Cracking the Code Third Edition Better Book & Cassette of America PublishersCracking the Code Third Edition®, Copyright © 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002 by Better Book & Cassette of America. All Rights Reserved. No part of the proprietary, common-law-copyrighted material contained in this book, Copyright © 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, may be used or reproduced for the purpose of financial gain, ie, profit from sale, without the express written consent and acknowledgment of the publisher/copyright holder, and all such use is strictly prohibited. Penalties for unauthorized use are set forth in detail on the opposite page. For information, address Better Book & Cassette of America, 19528 Ventura Boulevard #584, ‘Tarzana, CA 91356. This book is solely for informational and educational purposes and is not legal advice. The reader is advised to consult a licensed legal professional for assistance with any legal matter. The success stories contained herein are representative of results attainable upon application of the informational and educational material provided, but no guarantee is made. Individual results may vary, depending on the diligence of the party applying the material. Cracking the Code Third Edition® is intended for the personal use and enjoyment of all people of good will worldwide. The intent of the authors in sharing this information is for furthering the causes of freedom, understanding, and happiness in accordance with such timeless principles as: “Know the truth and the truth shall make you free,” and “He who helps others helps himself.” The contents of this book are private in entirety and non-negotiable between the author(s) and the purchaserireader. Cracking the Code Third Edition® Designed by D. Anser ISBN 0-9717588-2-4 Better Book & Cassette of America 19528 Ventura Boulevard #584 ‘Tarzana, CA 91356 Website: www.bbeoa.com Email: [email protected]PAPERWORK PREPARATION COUPON Cracking the Code Third Edition® No matter what new developments may come down the pike in the coming years, it is vital that one take official control of the all-caps TRADE NAME as soon as possible in order to protect one’s interests in all property associated with that name. The manual is written so that the reader can successfully prepare and file hishher Copyright Notice and UCC paperwork, and produce all the necessary documents that establish the TRADE NAME (artificial person) as the debtor of the True Name ("You"). If, after reading the manual, you would prefer to have your initial UCC Financing Statement documents prepared for you by experienced personnel, BB&C of America can assist you. With a referral from us, your paperwork can be prepared by a consultant working directly under the supervision of the authors of Cracking the Code Third Edition®. Cost of this service, called the "UCC Financing Statement Package” (details below), is $800.00 for a single party (one filing) and $1250.00 for a husband and wife (two filings—children under 18 included at no extra cost). Use This Coupon for Special Discount Presentation of this coupon entitles one to a UCC Financing Statement Package for only $675.00 for a single filer (additional $200 for cross filing for certain states) or $1125.00 for a husband and wife (additional $200 for cross filing for certain states)—a discount of $125.00 (purchase price of the manual). An outline of the complete, personalized, UCC Financing Statement Package is as follows: * Copyright Notice for filing in newspaper; * Private Agreement; * Hold-harmless and Indemnity Agreement; * Security Agreement (with Attachment Sheet and Private Collateral List); * UCC Financing Statement (also includes a second UCC Financing Statement for filing at county level, if filer owns real estate); * Cover sheet for filing of UCC Financing Statement; and * Ready-for-mailing envelope. The UCC Financing Statement Package also comes with detailed instructions (including explanatory sticky-notes) for completing all documents. Te take advantage of this offer, please call (818) 754-8611 Note: If you have specific needs in your situation, you can purchase one hour (maximum) of consultation time for $250 and we will ensure that a qualified personnel contacts you within 72 hours (not including Sundays). You must leave a contact phone number (which will be kept strictly confidential) where you can be reached live, and must inform us of the best hours to reach you.NOTE: The authors have instructed the publisher that the electronic Copyright Notices referenced in Footnote # 1 on page 195 should not be included in the CD-ROM. It is important that anyone who uses the Copyright Notice understand completely what he/she is stating, and for that reason should type out his/her own document, word by word. Thank you for your understanding. NOTE: The source book referenced in the first paragraph on page 204, UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE AND RELATED PROCEDURES GUIDE (published by Registré), is now available directly from BB&C of America at the same price, $39.95, plus S&H. All orders shipped within 24 hours. Order directly from our website at www.bbcoa.com, or send a money order for $39.95 + $5.00 S&H, a total of $44.95, to: BB&C of America, 19528 Ventura Boulevard #584, Tarzana, CA 91356COPYRIGHT NOTICE / SECURITY AGREEMENT ‘A ight reserved re Cracking the Code Third Eton, conn iw copytight @ 1869, 2000, 2001, 2002 by Better Book & Cassatt of America. No part of Cracking the Code Thi Eaton? may be reproduce in any manner for purposes of commercial gain (ft rom sale) witout the price, express, writen consent and acknowledgement of Getter Book & Cassette of America, heenatr ‘Secured Paty.” The trade secrets, intelectual property, and cantens and patem of colectve application of sample documents, i. “Copyright Notice” "Private Agreement’ “Hold Hamless and Inder "Private Coleteal Uist (UCC) Financing Slaten (UCC) Financing Statement Amendment “Respondents Pvt, Inemaional, Administabve Remedy Demand? and “Incice ~ Verified Statement of Account,” contained inthe Practical secon of hs manual, ave commen iaw-copyighted property and are rerned here withthe perisson of the copyright holder, commanaw copysgh © 1885, 1986, 1997, 198, 1999, 2000, 2001, 002. Al Rghs Reserved. Reproduction and use ofthe ‘orementoned trade secrets, intelectual property, and sample dociments contained i the Praccal potion of Cracking the Code Third Eaton, as well 28 al other writen mata contained in Cracking the Code Tir Eion® i authorized onl for personal, noncommercial non-proi-making) purposes. With the intent of being contractually bound, any jurisic person, as well s the agent of said uric parson, consents and agrees by this Copyright NotcetSeoutty Agreement that nether said jurisic person, nor the agent of sad juste person, shall use for commercalfnancal gain the name “Cracking the Code Third Eaton nor any ofthe alorementoned copyrighted matt contained herein, without the pcr, express, wien consent and acknowledgment of Secated Paty assigned by sed Secured Pays signature n rd ink, nd, inthe case ofthe comer aw-copyihte rade secrets, inelectal property, and coniens and patern of colectve application of sample docunens contained inthe Practical orion of Cracking the Code Third Eton, the prc, express, witen consent and acknowiedgment of sad commonlaw copyright Rode, as signified by sad commonfaw copyright ode’ signature inedink. Secured Party nether grants, nor implies, nor therwise ives consent fox any unauthorized commercial use of Cracking the Code Thid Edton®, nor the copyrighted material conained herein, and al such unauhorized use is sticly prohibited, Seltexecuting CContractSecurity Agreement in Event of Unauthorized Use: 8y tis Copyroht Notice, both te ursc person and any agent of said uns person, hereinafter joint and severaly “User, consen! and agree that any use of Cracking the Code Third Eaion®, as wel asthe copyrighted material contained hen, cer than authorized personal non-commercial use as se forth above, consis unauthorized use, countering, ofthe copyighed material contained herein, and contractual binds User, renders his Copyright Noice a Secu