great influence on the legislation being passed in the United States. Of course such legislation did not apply to the states or to the people in the states, but making the distinction was not deemed to be a necessary duty of the legislators. It was the responsibility of the people to understand their relationship to the United States and to the laws that were being passed by the legislature. This distinction between the United States and the states was taught in the homes and the schools and churches. The early admiralty courts did not interpret legislation as broadly at that time because the people knew when the courts were overstepping their jurisdiction. The people were in control because they knew who they were and where they were standing in relation to the United States.

In 1913 the United States added numerous private laws to its books that facilitated the increase of subjects and property for the United States. The 14th Amendment provided for a new class of citizens – United States citizens, that had not formerly been recognized. Until the 14th Amendment in 1868, there were no persons born or naturalized in the United States. They had all been born or naturalized in one of the several states. United States citizenship was a result of state citizenship. After the Civil War, a new class was recognized, and was the beginning of the democracy sited in the District of Columbia. The American people in the republic sited in the several states, could choose to benefit as one of these new United States citizens BY CHOICE. The new class of citizens was given the right to vote in the democracy in 1870 by the 15th Amendment. All it required was an application. Benefits came with this new citizenship, but with the benefits, came duties and responsibilities that were totally regulated by the legislature for the District of Columbia. Edward Mandell House is attributed with giving a very detailed outline of the plans to be implemented to enslave the American people. (1) The 13th Amendment in 1865 opened the way for the people to volunteer into slavery to accept the benefits offered by the United States. Whether House actually spoke the words or not , is really irrelevant because the scenario detailed in the statement attributed to him has clearly been implemented. Central banking for the United States was legislated with the Federal Reserve Act in 1913. The ability to decrease the currency in circulation through taxation was legislated with the 16th Amendment in 1913. Support for the presumption that the American people had volunteered to participate in the United States democracy was legislated with the 17th Amendment in 1913. The path was provided for the control of the courts, with the creation of the American Bar Association in 1913.

In 1917 the United States legislature passed the Trading with the Enemy Act and the Emergency War Powers Act, opening the doors for the United States to suspend limitations otherwise mandated in the Constitution. Even in times of peace, every contrived and created social, political, or financial emergency was sufficient authority for the officers of the United States to overstep its peace time powers and implement volumes of “law” that would increase the coffers of the United States. There is always a declared emergency in the United States and its States, but it only applies to their subjects.

In the 1920’s the States accelerated the push for mothers to register their babies. Life was good and people were not paying attention to what was happening in government. The stock market crashed, and those who were not on the inside were not warned to take their money out before they lost everything.

In the 1930’s federal legislation provided for registration of babies through applications for birth certificates, so government workers could get maternity leave with pay. The States pushed for registration of cars through applications for certificates of title, and for registration of land through registration of deeds of trust. Constructive trusts secretly were created as each of the people blindly walked into the United States democracy, thereby agreeing to be sureties for the debts of the United States. The great depression supplied the diversion to keep the people’s attention off what government was doing. The Social Security program was implemented, along with numerous other United States programs that invited the American people to volunteer to be the sureties behind the United States’ new registered property and adhesion contracts through the new United States subjects.

The plan was well on its path by 1933. Massive registration of property through United States agencies, including the State of _______ subdivisions, was assuring the United States and its officers would get rich beyond their wildest expectations, as predicted by Mendall House. All of this was done without disclosure of the material facts that accompanied each application for registration – fraud. The fraud was a sufficient reason to charge all the United States officers with treason, UNLESS a remedy could be supplied for the people to recoup their property and collect for the damages they suffered as a result of the fraud.

If a remedy were available, and the people chose not to or failed to use their remedy, no charge of fraud could be sustained even in a common law court. The United States only needed to provide the remedy. It was not required to explain it or even tell the people where the remedy could be found. The attorneys did not even have to be taught about the remedy. That gave them plausible deniability when the people struggled to understand the new laws. The legislators did not have to have the intricate details of the law explained to them regarding the bills they were passing. That gave them plausible deniability. If the people failed to use their remedy, the United States came out the winner every time. If the people did discover their remedy, the United States had to honor it and release the registered property back to the people, but only if the people knew they had a remedy, and only if they requested it in the proper manner. It was a great plan.

