Refusing A Non-Substantive Offer (Nullify Commercial Law)

Tags

acceptance under UCC 1-308, law forms, motion to dismiss, nullify commercial law, Reservation of Rights, return for cause, sample forms, sample nullification, states illegal contract, substantive statute, substantive statute returned for cause, sui juris, U.S. corporation, UCC 1-103, UCC 1-207 replace by UCC 1-308, UCC 1-308 remedy, under protest, without commercial dishonor, without prejudice

(For Frank ‘Austin’ England III) 

(Blog Masters Note:  In the Last Post, Frank ‘Austin’ England showed you the difference between Substantive and Regulation as they appear in the Code of Federal Registry (CFR)  anything with Brackets  in the authorization is null and void if you send it back to the maker of the instrument.  This is an e-mail portion of one of his messages. )

Okay . . . virtually everything that the corporate government does and or serves on you, can be nullified nullified by simply writing across the “instrument” or “item” “Returned for Cause, Without Commercial Dishonor and No Recourse” . . . and above your signature write “Without Prejudice UCC 1-308”.
Study the three attachments.  Read the Remedy by non-assumpsit first . . . should bring you up to speed to deal with understanding the other two . . . This cuts the administrative process off at the knees . . . 

(Blog Masters Note: These are a set of three documents that Frank ‘Austin’ England III used as training tools. One of those documents has already been posted  “Court (Remedy by Non-Assumpsit)” Now we will go through one that hasn’t been posted already:

NULLIFY THE LAW 

Government has no jurisdiction under the constitution.

 Important : UCC 1-207 has been moved to UCC 1-308 to hide it from the public. Also you will need to make written motions along with the verbal procedure in court in this article “The UCC Connection”　 Additionally, lower level state courts and magistrates will not know what you are talking about. You have to either appeal to a higher court an/or ask for a real judge. In Federal court they will offer you a magistrate. Never accept a magistrate. You always want a real judge.I have enclosed a notification of reservation of rights. Make sure you get it notarized and then file it with the county to make it public record. This is usually the same place that you file a marriage license. After they stamp it filed, then make several copies and send it to real judges on the state and Federal level. Certified mail and return receipt. If signature is refused, then just send it first class mail and they are then responsible for its knowledge. Be sure to keep all of your mail receipts. DO NOT send it to magistrates or judges that only try traffic tickets and dog bites etc.. Send it to real judges that try real felonies. It’ll take about 15 to 30 days, but there will never be a warrant issued for your arrest or to search your property unless Ya actually harm someone.　 Also so you should not get a traffic ticket. Sometimes the judges fail to put you on the list for diplomatic immunity. If you do get a traffic ticket, then just appeal the decision of the traffic ticket court to the next court up and file a motion to dismiss because of reservation of rights. Then you may never hear from them again, or they will drag it out up to a year trying to wear you down or scare you into a plea bargain. But stick to your guns and do not give in. There is nothing they can do. The fact is that he will never rule on your motion but continue to drag out the case until they can no longer try you. This is usually 12 months. Then you file a motion to dismiss because you did not receive a speedy trial.To test for diplomatic immunity, I suggest getting a parking ticket or removing your car tags. This way if you are not on the list and do get a ticket, this non moving violation ticket should not hurt your insurance in case ya mess up the process.

How the UCC 1-308 works.
Compare that the constitution for the US establishes for the court’s jurisdiction at common law, equity and admiralty under article 3. As opposed to this, the Federal corporation establishes a similar jurisdiction except as principles under the Uniform commercial code. See…　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　
　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　 UCC § 1-103. Supplementary General Principles of Law Applicable.
Unless displaced by the particular provisions of this Act, the principles of law and equity, including the law merchant and the law relative to capacity to contract, principal and agent, estoppel, fraud, misrepresentation, duress, coercion, mistake, Bankruptcy, or other validating or invalidating cause shall supplement its provisions.　

Anytime ya see law by itself as in the foregoing, it means the common law. Except that they are taking the common law jurisdiction from the contract the UCC. The remedy of course is UCC 1-308. 　So the UCC is a deceptive criminal contractual constitution of sorts to those who uses it against us.　　

UCC 1-308　is the remedy for any legal process under commercial law in the U.S.

UCC § 1-308. Performance or Acceptance Under Reservation of Rights.(a) A party that with explicit reservation of rights performs or promises performance or assents to performance in a manner demanded or offered by the other party does not thereby prejudice the rights reserved. Such words as “without prejudice,” “under protest,” or the like are sufficient.　

Since the Federal Corporation is just that, a corporation. It has no jurisdiction except with those that contract with it. Also see Congressional act of 1871 and USC Title 28, Part VI, chapter 176, sub chapter 176, subsection A, 3002 (15) “United States” means—(A) a Federal corporation;

The states illegally contracted with the federal corporation by passing the Uniform Commercial Code making themselves as well as the unsuspecting people subject to the Federal corporation and　also to the states in their new commercial capacities. Therefore all of the laws (color of law) are contractual commercial laws and the remedy is UCC 1-308. The Uniform Commercial Code makes all crimes commercial　only by　contract as per 27 CFR 72.11. The problem is that you have to get into higher courts before they will recognize the remedy. The remedy however should legally and always be give without delay on demand or claim. This of course is the problem. The misdemeanor courts do not have a clue as to where their jurisdiction comes from and neither do magistrates. You have to get in front of a court with a real judge that tries felonies. The courts　try to string ya along under duress of threat hoping that you can be scared into a plea. But they in the end have to honor the remedy.　

27 CFR 72.11　PART 72_DISPOSITION OF SEIZED PERSONAL PROPERTY–Table of Contents　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　

Subpart B_Definitions　Commercial crimes. Any of the following types of crimes (Federal or State): Offenses against the revenue laws; burglary; counterfeiting; forgery; kidnapping; larceny; robbery; illegal sale or possession of deadly weapons; prostitution (including soliciting, procuring, pandering, white slaving, keeping house of ill fame, and like offenses); extortion; swindling and confidence games; and attempting to commit, conspiring to commit, or compounding any of the foregoing crimes. Addiction to narcotic drugs and use of marihuana will be treated as if such were commercial crime.　　　

Last note: The 14th amendment actually creates a lower class of “citizen of the United States” rather than the higher Citizenship of one of the several states of the union. The remedy provided to the 14th amendment, is an act by congress known as 15 United States Statute at Large, July 27, 1868, one day before the 14th Amendment took effect and also known as the “Expatriation Statute.” This is your remedy to claim to be a natural Citizen of your state. This makes you a higher Citizen and no longer subject to the Article 4 loophole that also deprives you of your rights.

Notification of reservation of rights

UCC1-308/UCC 1-207

PUBLIC　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　Your name here, __________sui juris

THIS IS A PUBLIC COMMUNICATION TO ALL　　　　　　　　　　　　　
All rights reserved

UCC1-308

Notice to agents is notice to principles
Your Address

Notice to principles is Notice to Agents　　　　　　　　　　　　
Your Address

Applications to all successors and assigns　　
Your Address

All are without excuse　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　
Phone: XXX XXX XXXX

Let it be known to all that I, your name here explicitly reserves all of my rights.

UCC1-308 which was formally UCC 1-207.

Further, let all be advised that all actions commenced against me may be in violation of,…

USC TITLE 18 > PARTI > CHAPTER 13 > § 242 Deprivation of rights under color of law

USC TITLE 18 > PARTI > CHAPTER 13 > § 241 Conspiracy against rights

Wherefore all have undeniable knowledge.

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　

AFFIDAVIT

Affiant, your name here, sui juris, a common man of the Sovereign People, does swear and affirm that Affiant has scribed and read the foregoing facts, and in accordance with the best of Affiant’s firsthand knowledge and conviction, such are true, correct, complete, and not misleading, the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

Signed ___________________________sui juris, This Affidavit is dated________.

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　 NOTARY PUBLIC

STATE OF COUNTY OF______________________________________________________________

Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public, the above signed your name here.

This day of _________________________, 2009

Notary Public　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES:_______________________________________

***************************************************　

If you have been arrested, then you will need to file one of the motions below. If you are in a state court that only tries misdemeanors like traffic tickets and dog bites, they will not know what the motion is about and will will find you guilty. You simply appeal it to the higher court and file the same motion. If you are in a federal court, make sure that you are in front of a real judge. NEVER ACCEPT A MAGISTRATE !! The judge will act dismissive of your motion to scare you into a plea bargain and will continue to to make you appear before the court with all sorts of hearings and may even schedule a court date. But just keep reminding him to rule on your motion. The fact is that he will never rule on your motion but continue to drag out the case until they can no longer try you. This is usually 12 months. Then you file a motion to dismiss because you did not receive a speedy trial. The judge has to dismiss your case so do not be scared into a plea bargain of any kind. He will not rule on your motion but pick out some technicality that was made by the prosecution or officer. After this you will have the equivalent of diplomatic immunity and will never even get a ticket. You can only be arrested for causing injury to another party. However, just file the same motion to dismiss because the court still has no jurisdiction.

(Place the name of the court as per example

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS )

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　

MOTION TO DISMISS

(Plaintiffs name here)　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　Plaintiff

　　　　　　　 VS　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　 Case number (number here)

(Defendants name here)　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　 Defendant

Motion to Dismiss.

The defendant moves the court to dismiss this case against for the following reasons.

1. THE RESERVATION OF MY RIGHTS.

I explicitly reserve all of my rights. UCC 1-308 which was formally UCC 1-207.

§ 1-308. Performance or Acceptance Under Reservation of Rights.

(a) A party that with explicit reservation of rights performs or promises performance or assents to

performance in a manner demanded or offered by the other party does not thereby prejudice

the rights reserved. Such words as “without prejudice,” “under protest,” or the like are

sufficient.

2. FURTHER ADVISEMENT

This is to advise that all of the actions of the court and all others in these cases against Defendant

are in violation of …

A. USC TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 13 > § 242 Deprivation of rights under color of law

B. USC TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 13 > § 241 Conspiracy against rights

WHEREFORE, Defendant prays for the foregoing speedy relief.

Kindest and warmest regards,

Signed__________________________________________

Without prejudice UCC 1-308

From the defendant: (Your name here)

Physical address

Mailing address

Phone

　

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　 　

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　

 

 

Uniform Commercial Code (The Application of Commercial Law (part-2)

Tags

5th Amendment, accept for value, acceptance, Bill of Attainder, Bill of Pains and Penalties, conditional acceptance, English Crown, English Crown owns U.S., Foreclosure, Just Compensation, power of acceptance, sample: commercial security agreement, security agreement, security interest, trade name, transactions where UCC does not apply, U.S. Code Title 15 section 44, UCC 1-103, UCC 1-104, UCC 9-105(h), UCC does not apply, UCC-1 Financing Statement, vice-admiralty courts

(For Frank ‘Austin’ England III) 

 

Uniform Commercial Code

The National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws together with the American Law Institute drafted Nation-wide Uniform Laws and each state has now adopted these laws. These laws govern commercial transactions, including sales and leasing goods, transfer of funds, commercial paper, bank deposits and collections, letters of credit, bulk transfers, warehouse receipts, bills of laden, investment securities, and secured transactions. The UCC has been adopted in whole or substantially by all states. Blacks 6th. The UCC is a code of laws governing various commercial transactions — sale of goods, banking transactions, secured transactions in personal property, and other matters, that was designed to bring uniformity in these areas to the laws of the various states, and that has been adopted, with some modifications, in all states, including the District of Columbia and the Virgin Islands. Barron’s 3rd. Unless displaced by the particular provisions of this code, the principles of law and equity, including the law merchant and the law relative to capacity to contract, principle and agent, estopple, fraud, misrepresentation, duress, coercion, mistake, bankruptcy, or other validating or invalidating cause shall supplement its provisions. UCC 1-103.

To paraphrase the third definition above, the UCC is the supreme law on the planet, and all other forms of law are encompassed by it and included in it (except you as a sovereign, of course). Pennsylvania was the first state to adopt the UCC (July 1954), and Louisiana the last (January 1, 1975).

The following is a quote from the BANK OFFICERS HANDBOOK OF COMMERCIAL BANKING LAW WITHIN THE UNITED STATES, sixth edition, paragraph 22.01(1) and pertains to certain types of transactions:

“There are twelve transactions to which the UCC does not apply. They are as follows:

1. Security interests governed by federal statutes . . .

2. Landlord liens . . .

3. Liens for services or material provided . . .

4. Assignment for claims fore wages . . .

5. Transfers by government agencies . . .

6. Certain isolated sales of accounts or chattel paper . . .

7. Insurance Policies . . .

8. Judgments . . .

9. Rights of setoff . . . (see setoff)

10. Real Estate interests . . .

11. Tort Claims . . .

12 Bank accounts . . .”

UCC-104 states : “Construction against implicit repeal. This code being a general act intended as a unified coverage of its subject matter, no part of it shall be deemed to be impliedly repealed by subsequent legislation in such construction be reasonably avoided”.

Nothing in the UCC has ever been repealed, nor can it ever be. In the event of conflict between a deleted section and a current section, the deleted section controls. If this is examined one will see that it cannot be the other way. Potentially countless commercial transactions can be consummated based on the current UCC at any time. To “cancel” any portion of the UCC at a later point is to throw into upheaval and chaos all commercial agreements that were based on the deleted portion, an act that would carry unimaginably astronomical liability to the many actors who attempted to effect such change.

Now, we must define the United States. This was covered in course number 2. But for purposes in this particular area, we must define it for a better understanding applied to this procedure.