Agreement, wherein Useris debtor and Better Book & Cassette of America's Secured Party, and sigies that Use: (1) aan Secured Paty asecuy intrest inal of Users assets, land, and personal property, and all f Use’ intrest in asses, land, and personal propery, nthe sum can amount of $250,000.00 per each cocuence of unauthorized use ofthe copyrighted matrl contained herein, plus cst, pus tiple damages; (2) authenticates this Copyright Noce/Secuy Agreement herent “Secuty ‘Ageement” wherein User is debtor and Beter Book & Cassette of Amerca is Secured Paty, and wherein User pledges all of User's asses, land, cansumer goods, farm product, inveroy, equipment, mene, investment property, commercial ot cams, eters of ce, leter-f-cret rights, chatel ape, nstumenis, deposit accounts, accounts, documents, and general intangibles, anal Users interest inal such freeing property, now owned and hereafter acquired, raw exising and hereafter arising, and wherever located, as colaeral for securing Users contractual obigatin in favor of Seoed Paty for Users unauthorized use of Secured Pars copighted property; (3) consents and agrees with Secured Pays fing of @ UCC Financing Statement inthe UCC fing fice, aswel a in any county record’ ofce, wherein Users debi and Beter Book & Cassette of America is Seoxed Paty; (4) consents and agrees that sad UCC Financing Siatement described above in paragraph (isa continuing financing statement, and futher consents and agrees wih Secured Party's fling of any connuaton statement necessary for maintaining Secured Paty’ perecod secur interest in al cf Users property and interest in propery, pledged as collard in Secuy Agreement and descibed above in paragraph (2) unt Use’ contacua cbigaion thereofre incur has bee uly satis (6) consents and ages with Secured Party’ fling of any UCC Financing Statement as desided above in paragraphs 3" and (4) 25 wel as thefling ofthis Securty Agreement, a descbed above in paragraph (2) inthe UCC fing office, a wel asin any couty reorders fice; (6 consents and arees ha any and al uch ings descibed in paragraphs "8" and “8 above are no, and may not be considered, bogus, and that User wil not aim that any such fing is bogus; 7) waives al defenses, and (8) Appints Secured Pary as Authorized opresentatve for User, efectve upon Use’s default re User's coiractualebgaons in favor of Secured Party 2s set foth below under “Payrent Terms" and Defaut Terms granting Secured Paty ful authonty and power engaging in any and al acon on beha of User incutng, but not ited by authentication ofa record on behal of User, as Secured Paty, in Secured Party's sole dsciebon, deems appropri, and, as regards any deposit count of any kind maintained wth any bark inunder he name of User, and Ikewise any deposit account mained wih any bank under te Soil Seeufy Account NumberEmploye denticaton Number of User, notwithstanding the absence of Uses name 2s accountholder on any such depos ‘account maintained with any bank inunder the Social Secuiy Account NumberEmployer Ieniicaion Number of User, grants Secured Paty full autorty and power for ognatinginstucions fr sai depnst-aocount bank and decting he disposition of funds in said deposit acount by acting as signatory on sd deposit account without futher consent of User and wihou ably, and User further consents and agrees that this appointment of Secured Pary as Authorized Representative for User, effective upon Users defaut, i ievocatle and coupled wit a security intrest. User further following additonal terms of Seexecuting Contract Security Agreement in Event of Una Payment Tem In aocordance wih fes for unauthorized use of Cracking the Code Third Edton® andthe copyrighted mater contaned herein, 28 Set fort above, User hereby consents and agrees thal User shal pay Secured Pary all unauthorized-use fees nfl win ten (10) days of he date ser is sent Secured Pat's invice, hereinafter “Incice” itemizing sald fes. Default Terms In event of non-payment in fl ofall unauhorzed-use fees by User within en 10) das of date invoces set, User sal be deemed in default ana al of User's property and iterestin propery, pledged as colaeral by User and described above in paragraph “(2)” immediatly becomes e. i, property of Secured Paty; 0) Secured Paty is appined User's Authorized Representative as se fort above in paragraph (8); and (c) User consents and agroes that Secured Party may take possession of, a well as there dispose af in any manner that Secured Paty, n Secured Party's sole discon, deems appropiate, ining, but nt iit by, soe at aucion, at any fie foloving Users default, and without further noice, any and al cf Use’ former property and interest in property, forme pledged as colar by User as desctbed above in parareph "2," now propery of Secured Pay, in espct of hs Scutty Agreement that Secured Par, again in Secured Pars sole cscetin, deems appropri. Tem for Gung Default: Upon event of default, asset foth above under "Default Terms; iespecte of any and all of User's former property and interes in property inthe possession of, as wel as disposed of by, Secured Paty, as authorized above under ‘Default Terms” User may cure Use’ deat re ony the remainder of Use’'s propery nd interest in propery, formerly pledged as collateral as descibed above in paragraph (2) tha is nthe nthe possession of, nor atenwse disposed o by, Secured Party within twenty (20) days of date of Users defaut only by payment in fl. Tems of St Forecosure: Users non-payment in fl of ll unauborzedse fees tized in invoice within sid twenty (20) day perio for curing default asset fort above under “Terms for Curing faut autores Secured Pat's immediate nonjudcialstict foredosure on any and all remaining propery and interest in propery, fomery pledged as colateral by User as described above in paregrph 2)" now property of Secured Paty, whichis notin the posession of, nor cherie disposed of by, Secured Paty upon expat of sid went 20) day defaut- Curing period. Ownership subject o copyright held by Beter Bock & Cassatt of America, Copyight © 1869, 2000, 2001, 2002. All Rights Reserved“There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic laws on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner which not one ina million is able to diagnose John Maynard Keynes Economist, Member of the Order of the Illuminati ‘The Economic Consequences of the Peace, 1919“Mr. Speaker. We are now here in Chapter 11. Members of Congress are official trustees presiding over the greatest reorganization of any bankrupt entity in world history, the U.S. Government...” Congressman James A. Traficant Jr. Congressional Record, March 17, 1993, Vol. 33On Sovereigns “We of this mighty western Republic have to grapple with the dangers that spring from popular self-government tried on a scale incomparably vaster than ever before in the history of mankind, and from an abounding material prosperity greater also than anything which the world has hitherto seen. “As regards the first set of dangers, it behooves us to remember that men can never escape being governed. Either they must govern themselves or they must submit to being governed by others. If from lawlessness or fickleness, from folly or self- indulgence, they refuse to govern themselves then most assuredly in the end they will have to be governed from the outside. They can prevent the need of government from without only by showing they possess the power of government from within. A sovereign cannot make excuses for his failures; a sovereign must accept the responsibility for the exercise of power that inheres in him; and where, as is true in our Republic, the people are sovereign, then the people must show a sober understanding and a sane and steadfast purpose if they are to preserve that orderly liberty upon which as a foundation every republic must rest.” President Theodore Roosevelt Opening of the Jamestown Exposition Norfolk, Virginia, April 26, 1907 “Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law...” Yick Wo v. Hopkins 118 U.S. 356; 6 S.Ct. 1064 (1886) May 10, 1886Absolute Rights “As regards right to interfere with contractual obligations of another, ‘absolute rights’ which individual may exercise without reference to motive