With plausible deniability, even when the people knew they had a remedy and pursued it, the attorneys, judges, and legislators could act like they did not understand the people’s claims. Requiring the public schools to teach civics, government, and history classes out of approved politically correct text books also assured the people would not find the remedy for a long time. Passing new State and Federal laws that appeared to subject the people to rules and regulations, added another level of protection against the people finding their remedy. The public media was molded to report politically correct, though substantially incorrect, news day after day, until few people would even think there could be a remedy available to them. The people could be separated from their money and their time to pursue the remedy long enough for the solutions to be lost in the pages of millions of books in huge law libraries across the country. So many people know there is something wrong with all the conflicts in the laws with the “facts” taught in the schools. How can the American people be free and subject to a sovereign governments whims at the same time? Who would ever have thought the people would be resourceful enough to actually find the remedy? BUT they did!

In 1933 the United States put its insurance policy into place with House Joint Resolution 192 (2) and recorded it in the Congressional Record. It was not required to be promulgated in the Federal Register. An Executive Order issued on April 5, 1933 paving the way for the withdrawal of gold in the United States. Representative Louis T. McFadden brought formal charges on May 23, 1933 against the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve Bank system, the Comptroller of the Currency, and the Secretary of the United States Treasury (Congressional Record May 23, 1933 page 4055-4058). HJR 192 passed on June 3, 1933. Mr. MaFadden claimed on June 10, 1933: “Mr. Chairman, we have in this country one of the most corrupt institutions the world has ever known. I refer to the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Banks…” HJR 192 is the insurance policy that protects the legislators from conviction for fraud and treason against the American people. It also protects the American people from damages caused by the actions of the United States.

HJR 192 provided that the one with the gold paid the bills. It removed the requirement that the United States subjects and employees had to pay their debts with gold. It actually prohibited the inclusion of a clause in all subsequent contracts that would require payment in gold. It also cancelled the clause in every contract written prior to June 5, 1933, that required an obligation to be paid in gold – retroactively. It provided that the United States subjects and employees could use any type of coin and currency to discharge a public debt as long as it was in use in the normal course of business in the United States. For a time, United States Notes were the currency used to discharge debts, but later the Federal Reserve and the United States provided a new medium of exchange through paper notes, and debt instruments that could be passed on to a debtor’s creditors to discharge the debtor’s debts. That same currency is available to us to use to discharge public debts.

In the 1950’s the Uniform Commercial Code was presented to the States as a means of unifying the generally accepted procedures for handling the new legal system of dealing with commercial fictions as though they were real. Security instruments replaced substance as collateral for debts. Security instruments could be supported by presumptive contracts. Debt instruments with collateral, and accommodating parties, could be used instead of money. Money and the need for money was disappearing, and a uniform system of laws had to be put in place to allow the courts to uphold the security instruments that depended on commercial fictions as a basis for compelling payment or performance. All this was accomplished by the mid 1960’s.

The commercial code is merely a codification of accepted and required procedures all people engaged in commercial activities must follow. The basic principles of commerce had been settled thousands of years ago, but were refined as commerce become more sophisticated over the years. In the 1900’s the age-old principles of commerce shifted from substance to form. Presumption became a big part of the law. Without giving a degree of force to presumption, the new direction in enforcing commercial claims could not be supported in courts. If the claimants were required to produce their claims every time they tried to collect money or time from the people, they would seldom be successful. The principles expressed in the code combine the means of dealing with substantive commercial activities with the means of dealing with presumptive commercial activities. These principles work as well for the people as they do for the deceivers. The rules do not respect persons.

Those who enticed the people to register their things with the United States and its sub-divisions, gained control of the substance through the registrations. The United States became the Holder of the titles to many things. The definition of “property” is the interest one has in a thing. The thing is the principal. The property is the interest in the thing. Profits (interest) made from the property of another, belong to the owner of the thing. Profits were made by the deceivers by pledging the registered property in commercial markets, but the profits do not belong to the deceivers. The profits belong to the owners of the things. That is always the people. The corporation only shows ownership of paper – titles to things. The substance cannot appear in the fiction. [[Watch the movie Last Action Hero and watch the confusion created when they try to mix substance and fiction.]] Sometimes the fiction is made to look very much like substance, but fiction can never become substance. It is an impossibility.