Commercial Lien

A commercial lien is a non-judicial claim or charge against property of a Lien Debtor for payment of a debt or discharge of a duty or obligation. A lien has the effect of permanently seizing property in three months, ninety days, upon failure of the lien debtor to rebut the Affidavit of Claim of Lien. The commercial grace of a lien is provided by the three-month delay of the execution process, allowing resolution either verbally, in writing, or by jury trial within the 90 day grace period. A Distress (to be defined in Blacks 6th) bonded by an affidavit of information becomes a finalized matured commercial lien and accounts receivable ninety days from the date of filing. The Lien Right of a Lien must be expressed in the form of an Affidavit sworn true, correct and complete, with positive identification of the Affiant. The swearing is based on one’s own commercial liability.

A commercial lien differs from a true bill in commerce only in that ordinarily a true bill in commerce is private, whereas a lien is the same bill publicly declared, usually filed in the office of the County Recorder, and, like all such declarations, when uncontested by categorical point-for-point rebuttal of the affidavit, is a Security (15 USC) and an accounts-receivable.

A commercial lien differs from a non-commercial lien in that it contains a declaration of a one-to-one correspondence between an item or service purchased or offenses committed, and a debt owed. A commercial lien does not require a court process for its establishment. However, a commercial lien can be challenged via the Seventh Amendment jury trial, but may not be removed by anyone except the Lien Claimant or a jury trial, properly constituted, convened, and concluded by due process of law. It cannot be removed by summary process, i.e. a judges discretion. A commercial lien (or distress) can exist in ordinary commerce without dependence on a judicial process, and is therefore not a common law instrument unless challenged in a court of common law, whereupon it converts to a common law lien. A commercial lien must always contain an Affidavit in support of Claim of Lien and cannot be removed without a complete rebuttal of the Liens Claimant affidavit point-by-point, in order to overthrow the one-to-one correspondence of the commercial lien. Also, no common law process can remove a commercial lien unless that common law process guarantees and results in a complete rebuttal of the lien claimants Affidavit categorically and point-for-point in order to overthrow the one-to-one correspondence of the commercial lien.

What is a True Bill in Commerce?

This is a ledgering or bookkeeping/accounting, with every entry established. This is your first Affidavit, certified and sworn on the responsible party’s commercial liability as true, correct, and complete, not meant to mislead. It must contain a one-to one correspondence between an item or service purchased or offenses committed and the corresponding debt owed. This commercial relationship is what is known as “Just compensation” (5th Amendment to the Constitution), in relationship between the Government and the American people, a true bill is called a warrant (4th Amendment to the Constitution), and the direct taking of property by legislative act, ( e.g. IRS and the like) is called a “Bill of Pains and Penalties” (Constitution, Art. I, Section 10, Clause I, and Article I, Section 9, Clause 3 -“Bill of Attainder).

There is one other matter we must define before we start putting all these pieces of the puzzle together into a workable tool for our benefit. That is the Uniform Commercial Code itself.

United States – US- U.S.-USA-America

Means: (A) a federal corporation . . . Title 28 USC Section 3002(5) Chapter 176. It is clear that the United States . . . is a corporation . . . 534 FEDERAL SUPPLEMENT 724.

`It is well settled that “United States” et al is a corporation, originally incorporated February 21, 1871 under the name “District of Columbia,” 16 Stat. 419 Chapter 62. It was reorganized June 11, 1878; a bankrupt organization per House Joint Resolution 192 on June 5, 1933, Senate Report 93-549, and Executive Orders 6072, 6102, and 6246; a de facto (define de facto) government, originally the ten square mile tract ceded by Maryland and Virginia and comprising Washington D. C., plus the possessions, territories, forts, and arsenals.

The significance of this is that, as a corporation, the United States has no more authority to implement its laws against “We The People” than does Mac Donald Corporations, except for one thing — the contracts we’ve signed as surety for our strawman with the United States and the Creditor Bankers. These contracts binding us together with the United States and the bankers are actually not with us, but with our artificial entity, or as they term it “person”, which appears to be us but spelled with ALL CAPITAL LETTERS.

All this was done under,

VICE-ADMIRALTY COURTS.

In English Law. Courts established in the queen’s possessions beyond the seas, with jurisdiction over maritime causes, including those relating to prize.

The United States of America is lawfully the possession of the English Crown per original commercial joint venture agreement between the colonies and the Crown, and the Constitution, which brought all the states (only) back under British ownership and rule. The American people, however, had sovereign standing in law, independent to any connection to the states or the Crown. This fact necessitated that the people be brought back, one at a time, under British Rule, and the commercial process was the method of choice in order to accomplish this task. First, through the 14th Amendment and then through the registration of our birth certificate and property. All courts in America are Vice-admiralty courts in the Crowns private commerce.

ACCEPT FOR VALUE AND ACCEPTANCE

By now, you have probably heard the term accept for value. This term, for me, gave me quite a problem in understanding when first encountered. And, most of the people starting in this redemption program seems to have the same problem.

When you look up the word accept in Blacks 4th Edition you find, “To receive with approval or satisfaction; to receive with intent to retain.”

With this in mind, when you get a traffic ticket, a notice of foreclosure or whatever, one’s first instinct is “Oh, No. I’m certainly not going to ‘accept’ that!” Why would anyone want to accept such a thing?

Acceptance. The taking and receiving of anything in good part, and as it were a tacit agreement to a proceeding part, which might have been defeated or avoided if such acceptance had not been made.

Nope, that doesn’t sound much better, now does it?

First, you may not know what the word ‘tacit’ means so let’s look that one up as well. In Blacks 6th it states: 1. “Existing, inferred, or understood without being openly expressed or stated; implied by silence or silent acquiescence, as a tacit agreement or a tacit understanding. 2. Done or made in silence, implied or indicated, but not actually expressed. Manifested by the refrainment from contradiction or objection; inferred from the situation and circumstances, in the absence of express matter.”

From the above, I deduce that if I accept the thing then there is an agreement. I agree with what they have said in the writing, whatever it may be. But, then, if I don’t accept it, don’t say anything, then there is still an agreement because I don’t refute it or contradict what they say in the writing. I know from all my past experience that I certainly don’t want to get into a court battle with anyone. No matter how right you might think you are, what law you think is on your side, you always seem to lose in any court. My, my, what a predicament.

So, why would I want to accept anything for value? How could that phrase possibly be of any help?

Well, let’s look a little further, define more words, and see if we can make any sense out of all this.

Let’s go a little further when we look under Acceptance in Blacks 6th edition. You’ll go on down the page until you get to Types of acceptance. Beneath that heading you’ll see Conditional acceptance;

Conditional acceptance. An agreement to pay the draft or accept the offer on the happening of a condition.

A ‘conditional acceptance’ is in effect a statement that the offeree [this is you] is willing to enter into a bargain differing in some respects from that proposed in the original offer. The conditional acceptance is, therefore, itself a counter offer.”

OK. That sounds a little better. If I accept their offer with a conditional acceptance, I now have a counter offer to make back to them. Now, the ball is in their court. If they do not answer, they then accept your offer by tacit agreement and you win. Now this sounds much better. But, we’re not through yet. Let’s look at power of acceptance. In Blacks 6th edition it says:

Power of acceptance. Capacity of offeree [that’s you again, the offeree] upon acceptance of terms of offer, to create a binding contract.

So, if I accept your offer, with conditional acceptance, then place my own terms in which I do accept your offer, then we now have a binding contract. The offeror (a municipality or corporation) must now come back with a rebuttal to prove my terms and conditions in error. We will go into detail on this in the 5th Course – Contracts, but first you need to accept these contracts by claiming the fictitious entity the state created when you were born.

REDEMPTION

Did you know the UNITED STATES actually defines the fictitious entity spelled like your name with upper case letters as a “corporation”? The definition is in 15 USCA (United States Code Annotated) section 44;

“Corporation” shall be deemed to include any company, trust, so-called Massachusetts trust, or association, incorporated or unincorporated, which is organized to carry on business for its own profit or that of its members,….”

So if the state has created this “unincorporated corporation” then does it have authority over it? Yes it does. And until you give them notice otherwise, they will always have authority over it. That is what a UCC-1 Financing Statement does, it gives public notice that you, the secured party, have a claim against the debtor, the unincorporated corporation. Now when you file this notice, you take this entity “out of the state”, out of the jurisdiction of a fictitious entity and into the private venue, your kingdom, and thus the entity becomes “foreign” to the state and now it becomes an unincorporated foreign corporation to the state. Sounds like an oxymoron, but then again, I am using THEIR terminology!

Financing Statement: A document setting out a secured party’s security interest in goods. A document designed to notify third parties, generally prospective buyers or lenders, that there may be an enforceable security interest in the property of the debtor; It is merely evidence of the creation of a security interest, and usually is not itself a security agreement; The financing statement is filed by the security holder with the Secretary of State, or similar public body, and as such becomes public record.

Security Agreement: An agreement which creates or provides for a security interest between the debtor and a secured party. UCC-9- 105(h); An agreement granting a creditor a security interest in personal property, which security interest is normally perfected either by the creditor taking possession of the collateral or by filing financing statements in the proper public records.

Security interest: Interest in property obtained pursuant to security agreement; A form of interest in property which provides that the property may be sold on default in order to satisfy the obligation for which the security interest is given; Often “lien” is used as a synonym, although lien most commonly refers only to interests providing security that are created by operation of law, not through agreement of the debtor and creditor.

A security agreement must exist to file a UCC-1 Financing Statement, but does this mean it must be in writing and attached to the UCC-1? Possibly, but what if it is a verbal agreement? Since your strawman corporation cannot speak how can it write or sign its name? You can create one and attach it, but you probably don’t need it. In fact, one can still do all of the administrative procedures without filing a UCC-1, because you are the secured party and creditor whether you file or not. Filing the UCC-1 is actually more for your benefit than for anyone else because it makes this esoteric, intangible subject more real to you and gives you confidence, and that gain alone is worth every bit of the effort expended.

Some of the states give you a hard time when filing the financing statement as they claim you are “contracting with yourself”. To prevent this, you create a separation between you and your strawman corporation so that “they” can tell the difference (as if they didn’t know!). One of the things you can do is to apply for a tradename for your corporation. Once this is filed, you will start receiving promotions in the mail advertising credit card machines that you can use in your “new business”. You will not need them, but it indicates that the “corporate system” now recognizes your strawman as a “fictitious entity doing buisiness for profit” – a corporation.

Drill: File your tradename and UCC-1 Financing Statement

1. Go to the website for your state and pull off an Application for Trade Name and a UCC-1 Financing Statement form. You should be able to go to your Secretary of States site, such as SOSAZ would be for Arizona, or just call for the website.

2. Fill out the Application for Trade Name and send it into the SOS (Secretary of State) of your state along with the application fee. Mark “person” for the section of what kind of business it is. They get confused if you mark anything else.

3. When you get the Trade Name certificate back, make a copy as an attachment for the UCC-1 Financing Statement that you will be doing next.

4. Fill out the UCC-1 Financing Statement according to the example below and attach your Trade Name certificate to it as well as a copy of your birth certificate. A Security Agreement is not necessary as this is a private agreement between you and your corporation commonly referred to as a strawman. You must put the HOSPITAL where you were born as the address for the DEBTOR as this is where the corporation was created by the state. It is important to list all of the contracts that you have signed for your strawman such as the Drivers License, Social Security Number, Marriage license, Passport, etc.

5. Also reserve a number that will become your TREASURY POSTED REGISTERED ACCOUNT. This account will be set up at the US Department of Treasury with the private man entitled US Secretary of Treasury. It is important you refer to this man by his name such as “Paul O’Neill”, as you cannot deal with a fiction while in the private venue. The number will consist of the registered number that is printed on the red registered mail sticker you get from the Post Office, plus your social security number with NO dashes. Example is RR26511985 & 111223333.

6. File your UCC-1 with the SOS with the applicable fees.

Commercial Security Agreement

This non-negotiable and non-transferable Security Agreement is made and entered this day of ______________ , 2001 by and between JOHN HENRY DOE, hereinafter “Debtor”, Organization Number 570-50-8194 John Henry Doe, hereinafter “Secured Party”, Creditor Identification Number 544327911. The Parties, hereinafter “Parties”, are identified as follows:

DEBTOR:

JOHN HENRY DOE, a Legal Entity

SAINT MARY’S HOSPITAL

TUCSON, ARIZONA 85746

Organization Number: (Social Security Number)

Secured Party:

John Henry Doe, a man

Mailing Location: c/o 4741 W, Camino Tierra

Tucson, Arizona 85746

Creditor Identification Number: 544327911

AGREEMENT

NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties agree as follows:

Debtor hereby grants Secured Party, who deems herself insecure, a security interest in the Collateral described generally herein or specifically on attached Schedule A, hereinafter referred to as “Collateral”, to secure all Debtor’s property, as well as all income from every source, and all direct and indirect, absolute or contingent, due or to become due, now existing or hereafter arising, presumed or actual, parole or expressed public indebtedness and liabilities held by Debtor, to Secured Party in consideration for Secured Party providing certain things and accommodations for Debtor, including but not limited to:

1. the Secured Party signing by accommodation, without immediate consideration, for the Debtor when necessary where the signature of the Debtor will be required, while retaining the right to make sufficient claims to secured such indebtedness until satisfied in whole;

2. the Secured Party issuing a binding commitment to extend credit or to extend immediately available credit, whether or not drawn upon and whether or not reimbursed in the event of difficulties in collection; and

3. the Secured Party providing the security for payment of all sums due or owing, or to become due or owing, by the Debtor on every public contract entered by the Debtor.