are rights incident to ownership of property, rights growing out of contractual relations, and right to enter or refuse to enter contractual relations. “By the ‘absolute rights’ of individuals is meant those which are in their primary and strictest sense, such as would belong to their persons merely in a state of nature, and which every man is entitled to enjoy, whether out of society or in it. The rights of personal security, of personal liberty, and private property do not depend upon the Constitution for their existence. They existed before the Constitution was made, or the government was organized. These are what are termed the ‘absolute rights’ of individuals, which belong to them independently of all government, and which all governments which derive their power from the consent of the governed were instituted to protect.” Words and Phrases, Volume 1, 1968 West Publishing Company“Good name in man and woman, dear my lord, Is the immediate jewel of their souls: Who steals my purse steals trash; ‘tis something, nothing; ‘T was mine, ‘t is his, and has been slave to thousands; But he that filches' from me my good name Robs me of that which not enriches him, And makes me poor indeed.” Othello, the Moor of Venice Act III, Scene 3 By William Shakespeare " Fileh: To steal to pilfer.“Neither a borrower nor a lender be: For loan oft loses both itself and friend, And borrowing dulls the edge of husbandry.”" Hamlet Act I, Scene 3 By William Shakespeare " Husbandry: Economy; ‘Shakespeare Lexicon and Quotation Dictionary, 1902.Contents Contents Preface c . xix Real World Successes : xxi Foreword : xxix Part |: Theory Section 1: Maintaining Fiscal Integrity — Functional Sovereignty al Section 2: The Truth About Esquires 39 Section 3: The Curse of Co-Suretyship ‘ : 67 Section 4: Annotated Glossary of Terms 91 Glossary Key : , 92 Glossary. , 93 Part Il: Pi y Section 5: Copyright Notice Instructions 5 193, Copyright Notice (single) 198 Copyright Notice (family) : 200 ‘Sample Cover Letter for Newspaper 202 Section 6: Vital General Instructions for All UCC Filings 203 Section 7: Information Request (UCC11R) Instructions 209 Official UCC Instructions 212 Information Request. 213 Section 8: UCC Financing Statement (UCC1) Instructions 245 Official Instructions 228 Official ADDENDUM Instructions 229 UCC Fanancing Statement Fling 230 Cross-Filing : , : 232 Real Estate Filing , : 234 ‘Sample Cover Sheet : : : 236 Private Agreement 237 Hold-Harmless and Indemnity Agreement . 239 Security Agreement 241 Attachment Sheet 250 Private Collateral List 251 Section 9: UCC Financing Statement Amendment (UCC3) Instructions 253 Official AMENDMENT Instructions - 268 Official AMENDMENT ADDENDUM Instructions. 259 Cross-Filing Amendment #1 260 Cross-Filing Amendment #2 262 Section 10: Handling Presentments — Instructions 265 Notice by Written Communication 287 Return Receipt (Green Card) : 292 Registered Mail Receipt , 293 Affidavit of Mailing 294 Validation of Debt Package : 295 Invoice — Verified Statement of Account 309 Page 1 of 2 xviiSection 10: (continued) Affidavit of John Henry Doe, by Special Visitation 310 Notary's Certification of Non-Response 314 How to Sign Your Signature Without Liability 315 Helpful Notes for Pressure Situations. : 322 Part Ill: Appendix Section 11: Executive Order Outlawing Ownership of Gold 328 Crime is Commerce (27 CFR'72.11)—. 329 Re Prisoners, Prisons, and Courts - 330 Us Attomey Disclaims IRS as Agency of US Government. 331 IRS Appoints Apparent Communist as Attorney 337 The Demise of the American Constitutional Republic 338 ‘A Memorandum of Law on the Name 342 ‘The Shetar's Effect on English Law — ‘A Law of the Jews Becomes the Law of the Land . 361 State Bar not Registered as a Public Corporation 373 60X Magnification of Signature Line on Personal Checks. 374 Copyright law : . a) 315) UGC Filing Offices : =| or6) UGC Filing Offices in Canada : . 38 Part IV: Blank Forms & Form Letters Section 12: Information Request. 384 UCC Financing Statement 385 UCC Financing Statement ADDENDUM 386 UCC Financing Statement AMENDMENT 387 UCC Financing Statement AMENDMENT ADDENDUM 388 Cover Sheet for Filing by Mail/Courier 389 Letter for State Registrar re Birth Certificate 390 * CER: Code of Federal Regulations Page 2 of 2 Contents xviiPreface This book has been written for the purpose of showing anyone how to successfully withstand and nullify unsolicited demands for payment/performance from attorneys, banks, judges, clerks of court, police, taxmen, and government agents (and anyone else who would casually and unjustly damage one's life) and cease being muscled into “doing business” with such parties against his will. Any who proceed against the Redemptor' after having been noticed are vulnerable for both immediate and long-term grievous and catastrophic personal financiaV/commercial ruin, thereby providing adequate motivation to look elsewhere for a more compliant “customer.” As abundantly documented herein, the judicial system may be accurately defined as “a private, invitation-only, cultic, British-owned and -operated, commercial extortion racket,” with only an apparent monopoly over the transference of wealth and control of personal freedom in this country. The prescriptions contained within the pages of this manual can set you free of this menace. In America—as in any communist country*—Big Brother's modus operandi consists of bringing down the full might of the government upon any unlucky “citizen” that crosses paths with its divine agenda (absolute ownership and control of all property and people). Few, if any, can withstand such an assault. Operating in limited liability with official immunity, Big Brother's operatives wreak holy hell on a daily basis against any they choose, but continually walk away from the carnage unscathed.” For those who follow the precepts as presented in this manual, such days are numbered, if not over. The procedures appearing in this volume, if scrupulously followed, can render any legal attacker immediately liable and fully personally accountable for his/her actions should he/she proceed—the right medicine for anyone suffering from a case of the “More Equal* Than Thou Syndrome’—and the best reason to halt all proceedings. Cracking the Code Third Edition® offers a new plateau of stability and is orders of magnitude beyond the first two editions. This process is tried and true and cannot be defeated if followed without alteration. The non-judicial Uniform Commercial Code has been cracked and is now utterly accessible for any who would examine the contents of this manual. As you will discover, the assurances made in the preceding paragraphs are not hollow chatter: this text can set you free. The treatises, essays, and historical material contained in this book are all on solid legal ground. It is not a matter of if we are on the right trail or not; it is rather a matter of how well we read the trail markings we encounter—because the remedies described in this manual are working like crazy north, east, south and west, and the successes contained herein will " Redemptor: Latin, One who buys back, reclaims (one who has reclaimed legal ttle over his life and property). All 10 planks of the Communist Manifesto are firmly entrenched in daily American life, deeply implanted in America’s psyche, and thoroughly dispersed in an ocean of code, ie. “law.” > {As well as innumerable, eminently qualified judges, a prime example of this phenomenon is the former California Insurance Commissioner, Chuck Quackenbush. In addition to padding his own political career, and likely lining his ‘own pockets and the pockets of his cohorts, this man was personally accountable for the ruination of the lives of thousands (if not tens of thousands) of California families whose homes were damagedidestroyed in the 1994 Northridge Earthquake, by officially letting insurance companies off the hook—to the tune of billions of dollars. ‘Chuck Quackenbush has quietly slipped into obscurity without so much as a slap on the wrist, “In Animal Farm, the brilliant little allegory of communism by George Orwell, the original, sacred “Seven ‘Commandments” were continually altered/deleted for favoring the pigs (the leaders) until, in the end, there was only ‘one commandment left: “ALL ANIMALS ARE EQUAL, BUT SOME ANIMALS ARE MORE EQUAL THAN OTHERS.” Preface Page | of 3 xixxx free you of the ranting of any critic.’ The main failing with professional (and amateur) critics is that that particular vocation does not involve helping people and getting things done. It just involves tearing down things that might help, and stopping others from breaking free of Big Brother's clutches—an occupational calling/hobby with a marginal sanity index. When you come across someone who is preoccupied with stopping this process and saying how bad it all is, realize that the critic is a “company man," obsessed with infecting all with the venom of statism,® and does not have your best interests at heart—and likely never will.” ‘An honorable critic would bring forth another solution, ie. another remedy for the situation at hand, rather than just sounding a general hue and cry® and proclaiming that all (sheep) should stand stockstill? and accept their fate as “part of life.” As with the first two editions, the initial aim of this volume is fully acquainting you with the process of regaining control of the all-capital-letters juristic'’” name/TRADE NAME that began appearing on legal documents, such as the Social Security card in your possession, following the registration of your birth. This name is “yours” only in the sense that it belongs to you; it does not identify you. The problem with such a name is that even though it belongs to you, and was created expressly to reference you, someone else has custody of it-meaning that someone else can control the travels that particular piece of intellectual property (the all-caps TRADE NAME) and has been using it for financial gain courtesy of your labor. This handbook shows you how to rectify this situation. Having accomplished the foregoing, the main objective of this manual becomes providing you with the means for fortifying your existence and deflecting all legal and financial assaults on your freedom, family, wealth, property, and peace of mind. The legality of the issues addressed herein is well substantiated in the common law and the UCC, and you are limited only by your lack of understanding of them. The Glossary contained herein has been specifically created and annotated to assist you in acquiring a working knowledge of the key issues. Material has been laid out so that the reader can go straight into the practical application of the filing instructions, adapt the sample documents with the details of his/her life, and successfully file the documents without doing anything else. However, such practice is basically “treating the symptom” and is not recommended because the cause of the condition—unwanted victimization at the hands of the system—is still unresolved; sort of like being lost in the jungle, finding a compass, but then not knowing which direction is the best way out. The theory portion of this volume, as well as the items in the Appendix, affords a treetop perch for those who might be lost in the legal/commercial/political jungle: one with a bird's- eye view of the whole territory as never before. Once a bewildered traveler gets a compass reading on the right landmark, he can thereafter successfully negotiate any difficulties encountered on his way out of the jungle because of acquired certainty of where he is, headed and the full expectation that he will make it. Whether you do your filing(s) sooner 5 For conclusive, unimpeachable documentary evidence (from the Federal Reserve) of the correctness of the procedures st forth in this manual, see “How to Sign When Your Signature is Demanded” in Append. Statism: A theory of government which holds that the returns from group or individual enterprise are vested in the state, as in communism. Funk & Wagnall’s New College Standard Dictionary, 1947, Remember, a statue has never been set up in honor of a critic.” Jean Sibelius (renowned composer), Oxford Dictionary of Twentieth Century Quotation: ‘Hue and cry: A great stir and clamor about any matter. ° Stockstill: As stil asa stock or post; motionless. "° Juristic: Of or relating to law. Page 2 of 3 Prefacerather than later, steady progress between the covers of this manual, however unhurried, will give you a new perspective on the same old surroundings and produce a courage and a confidence that can fuel your journey alll the way out of the “jungle” and onto the highroad for a better life. Because the Code has been cracked, the filing procedures and background material are now simple, Matters have now been removed from the private, monopolistic, judicial system, and players within that arena have become personally commercially accountable for their actions. These breakthroughs have thereby greatly remedied the nuisance of dealing with the courts, the courts’ extreme formalism, and the secret rituals'' of the inner sanctum of the legal fraternity, “the Brotherhood.” For those reading this page that may have the misfortune of being involved in an ongoing legal dilemma, some words of encouragement: the procedure contained herein is beneficial at any stage of the game.'? The more entangled one has become, the more complicated it can seem to be to extricate oneself from the tentacles of those who would gleefully destroy one's life. Obviously, the further along on the judicial conveyor belt, the more difficult things can become. However, irrespective of what has happened, the liberation procedure is essentially the same no matter what stage of the game you are in. A healthy (and workable) approach is simply to write off everything that has already happened, chalk it up to experience, and start afresh and anew with a clean heart. What is offered here can be completely locked into place in very short order and can serve you thereafter in many different circumstances.” This manual will also introduce you with the very real possibility of personal independence and functional sovereignty. Believe it or not, it was the exercise of your inherent sovereign right to “decide” with whom you would contract that got you into this mess in the first place. The first step in regaining sovereignty is reestablishing ownership and control of the corporately colored property identified as your all-capital-letters TRADE NAME (and any and all other corruptions/permutations thereof). That, and the procedure to fortify your freedom and maintain control of your worldly possessions thereafter, has been presented here in detail to ensure your understanding of the subject and assist you in your efforts to create a pleasant and worry-free life for yourself Wishing you happier times . .. The Authors 11 The characteristic of the earlier Roman law was its extreme formalism. From its first secret administration as the law of the privileged classes it expanded until it became the basis of all civilized legal systems.” Cathol Encyclo ‘As of this writing these breakthrough procedures have already stopped the levying of a bank account after judgment had been finalized Professional assistance, support, and (non-legal) document preparation services are available through the publisher. Preface Page 3 of 3Real World Successes Important Note: The banking system in America, to mention one area addressed by this manual, is a fraudulent enterprise. That is why these processes are so effective at eliminating claims of debt. Credit lenders never loan anything of substance, and hence cannot withstand the simplest examination of their practices, cannot legally support their claims, and give up sooner or later, depending on their interest level in the particular transaction. The monetary system has been designed expressly for creating defaults and foreclosures and bankruptcies, and it is working exactly as it is supposed to: people (and companies) are being picked off left and right in greater and greater numbers. We are in the middle of a national epidemic at the hands of the Money Power and its minions’; the only reason you do not hear more about itis because of the managed news media, another vital cog in Big Bother's machinery. The main reason there is not a large number of testimonials in this section of the