The profits from all the registered things had to be put into trust (constructive) for the benefit of the owners. If the profits were put into the general fund of the United States and not into separate trusts for the owners, the scheme would represent fraud. The profits for each owner could not be commingled. If the owner failed to use his available remedy (fictional credits held in a constructive trust account, fund, or financial ledger) to benefit from the profits, it would not be the fault of the deceivers. If the owner failed to learn the law that would open the door to his remedy, it would not be the fault of the deceivers. The owner is responsible for learning the law, so he understands that the profits from his things are available for him to discharge debts or charges brought against his public person by the United States.

If the United States has the “gold”, the United States pays the bills (from the trust account, fund, or financial ledger). The definition of “fund” is money set aside to pay a debt. The fund is there to discharge the public debts attributed to the United States subjects, but ultimately back to the accommodating parties – the American people. The national debt that is owed is to the owners of the registered things – the American people, as well as to other creditors.

If the United States owes a debt to the owner of the thing, and the owner is presumed (by accommodation) to owe a public debt to the United States, the logical thing is to ask the United States to discharge that public debt from the trust fund. The way for the United States to get around having to pay the public debts for the people is to claim the owner cannot be an owner if he agreed to be the accommodating party for a debtor person. If the people are truly the principle, then they know how to handle their financial and political affairs, ULNESS they have never been taught. If the owner admits by his actions out of ignorance, that he is an accommodating party, he has taken on the debtor’s liabilities without getting consideration in exchange. Here lies the fiction again. The owner of the thing does not have to knowingly agree to be the accommodating party for the debtor person; he just has to act like he agreed. That is easy if he has a choice of going to jail or signing for the debtor person. The presumption that he is the accommodating party is strong enough for the courts to hold the owner of the thing liable for a tax on the thing he actually owns.

Debtors may have the use of certain things, but the things belong to the creditors. The creditor is the master. The debtor is the servant. The Uniform Commercial Code is very specific about the duties and responsibilities a debtor has. If the owner of the thing is presumed to be a debtor because of his previous admissions and adhesion contracts, he is going to have a difficult time convincing the United States that it has a duty to discharge public debts for him. In addition, the courts are staffed with loyal judges who will look for every mistake the people make when trying to use their remedy.

There is a very powerful tool the people can use to help them get to the real issues when they find themselves up against the power of presumption. The law provides for either party of an admiralty court action to OBJECT to a line of questioning. When you object in that court setting, you must tell the judge why you object, or he will overrule your objection. The reason is:

“This line of questioning assumes facts not in evidence.”

You can request that evidence of the Plaintiff’s claim be entered as evidence. If the judge overrules this fundamental, basic, underlying, necessary principle of establishing jurisdiction and right to make a charge, there is a major procedural error in the proceeding. Granting impersonam jurisdiction to get to the bottom of the issue is vastly better than arguing, “I’m not that person.”

The owner of the thing, after learning the law and discovering who he is in relation to the United States, can file a UCC Financing Statement and Security Agreement registering his interest in the artificial entity (PERSON) the United States created after Mom applied for a birth certificate. That was the act of registering her biological property, her baby (substance), with the State of _______. The United States holds the paper title (form), not the substance (baby). Until your Financing Statement is filed, the United States is the holder of the title to the artificial entity. Its name is spelled in all capital letter – JOHN HENRY DOE. When John Henry Doe files the Financing Statement supported by a Security Agreement signed by the artificial entity (JOHN) and the owner (John), he becomes the holder in due course of the title to JOHN. The UCC and the State commercial law are very specific about the effect of a registered security interest. It has priority over most other interest claimed (only claimed) in the same thing. The evidence that is missing in the court, is the registered claim over the person (JOHN).

The owner also must notify the Secretary of the Treasury that he is going to handle his own affairs in the future. He can file a Bill of Exchange with the Secretary through which he exchanges his person’s accepted-for-value birth certificate and social security numbers, for a chargeback of all the presumed charges brought against his person since the birth certificate was issued.