Debtor declares it is a legal entity recognized as such, and has rights and privileges recognized under the laws of the United States, as has been the case since its creation in 1966. All legal means to protect the security interest being established by this Agreement, will be used by the Debtor when necessary; and all support needed by the Secured Party to protect his security interest in the collateral identified herein, will be provided by the Debtor.

Execution of this Security Agreement incorporates a promise that the Debtor will execute such commercial forms, including but not limited to such Financing Statements as may be necessary, to assure the Secured Party’s interest is perfected. The security interest established by this Agreement will continue until the Secured Party is relieved of all liability associated with said services provided to the Debtor, and until all owing and due consideration to the Secured Party has been delivered, regardless of whether the Collateral identified in this Agreement is in the possession of the Debtor or the Secured Party.

Debtor warrants that Secured Party’s claim against the Collateral is enforceable according to the terms and conditions expressed therein, and according to all applicable laws promulgated for the purpose of protecting the interests of a creditor against a debtor. Debtor also warrants that it holds good and marketable title to the Collateral, free and clear of all actual and lawful liens and encumbrances except for the interest established herein, and except for such substantial interest as may have been privately established by agreement of the parties with full attention to the elements necessary to establish a valid contract under international contract law. Public encumbrances belonging to the Debtor, against the Collateral, shall remain secondary to this Agreement, unless registered prior to the registration of Secured Party’s interest in the same Collateral, as is well-established in international commercial law.

GENERAL PROVISIONS

Possession of Collateral. Collateral or evidence of Collateral may remain in the possession of the Debtor, to be kept at the address given in this Agreement by the Debtor or such other place(s) approved by Secured Party, and notice of changes in location must be made to the Secured Party within ten (10) days of such relocation. Debtor agrees not to otherwise remove the Collateral except as is expected in the ordinary course of business, including sale of inventory, exchange, and other acceptable reasons for removal. When in doubt as to the legal ramifications for relocation, Debtor agrees to acquire prior written authorization from the Secured Party. Debtor may possess all tangible personal property included in Collateral, and have beneficial use of all other Collateral, and may use it in any lawful manner not inconsistent with this Agreement, except that Debtor’s right to possession and beneficial use may also apply to Collateral that is in the possession of the Secured Party if such possession is required by law to perfect Secured Party’s interest in such Collateral. If Secured Party, at any time, has possession of any part of the Collateral, whether before or after an Event of Default, Secured Party shall be deemed to have exercised reasonable care in the custody and preservation of the Collateral, if Secured Party takes such action for that purpose as deemed appropriate by the Secured Party under the circumstances.

Proceeds and Products from Collateral.Unless waived by Secured Party, all proceeds and products from the disposition of the Collateral, for whatever reason, shall be held in trust for Secured Party and shall not be commingled with any other accounts or funds without the consent of the Secured Party. Notice of such proceeds shall be delivered to Secured Party immediately upon receipt. Except for inventory sold or accounts collected in the ordinary course of Debtor’s public business, Debtor agrees not to sell, offer to sell, or otherwise transfer or dispose of the Collateral; nor to pledge, mortgage, encumber, or otherwise permit the Collateral to be subject to a lien, security interest, encumbrance, or charge, other than the security interested established by this Agreement, without the prior written consent of the Secured Party.

Maintenance of Collateral. Debtor agrees to maintain all tangible Collateral in good condition and repair, and not to commit or permit damage to or destruction of the Collateral or any part of the Collateral. Secured Party and his designated representatives and agents shall have the right at all reasonable times to examine, inspect, and audit the Collateral wherever located. Debtor shall immediately notify Secured Party of all cases involving the return, rejection, repossession, loss, or damage of or to the Collateral; of all requests for credit or adjustment of Collateral, or dispute arising with respect to the Collateral; and generally of all happenings and events affecting the Collateral or the value or the amount of the Collateral.

Compliance with Law.Debtor shall comply promptly with all laws, ordinances, and regulations of all governmental authorities applicable to the production, disposition, or use of the Collateral. Debtor may contest in good faith any such law, ordinance, or regulation without compliance during a proceeding, including appropriate appeals, so long as Secured Party’s interest in the Collateral, in Secured Party’s opinion, is not jeopardized. Secured Party may, at his option, intervene in any situation that appears to place the Collateral in jeopardy.

Public Disputes.Debtor agrees to pay all applicable taxes, assessments, and liens upon the Collateral when due; provided that such taxes, assessments, and liens are proved to be superior to the lawful claim established by this Agreement and subsequently perfected by the Secured Party by appropriate registration. In the event Debtor elects to dispute such taxes, assessments, and liens, Secured Party’s interest must be protected at all times, at the sole opinion of the Secured Party, who may, at his option, intervene in any situation that appears to jeopardize Secured Party’s interest in the Collateral. Debtor may elect to continue pursuit of dispute of such taxes, assessments, and liens, only upon production of a surety bond by public claimant(s), in favor of the Secured Party, sufficient to protect Secured Party from loss, including all costs and fees associated with such dispute. Should public judgment against the Debtor result from such dispute, Debtor agrees to satisfy such judgment from its accounts established and managed by the United States or its subdivisions, agents, officers, or affiliates, so as not to adversely affect the Secured Party’s interest in the Collateral.

Indemnification. Debtor hereby indemnifies Secured Party from all harm as expressed in the attached Indemnity Bond, incorporated herein as if fully set forth within this Security Agreement.　

(Blog Master Note: Next Post I’ll continue with this sample of a Commercial Security Agreement)

　

　

　

　

　

　

Ten Basic Foundations Of Commercial Law (Part 2)

Tags

acceptance defined, acquiescence, acquiescence defined, bankruptcy reorganization, Birth Certificate, bond defined, definition of certificate, equitable estoppel, guarantor defined, H.J.Res. 192, holder in due coarse, legal tender, obligation of good faith, offer, Special Drawing Rights, State UCC, surity defined, UCC 1 Financial Statement, UCC 1-103, UCC 1-201, UCC 1-203, UCC 1-208, UCC 3-106, UCC 3-302, UCC 3-306, UCC 6-104, UCC 6-105, UCC 6-106, UCC 6-107, UCC3-305, Uniform Commercial Code

You can download a copy your state UCC   Here.

The Birth Certificate

First, you must know exactly what is considered to be the key element, within the presumed contract, that holds title and ownership to a real man’s labors, Rights, intellect, and property through his persona. This foundational element is legally called an “instrument”, but you know it as your Birth Certificate. Since the early 1960’s, Birth Certificates were issued by the governments to personae with all CAPITALIZED lettered names. This is not a Lawful record of your physical birth, but something totally different. A Birth Certificate is the government’s commercial instrument to their legal Title of Ownership or Deed to your “straw man” (don’t forget that the presumption in contract is that the real you and your persona are one and the same). This Commercial Record or Commercial Instrument (Birth Certificate) is a legal commercial “receipt”. It’s no different than any other commercial Bill of Lading or a Warehouse Receipt. Delivery of the commercial “goods” was made to the government at your local hospital. For clarity, view a Birth Certificate as a Commercial “Document of Title”. While this “Document of Title” is not the Title itself, it is parallel to a commercial Certificate of Title or Certificate of Birth.

UCC 1-201 Definitions–

“Document of title” includes bill of lading, dock warrant, dock receipt, warehouse receipt or order for the delivery of goods, and also any other document which in the regular course of business or financing is treated as adequately evidencing that the person in possession of it is entitled to receive, hold and dispose of the document and the goods it covers.

“Bill of lading” means a document evidencing the receipt of goods for shipment issued by a person engaged in the business of transporting or forwarding goods [a hospital, for example], and includes an airbill.
The U.S. corporate Federal Government is bankrupt and holds no Constitutionally mandated silver or gold (coin and bullion) to back up or pay their debts. All privately held and federally held gold coins and bullion in America was seized by Executive Order of April 5, 1933 and paid to the creditor, the private Federal Reserve Bank Corporation (FRB) under the terms of bankruptcy. Then, in 1964, coins with no silver content were issued and the Constitutional silver coins were recalled and seized. Further evidence of this was the shortage of industrial silver and bullion from the mid-1960’s through mid-1970’s. The small inventories of silver available during this period was astronomically expensive. We called the copper edged coins “LBJ funny-money” at the time, not understanding or knowing that all the silver was being turned over to the creditor, the privately owned FRB.

The only asset the Federal U.S. government has in order to pay their corporate debt is the people themselves, so they commercially pledge birthright Americans as collateral for credit (loans) to pay daily operational costs. The technical way this is done is astoundingly simple but relatively unknown.

When a child is born within the corporate United States, a Record of Live Birth form (a commercial Bill of Lading), or similar, is issued by the hospital. The father and mother sign this hospital form (a receipt for goods) as the parents (manufacturer) and title holders (owners) of the goods (child). The transfer of the property Rights (the child’s Rights) to the State is accepted by the signature of their government agent, a State licensed Physician. The parents have unknowingly pledged their child’s future and labors to the government and signed a presumed contract. This converts the legal status of their child to that of chattel property in permanently indentured servitude (See Preface, Part I). The State becomes the de facto holder of the Rights to the child (collateral).

Next, the hospital sends the Record of Live Birth to the State Bureau of Vital Statistics, sometimes called the department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS) in some States. Each State is required to supply the Federal government with birth, death, and health statistics. The State agency that receives the Record of Live Birth (title) keeps it and then issues a Birth Certificate (BC). The BC is a commercial instrument (document) evidencing that the State is holding the title (ownership) to the child. Holding the title is not the same as having possession of the property, so the State is the “holder” of the instrument but not the “holder in due course”. This is all based on the presumed acceptance of the contract (Record of Live Birth) between the manufacturer (parents) and the purchaser (State). The parents are not aware of this assumed contract because it was never revealed to them nor was full disclosure made in good faith, so they don’t object to what they don’t know. The current holder of your commercial birth document (receipt) is able to capitalize on it because of your failure to instruct the holder to do otherwise, due to your silence and lack of legal action.

cer·tif·i·cate, noun. Middle English certificat, from Middle French, from Medieval Latin certificatum, 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).

This Birth Certificate issued by the State is then registered with the U.S. Department of Commerce through their agency, the U.S. Census Bureau, who is responsible to collect vital statistics from all the States. The word “registered”, in commercial law, does not mean that your name was merely noted in a registry or book for reference purposes. When a Birth Certificate is registered with the U.S. Department of Commerce, it means that the child’s persona named on it has become a surety or guarantor as collateral for a commercial loan.

registered. Security, bond. (Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of Law 1996)

Security. 1a: Something (as a mortgage or collateral) that is provided to make certain the fulfillment of an obligation. Example: used his property as security for a loan. 1b: “surety“. 2: Evidence of indebtedness, ownership, or the right to ownership.

Bond. 1a: A usually formal written agreement by which a person undertakes to perform a certain act (as fulfill the obligations of a contract) …with the condition that failure to perform or abstain will obligate the person …to pay a sum of money or will result in the forfeiture of money put up by the person or surety. 1b: One who acts as a surety. 2: An interest-bearing document giving evidence of a debt issued by a government body or corporation that is sometimes secured by a lien on property and is often designed to take care of a particular financial need.

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’s not difficult to see that a Birth Certificate is a document evidencing debt the moment it’s issued. This is how it works: Once each State has registered, by commercial bulk transfer, the Birth Certificates with the U.S. Department of Commerce, the U.S. Department of the Treasury then issues Treasury Securities in the form of Treasury Bonds, Notes, and Bills using the BC’s as sureties or guarantors for these purported Securities. This means that the bankrupt corporate U.S. can guarantee to the purchasers of their Securities the lifetime labor of all Americans as collateral for payment. Isn’t it nice to know that when you were born, within days you became the collateral for corporate U.S. debt-loans through the assumed contract your parents thought was nothing more than a Record of Live Birth? But wait… the chain of events gets even more interesting.
Who purchases these Treasury Securities? Nearly all are purchased by commercial institutions and brokerage firms on behalf of their individual clients. These purchases are called commercial book entry transactions whereby the individual purchaser never receives a paper stock certificate. Follow very closely and see if you can notice the monopoly and identity of the World Power Brokers unfolding here. Key words are underlined:

1. The commercial book entry system is operated exclusively by the privately owned Federal Reserve System(formerly the Federal Reserve Bank) as fiscal agents of the U.S. Treasury Department.

2. All these securities are recorded in the commercial book entry system as “book entry issues” held for the account of the depository institution.  

3. The exclusive depository institution is the Depository Trust Company(DTC), a privately owned trust company (bank), who maintains records identifying the individual “beneficial owners” of securities that the DTC holds (holder) in its account in the commercial book entry system.

4. The Depository Trust Company is an operating unit of ( owned by) the Federal Reserve System.

5. The Depository Trust Company  transfers all the securities to their own private holding company Cede & Company.

6. Cede & Company is the holder of nearly $20 trillion ($ 20,000,000,000,000) of stocks and bonds.

7. The Federal Reserve System uses the Treasury Securities it holds as collateral to print and issue Federal Reserve Notes, which are further debt obligations.

What starts out as a Record of Birth becomes a monopoly of collateral slavery in the hands of the World Power Brokers, also known as the privately owned Federal Reserve System.   The ultimate Real Party of Interest to your persona, or strawman, is Cede & Company since you are the collateral and surety for the Treasury Securities that are physically held by them in their name. It’s worthy to note that as you walk up to the DTC skyscraper at 55 Water Street in New York City, the sign in the front says “The Tower of Power”.