book is three-fold: (1) full-scale application of the procedures contained herein has been underway less than a year, based on the time required to research, develop, test, and perfect the documents and procedures contained herein; (2) there is a time lag involved in actually acquiring the legal title for both houses and cars, even though former creditors may cease all collection activity much earlier in the process; and (3) there is nothing very exciting to write about when credit card companies and other debt collectors simply drop all claims, stop communicating, and go away. Credit card companies are the easiest to handle because credit cards have no value, and credit card claims are 100% unsupportable and evaporate upon proper challenge. Debt- collector-type debt (when another company has purchased the account from the original creditor) is also very easy. The only time things get sticky is when these types of accounts end up in a lawsuit, and the courts have gotten involved. Even then, the little guy can stil prevail; it just takes a bit more effort. Mortgages, on the other hand, are another matter, because of the value involved. Mortgage lenders are more likely to go down fighting, but— 80 far—they always go down, because they cannot prove that they have a valid claim in the loan transaction. A tiny minority of situations are not within the realm of rescue because of fatal mistakes made by the debtor, and so are not attempted. But of those taken on, there are factually no failures (because handlings are based on the truth of the matter); some just take a little longer than others. They can get drawn out because some creditors just don't want to let go and give up (it may be too much of a shock when a lender realizes that someone has figured out his racket and that he might have to stop robbing people and find honest work). Another definite factor causing creditors, and judges and attorneys alike, to beat a hasty retreat is the penalty for unauthorized use of the “borrower's” private, common-law- copyrighted property, his name. For various reasons, this system is bringing the activities of financial pirates under control. It also works in other situations where one’s name is being used for financial gain, but handling “lenders” seems to be its most popular use right now. Below is a sampling of different types of successes. There are many more that have crushed the initial assault, but have not yet arrived at final completion with title in-hand. ' Minion: A servile favorite or follower: aterm of contempt. Page | of 7 Real World Successes1. After getting involved in a certain business opportunity, Mark from Missouri gradually poured in over $100,000 and one day found himself hurting for cash. He got a quick $15,000 loan from a prominent national lending company at a heffy interest rate, but was not worried because he expected the business deal to come through. He put up the certificate of title for each of his three vehicles as collateral for the loan. Mark made monthly payments of $500 on the loan for about a year, hoping that something would work out with the investment, but it never did. As well, his payments were apparently not making much of a dent in the loan because the lending company informed him that he still owed about $17,000. He had lots of bills, litle cash, got three months behind on payments, and realized that the lending company was probably thinking about picking up the cars. He began placing the autos in a secluded place to inhibit the lender from just coming ‘over and taking them, but before he could secure the last one, they repossessed it. Shortly after that, Mark hooked up with SecuredParty.org, did his Copyright Notice and UCC Financing Statement, and then issued the lending company a promissory note in the form of a draft (a one-page, abbreviated version of the Certified Promissory Note that appears on page 10 of the 14-page Validation of Debt Package in Section 10, Handling Presentments) in the amount of $16,948,27, along with a certified copy of all his UCC paperwork. ‘A few days later Mark received another statement from the firm, listing the unpaid balance at $41.07. He purchased a money order in that amount and showed up at the local office to tender payment. The people there were shocked to see him. They told him that his account had been shifted to the national office, that they no longer had the capability of accepting payment from him on their computers, and instructed him to call the main office. When he made contact with the account rep at national headquarters he asked what he needed to do to get the balance cleared off: Rep: As far as what | can see here in your file, you're fine. You're done. You're taken care of. You got a statement from us? Mark: Yes. Rep: Does it have a date on it? Mark: It was about a week ago. Rep: Oh, that must be some computer error. Just disregard that. Just forget it. You're taken care of. Mark: Well, | have a couple of other problems. Rep: What's that? Mark: Your local office still has my certificates of title, and they also repossessed one of my cars. Rep: Well, give them a couple of weeks to straighten out the paperwork and then go in and talk to them, and if you don't get satisfied—you have my name and number—just call me back and I'll see to it that you are satisfied. Real World Successes Page 2 of 7A few weeks later he checked in as directed, and was told he could pick up his titles and get his car back as long as he paid the towing and storage fees at the impound lot, a total of $230, which he did in November. He has never heard from them again. 2. Dan, a knowledgeable fellow in UCC matters, set up new business relationships after relocating in his old hometown, Muskegon, Michigan, having been gone for many years. One thing he needed was a bank account and he decided on the credit union where his mother and stepfather banked. After proving that that family members were already banking there, the new accounts clerk cheerfully handed over an application. Since the new (non-interest bearing) account would be in the straw man’s TRADE NAME, that’s how Dan filled out the app: printing the straw man’s all-caps name and placing a “” copyright symbol immediately after the last letter of the name. When the straw man “finished filing out the form," the Secured Party, i.e. flesh-and-blood Dan, wrote across the signature card in red ink: “Accepted for value, exempt from levy,” filled in his EID #2, dated it September 23, 2001, and signed it. He then supplied a copy of his UCC Financing Statement and Security Agreement and turned them in with the signature card, requesting a photocopy of the card, front and back. The next morning Dan received a call from the president of the bank: “I'm sorry, but we will not be able to open the account. Our legal department says we can't have a copyrighted name on an account.” Shortly thereafter, Dan shows up at the bank. Here is a portion of his conversation with the president: President: if you will simply remove the copyright symbol from the name there will be no problem in opening the account. Dan Will it be @ secured account? President: Yes. Dan What happens if someone takes money out of this account? President: That will not happen. Dan: Let's just say hypothetically that... President: | will not let that happen. Dan: Even if the IRS wants to take some money? President: Even the IRS. This account will be permanently flagged “PRIVATE” in the computer and will never be touched by anyone other than you without your permission. Since the account would be in your name, even your wife could not remove money without your official authorization. Dan: Let's just say someone DID take some money out of my account. Who would be liable? President: The credit union. Dan opened the account. He receives checking services with no monthly fees and pays nothing for money orders and other such services. No fees of any kind are deducted from his account. The president also confided that the legal department had commented that this was the strongest Security Agreement they had ever seen. ? EID #: “Employer Identification Number” of the Secured Party, derived from the straw man’s Social Security Account