The owner can also reserve a noncash Federal Reserve routing number and any number of noncash instrument numbers by filing an amendment to his Financing Statement or just including his reservation on his original Financing Statement. Each bank account opened in the name of the owner’s person has a routing number. If an account is open, it is available to process cash items. If you write a check to the plumber, it can be converted to cash at your bank. You cannot write a check on an account that has been closed. Those accounts and their routing numbers are reserved for noncash items for the person (JOHN) that opened the account originally. Accounts that have been closed by the bank instead of the person, should not be used for noncash items. Once this is done, you are in a position to begin receiving reimbursements against the obligation the United States owes to you for money and time it has received that belong to you.

The owner of registered things, who has learned the law and what his rights are, and has filed his Financing Statement, Security Agreement, and Bill of Exchange, and reserved his noncash account routing numbers, can issue an instrument indicating his UCC registration number, his registered Federal Reserve routing number, the name of the public party making a charge against his person, and the amount of the debt to be discharge.

Think of the whole transaction in relation to a dead battery. The batter represents your public person (JOHN), which is a dead entity that can function within the public maize of fiction, transmitting benefits from the public to you in the private IF it is charged up. You cannot go into the public because you are not a fiction. JOHN has no power until it is charged with some energy. That energy comes from an IRS default notice, court judgment, credit card bill, utility bill, traffic ticket, or some other instrument that has a $ amount and JOHN’s name on it as the presumed debtor. The bill is the energy. It charges the dead JOHN. You can now discharge JOHN and put JOHN’s accrual account with the charging party back to a zero balance. You as the secured party over the assets put up as security by JOHN to you as collateral for the debt JOHN owes you, can discharge JOHN with a negotiable instrument for the same $ amount as the charging instrument. The charging party that receives your noncash item can 1) process it through a United States department, 2) give it to a third party, 3) keep it to increase its liquidity.

When you, as the owner of a thing, registered it with the United States or one of its subdivisions, you let the United States hold the legal title to your thing based on misrepresentation and failure to disclose material facts to you at the time of registration. You probably retained possession of the thing. The United States invested the title and made a profit. If you did not specifically authorize the United States and its agents to invest the legal title, the profits made from that title belong to you, because as the owner, you remain the equitable title holder. Legally all the profits from the investment of the titles to all your registered things must go into a fund for your benefit. If they did not put the profits in a trust fund of some sort, it would be fraud.

Just acquiring the titles through what is promoted as mandatory registration, is fraud. If the scenario attributed to Mandell House is now in full application in the United States, which it is, the officers of the United States could be charged and convicted with treason IF they had not provided a remedy, which they did. -- House Joint Resolution 192 on June 5, 1933. This is their insurance policy to assure they are not convicted of treason. That does not mean they cannot be charged with treason, but the courts will dismiss based on failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Because you have a remedy outside the court, you cannot sustain a charge of treason.

The problem in the past with trying to discharge public debts with instruments that could not be processed through your bank on the corner, was that those discharge instruments did not route through the Federal Reserve. It is the bean counter for the national debt. That debt is first and primarily owed to the people who are the equitable titleholders of all the substance in this country. If you try to discharge a public debt with your discharge instrument, and you do not route it through the Federal Reserve, it appears you are receiving a benefit from the United States without exchanging it for something of value. This is not technically correct because you have a right to be reimbursed, whether or not you apply it toward the debt the United States owes you. You are the substance; it is the fiction.

If you do route your discharge instrument through the Federal Reserve, where the national debt owed to you can be reduced by the amount of the instrument, you have made an exchange that fits nicely into their accrual bookkeeping system. Your PERSON’s charge from the charging party within the United States commercial scheme is discharged, and the debt the United States owes to you is discharged by the same amount. That is a quid pro quo, and everyone is happy, EXCEPT those who are not interested in the money but just want to be in control from behind the scenes.