When you reclaim the Title, Deed and ownership of the real you through your Birth Certificate by accepting it back for it’s commercial value, you will regain your sovereignty, Freedom and Liberty. The “Wizards of Oz” (also known as the World Power Brokers) who have alleged to be the Real Party of Interest (RPOI), and all their agents, will then be legally powerless. Legally, only you can give yourself back your own inherent sovereignty.

Once again, the foundational truth being that “all law is contract”, the World Power Brokers (WPB) have successfully made their claims by making us subject, via contract, to their sovereignty and ownership. The same rules that have made us servants and slaves to the WPB can also set us free from their legal claims. The key is going to the source and making it apply to our current legal status dilemna. There are many maxims (truths or proverbs) of Law that state this:

Nihil tam naturale est, qu m eo genere quidque dissolvere, quo colligatum est– It is very natural that an obligation should not be dissolved but by the same principles which were observed in contracting it.

Qui evertit causam, evertit causatum futurum– He who overthrows the cause, overthrows its future effects.

Sublata causa tollitur effectus–Remove the cause and the effect will cease.

Cujusque rei potissima pars principium est– The principal part of everything is in the beginning.

The WPB followed these same Legal Rules to set up their “system”. We must follow the same legal Rules to escape their “system”. Knowing how they set this up is an element behind the reasoning for its existence.

When the original thirteen sovereign nations of North America declared and received independence more than 200 years ago, the World Power Brokers – comprised of kings, bankers, and merchants – lost a wealth of future commerce and profits from their previous Colony Franchises and Letters Patent. Since then, the WPB’s have continually strived and schemed to regain their control and ownership of the real American People. They have been the instrumental force behind the conversion of free American states into the corporate and commercial United States. They have founded their “takeover” on outright deceit and presumptions without a single outcry from the American People. However, those presumptions and implied contracts can be rebutted according to the legalities they themselves have set into place. It’s kind of like the old saying, “What’s good for the goose is good for the gander”. In order to get in the front door, they had to leave the back door open for their own protection in case they needed to escape. But who’s to say their servants can’t use the same back door to escape? The law says we can and the door has been left wide open. They simply cannot abolish the legal means of our escape unless they abolish the legal means that put them in power and control.

Their entire plan backfires in their faces when the contract presumptions are rebutted by the same legal Rules and Procedures they have set into place. The only reason they have succeeded to this point is that the American People now live in a false complacency; happy and satisfied with their debt contracts for houses, cars, boats, airplanes, and much more. But, many of us know that this lifestyle is soon to change into a more realistic picture of actual and physical servitude and slavery. The debts must be paid. Not only is the U.S. Government broke, but so are the American People. Had Christian Americans followed the principles and Laws written in the Bible, as did the early Americans, they would never be in this position. There is no doubt that the World Power Brokers have been dangling the bait of debt/credit as a means to entice the common man to obtain material wealth without having to pay up front for it. Has any average American ever taken the time to think what would happen if the loans they now have were all “called in” for payment? Where will you house your family? How will you drive to your job? How will you purchase your food?

“Can’t happen”, commented an ABA Lawyer reviewing this material. When we pointed out that any declared “emergency” by the bankrupt Federal Government voids the payment terms of all contracts and legally all debt becomes “due and payable at will”, he thought about it again and had to agree with us. Our premise for argument was that Roosevelt confiscated all the gold in 1933 just for that purpose, as well as the Uniform Commercial Code itself, which states:

UCC 1-208 Option to accelerate at will.–A term providing that one party or the party’s successor in interest may accelerate payment or performance or require collateral or additional collateral “at will” or “when she or he deems herself or himself insecure” or in words of similar import shall be construed to mean that she or he shall have power to do so only if she or he in good faith believes that the prospect of payment or performance is impaired. The burden of establishing lack of good faith is on the party against whom the power has been exercised. 　

Method of Rebuttal

In 1988, the federal and corporate United States joined the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods which now governs contracts within its scope. According to international and universal (uniform) Contract Law, such as the UCC, a contract can only be valid if it follows all the Rules and Process of law that created it. One of the main elements or rules of contract law states that “all parties must understand the scope, nature, terms, and conditions of the contract”. Another main element states that “all parties must consent to the contract”. If it is not agreed to and there is no mutual consent, then there is no contract. Any purported commercial contract that fails to be entered into by mutual “good faith”, with full disclosure of the terms and conditions to both parties, and consent by all parties, is void ab initio (from the beginning). Whenever the elements of “good faith” disclosure and/or “consent” are missing, any contract can automatically be ruled null and void if the deceived or defrauded party enforces the Rules of Law. Once again, silence is default. If you say nothing, you have defaulted.

UCC 1-203 Obligation of good faith.–Every contract or duty within this code imposes an obligation of good faith in its performance or enforcement.

Were you aware of the implied and “presumed” contract between you and the Real Party of Interest, the owners of the Federal Reserve System? In all law and truth, it doesn’t exist, does it?

UCC 1-201 Definitions– (31) “Presumption” or “presumed” means that the trier of fact must find the existence of the fact presumed unless and until evidence is introduced which would support a finding of its nonexistence.

Were all terms and conditions disclosed to you at birth or any time since then? Of course not. Legally, once you rebut the presumption by affidavit for failure to disclose the terms and conditions or obtain mutual consent, the contract automatically becomes null and void. Such a contract as this, which has unlawfully bound the average American to it, is considered fraud or misrepresentation. For example:

UCC 1-103 Supplementary general principles of law applicable.–Unless displaced by the particular provisions of this code, the principles of law and equity, including the law merchant and the law relative to capacity to contract, principal and agent, estoppel, fraud, misrepresentation, duress, coercion, mistake, bankruptcy, or other validating or invalidating causeshall supplement its provisions.

As you can now see, the major flaw in all artificial governments and their “laws” is the absence of a genuine and legal agreement between the parties due to a failure to fully disclose, have a meeting of the minds, and lack mutual “good faith”. In their presumption that you have agreed to a bona fide contract with the government, you were never informed of the full terms and conditions of the purported contract.

The reason this situation could exist in the first place is due to the fact that the American People have fooled themselves, lied to themselves, and failed to communicate among themselves. They have put aside their Holy Bibles and replaced the True Law of God with the laws of men. The world of man’s laws and governments was brought about by the very people who are now servants to the “system”. Since Lincoln’s War, Christian Americans have lived in fear of speaking out against wrongs that they see taking place.

According to the universal principles and foundations of contract law (See Background, Part I), in the absence of a genuine agreement, no contract exists. What does exist is nothing more than a presumption of contract based on the deceived party (you) having foolishly trusted in the government. Although fraud is unlawful, it is not illegal in artificial State rulership systems. Keep in mind, once again, that all governments are structurally fraudulent due to the origins of their artificial conception. Based on this premise of evidence, it’s an obvious fact that fraud must be “legal” as governments are able to judge themselves as legal in the first place. In other words, the existence of a government is a legality of fraud ab initio.

Holder in Due Course

In Commercial Law, the ultimate owner of any “Document of Title” is known as the “Holder in Due Course” (HDC). He is the only one who possesses a valid claim to “title” whereby the goods or property are deliverable to him. By comparison, a technical “Holder” may legally possess a “Negotiable Instrument”, but he lacks the ultimate claim of “title” held by the HDC and is nothing more than a receiver and collector of payments. The HDC receives the delivery of the property; the Holder merely receives payment for the property.

UCC 1-201 DEFINITIONS–(20) “Holder,” with respect to a negotiable instrument, means the person in possession if the instrument is payable to bearer or, in the case of an instrument payable to an identified person, if the identified person is in possession. “Holder,” with respect to a document of title, means the person in possession if the goods are deliverableto bearer or to the order of the person in possession.

UCC 3-302 HOLDER IN DUE COURSE–Subject to subsection (c) and Section 3-106(d), “holder in due course” means the holder of an instrument if: (1) the instrument when issued or negotiated to the holder does not bear such apparent evidence of forgery or alteration or is not otherwise so irregular or incomplete as to call into question its authenticity; and (2) the holder took the instrument (i) for value, (ii) in good faith, (iii) without notice that the instrument is overdue or has been dishonored or that there is an uncured default with respect to payment of another instrument issued as part of the same series, (iv) without notice that the instrument contains an unauthorized signature or has been altered, (v) without notice of any claim to the instrument described in Section 3-306, and (vi) without notice that any party has a defense or claim in recoupment described in Section 3-305(a).

As stated earlier, your Birth Certificate is simply a warehouse receipt. Birth Certificates are bundled together and transferred or purchased in “bulk sales” under one or more of the provisions found in UCC 6-104 through 108. However, possession of your Birth Certificate was not taken by the government in “good faith” and the legal Holder (government) cannot “enforce the instrument free from all claims and personal defenses.” This means that whoever, or whatever artificial entity, is now acting as the purported “owner” of your Birth Certificate can, in legal reality, only be only a technical “Holder” of the Negotiable Instrument and can never be the actual “Holder in due Course”. Only you can be the HDC.

The HDC is the most powerful position in any exchange of property or goods in commercial law. The allodial key to understanding this lies in whether you are or are not the HDC of your Document of Title of birth, the Negotiable Instrument to your legal existence. Once you see that you are the legal HDC to your own Title of Rights, your whole worldly life will change dramatically. You are then, once again, a sovereign with respect to anything of which you are the Holder in Due Course. This will make you the HDC of “yourself”, both the real biological person and the artificial persona. It will place you as the ultimate owner of all your earthly affairs and everything else concerning ownership of your legal life. When you really think about it, this is the “legal” means by which your physical being and your Spiritual being can join together in true Freedom and Liberty.

The “secret” to becoming the HDC is known as “Acceptance for Value.” Your Birth Certificate (Document of Title) is currently held by “unknown parties” who can never be the HDC of it. Only you, and you alone, can become the HDC. When your offer of “purchase” is made, title passes upon acceptance of the offer. The offer (your UCC-1) is accepted by the previous Holder (the government) when they record it in the State records for a fee payment (value). The “acceptance for value” is made by the government in accordance with two Rules of law: One, the fee paid for recording the instrument; Two, since it is recorded without objection, it is also accepted by their own conduct, both implied and direct.

All that remains to do at this point is to give or show affidavit evidence of the exchange (a copy of your recorded UCC-1 Financing Statement with the State acceptance seal and certification). “Acceptance” and “offer” are the two mandatory elements to any legal contract in commercial law. “Acceptance” or “Acceptance for Value”, for the purpose of commercial law, is “acquiescence”. Look carefully at these definitions written by Canadian lawyer Lloyd Duhaime from Duhaime’s Law Dictionary:

Acceptance . A contract is a legally binding agreement between two or more parties which starts with an offer from one person but which does not become a contract until the other party signifies an unequivocal willingness to accept the terms of that offer. The moment of acceptance is the moment from which a contract is said to exist, and not before. Acceptance need not always be direct and can be implied by conduct.　

Acquiescence. Action or inaction which binds a person legally even though it was not intended as such. For example, action which is not intended as a direct acceptance of a contract will nevertheless stand as such as it implies recognition of the terms of the contract. If I display a basket of fruit in a marketplace and you come by, inspect an apple and then bite into it, you have acquiesced to the contract of sale of that apple.

Offer. An explicit proposal to contract which, if accepted, completes the contract and binds both the person that made the offer and the person accepting the offer to the terms of the contract.

In this modern world, man’s laws dictate that there are only two classes of people in any legal proceeding. You are either a Creditor or a Debtor. When your “legal sovereignty” is established, you become the sovereign Creditor of your life and affairs. Every adverse party then becomes your Debtor. However, if you do not establish your legal sovereignty, you do not “own” yourself (your own title) as the HDC; you have no legal capacity; you have no “standing in law” to assert your Rights; and you will remain a permanent Debtor as you are now. As Debtor, you will always lose in every dispute or claim by the current “system” for “failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted”.

Reclaiming the legal ownership of your persona (straw man) acts as an “equitable estoppel” to any and all who come against you in commerce and law.
equitable estoppel. An estoppel that prevents a person from adopting a new position that contradicts a previous position maintained by words, silence, or actions when allowing the new position to be adopted would unfairly harm another person who has relied on the previous position to his or her loss. (called also estoppel in pais). Source- Merriam Webster’s Dictionary of Law 1996.

If you do not reclaim your legal Rights of title and ownership to your persona, which makes you the Creditor and absolute sovereign ruler of your “straw man”, you will not be sovereign and you will lose every claim made against you. This is the reason why, if you ever think of hiring an ABA attorney to represent you in any legal proceeding against the “system”, you must demand up front that he make you the Holder in Due Course of the action. Since he legally can’t do this, then you will lose if he “appears” for or “represents” you. The best any Bar(fly) attorney can do is make a deal with the system Creditor, which is a negotiated settlement of the money being claimed as damages. You must be the HDC to be able to ensure victory in all dealings with the government and the “system”.

We conclude Part V with some Maxims for you to absorb:

Quod initio vitiosum est, non potest tractu temporis convalescere– Time cannot render valid an act void in its origin.

Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus– False in one thing, false in everything.

Quae malasunt inchoata in principio vex peragantur exitu– Things bad in the commencement seldom end well.

Quod ab initio non valet, in tractu temporis non convalescere– What is not good in the beginning cannot be rendered good by time.

You are now ready for Part VI, How to secure your Freedom through use of a Financing Statement.