Number (SAN); e.g. EID # 1234-56789, derived from SSAN 123-45-6789; a number uniquely identifying the Secured Party. Page 3 of 7 Real World Successes xxiv3. Dan decided he wanted his funds in a 401(k) for helping with the costs of getting set up and relocated in Muskegon. When he visited the brokerage house that managed the account he was told that there would be a 30% levy for liquidating the account, a chunk of more than $4,000 of the total. He left and returned with a secretary of state-certified copy of his UCC Financing Statement and Security Agreement, pointing out that he, the Secured Party, had the supreme claim on the account, was exempt from levy, and would return in three days for a check in the full amount of the balance. ‘Two days later he received a phone call and was told his wishes could not be honored. With tape recorder in hand he went into the bank and asked for the account specialist and served her with a “Notice by Declaration/Security Agreement” Dan: You are now on notice, and | want my money now. If you remove any funds from the balance due me you are liable for $500,000.00, and the same goes for the IRS. 1 would be happy to transfer 100% of the money this second if you would just open an IRA at another bank. Acct Spec: Dan visited another bank where he already had an account (and was known), National City Bank, and opened an IRA account in the straw man's name as usual, then accepting for value the signature card, noting "exempt from levy" and placing EID # and dating and signing as before, all in red ink. The brokerage firm was provided with bank coordinates for the new IRA with National City Bank and the funds were immediately wired in. Less than an hour later Dan walked out the door with a cashiers check for the. full $13,800.00. No financial institution could levy any of Dan's money without first placing his straw man's name on at least one piece of paper. The straw man’s TRADE NAME, in any form, is Dan's private, copyrighted property. Without Dan's permission, no one may use the name without incurring a $500,000.00 obligation for each such use; hence all the cooperation from the banks. 4, On November 17, 2000 the balance on Dan's MBNA credit card was $12,507.71 Having recently learned of the fraudulent business practices of credit card companies, Dan was not amenable with paying MBNA his hard-earned cash. He sent MBNA a “Validation of Debt’ package" requesting that they prove that he owed the money they were asking for and included a certified promissory note (written in strict accordance with UCC mandates for a negotiable instrument) as bona fide payment if the debt could > Now designated “Notice by Written Communication/Security Agreement.” A turbo-charged and lengthier version of the Copyright Notice that is enclosed herein, with intimate details on the workings of the self-executing Security Agreement in the event the recipient uses the name without authorization. Fee for usage is $500,000.00 per cccurrence of use, secured by all tangible and intangible property of the recipient (this document, drawn strictly from the UCC and Revised Article 9, is as final as a guillotine; available through BB&C of America with purchase of the UCC Financing Statement package). * ‘an exacting package of interrelated documents requiring that a credit card company officer swear out an affidavit (true, correct, and complete”) in accordance with the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, identifying the substance/valuable consideration that was exchanged with the credit card account holder that supports the contract, and justifies the credit card company’s demand that the account holder pay the amount demanded. No financial in America can do this because nothing of value is ever given by any “lender,” including all credit card ‘The Validation of Debt package has never failed in stopping a credit card company seeking payment (the Validation of Debt package is available through BB&C of America. Real World Successes Page 4 of7be validated. Three days after sending the Validation of Debt package, Dan sent along a Notice by Declaration/Security Agreement, informing MBNA that his name was copyrighted property and that if they used it for financial gain it would cost them $500,000.00 for each such use. That was a year ago and Dan has neither heard from MBNA since, nor from any debt collector associated with them. The $12,507.71 debt disappeared. On his credit reports with the various credit reporting agencies—which have also been served with a Notice by Declaration/Security Agreement—the account is marked “PRIVATE.” There is no further credit history on any credit report after the date each agency was served with a Notice by Declaration. When Dan wants credit extended from some merchant he simply provides bank records for the last three years, and sometimes letters from other creditors attesting his payment history. It has never been a problem. 5. In January of this year Dan received a letter from his bank informing him that an attorney had shown up at the bank with, apparently, a judgment against Dan's wife, demanding that the funds be paid out immediately. A copy of the “judgment"—which had no judge's signature on it—was also included with the letter from the bank. Apparently the attorney felt he could invade Dan's account simply because he was the spouse of the ‘judgment debtor.” The bank, of course, assured Dan that not one penny would be removed from the account without his authorization. With Dan's friend Jim's help, as with all of Dan’s other documents, the Notice by Declaration was created for Dan. As well as mailing it Certified Mail’, Return Receipt Requested, Dan also faxed the attorney the Notice by Declaration/Security Agreement from the automobile dealership where he worked. Less than ten minutes later the attorney was on the line with Dan asserting that, among other things, the faxed document had “nothing to do with the judicial system.” Dan agreed with the shyster entirely, “That's exactly right. This has nothing to do with the judicial system.” That was May 2001, nine months ago, and Dan has not heard from the attorney since. [Note: In this testimonial, as well as in all the others here, the judicial system plays no part in the process. These are all private, consensual contracts containing no controversy that would allow the intervention of any third-party judge. Everything is agreed upon in advance when the aggressor/debtor executes the contract by using your private property (any version of your copyrighted name) without your authorization. Since it is your property, any user must comply with contract terms that you set for its authorized, as well as its unauthorized, use.] 6. Because of a Notice by Declaration/Security Agreement on file with the county where Dan lives the county title insurance office will not issue a copy of the title on one of Dan's properties certifying that it is held free and clear (which it is). They have no problem issuing a plain photocopy of the deed—because the document does not constitute legal evidence when in the form of a plain photocopy—but will not issue a certified document with Dan's copyrighted name on it. Apparently the revenue from selling the certified copy of deed is outweighed by the half-million dollar ticket for using Dan's private, copyrighted property without his permission * Though Dan used Certified Mail here, itis strongly recommended that you always use Registered Mail and send Return Receipt Requested, Restricted Delivery, with an Affidavit of Service for proof of service. Page 5 of 7 Real World Successes xxvi7. Amold from New Jersey, 86 years of age, had ceased filing income tax returns as of 1991. Using Title 26 United States Code Section 6020, the Secretary of the Treasury had done an SFR, “substitute for return,” for Arnold, signing Arnold’s name on his behalf on a tax return (authorized by Amold's signing of the W-4 Form) for each of those years. In 1998 a “Notice of Federal Tax Lien” was filed against ARNOLD (not “Arnold”) and IRS began levying Arnold's Du Pont-corporation pension from at a clip of $1,347.68 a month. Arnold tried every tactic he could think of for two and a half years, but