To accomplish this quid pro quo exchange:

1. your claim to being one of the people must appear on a public register (the Secretary of State),

2. you must have an account with the banker for the United States (the Secretary of the Treasury),

3. you must have given notice of your reservation of routing numbers through the national debt accountant (the Federal Reserve),

4. you must refer to the insurance policy that covers your remedy (House Joint Resolution 192),

5. you must make your instrument negotiable so it can be used by the United States for a profit,

6. you must transmit your instrument back into the public through an agent (your registered debtor),

7. you must only use a noncash item for this exchange,

8. you must do a banker’s acceptance of a charging instrument to attach to your noncash item, and

9. you must understand that you are not getting something for nothing

Reserving your routing numbers to use on your discharge instruments is not as difficult as was thought during the previous decade. Every person has opened bank accounts in the past that have been closed for one reason for another. On the bottom of the checks for those closed bank accounts is a routing number to the particular bank and a routing number to the particular account. Each check has a check number. When you put the check number together with the two routing numbers, you have a means of tracking each item that goes through the worldwide banking system. The routing numbers on the bottom of the checks from accounts your person has closed will never be reassigned. They are attached to your person’s NAME forever and kept in the records of the Federal Reserve.

Bank accounts that are still open and active are used for cash items. Checks written on these open bank accounts can be taken to the particular bank and CASHED. This is the type of instrument used in commercial transactions everyday. There is a fund attached to the check from which the debt evidenced by the check can be paid.

Bank accounts that are no longer open and active cannot be used to process cash items. They can only be used to process noncash items. They require special handling. Title 12 of USC and CFR explain how and when receiving banks are to process noncash items. A closed bank account associated with your debtor’s NAME, has routing numbers that can route your discharge instrument through the Federal Reserve to reduce the national debt to you and increase the balance of the bank account of the party that is charging your debtor. It is a WIN WIN situation.

The charging party is instructed to mail the discharge instrument to the Secretary of Transportation. Title 46 has sufficient evidence to support the proposition that the Secretary is the trustee over some or all vessels mortgaged by the United States. If your debtor PERSON is presumed to be a vessel, it is regulated by the Secretary of Transportation through the Maritime Ministries Administration, that is the proper party to assist in processing your noncash item. The Secretary of Transportation can forward the item to the Secretary of the Treasury, who already has been notified to prepare for noncash activity in your treasury direct account on the Bill of Exchange. The Secretary of the Treasury is directly related to the Federal Reserve. Between the Treasury and the Federal Reserve, your noncash item can be directed to the proper parties to settle the account and get everyone into that quid pro quo position we want.

The United States and its co-business partners are debtors to you. You are the creditor, not only over your debtor PERSON, but also over the United States, the legal titleholder over the registered things to which you are the equitable titleholder. You are the primary creditor, so if the United States has other creditors, like the international bankers, they cannot jump to the front of the line. Their claims are subordinated to your claims if your claims are registered and if you understand the law surrounding what you are doing.

LEARN THE LAW FIRST, THEN JUMP OFF THE CLIFF!!!!!!!!! 

MONEY FROM NOTHING. Montgomery vs. Daly






I. MONEY FROM NOTHING.

It’s been called the most astounding sleight of hand ever devised. The creation of money privatized, and usurped from Congress by a private banking cartel. Most people think money is issued by fiat through the government, but that is not the case. Except for coins, which compose only about one one-thousandth of the total U.S. money supply, all of our money is created by private banks. Federal Reserve Notes (dollar bills) are issued by the Federal Reserve, a private banking corporation, and lent to the government at interest, creating a huge debt to the nation. A debt the nation can never get out of unless the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 is abolished. Moreover, Federal Reserve Notes and coins together compose less than 3 percent of the money supply. The other 97 percent is created by commercial banks as loans, and backed by nothing.

You don’t believe banks create the money they lend? Neither did the jury in a landmark Minnesota case, until they heard the evidence. First National Bank of Montgomery vs. Daly (1969) was a courtroom drama worthy of a movie script. Every American that is facing a housing crisis should take note.

Defendant Jerome Daly opposed the bank’s foreclosure on his $14,000 home mortgage loan on the ground that there was no consideration for the loan. “Consideration” (“the thing exchanged”) is an essential element of a contract. All contracts need an offer, acceptance and consideration to be valid.