Part VI: How to Secure Your Freedom

The Money Game

As we stated earlier, the corporate entity known as the United States is bankrupt. Congress confirmed this bankruptcy through the “Joint Resolution to Suspend The Gold Standard And Abrogate The Gold Clause, June 5, 1933” in H. J. Res. 192, 73rd Congress, 1st session, Public Law 73-10. Within this 1933 Public Law, it states in part “…every provision contained in or made with respect to any obligation which purports to give the obligee a right to require payment in gold or a particular kind of coin or currency, or in an amount in money of the United States measured thereby, is declared to be against public policy”. In 1950, the corporate U.S. declared bankruptcy a second time whereby the Secretary of Treasury was appointed as “Receiver” of the bankruptcy in Reorganization Plan No. 26, Title 5 USC 903, Public Law 94-564, Legislative History, page 5967.

The issuance of paper as a “legal tender” and circulating medium of exchange did not occur until 1862 during Lincoln’s War. The Congress authorized the issuance of non-interest bearing Treasury notes and declared the resulting bills of credit to be legal tender for all debts, public and private, with the exception of taxes on imports. The notes were deemed necessary to “float the debt of the United States” for the war effort. In reality, the corporate United States was already bankrupt. On June 3, 1864, Congress passed “An Act to provide a National Currency, secured by a Pledge of United States Bonds, and to provide for the Circulation and Redemption thereof.” Today, “Federal Reserve Notes” are officially recognized as “SDR’s” — Special Drawing Rights — under the amended Breton Wood Agreements Act, Public Law 94-564. See further Legislative History, Senate Report No. 94-1148, October 1, 1976.

As you can see, there is no lawful money in circulation today. What the average American thinks is “money” is nothing more than private commercial debt instruments made of paper, “legal tender”, evidencing the debt Americans are required to pay against the collective bankruptcy of the federal government. Real money is a tangible substance such as gold, silver, produce of the earth, or labor. Real money can never be debt. The original Mint Act was passed on Thursday, January 12, 1792. This Act was drafted in Pursuance with the Constitution for the United States of America [See Article VI, Clause 2] and provided for the minting of both gold and silver dollars under Section 9. This Act met all of the requirements of Article I, Section 8, Clause 5 and 6, and Article I, Section 10, Clause I.

The use of real money is a Right of sovereigns, not slaves. Debt is created by a mere signature authorizing notes of indebtedness. All “money” in circulation today is created from further borrowing against our federal bankruptcy. Only by borrowing against a government’s bankruptcy can its servants and slaves have pieces of paper to spend like money, even thought they are purely notes of indebtedness.

Unless one is the Holder in Due Course of one’s straw man, “owning” such paper debt Notes or anything it buys is a liability, not an asset. The fact that people mistakenly consider Federal Reserve Notes to be assets is a major cause of the problem we all face. Whenever a “person” accumulates private Federal Reserve Notes (FRN’s), he is accumulating more debt. The more FRN’s you have; the more commercial goods, property and services you purchase with them; the more indebted you become.

Since all purported money is created by the further borrowing against our federal government’s bankruptcy by signature, every time you sign your name to any public document, or contract, or instrument involving FRN’s as the “valuable” consideration, you borrow against and increase your own debt. By increasing your borrowing and indebtedness you are providing yourself with more debt instruments to “spend.” This is a tell-tale sign of a slave in permanent indentured servitude; he commits himself further and further in debt every time he borrows from his sovereign task-master. Again, since all modern paper money is created by borrowing against the collective bankruptcy of the corporate United States, it is mathematically impossible to ever pay off the debt. This is a never ending nightmare that must end; and when it does, the common American will suffer greatly if he has not been diligent to break his bonds of servitude.

To Be Continued . . . .

　

 

Uniform Bonding Code – part 3

Tags

Affidavit of Obligation, Article 3 Sec 2 remedy, bonding company, bonding jail procedure, bonding of enforcement officers, brutum fulmen definition, consequences of losing bond, counter complaints, Dun and Bradstreet, lacking mandatory oath, liability of enforcement officers, Lien Claimant, municipal bond, rights in jail, Sovereign document, three complaints ends bond, UCC 1 -308, UCC 1-103, UCC 1-207, unbonded statutes, when enforcer losing bond

If the Bonding Company Compels the Prosecution

If the bonding company compels the prosecution and the acts of the officer are clearly criminal, then the bonding company can argue for release of the liability of the bonding company for the officer’s actions, provided the bond was written to dissuade (discourage)_ criminal acts.

 Since the prosecutor must have a bond in order to be a prosecutor in fulfillment of his job description, it follows that the bonding companies collectively have the power to compel the prosecutor to prosecute on the criminal charges to attempt to vindicate the officer and to protect the relevant (directly affected) bonding company from a claim, or to minimize the claim against the bonding company.

If the Bonding Company Does Not Compel Prosecution

 If the bonding company does not compel prosecution, then the first claim of liability is against the bonding company up to the face value of the bond, and the remaining claim of liability is against the corporation and against the officer for the unpaid balance of the claim. The officer against whom the complaint and accusation has been made also has the right to defend his interests by demanding that he be prosecuted and vindicated. Both the complaining party and the prosecutor have the obligation to serve notice on the accused officer if the prosecutor will not prosecute, thereby giving the officer a chance to protect his interests by demanding a prosecution.

7.2 – Bonding of Attitude

 1.The principles of economics are more and more being used to establish scientific bonding practices which eliminate the bonding, hence employment, of antisocial enforcement officers.

2. The bond on an enforcement officer is based on the officer’s social attitude and past performance, that is, his “track record.”
3. An antisocial officer is generally defined as a person who:
A. has a bad social attitude,
B. thinks he is bonded for any sort of social behavior whatsoever,
C. thinks he has to prove himself by being socially abusive or “macho” towards members of the general public.
4. Antisocial officers create bad enforcement situations which cause citizens to file malpractice claims with bonding companies.
5. Therefore, a credible bonding company will not bond a known antisocial enforcement officer.

7.3 – Bonding of Education

Principle–Ignorance of the law is not an allowable excuse for a law enforcement officer to use when exercising the power to enforce the law.

An officer must know and understand all of the processes which must be bonded before he can act on an execution of judgment.

An officer, although presumably acting in his official capacity, has no commercial escape or grace through a bonding company when the statute he enforces is not bonded against accidental misuse. When an officer commits an accidental misuse of his office or of a statute, or accidentally acts on an unbonded statute, the bonding company will pay on the bond only to the extent of a reasonable degree of error or accident; but nothing in the agreement between the bonding company and the bonded party shall be construed to free the official or officer from investigating and knowing whether or not his own actions or the statute acted upon or enforced were adequately bonded; and whatever portion of the damage claim remains after the bonding company has paid its reasonable obligation to the bonded party, shall be paid out of the assets of the municipal corporation and/or out of the real and personal property of the official or officer who mis-acted.

An enforcement officer of a municipal corporation (city, county, state), who operates without a bond or who enforces an unbonded statute, is acting outside of the public hazard licensing and bonding statutes governing municipal corporations. A bonding company has no financial responsibility for such an officer. Such an officer is regarded to be out of uniform, outside the shield or veil of his official capacity, and is a common citizen operating upon his own personal liability and risk.

If an officer was deceived by the government (municipal corporation) for which he works, into performing his “duties,” namely, of accepting statutes, carrying out Judgments of execution, or exerting enforcement beyond limits of his bonding, then, the officer shall not have a claim on the bonding company, and his personal property shall become attachable for the satisfaction of claims of damages, and he will have to make his claim against his employer. In the case of an unbonded statute, the employer will have to make its claim against the state legislature and the state of these factors are:

1. The psychological stability and sociability of the officer (is he antisocial, does he have a good social attitude, is he reasonable?),
2. the “track record” of his daily performance (past performance),
3. how much legal education the officer has and what kind of legal education the officer has and what kind of legal education does he have relevant to the laws that he will be required to enforce,
4.the specific performance (job description) of the officer being bonded, generally for the construction and advertisement of an unbonded statute. If a citizen knows how to enforce his civil remedies under the laws of commerce, and if the claim of the citizen for civil damages exceeds the face value of the bond, then the officer who victimizes that citizen can easily be bankrupted.

7.4 – Bonding of Specific Performance

Modern scientific bonding is based on a number of factors which mathematically determine the price of the wager (premium) charged by the bonding company. Some
5. the types of unbonded statutes he will enforce,
6. the types of bonded statutes he will enforce,
7. the types of paper enforcement processes he will use, and,
8. the types of enforcement acts he will engage in (especially the violent ones).

An officer is acting without the protection of a municipal bond, is acting on the municipal corporate assets, or is acting “out of uniform” and on his own personal liability if he:

1. behaves in a clearly antisocial manner,
2. does not have an education in law adequate for his specific performance ia a law enforcement officer,
3. is not adequately bonded for law enforcement, i.e., to enforce the law,
4. does not have an adequate identification card or does not show his identification card when necessary,
5. acts on an unbonded statute, and/or
6. violates a citizen’s U.S. or state constitutional rights or equal protection of the laws.

The identification card of a law enforcement officer declares the authority of the officer to act by:

1. stating the specific performance of his job for which he is bonded, such as the class of statutes he is bonded to enforce.
2. stating that he is licensed and bonded,
3. stating the name of the bonding company which is bonding the executive acts of the officer, and
4. stating the bond (policy) number of the officer’s bond (insurance).

An officer who cannot or does not display his official identification card is deemed out of uniform and acting as an ordinary citizen on his own personal liability. His personal property is then the true pledge underwriting his authority.

Liability by Association 

An officer can be sued for the injury caused by the act(s) of another officer, if the act(s) was committed and the injury was caused while the two officers worked together. The assessment of the transfer of liability rests upon such concepts as reasonable diligence, accident, neglect and conspiracy. 

7.5 – Authority

1. A statute has no social authority or the capacity to be enforced without an author, and has no author without the assumption of social, liability or financial responsibility for the statute authored.

2. Any attempt to exercise social authority by enforcing a statute without assuming a corresponding measure of social liability for the enforcement of the statute constitutes fraud.

The only authority which an official, officer or clerk of a government (e.g., municipal corporation) has to use, act upon, or enforce a statute resides in or arises out of the financial responsibility for the acts and actors as follows:

1. the legislation-construction of the statute,
2. the content of the statute itself,
3. the judication–the exercise of the judicative power,
4. the judicative process itself,
5. the execution-the enforcement paper process which is used as a reason to enforce the statute,
6. the enforcement act of the enforcement officer, and
7. the enforcement officer.

This financial responsibility for the acts and actors will usually be provided from one or more the following three sources:

1. the bonds on the acts and the actors (insurance on an official act or person),
2. the sacrifice, forfeiture or pledge of the personal property, real or movable, of the government corporate property, real or movable, or,
3. the sacrifice, forfeiture or pledge of the personal property, real or movable, of the official, officer or clerk who is using, acting upon or enforcing the statute.

 The total value in property or money extractable from these three sources must be sufficient to sustain a suit at law and pay for the damages caused as a consequence of using, acting upon or enforcing the statutes; that is, in defense of each specific performance of the jobs or of the persons, the said performance of said jobs being the product of the government known as public service.

A government official, officer or clerk who is not bonded or who loses his bond, shall be held financially responsible for his own actions. He shall have, as the only support for his own authority, the pledge of his own personal property, real and movable, to satisfy the damages which he causes to citizens by the exercise of that authority.

7.6 – Bonding Municipal Corporations

Many municipal corporations (city, county, state) have quietly chosen to operate without malpractice bonding in violation of state corporate public hazard bonding laws because their bonding is expensive. Often municipal corporations claim to be “self bonded,” but because civil rights suit claims are often, and properly, astronomically large, such in-house bonding is actually fraud, and passes liability on to the officials, officers and clerks of the municipal corporation. Municipal corporations have had to resort to lies and deceptions concerning the bonding of their officers in order to get their officers to put on a uniform and go out to fight for the corporation. The officers are not told that their public hazard bond is not adequate, and they are not told that if their onthe-job activities involve them in a situation where the face value of the bond is not sufficient to cover an injury (physical, mental, emotional, legal, etc.) to a public citizen, that then the citizen will have the right to sue the officer for a sufficient amount of the officer’s personal property (real and/or movable) in order to be paid the difference between the amount of the damage claim and the face value of the bond.

A municipal corporation will lose its executive enforcement bond or be rendered unbondable:

1. if it hires an enforcement officer and sends him out into the public to do official enforcement duties without bonding his enforcement processes and actions. The officer must be provided with a written notarized declaration of his job description;
2. if it fails to tell an officer or clerk that he is not adequately bonded, the officer must be provided with a written notarized declaration of his bonding status;
3. if it fails to issue an identification card to an enforcement officer declaring:

A. that the officer is bonded,
B. the name of the officer,
C. the officer’s enforcement classification,
D. the name of the municipal corporation for which he works,
E. the name of the bonding company which is bonding his enforcement,
F. the bond (policy) number of the officer,
G. the address and/or telephone number of the bonding company (bonding companies may want to know who is cheating them. Many municipal corporations are not adequately bonded and never tell their employees about it),
H. a picture of the officer.

4. if it does not provide a law enforcement officer with a sufficient education in law and process so that the officer can properly carry out his law enforcement duties as agreed to in his job description,
5. if it engages an enforcement officer to enforce an unbonded “statute” which by its hazardous nature must be bonded, or
6. if it engages an enforcement officer to violate a citizen’s U.S. constitutional[ly secured] rights or equal protection of the laws.