was unsuccessful in nullifying the effects of the “Notice of Federal Tax Lien.” By good fortune, Amold recently met the folks at SecuredParty.org (authorized distributors of Cracking the Code Third Edition®) and sent IRS a smaller version of the current “Validation of Debt" package (see Section 10, Handling Presentments). Before the next pay period Amold received a “Release of Notice of Federal Tax Lien,” and his next pension check from Du Pont had no deductions for IRS. 8. While being admitted at the hospital following an automobile accident in December 1999, Bill from New Jersey was given a consent form by the hospital for establishing financial liability for its services. Noticing that the hospital had printed out the name of his all-caps straw man on the form as the liable party, and knowing that an agent is not responsible for the principals liability, Bill signed as follows: “WILLIAM QUINCY JONES by William Quincy Jones, Agent” Even though the other driver's insurance company paid in full for the loss of Bill's car, they refused responsibility for a $475.00 bill for x-rays that Bill had forwarded after he was billed by the hospitals radiology department. The $475.00 bill went into collection and Bill was sued in early 2001. Bill responded using the all-caps name of his straw man only on all documents, but also entered his Security Agreement® and UCC Financing Statement into the record as evidence that he (the flesh-and-blood man) was not the party being sued and that he held the supreme claim against the liable party, his all-caps TRADE NAME. At the April 2001 trial, after nearly an hour of verbal ping-pong, both judge and hospital attorney realized that Bill could not be tricked into taking the place of the debtor, nor into becoming a surety’ for the debtor, so the attorney asked for default judgment, asserting that the defendant, the TRADE NAME, had not appeared in court. The judge immediately granted default judgment in favor of the hospital against Bill. It is now February—ten months later—and Bill has heard from neither the court nor the attorney since the trial. When he recently checked the court record he discovered that no judgment was ever signed by the judge—as required by New Jersey court rules—and entered in the record. Despite the play-acting in the courtroom by the judge, Bill actually won the case based on his Security Agreement and his mastery of “legal dodge-ball’ in avoiding the trickery of the judge and the attorney.® 9. In March of 2000 the same Bill from above was lassced into using his credit card for renting a truck for a friend at a rental agency, and then picking up and delivering some © The new Security Agreement, available through BB&C of America, is an impregnable fortress for the interests of the Secured Party in his relationship with the Debtor STRAW MAN. ” Surety: A person who binds himself for the payment of a sum of money, or for the performance of something else, for another. Bouvier's Law Dictionary, Fighth Edition, sé of the Federal Reserve's acknowledgment of the legal distinction between true name and TRADE ‘How to Sign Your Signature Without Liability” at the end of Section 10, Handling Presentments. Real World Successes Page 6 of 7 xxviiXXxViii furniture. Bill reluctantly agreed on the credit card use, taking out full insurance on the truck. On the way back they clipped a telephone pole that was leaning slightly toward the road at a tight intersection. Thinking only the rear view mirror had been damaged they were all surprised when they stopped at a diner and noticed that the top of the box had been gashed open, as well. Bills friend was worried about the liability, but Bill comforted him by reminding him that they had purchased full insurance coverage on the truck. Bill also explained for his friend how he had signed the rental agreement in the straw man’s name: “WILLIAM QUINCY JONES by William Quincy Jones, Auth. Rep.” Upon arrival back at the rental agency a damage/incident report was written up and Bill explained what happened for the manager/owner, who noted the damage. The rental transaction was completed and Bill and friend departed ‘A month later on April 18, 2000 Bill received a bill from the rental agency for $1,937.64. He then got on the phone and reminded the manager that he was carrying full insurance coverage on the vehicle at the time of the accident. The manager then stated that the insurance didn't cover overhead damage and that Bill was personally responsible for the repair. On May 30th the attorney for the rental agency wrote a letter requesting payment in the amount of $2,325.16 and threatening litigation absent payment in full. Bill then sent a “Validation of Debt package requesting validation of the purported debt per the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Also included was UCC documentation that proved Bill was the Secured Party/Creditor over the Debtor, Bill's straw man, and that unless the attorney could prove a superior claim, he had nothing. Bill received a letter dated June 13, 2000 from the formerly combative attorney stating as follows: “... A copy of the bill has been previously submitted to you and it is my opinion that the debt is valid. If you have any interest in trying to resolve it amicably, please call me “Thank you for your courtesy and cooperation. “Very truly yours...” That was the last communication Bill received from the attomey, 21 months ago. From the marked change in substance and tone of the attorney's communication he apparently recognized that Bill had figured out the UCC game by proving superior knowledge of how it all works (see “How to Sign Your Signature Without Liability” in Section 10, page 315, for a full explanation). Page 7 of 7 Real World SuccessesForeword This manual is about a code. As well as being a system or collection of rules and regulations, a code is also defined as “a system used for secrecy of communication, in which arbitrarily chosen words, letters, or symbols are assigned definite meanings.” Laws today are called “codes” (Vehicle Code, Internal Revenue Code, Uniform Code of Military Justice, Penal Code, etc.) because they have been encoded from their original form. For the man on the street, accessing and utilizing these codes generally requires the services of a specially trained “decoder,” called an attorney. A hundred years ago the average man knew the law and was equipped with knowledge for conducting himself and his affairs and avoiding unwanted legal situations, thereby protecting himself, his family, and his property from legal opportunists. This is no longer the case—and law is no longer just “law,” but a comucopia of “code,” requiring cavernous libraries with miles of shelving just for housing its billions of pages of print (Library of Congress has over three million different law books on file—approximately 80 linear shelf-miles of law books). ‘The Uniform Commercial Code, “UCC,” the subject of this manual, is the transcendent, paramount achievement of the efforts of a few thousands of intensely dedicated and single- minded collaborators (dare we call it “conspiracy”?) over the last two-plus millennia. It is the culmination of an almost incomprehensibly complex, systematic, intricate, pervasive, and far-reaching agenda of strategic and tactical global planning for securing absolute legal, financial, social, ecclesiastical, and political dominance over the people of Earth. The fundamental medium chosen to accomplish these iniquitous aims: Commerce. The UCC, first introduced in 1954, has been developed across the centuries with microscopically excruciating and painstaking attention to detail for avoiding forever risk of detection and revelation of its true nature. It was fully expected that the Code would never be cracked. Proof of this fact is the absence of any device/mechanism for the enforced reversal of the process and recapture of slaves who manage to break free. Incredibly, the development of the UCC has been so brilliantly orchestrated by the Legal Masters of the World that even though it permeates and dominates the everyday lives and activities of every man, woman, and child in America from conception to casket—as well as virtually