Daly, an attorney representing himself, argued that the bank had put up no real money for his loan. The courtroom proceedings were recorded by Associate Justice Bill Drexler, whose chief role, he said, was to keep order in a highly charged courtroom where the attorneys were threatening a fist fight. Drexler hadn’t given much credence to the theory of the defense, until Mr. Morgan, the bank’s president, took the stand. To everyone’s surprise, Morgan admitted that the bank routinely created money “out of thin air” for its loans, and that this was standard banking practice. “It sounds like fraud to me,” intoned Presiding Justice Martin Mahoney amid nods from the jurors. In his court memorandum, Justice Mahoney stated:

Plaintiff admitted that it, in combination with the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis,  did create the entire $14,000.00 in money and credit upon its own books by bookkeeping entry. That this was the consideration used to support the Note dated May 8, 1964 and the Mortgage of the same date. The money and credit first came into existence when they created it. Mr. Morgan admitted that no United States Law or Statute existed which gave him the right to do this. A lawful consideration must exist and be tendered to support the Note.

The court rejected the bank’s claim for foreclosure, and the defendant kept his house. To Daly, the implications were enormous. If bankers were indeed extending credit without consideration – without backing their loans with money they actually had in their vaults and were entitled to lend – a decision declaring their loans void could topple the power base of the world. He wrote in a local news article:

This decision, which is legally sound, has the effect of declaring all private mortgages on real and personal property, and all U.S. and State bonds held by the Federal Reserve, National and State banks to be null and void. This amounts to an emancipation of this Nation from personal, national and state debt purportedly owed to this banking system. Every American owes it to himself . . . to study this decision very carefully . . . for upon it hangs the question of freedom or slavery.

Needless to say, however, the decision failed to change prevailing practice, although it was never overruled. It was heard in a Justice of the Peace Court, an autonomous court system dating back to those frontier days when defendants had trouble traveling to big cities to respond to summonses. In that system (which has now been phased out), judges and courts were pretty much on their own. Justice Mahoney, who was not dependent on campaign financing or hamstrung by precedent, went so far as to threaten to prosecute and expose the bank. He died less than six months after the trial, in a mysterious accident that appeared to involve poisoning. Since that time, a number of defendants have attempted to avoid loan defaults using the defense Daly raised; but they have met with only limited success. As one judge said off the record:

If I let you do that – you and everyone else – it would bring the whole system down. I cannot let you go behind the bar of the bank. We are not going behind that curtain!

From time to time, however, the curtain has been lifted long enough for us to see behind it. A number of reputable authorities have attested to what is going on, including Sir Josiah Stamp, president of the Bank of England and the second richest man in Britain in the 1920s. He declared in an address at the University of Texas in 1927: “The modern banking system manufactures money out of nothing. The process is perhaps the most astounding piece of sleight of hand that was ever invented. Banking was conceived in inequity and born in sin . . . . Bankers own the earth. Take it away from them but leave them the power to create money, and, with a flick of a pen, they will create enough money to buy it back again. . . . Take this great power away from them and all great fortunes like mine will disappear, for then this would be a better and happier world to live in. . . . But, if you want to continue to be the slaves of bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let bankers continue to create money and control credit.”

Robert H. Hemphill, Credit Manager of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta in the Great Depression, wrote in 1934: “We are completely dependent on the commercial Banks. Someone has to borrow every dollar we have in circulation, cash or credit. If the Banks create ample synthetic money we are prosperous; if not, we starve. We are absolutely without a permanent money system. When one gets a complete grasp of the picture, the tragic absurdity of our hopeless position is almost incredible, but there it is. It is the most important subject intelligent persons can investigate and reflect upon.”

Graham Towers, Governor of the Bank of Canada from 1935 to 1955, acknowledged: “Banks create money. That is what they are for. . . . The manufacturing process to make money consists of making an entry in a book. That is all. . . . Each and every time a Bank makes a loan . . . new Bank credit is created — brand new money.”

Robert B. Anderson, Secretary of the Treasury under Eisenhower, said in an interview reported in the August 31, 1959 issue of U.S. News and World Report: “[W]hen a bank makes a loan, it simply adds to the borrower’s deposit account in the bank by the amount of the loan. The money is not taken from anyone else’s deposit; it was not previously paid in to the bank by anyone. It’s new money, created by the bank for the use of the borrower.”