8.0 – EXECUTIVE CONTROL

The control/enforcement process of an executive/enforcement officer will be bonded only if the bonding company finds that:

1. before executing an order of execution the officer had in his possession:

A. a faithful recap (recapitulation) of the case representing both sides of the argument, hand-signed by the author of the recap (who is liable for his recap),
B. an original hand-signed verified bonding check list of the complete court process,
C. an original hand-signed copy of the judgment and the order of execution of judgment,
D. a proper personal identification card including:

i that the officer is bonded,
i. the name of the officer,
ii. the officer’s enforcement classification,
iii. the name of the municipal corporation for which he works,
iv. the name of the bonding company which is bonding his enforcement,
v. the bond (policy) number of the officer,
vi. the address and/or telephone number of the bonding company, and
vii. a picture of the officer,

E. a proper personal business card which the officer could hand out to the public and to the person(s) arrested, containing all of the same information as given in Part (1) (D) except for the picture, because of the expense of picture cards.

9.0 – EXECUTIVE OUTPUT

The output/enforcement act of an executive/enforcement officer will be bonded only if the bonding company finds to its satisfaction that, taking into consideration the urgency and hazard of the situation, the officer while enforcing the paper process acted in a reasonable manner as regards:

1. the reading and understanding of the recap,
2. the reading and understanding of the verified bonding list,
3. the reading and understanding of the judgement, and
4. the reading and understanding of the order of execution of judgment, And when enforcing
5. properly identifying himself,
6. properly serving necessary papers, and
7. properly notifying people of their rights.

9.1 – Bonding Jail. Procedure

A government, or an official, officer or clerk of a government, will lose its/his bond, will not be bonded and will not be bondable if a person, hereinafter referred to as the “prisoner,” which it/he handles, who has been charged and arrested but who has not been convicted:

1. has been denied or delayed anything, or any right, or the equal protection of the law necessary for the prisoner’s defense which an uncharged and unarrested citizen would have at his use, service and disposal,

2. has been denied or delayed legal paperwork in the prisoner’s case, including but not limited to affidavits of accusation, police reports, arrest warrants, mailing addresses for the delivery of all leg paperwork, etc.,

3. has been denied or delayed. the assistant counsel of, or communication with any lawyer, attorney, spouse, relative, friend, non-union paralegal, non-union lawyer, etc., needed for his personal safety and legal defense,

4. has been denied or delayed necessary appearances and opportunity to speak before a judge in court and on the court record (“necessary” as defined by the prisoner, not as defined by the jail. Ear, the judge or the court), and/or consideration from the jailer, the judge of the court, and/or a hand-signed record of the proceedings before the judge and the court,

5. has been denied or delayed a copy of anything:
 　(A) the prisoner has signed while entering or dwelling in the jail, or
 　(B) the prisoner has been required to sign while entering or dwelling in the jail (“It is best not to sign anything.”),

6. has been denied or delayed the physical basics; namely, light, heat, simple comforts, rest, writing materials or any other obvious physical means necessary to compose, write and perfect the prisoner’s defense, said basics to be provided at no cost to the prisoner,

7. has been denied or delayed the opportunity to effectively file counter complaints against the prisoner’s accusers, and those who have handled and processed the prisoner’s case (see also 4.0 Judicative Input,_specifically),

8. has been denied or delayed a readable copy of the Holy Bible printed in a language in which the prisoner is educated or fluent,

9. has been denied or delayed access to law books of the prisoner’s choice,

10. has been denied or delayed medical needs. NOTE: The county shall provide all of the above services immediately to the un-convicted prisoner at no cost to the prisoner. Any county which fails to meet the above criteria will itself be totally liable for its own acts. It is not inconceivable that a county violating the above criteria could accumulate over one hundred million dollars worth of civil damages in one day’s time involving only one prisoner, and no credible bonding company wants anything to do with that kind of obligation.

– In Conclusion –

According to the equitable authorities at law in regard to state-created marriages, any property sought after belongs to both parties/spousal, therefore, both are responsible for their spouse’s action(s). Thereby, criminal complaints jointly affect in regard to liens. In short, bring the civil rights violators, wife/husband, into the court action also. Remember, all liens cannot be removed until the declaration is adjudicated and/or the claimant is satisfied.

In the wording of the published rules of the Ninth Circuit Court, “Go for the jugular vein.”

9.2 – Escalation

Further: A law enforcement officer will lose his bond if he oppresses a citizen to the point of civil. rebellion when that citizen attempts to obtain redress of grievances (U.S. constitutional 1st so-called amendment).

When a state, by and through its officials and agents, deprives a citizen of all of his remedies by the due process of law and deprives the citizen of the equal protection of the law, the state commits an act of mixed war against the citizen, and, by its behavior, the state declares war on the citizen. The citizen has the right to recognize this act by the publication of a solemn recognition of mixed war. This writing has the same force as the Declaration of Independence. It invokes the citizen’s U.S. constitutional 9th and 10th so-called amend guarantees of the right to create an effective remedy where otherwise none exists.

“I found this insight on the UBC to be very perspicuous and most useful to the Patriot movement, but like all laws, it is useful only to the one(s) who use it and enforce it.”

Remember the etymon at the time of law’s creation and The Federalist Papers. (Read and discern until it’s perspicuous.)

“Prior law governs always.” “Prior etymons govern always.”

“To act in pro se fashion in a court of law or equity is to profess in law, thus, casting yourself to drift away from logic and into the arms of a fool.”

Study the UBC, file your “criminal complaints” in timely fashion, take their money or their hides for future parchment. MAXIM; (Universal Axiom of Law)

All people know that the foundation of law and the legal system exists in the telling of the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, generally by testimony, deposition, and/or by affidavit. Therefore, every honorable judge requires those who appear before him to be sworn to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, and is compelled by the high principles of his profession to protect that truth and do nothing to tamper with that truth, either directly or indirectly, either in person or by proxy, or by subornation of the affiant or other person (subornation/extortion of perjury).

This instrument is an Affidavit of Obligation, also known as a Claim of Lien. This affidavit of obligation is a commercial instrument arising from a private or public contract, either express, constructive, and/or implied, which exists by the express, constructive, and/or implied consent of the Lien Debtor. Therefore, this Affidavit of obligation is a consensual commercial lien. This lien arises from the necessity to guarantee specific performance (oath) of the Lien Debtor. Therefore, this Affidavit of obligation is also a just compensation commercial lien.

The Lien Claimant’s Claim of Lien is expressed as this Affidavit. A mere unsworn declaration is not sufficient grounds for a Claim of Lien because it does not attach commercial liability to the person making the claim of obligation upon a debtor. The person making the claim (the Lien Claimant) must assume the commercial liability for making a claim against the debtor (the Lien debtor) by issuing a sworn statement known as an Affidavit of Obligation which is given to the best of the claimant’s knowledge and belief to be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, for which the claimant stands personally commercially responsible.

A declaration of obligation does not become a lien unless it is sworn to, in which case it is known by the stronger term, “Affidavit of Obligation.” A mere declaration of obligation is not a lien.

A “distress,” which essentially compels instant specific performance, being severe because of its instant effect, must be bonded. On the other hand, a lien, having a traditional three month grace period, allows ample time for a response, hence is regarded as commercially moderate, and, therefore, does not have to be bonded beyond the personal liability which it automatically imposes upon the Lien Claimant/Affiant. (The three day, three week, three month, and three year grace periods in American Law arise from the traditional numerology of ancient Hebrew and Jewish law. See Holy Bible, Old Testament.)

 As would be the case with any other affidavit, deposition, or testimony, an Affidavit of Obligation (commercial/contract lien) may not be tampered with by any judge, other public official, or other person, and generally may be removed by only one or more of four means:

1. A satisfaction of the lien by the Lien Debtor.

2. A categorical point-for-point rebuttal (affirmation, denial, or explanation) of every element of the Lien Claimant’s claim, said rebuttal being also in the form of a commercial affidavit for which the Lien Debtor accepts full personal. commercial responsibility. If the lien claimant can rebut the lien debtor’s rebuttal, the lien stays in force.

3. A voluntary (unextorted) removal of the lien by the Lien Claimant (or his heirs and assigns, if such has been provided for).　

4. A decision by an impartial jury duly convened and properly conducted (not tampered with by a judge, other public official, or other person).

The suspension of an Affidavit of Obligation is the suspension of the right to give testimony in one’s own behalf and is, therefore, in the nature of a suspension of the Writ of Habeas Corpus, a thing done only under the conditions of martial law, civil war, or mixed war.

 A judge cannot interfere with, tamper with, or in any way modify testimony without rendering incredible the truth seeking process in his sacred profession and destroying the fabric of his own occupation, thereby committing professional suicide. Any judge who tampers with testimony, deposition, or affidavit, is a threat to the commercial peace and dignity of the State and of the United States, is in violation of the Supreme Law of the Land, is acting in the nature of a foreign enemy, and is justifiably subject to the penalties of treason; God’s speed.

 A lien implies impoundment of property. A breach of the said impoundment, also known as pound breach, and is a felony.

A bill in commerce is a private declaration of obligation. A lien in commerce is the same bill made public with a commercial affidavit attached in support　 of the bill. When a lien instrument is composed and made public, either by filing in the Office of the County Recorder or by any other method of open and wide publicity, a copy of the Claim of Lien must be provided for the Lien Debtor so that the Lien Debtor will thus be enabled to defend against the lien. To guarantee that the Lien Debtor has an ample grace period of three months to defend against the lien, the grace period does not begin until a copy of the Claim of Lien or a Notice of Lien is in the possession of the Lien Debtor. If only a Notice of Lien is supplied to the Lien Debtor then the Claim of Lien must be filed in a place of public access such as the County Recorder’s Office, or other such public place clearly specified in the Notice of Lien/Affidavit of Obligation, and therefore cannot be lawfully entered by the County Recorder on a County, State or Federal Lien Index.

A Claim of Lien exists upon the property of a Lien Debtor even if a copy of that lien is only witnessed and in the possession of the Lien Debtor. However, if the Lien Debtor commits poundbreach by a sale, transfer, or assignment of the liened property to some third party, the Claim of Lien does not travel along with that property and attach commercial liability to the said third party, unless the Claim of Lien has been filed in the County Recorder’s Office of the county affected by the lien, or said Claim of Lien has　 otherwise been satisfactorily publicized. If any attempt is made by any public official to impair the lien process by compelling the county recorder to refuse to file the Lien Claimant’s Claim of Lien, then any alternate publicity of the Claim of Lien with reasonable diligence is to be considered adequate publication of the lien for the purpose of passing the obligation of lien forward to the new third party owner of the property, the property seized by the original Claim of Lien against the original Lien Debtor.

BONDING

DUN AND BRADSTREET re DEFACTO GOVERNMENT

There are a few more things worth noting regarding the DUN & BRADSTREET listing service:

D-B is a financial rating service for both ‘public’ and ‘private’ corporations.　 Utilities and municipal bond ratings would come under D-B perview for certain.　 It just really never occurred to me years ago when doing litigation discovery, research and analysis, and ‘structured settlements’ that there was seemingly anything incoherent with that fact that municipal and utility bonds are integral to D-B rating services.　 I never ever stopped to think about or scrutinize that fact, yet alone allow my deliberation and research skills to ‘wander’ or ‘wonder’ into research that would have disclosed what we recently found.　 Part of the ease of discovering the complex web of inter-related inter-locking CORPORATIONS had to do with ease of electronic research over the internet.　 Years ago, if one wanted to search anything within any of the rating services, including “Moody’s”, Standard & Poors, and Dun &　 Bradstreet, + others, one would have to either have to be a subscriber to the service in order to manually expedite their search-rating results, or, one would have to pay a fee and cause a search to arise.

D & B ‘ratings’ are effected everytime a ‘public hazard bond’, or ‘surety performance bond’, or ‘indemnity bond’ is complained against.　 An ‘administrative complaint’ is usually all that it takes to cause a ‘tag’ or book entry to be made on any particular bond.　 Any particular bond, once complained against three or more times, causes a change in underwriting bond ‘risk’.

For bonded Bar attorneys, who in many cases may also be appointed, commissioned, or elected to ‘public office’ as ‘Judge’, ‘Clerk of Court’, etc. when/if their bond is complained against for good and reasonable cause, their bond may be ‘pulled’, and due to loss of effective bond or ‘suretyship’, they cannot ‘practice’ or ‘discharge’ the duty of the office held, or occupied.　 In short, the bond maker-issuer is the bonding party for the benefit or on behald of the ‘bondee’, ie. the purported ‘public officer’, ‘employee’, or ‘official’.　 This would extend as well to all other ‘public employees’ and ‘agents’-‘agencies’, etc.

Every ‘person’ being bonded has a Dun & Bradstreet ‘bond rating’.　 At least it is reasonable to assume such.　 Once three complaints are filed against any bond, assuming they are with merit and well supported by fact and ‘law’ of the ‘breach’ of fiduciary duty, the bond is most always pulled or revoked.　 The ‘servant’ at ‘risk’ by assuming the responsibilities of operating in any ‘official capacity’ or by ‘employment’, can no longer be underwritten as a ‘no risk’ or ‘low risk’ contract.　

One incident of ‘breach’ or operating ‘ultra vires’, or ‘without the law’, causes the ‘immunity’ provisions of the written ‘law’ to cease to be effective, because when one violates the law as a ‘public servant’, one’s immunity blanket ceases to apply, thereby leaving the insurer or bondsman or bond issuer exposed to the liability arising from the servant’s acts, which under any ‘breach of law authority’ causes or gives rise to an ‘injury’ which is a civil or criminal commercial liability.

Everything, whether civil or criminal or martial, is a matter of ‘commerce’, and admiralty law is the venue and jurisdiction by which disputes in/of commercial nature are resolved in truth and fact.

All writings of the United States of America and of the UNITED STATES, or any other ‘government unit’ are forms of making an ‘offer to contract’.

There is no written matter of material fact or issue of fact that is ‘law’ which is not bonded.　 There is no ‘office’ or function of ‘civil service’ or ‘public’ function that is not bonded.　If the bond is not in existence, the bondee is ‘exposed’ and without ‘coverage’ by any ‘surety’.

Therefore, there is no ‘guarantor’ behind the agent, officer, official, or employee having ‘exposure’, by ‘assumption of risk’, of a material breach or injury in fact by the bondee [person being bonded or insured].　This leaves the person under taint or cloud of operating ‘in the public interest’ without the constitutionally and statutorily required bond, and therefore, in tacit violation of the constitutions and statutes under the scheme of ‘law’.　 “Law” applies first and foremost to government, its employees, officers, and agents.

In today’s rogue ‘doctrine of necessity’ ‘de facto’ environment, research has proven and documented that no person, performing as an ‘officer of the court’, being an alleged ‘judge’, being a ‘Bar attorney’ of the ABA or the Federal or State Bars, has a bona fide Constitutional Oath.　 The Bond that is supposed to be in existence sits atop the Oath.　 The Oath is not merely ‘incidental’ to the ‘office’ as has been ruled in some States by their corrupt court “officers”.　 The Oath is what imparts lawful and legal authority to the man/woman coming into ‘holding’ a ‘public office’ and becoming a ‘public official’.

A public servant having no proper Oath cannot have a proper Bond to encompass or include those risks associated with the ‘office’, ‘discharge of fiduciary duty’ of the office, and the various levels or elements of ‘law authority’ underlying the office.　 Hence, one may take an Oath to any office of the incorporated State, or the UNITED STATES, and not take a preceding Oath to the unincorporated de jure state or United States of America, and operate non/un constitutionally, which is all that has been going on for years, but which was not known or understood as being a material breach to the People of the State/state, causing or giving rise to material injuries in fact as a consequence of operating ‘ultra vires’, ie. outside the corporate charters and ‘trust indentures’ which create the office in the first place.

In the STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, not one judge has taken the necessary Oaths of office, which include the organic ‘state’ de jure republic oath for “North Carolina”, and the subsequent and inferior or ‘lesser’ oath for the STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA.　 The latter ‘public entity’ has federal character, a Federal Employer Identification Number, a Federal Tax Identification Number, and is a federal ‘instrumentality’ of the CORPORATE ‘UNITED STATES’, and the DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, under definition of 28 U.S.C. §3002(15), AND 26 U.S.C. §§7701 (a)(9) and (10).　　 This documented fact pertains to every judge in every State court, but also applies to most every other ‘public official’ or ‘law enforcement officer’.

I cannot address what other State public pretenders and ‘District Attorneys’ or “Prosecutors” do when bringing a criminal complaint against any “natural Man or Woman”, which includes CORPORATIONS [YES, they are both the class of ‘person’ under statute ‘law’ definition], but in the STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA, when it is the bringer of the action, the People of the State are never brought in as ‘party to the action’.　 Only the CORPORATION/DEBTOR name is found on the Criminal Complaint or Information form.　 Only the corporate State is present in the courtroom, trying a case before a CORPORATE JUDGE.　 There exists a complete breach and break from the Constitution of North Carolina, because the People of the republic North Carolina and their ‘law’ are not present in the action nor party to it.　 They are not in the courtroom, nor are they acting through any ‘officer’ of the People, as ‘District Attorney’, which Office alleges to be a ‘servant of the People’.　 It is NOT.　 Event the DA does not have the mandatory and proper Constitutional Oath as condition precedent under NORTH CAROLINA GENERAL STATUTES, which clearly state at Chapter 11, Section 11, there shall be two Constitutional Oaths taken.

Absent performance according to that bonded STATUTE regarding bonded Oaths, leaves a clear and certain risk-liability issue for the Bond maker-issuer.　 Some bonding agent has bonded the Statutes and other writings of the law of the State.　 Some bond issuer has bonded State ‘employees’, ‘officers’, and ‘public officials’.

Some bond issuer has, therefore, “underwritten” risk on the basis of having full knowledge that there exist no Constitutional Oaths beneath the CORPORATE OATH.　　 One cannot but presume that the bond issuer-maker has full disclosure; after all, ‘they’ have been registered within each State Department of Corporations, do business in all ‘States’ and DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, and are presumed to know the “LAW”….including the “law of the land “,  which under their “UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE” and all secondary ‘Civil’ or ‘Criminal’ Codes, would find itself to be in harmony with their legislative jurisdictional ‘statutes and implementing regulations’ at U.C.C. 1-308, 1-207, and 1-103, wherein All Rights are Reserved, and the U.C.C. states that it is harmonious with ‘all jurisdictions’, which would include the jurisdiction of the “law of the land”, ‘common law’, and the various common law Constitutions of the underlying several de jure republic ‘states’ of the American union, aka, United States of America.

Why would any bond underwriter knowingly underwrite these CORPORATE STATES, UNITED STATES, all of their ‘sub-corporations’, agents-agencies, instrumentalities, and their ‘law authority’ found in their various ‘writings’, private ‘laws’ etc., to operate a ‘public’ or ‘municipal’ construct as if it were ‘lawful government’, but knowing that it really is not?　 The underwriters of bonds, therefore, could not allege any defense against a massive intake of related claims by private inhabitants of any of the States or UNITED STATES who have been “compelled” under duress, extreme duress, or risk of extreme duress and prejudice of ‘seizure’, ‘confiscation’ ‘impound’, ‘occupation’, ‘detainment’, or injury or termination by any means of potentially lethal force?

Everyone who has ever been inside a State of North Carolina administrative or judicial ‘law’ proceeding, or been before any ‘clerk’ or ‘judge’ of same, or been prosecuted by any County District Attorney within said State/STATE, has been within a “brutum fulmen“:

Black’s Law Dictionary, 4t Edition:　 “brutum fulmen“:　 “An empty noise; an empty threat.　 A judgment void upon its face which is in legal effect no judgment at all, and by which no rights are divested, and from which none can be obtained; and neither binds nor bars anyone.　 Dollert v. Pratt-Hewitt Oil Corporation, Tex.Civ.Appl, 179 S.W.2d 346, 348.　 Also, see Corpus Juris Secundum, “Judgments” §§ 499, 512 546, 549.

The “Office of Sheriff” is a most important link between the People of any de jure republic ‘state’ and the Courts, and Offices of the State.　 However, it has been discovered that many Sheriffs do not, as Chief Law Enforcement Officer of any local ‘county’ or County, have a bona fide prior or ‘precedent’ Constitutional Oath to their respective republic state.　 Or, they may have taken a bona fide Constitutional Oath, and then disclaimed or disavowed it immediately henceforth by taking a CORPORATE Constitutional Oath.　 “A man cannot serve two masters”.

This same “axiomatic” principal applies to ‘officers’ of the United States as well.　 How can the newly ‘sworn’ Attorney General of the UNITED STATES, OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL [a federal corporation] take a Constitutional Oath to the United States, or UNITED STATES, and be held to such an Oath as ‘liable’ for his/her breach of fiduciary duty to the people of the United States of America, or to the franchise corporate trust estate ‘citizens of the UNITED STATES’, when the office ‘holder’ enjoins by contract to the ‘international purposes of INTERPOL’, under its Constitution [charter-contract] at Article 30 　shortly after taking said Oath?　 Article 30 is quite explicit in meaning and intent.　 If one understands the “international purposes of INTERPOL” and all other ‘international agencies’ was and is to ‘establish a financial dictatorship within the United States/United States of America’ for the benefit of undisclosed third parties, under jurisdiction and authority of the IMF-U.N, then all of the lower level ‘breach of duty’ by lack of proper Bond and Oath issues would begin to make clear sense.

In short, all alleged ‘public servants’ are serving ‘public policy’ and ‘public administration’ of the ‘laws’ and enforcing those laws to protect the CORPORATION, to the disinterest and detriment of the People, whom have been ‘captured’, ‘searched’, ‘seized’, ‘boarded’ as with a ‘vessel’, and which People have been placed into ‘warehouse storeage’ as ‘human capital’ and ‘property’ of the de facto King or “Sovereign”, which/who has conquered and occupied the Office of the People, and subverted and subordinated it into an Office of Inquisition for YOU KNOW WHO!!

Lacking mandatory Oath, creates liability against the bond of the STATE, and every officer-agent-employee who has come to be ‘employed’ thereby.Breach of any underlying writing of the STATE, or State, or state, as an offer to contract in admiralty venue, is a certain “injury in fact” giving rise to a “material injustice” and resultant ‘liability’.　 There is no longer any question about ‘risk analysis’ or ‘damage assessment’.　 The only real issue is “HOW MUCH IS THE INJURY WORTH”?　 WHAT PENALTIES should be compelled above the mere “pecuniary” or monetary ‘relief’ to be sought?　 　　Treble damages?　 Punitive damages?　 Civil or Criminal or BOTH?

If Oaths and Bonds have not yet been ascertained for all relevant federal and State officers, agents, and employees, they should be compelled by FOIA request or subpoena duces tecum 　immediately so that the elements of contract and breach of duty by these ‘public servants’ under mandate of relevant Constitutions, statutes, regulations, etc., including the U.C.C. in Admiralty venue can be comprehensively determined; then, a resultant ‘cause of action’ constructed accordingly.

It is further axiomatic that:　 “Where a liability in equity arises due to injury by any party, and that party does not also provide a “remedy” for said liability, the injured party has the right and standing to create his own remedy”(Which would provide the secured right to seek Article III sec. 2 remedy for the deprivation of Natural Rights by way of a Title 18 USC sec 241 in the United States Court of Federal Claims.) This would n0t be a Title 42 USC proceeding for the U.S. citizen or person of diminished corporate status.

Persons without proper Oaths do not and cannot have proper Bonds OR satisfy the necessary requirements to “hold” a bona fide “Office”, by ‘commission’, “election”, or “appointment”.　 In short, an ‘Officer’ or “Office Holder” cannot but ‘occupy’ the office under false and misleading pretense, misrepresentation, and FRAUD, which strips the ‘individual’ of ‘law authority’ and ‘immunity’ under well-seasoned law of the land and sea.　 Brutum fulmen!!　 　Bonds that are attached to such juristic ‘persons’ are subject to claim and lien, after “adequate assurance of due performance” has been found lacking pursuant to U.C.C. 2-619. 　　A proper Oath and Bond are but two of the three primary “poles” of “Office” [Oath, Bond, Commission].　 One cannot act upon being ‘duly appointed’ or ‘duly elected’ or ‘duly commissioned’ simply by INCORPORATION and CORPORATE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS.

NOTICE: CORPORATE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS aka “Administrative Procedures Act” lacks any bona fide Constitutional nexus and is without “lawful authority”, and thereby, has no nexus to the Constitutionally protected ‘Right’ of substantive “Due process” for the natural Man or Woman.　 Hence, any presumptive act or action taken against any natural Man or Woman by any oath sworn corporate ‘official’, ‘officer’, agent’ or ‘employee’ lacking such nexus is subject to CLAIM and/or COUNTER-CLAIM in a Chancery venue and proceeding.　　The claim, once perfected after ‘exhausting administrative remedy’ is brought against the Bond and the DUN & BRADSTREET rating of that CORPORATE PERSON will be affected as a consequence.　 The idea is not to seek an illegitimate claim for merely punitive or monetary purposes, but to seek claim on the basis of protest, dispute, redress, relief, and ‘remedy’ to restore you as to being made whole once again from the damage that has been maliciously exercised for the purpose to profit off your commercial value in total disregard and summary denial of the pre-existing accessible remedy provided out of necessity and thereby operation of law to avoid the circumstance of unjust enrichment of private and public parties, both natural and fictional.

Birth Certificate . . . Tracking Its Movement

Tags

acceptance for value, birth certificate fraud, equitable estoppel, sovereign documents, UCC 1-103, UCC 1-201, UCC and birth certificates, UCC1-203, UCC3-302

(For Austin)

(Blog Master’s Note: While going through Austin’s Documents I ran into two more on Birth Certificates.  This one defines the fraud involved in selling bonds on it.  By the end of this week, or sooner, I will give remedy for using the Birth Certificate as a Bond.)

TRACKING THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE SCHEME

HOW THE UNENLIGHTENED ARE PICKED CLEAN

When a child is born within the corporate United States, a Record of Live Birth form (a commercial Bill of Lading), or similar, is issued by the hospital. The father and mother sign this hospital form (a receipt for goods) as the parents (manufacturer) and title holders (owners) of the goods (child). The transfer of the property Rights (the child’s Rights) to the State is accepted by the signature of their government agent, a State licensed Physician. The parents have unknowingly pledged their child’s future and labors to the government and signed a presumed contract. This converts the legal status of their child to that of chattel property in permanently indentured servitude (See Preface, Part I). The State becomes the de facto holder of the Rights to the child (collateral).