II. The Following is the Actual Court Record of:

FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF MONTGOMERY VS. JEROME DALY

IN THE JUSTICE COURT

STATE OF MINNESOTA

COUNTY OF SCOTT

TOWNSHIP OF CREDIT RIVER

JUSTICE MARTIN V. MAHONEY

First National Bank of Montgomery,

Plaintiff

vs

Jerome Daly,

Defendant

JUDGMENT AND DECREE

The above entitled action came on before the Court and a Jury of 12 on December 7, 1968 at 10:00 am.   Plaintiff appeared by its President Lawrence V. Morgan and was represented by its Counsel, R. Mellby. Defendant appeared on his own behalf.

A Jury of Talesmen were called, impaneled and sworn to try the issues in the Case. Lawrence V. Morgan was the only witness called for Plaintiff and Defendant testified as the only witness in his own behalf.

Plaintiff brought this as a Common Law action for the recovery of the possession of Lot 19 Fairview Beach, Scott County, Minn. Plaintiff claimed title to the Real Property in question by foreclosure of a Note and Mortgage Deed dated May 8, 1964 which Plaintiff claimed was in default at the time foreclosure proceedings were started.

Defendant appeared and answered that the Plaintiff created the money and credit upon its own books by bookkeeping entry as the consideration for the Note and Mortgage of May 8, 1964 and alleged failure of the consideration for the Mortgage Deed and alleged that the Sheriff’s sale passed no title to plaintiff.

The issues tried to the Jury were whether there was a lawful consideration and whether Defendant had waived his rights to complain about the consideration having paid on the Note for almost 3 years.

Mr. Morgan admitted that all of the money or credit which was used as a consideration was created upon their books, that this was standard banking practice exercised by their bank in combination with the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, another private Bank, further that he knew of no United States Statute or Law that gave the Plaintiff the authority to do this. Plaintiff further claimed that Defendant by using the ledger book created credit and by paying on the Note and Mortgage waived any right to complain about the Consideration and that the Defendant was estopped from doing so.

At 12:15 on December 7, 1968 the Jury returned a unanimous verdict for the Defendant.

Now therefore, by virtue of the authority vested in me pursuant to the Declaration of Independence, the Northwest Ordinance of 1787, the Constitution of United States and the Constitution and the laws of the State of Minnesota not inconsistent therewith ;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED:

1.That the Plaintiff is not entitled to recover the possession of Lot 19, Fairview Beach, Scott County, Minnesota according to the Plat thereof on file in the Register of Deeds office.

2.That because of failure of a lawful consideration the Note and Mortgage dated May 8, 1964 are null and void.

3.That the Sheriff’s sale of the above described premises held on June 26, 1967 is null and void, of no effect.

4.That the Plaintiff has no right title or interest in said premises or lien thereon as is above described.

5.That any provision in the Minnesota Constitution and any Minnesota Statute binding the jurisdiction of this Court is repugnant to the Constitution of the United States and to the Bill of Rights of the Minnesota Constitution and is null and void and that this Court has jurisdiction to render complete Justice in this Cause.

The following memorandum and any supplementary memorandum made and filed by this Court in support of this Judgment is hereby made a part hereof by reference.

BY THE COURT

Dated December 9, 1968

Justice MARTIN V. MAHONEY

Credit River Township

Scott County, Minnesota

MEMORANDUM

The issues in this case were simple. There was no material dispute of the facts for the Jury to resolve.

Plaintiff admitted that it, in combination with the federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, which are for all practical purposes, because of their interlocking activity and practices, and both being Banking Institutions Incorporated under the Laws of the United States, are in the Law to be treated as one and the same Bank, did create the entire $14,000.00 in money or credit upon its own books by bookkeeping entry. That this was the Consideration used to support the Note dated May 8, 1964 and the Mortgage of the same date. The money and credit first came into existence when they created it. Mr. Morgan admitted that no United States Law Statute existed which gave him the right to do this. A lawful consideration must exist and be tendered to support the Note. See Ansheuser-Busch Brewing Company v. Emma Mason, 44 Minn. 318, 46 N.W. 558.   The Jury found that there was no consideration and I agree.   Only God can create something of value out of nothing.

Even if Defendant could be charged with waiver or estoppel as a matter of Law this is no defense to the Plaintiff. The Law leaves wrongdoers where it finds them. See sections 50, 51 and 52 of Am Jur 2nd “Actions” on page 584 – “no action will lie to recover on a claim based upon, or in any manner depending upon, a fraudulent, illegal, or immoral transaction or contract to which Plaintiff was a party.”

Plaintiff’s act of creating credit is not authorized by the Constitution and Laws of the United States, is unconstitutional and void, and is not a lawful consideration in the eyes of the Law to support any thing or upon which any lawful right can be built.

Nothing in the Constitution of the United States limits the jurisdiction of this Court, which is one of original Jurisdiction with right of trial by Jury guaranteed. This is a Common Law action. Minnesota cannot limit or impair the power of this Court to render Complete Justice between the parties.  Any provisions in the Constitution and laws of Minnesota which attempt to do so is repugnant to the Constitution of the United States and void.  No question as to the Jurisdiction of this Court was raised by either party at the trial. Both parties were given complete liberty to submit any and all facts to the Jury, at least in so far as they saw fit.

No complaint was made by Plaintiff that Plaintiff did not receive a fair trial. From the admissions made by Mr. Morgan the path of duty was direct and clear for the Jury.  Their Verdict could not reasonably have been otherwise. Justice was rendered completely and without denial, promptly and without delay, freely and without purchase, conformable to the laws in this Court of December 7, 1968.

BY THE COURT

December 9, 1968

Justice Martin V. Mahoney

Credit River Township

Scott County, Minnesota.

Note: It has never been doubted that a Note given on a Consideration which is prohibited by law is void.  It has been determined, independent of Acts of Congress, that sailing under the license of an enemy is illegal.  The emission of Bills of Credit upon the books of these private Corporations for the purpose of private gain is not warranted by the Constitution of the United States and is unlawful.  See Craig v. Mo. 4 Peters Reports 912.   This Court can tread only that path which is marked out by duty.    M.V.M.

JEROME DALY had his own information to reveal about this case, which establishes that between his own revealed information and the fact that Justice Martin V. Mahoney was murdered 6 months after he entered the Credit River Decision on the books of the Court, why the case was never legally overturned, nor can it be

III. JEROME DALY’S OWN ENTRY

REGARDING JUSTICE MAHONEY’S MEMORANDUM

FORWARD: The above Judgment was entered by the Court on December 9, 1968. The issue there was simple – Nothing in the law gave the Banks the right to create money on their books. The Bank filed a Notice of Appeal within 10 days. The Appeals statutes must be strictly followed, otherwise the District Court does not acquire Jurisdiction upon Appeal. To effect the Appeal the Bank had to deposit $2.00 with the Clerk within 10 days for payment to the Justice when he made his return to the District Court.  The Bank deposited two $1.00 Federal Reserve Notes. The Justice refused the Notes and refused to allow the Appeal upon the grounds that the Notes were unlawful and void for any purpose. The Decision is addressed to the legality of these Notes and the Federal Reserve System. The Cases of Edwards v. Kearnzey and Craig vs Missouri set out in the decision should be studied very carefully as they bear on the inviolability of Contracts. This is the Crux of the whole issue.   Jerome Daly.

SPECIAL NOTATION.  Justice Mahoney denied the use of Federal Reserve Notes, since they represent debt instruments, not true money, from being used to pay for the appeal process itself.  In order to get this overturned, since the bank’s appeal without the payment being recognized was out of time, it would have required that the Bank of Montgomery, Minnesota bring a Title 42, Section 1983 action against the judicial act of Justice Mahoney for a violation of the Constitution of the United States under color of law or authority, and if successful, have the case remanded back to him to either retry the case or allow the appeal to go through.  But the corrupt individuals behind the bank(s) were unable to ever elicit such a decision from any federal court due to the fact that because of their vile hatred for him and what he had done to them and their little Queen’s Scheme, had him murdered (same as them murdering him) just about 6 months later.  And so, the case stands, just as it was.  Amazingly, if they hadn’t been so arrogant about the value of their federal reserve notes and paid the Justice just 2 measly silver dollars, or else 4 measly half dollars, or else 8 measly quarters, or else 20 measly dimes, or else 40 measly nickels, or else 200 measly pennies, they could have had their appeal and would not have had to get blood on their hands.

As it is, they are now known for their bloody ways, and the day will come when the American people will reap vengeance upon them for such a heinous and villainous act.  Amen.