Next, the hospital sends the Record of Live Birth to the State Bureau of Vital Statistics, sometimes called the department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS) in some States. Each State is required to supply the Federal government with birth, death, and health statistics. The State agency that receives the Record of Live Birth (title) keeps it and then issues a Birth Certificate (BC). The BC is a commercial instrument (document) evidencing that the State is holding the title (ownership) to the child. Holding the title is not the same as having possession of the property, so the State is the “holder” of the instrument but not the “holder in due course”. This is all based on the presumed acceptance of the contract (Record of Live Birth) between the manufacturer (parents) and the purchaser (State). The parents are not aware of this assumed contract because it was never revealed to them nor was full disclosure made in good faith, so they don’t object to what they don’t know. The current holder of your commercial birth document (receipt) is able to capitalize on it because of your failure to instruct the holder to do otherwise, due to your silence and lack of legal action.

cer·tif·i·cate, noun. Middle English certificat, from Middle French, from Medieval Latin certificatum, 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).

 This Birth Certificate issued by the State is then registered with the U.S. Department of Commerce through their agency, the U.S. Census Bureau, who is responsible to collect vital statistics from all the States. The word “registered”, in commercial law, does not mean that your name was merely noted in a registry or book for reference purposes. When a Birth Certificate is registered with the U.S. Department of Commerce, it means that the child’s persona named on it has become a surety or guarantor as collateral for a commercial loan.

 registered. Security, bond. (Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of Law 1996).

 Security. 1a: Something (as a mortgage or collateral) that is provided to make certain the fulfillment of an obligation. Example: used his property as security for a loan. 1b: “surety“. 2: Evidence of indebtedness, ownership, or the right to ownership.

Bond. 1a: A usually formal written agreement by which a person undertakes to perform a certain act (as fulfill the obligations of a contract) …with the condition that failure to perform or abstain will obligate the person …to pay a sum of money or will result in the forfeiture of money put up by the person or surety. 1b: One who acts as a surety. 2: An interest-bearing document giving evidence of a debt issued by a government body or corporation that is sometimes secured by a lien on property and is often designed to take care of a particular financial need.

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’s not difficult to see that a Birth Certificate is a document evidencing debt the moment it’s issued. This is how it works: Once each State has registered, by commercial bulk transfer, the Birth Certificates with the U.S. Department of Commerce, the U.S. Department of the Treasury then issues Treasury Securities in the form of Treasury Bonds, Notes, and Bills using the BC’s as sureties or guarantors for these purported Securities. This means that the bankrupt corporate U.S. can guarantee to the purchasers of their Securities the lifetime labor of all Americans as collateral for payment. Isn’t it nice to know that when you were born, within days you became the collateral for corporate U.S. debt-loans through the assumed contract your parents thought was nothing more than a Record of Live Birth? But wait… the chain of events gets even more interesting.

Who purchases these Treasury Securities? Nearly all are purchased by commercial institutions and brokerage firms on behalf of their individual clients. These purchases are called commercial book entry transactions whereby the individual purchaser never receives a paper stock certificate. Follow very closely and see if you can notice the monopoly and identity of the World Power Brokers unfolding here. Key words are underlined:

  1. The commercial book entry system is operated exclusively by the privately owned Federal Reserve System (formerly the Federal Reserve Bank) as fiscal agents of the U.S. Treasury Department

2. All these securities are recorded in the commercial book entry system as “book entry issues” held for the account of the depository institution.

3. The exclusive depository institution is the Depository Trust Company (DTC), a privately owned trust company (bank), who maintains records identifying the individual “beneficial owners” of securities that the DTC holds (holder) in its account in the commercial book entry system.

4. The Depository Trust Company is an operating unit of (owned by) the Federal Reserve System.

5. The Depository Trust Company transfers all the securities to their own private holding company Cede & Company.

6. Cede & Company is the holder of nearly $20 trillion ($ 20,000,000,000,000) of stocks and bonds.

7. The Federal Reserve System uses the Treasury Securities it holds as collateral to print and issue Federal Reserve Notes, which are further debt obligations.

a contract can only be valid if it follows all the Rules and Process of law that created it. One of the main elements or rules of contract law states that “all parties must understand the scope, nature, terms, and t that fails to be entered into by mutual “good faith”, with full disclosure of the terms and conditions to both parties, and consent by all parties, is void ab initio (from the beginning). Whenever the elements of “good faith” disclosure and/or “consent” are missing, any contract can automatically be ruled null and void if the deceived or defrauded party enforces the Rules of Law. Once again, silence is default. If you say nothing, you have defaulted.

UCC 1-203 Obligation of good faith.–Every contract or duty within this code imposes an obligation of good faith in its performance or enforcement.

Were you aware of the implied and “presumed” contract between you and the Real Party of Interest, the owners of the Federal Reserve System? In all law and truth, it doesn’t exist, does it?

UCC 1-201 Definitions— (31) “Presumption” or “presumed” means that the trier of fact must find the existence of the fact presumed unless and until evidence is introduced which would support a finding of its nonexistence.

Were all terms and conditions disclosed to you at birth or any time since then? Of course not. Legally, once you rebut the presumption by affidavit for failure to disclose the terms and conditions or obtain mutual consent, the contract automatically becomes null and void. Such a contract as this, which has unlawfully bound the average American to it, is considered fraud or misrepresentation. For example:

UCC 1-103 Supplementary general principles of law applicable.–Unless displaced by the particular provisions of this code, the principles of law and equity, including the law merchant and the law relative to capacity to contract, principal and agent, estoppel, fraud, misrepresentation, duress, coercion, mistake, bankruptcy, or other validating or invalidating cause shall supplement its provisions.

As you can now see, the major flaw in all artificial governments and their “laws” is the absence of a genuine and legal agreement between the parties due to a failure to fully disclose, have a meeting of the minds, and lack mutual “good faith”. In their presumption that you have agreed to a bona fide contract with the government, you were never informed of the full terms and conditions of the purported contract.

The reason this situation could exist in the first place is due to the fact that the American People have fooled themselves, lied to themselves, and failed to communicate among themselves. They have put aside their Holy Bibles and replaced the True Law of God with the laws of men. The world of man’s laws and governments was brought about by the very people who are now servants to the “system”. Since Lincoln’s War, Christian Americans have lived in fear of speaking out against wrongs that they see taking place.

According to the universal principles and foundations of contract law (See Background, Part I), in the absence of a genuine agreement, no contract exists. What does exist is nothing more than a presumption of contract based on the deceived party (you) having foolishly trusted in the government. Although fraud is unlawful, it is not illegal in artificial State rulership systems. Keep in mind, once again, that all governments are structurally fraudulent due to the origins of their artificial conception. Based on this premise of evidence, it’s an obvious fact that fraud must be “legal” as governments are able to judge themselves as legal in the first place. In other words, the existence of a government is a legality of fraud ab initio.

Holder in Due Course In Commercial Law, the ultimate owner of any “Document of Title” is known as the “Holder in Due Course” (HDC). He is the only one who possesses a valid claim to “title” whereby the goods or property are deliverable to him. By comparison, a technical “Holder” may legally possess a “Negotiable Instrument”, but he lacks the ultimate claim of “title” held by the HDC and is nothing more than a receiver and collector of payments. The HDC receives the delivery of the property; the Holder merely receives payment for the property.

UCC 1-201 DEFINITIONS— (20) “Holder,” with respect to a negotiable instrument, means the person in possession if the instrument is payable to bearer or, in the case of an instrument payable to an identified person, if the identified person is in possession. “Holder,” with respect to a document of title, means the person in possession if the goods are deliverable to bearer or to the order of the person in possession.

UCC 3-302 HOLDER IN DUE COURSE — Subject to subsection (c) and Section 3-106(d), “holder in due course” means the holder of an instrument if: (1) the instrument when issued or negotiated to the holder does not bear such apparent evidence of forgery or alteration or is not otherwise so irregular or incomplete as to call into question its authenticity; and (2) the holder took the instrument (i) for value, (ii) in good faith, (iii) without notice that the instrument is overdue or has been dishonored or that there is an uncured default with respect to payment of another instrument issued as part of the same series, (iv) without notice that the instrument contains an unauthorized signature or has been altered, (v) without notice of any claim to the instrument described in Section 3-306, and (vi) without notice that any party has a defense or claim in recoupment described in Section 3-305(a).

As stated earlier, your Birth Certificate is simply a warehouse receipt. Birth Certificates are bundled together and transferred or purchased in “bulk sales” under one or more of the provisions found in UCC 6-104 through 108. However, possession of your Birth Certificate was not taken by the government in “good faith” and the legal Holder (government) cannot “enforce the instrument free from all claims and personal defenses.” This means that whoever, or whatever artificial entity, is now acting as the purported “owner” of your Birth Certificate can, in legal reality, only be only a technical “Holder” of the Negotiable Instrument and can never be the actual “Holder in due Course”. Only you can be the HDC.

owner of all your earthly affairs and everything else concerning ownership of your legal life. When you really think about itThe HDC is the most powerful position in any exchange of property or goods in commercial law. The allodial key to understanding this lies in whether you are or are not the HDC of your Document of Title of birth, the Negotiable Instrument to your legal existence. Once you see that you are the legal HDC to your own Title of Rights, your whole worldly life will change dramatically. You are then, once again, a sovereign with respect to anything of which you are the Holder in Due Course. This will make you the HDC of “yourself”, both the real biological person and the artificial persona. It will place you as the ultimate , this is the “legal” means by which your physical being and your Spiritual being can join together in true Freedom and Liberty.

The “secret” to becoming the HDC is known as “Acceptance for Value.” Your Birth Certificate (Document of Title) is currently held by “unknown parties” who can never be the HDC of it. Only you, and you alone, can become the HDC. When your offer of “purchase” is made, title passes upon acceptance of the offer. The offer (your UCC-1) is accepted by the previous Holder (the government) when they record it in the State records for a fee payment (value). The “acceptance for value” is made by the government in accordance with two Rules of law: One, the fee paid for recording the instrument; Two, since it is recorded without objection, it is also accepted by their own conduct, both implied and direct.

All that remains to do at this point is to give or show affidavit evidence of the exchange (a copy of your recorded UCC-1 Financing Statement with the State acceptance seal and certification). “Acceptance” and “offer” are the two mandatory elements to any legal contract in commercial law. “Acceptance” or “Acceptance for Value”, for the purpose of commercial law, is “acquiescence”. Look carefully at these definitions written by Canadian lawyer Lloyd Duhaime from Duhaime’s Law Dictionary:

Acceptance. A contract is a legally binding agreement between two or more parties which starts with an offer from one person but which does not become a contract until the other party signifies an unequivocal willingness to accept the terms of that offer. The moment of acceptance is the moment from which a contract is said to exist, and not before. Acceptance need not always be direct and can be implied by conduct.

Acquiescence. Action or inaction which binds a person legally even though it was not intended as such. For example, action which is not intended as a direct acceptance of a contract will nevertheless stand as such as it implies recognition of the terms of the contract. If I display a basket of fruit in a marketplace and you come by, inspect an apple and then bite into it, you have acquiesced to the contract of sale of that apple.

Offer. An explicit proposal to contract which, if accepted, completes the contract and binds both the person that made the offer and the person accepting the offer to the terms of the contract.

In this modern world, man’s laws dictate that there are only two classes of people in any legal proceeding. You are either a Creditor or a Debtor. When your “legal sovereignty” is established, you become the sovereign Creditor of your life and affairs. Every adverse party then becomes your Debtor. However, if you do not establish your legal sovereignty, you do not “own” yourself (your own title) as the HDC; you have no legal capacity; you have no “standing in law” to assert your Rights; and you will remain a permanent Debtor as you are now. As Debtor, you will always lose in every dispute or claim by the current “system” for “failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted”.

Reclaiming the legal ownership of your persona (straw man) acts as an “equitable estoppel” to any and all who come against you in commerce and law.

Equitable estoppel. An estoppel that prevents a person from adopting a new position that contradicts a previous position maintained by words, silence, or actions when allowing the new position to be adopted would unfairly harm another person who has relied on the previous position to his or her loss. (called also estoppel in pais). Source- Merriam Webster’s Dictionary of Law 1996.

If you do not reclaim your legal Rights of title and ownership to your persona, which makes you the Creditor and absolute sovereign ruler of your “straw man”, you will not be sovereign and you will lose every claim made against you. This is the reason why, if you ever think of hiring an ABA attorney to represent you in any legal proceeding against the “system”, you must demand up front that he make you the Holder in Due Course of the action. Since he legally can’t do this, then you will lose if he “appears” for or “represents” you. The best any Bar(fly) attorney can do is make a deal with the system Creditor, which is a negotiated settlement of the money being claimed as damages. You must be the HDC to be able to ensure victory in all dealings with the government and the “system”.

We conclude Part V with some Maxims for you to absorb:

Quod initio vitiosum est, non potest tractu temporis convalescere— Time cannot render valid an act void in its origin.

Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus– False in one thing, false in everything.

Quae malasunt inchoata in principio vex peragantur exitu– Things bad in the commencement seldom end well.

Quod ab initio non valet, in tractu temporis non convalescere– What is not good in the beginning cannot be rendered good by time. 

THE BODY DOES NOT ADMIT OF VALUATION

The human body does not admit of valuation{Corpus humanum non recipit æstimationem};

The body of a freeman does not admit of valuation (The Body Cannot be Liened or Levied, the Body is the Temple of the Soul, and Ultimately God’s Property.){Liberum corpus nullam recipit æstimationem};

Under the name of merchandise men are not included{Mercis appellatione homines non contineri; Dig. 50. 16. 207};

A sacred thing does not admit of valuation{Res sacra non recipit æstimationem; Dig. 1. 8. 9. 5}; ….