every other living soul on the planet—and even though it is the most senior form of codified law throughout the world, encompassing all others (see UCC § 1-103), the UCC is a cultural obscurity, blending in with societal scenery so well that it does not even raise an eyebrow upon mention. Even general members of the bar—ie. the lawyers, attorneys, solicitors, advocates, and barristers, i.e. the foot soldiers, snipers, and assassins of the banker-generals that wage war on the world—are for the most part ignorant of its far- reaching applications and implications, which dominate even their lives as well. Likely you never even heard of the Uniform Commercial Code until it was brought to your attention by ‘someone with the express purpose of revealing its influence over your life. As an interesting side note: two years ago the authors of this manual were contacted by a “forward-thinking attorney,” on behalf of the other attorneys in his law firm, to purchase the first edition as soon as it became available. Apparently they had gotten the word from a trusted friend that the manual was being written and what it dealt with. The attorney also allowed that he and his partners knew that the con was going down right before their eyes everyday in the legal system, and even though witnessing the daily administration of the shakedown, they just couldn't figure out exactly how it was being done. Foreword Page 1 of xxixThe law firm has long since acquired a copy of the first manual, but likely none of the attorneys availed themselves of the process. You see, an attorney occupies a special place in the grand scheme of things. Because of an attorney's connection with the Crown—the source of the attorney's British title of nobility,’ “Esquire” (all judges are esquires, as well) — via hishher misnamed “license to practice law,” and because only an attorney can “re- present’ the banks and corporations (artificial persons) that are owned/controlled by the owners/creditors of almost every single government on earth, attorneys cannot personally access this process. Attorneys are hired guns, mercenaries, of the hate-merchants and warmongers that operate the legal juggernaut that is intent on devouring the last shreds of personal wealth and freedom of the common folk of the world, Every whore has her price, and this type is no exception: judges and attorneys (esquires) have literally sold their soul to the devil for the inside track and a few easy bucks. Accordingly, since they are owned, they can never access sovereignty. Just like the whore, they have no personal freedom til the customer is satisfied that he got what he paid for. For esquires it's a ‘lifetime affair’ (with the Crown and the powers behind it). Accessing sovereignty requires that an esquire renounce his/her so-called “license to practice law" and his/her relationship with the privately owned judicial system and cease practicing as an esquire altogether—a cure more unpleasant than bearing the disease for most such whores. Nearly all will carry on; a few may break away. Esquires also fatuously” believe they are immune against attacks from the “litle people.” As you will learn from the Tin Man (i.e. “T-I-N,” Taxpayer-Identification-Number Man) in The Wizard of Oz (see Wizard of Oz, The in Glossary), and as you will discover in the Practical portion of this manual, the laws of commerce are heartless and apply equally with all— including attorneys and judges (for a comprehensive exposé of the skeletons in an esquire’s closet, see Section 2, “The Truth About Esquires”). Any judge/attorney who attempts using your private, copyrighted TRADE NAME for financial gain without first obtaining your express, written authorization and consent faces the same legal/commercial consequences that as anyone else—cataclysmic personal financial ruin—because in commerce, “All are equal under the law."> Judges, though also esquires, are a different creature than attorneys and receive special training in Reno, Nevada (National Judicial College; 3,500 judges trained each year) and Scottsdale, Arizona—sometimes hundreds of hours over their careers—for learning better ways of applying the UCC in the courtroom, and handling dissidents and unruly slaves who set a bad example for the other “paying customers.” This is the genius of the Legal Masters of the Worid: The populace and even many of the bar attorneys themselves believe that the law being practiced in the courtroom is “THE” law, i.e. the ONLY law being administered in the courtroom—whereas it is actually only a carefully orchestrated shadow of the real thing; an exhibition in histrionics par excellence. The UCC is not particularly concerned with Social Security Account Numbers, and including such is an option on the filing forms. The UCC filing office, located in each state (and elsewhere), provides public notice of private matters, and is concerned primarily with "The original, authentic Thirteenth Article of Amendment of the Constitution prohibited anyone who held a ttle of nobility granted by a foreign king, prince, or state from holding a position of public trust (i. political office). For an explanation why this amendment was never ratified, see paragraphs immediately preceding “Sugat-Coating the Deceit” in “The Truth About Esquires,” Section 2. ? Fatuous: Foolish, but self-satisfied, * For all 10 commercial maxims see Maxims of Commerce in Glossary. Page 2 of S Forewordidentifying those registered within by name only—just like it was a hundred years ago (before the Federal Reserve Act and Social Security Act) when a man's name, honor, and reputation were his most valuable personal possessions, and upon which his entire future depended in no small part. As you will discover, the Social Security Account Number is a ‘public’ number associated with a “public persona,” a “person,” a legal entity different from yourself and arificial, as well; i.e. existing in contemplation offby force of law alone. This is your alter-ego, ALL- CAPITAL-LETTERS TRADE NAME, your STRAW MAN. “Straw man* (see Glossary) is a legal term for a “front man,” or nominal party in a transaction, existing in name only, through which the owner can accomplish some purpose not otherwise permitted. A straw man serves its owner/master with slavish devotion, but you did not even know that you had one. He has been running around obligating you and entering into all kinds of unconscionable contracts and causing you much grief, heartache, and economic misery. It is time you get to know this fellow and set things straight. This manual will show you how to discover your straw man and bring him under your control instead of theirs. Most people understand that the law is very precise, with legalized deadly violence associated with the words appearing in the text of the codes that are enforced by courts and police alike. The English language and its accepted rules of grammar are likewise precise, however, and make no accommodation for writing proper nouns in all-capital letters. The all-capital-letters-written name that appears on your Social Security card, driver's license, passport, bank statement, credit cards, efe—and which is rigidly insisted upon and enforced by the legal system—is not there by mistake, but it is not your “true name,” which consists of the given (Christian) name‘ plus the surname (family name), and appears with only initial letters capitalized. The all-caps version is your TRADE NAME, the name under which you “do business,” and is written in another language entirely: “Legalese.” All names—including true names—constitute property, and can be copyrighted under the common law. Strangely enough, the source of all money in circulation today is your (and others’) TRADE NAME and your signed, “promise to pay” in exchange for loans of credit (air) issued in that name. Banks are accounting and bookkeeping operations, with only enough cash on hand to keep customers satisfied,” and covertly use your TRADE NAME and your “promise to pay” to create money and generate profit. The long-term intention of the Money Power is to abolish cash completely and leave people with track-able, electronic funds only. Because all names are no more than property, no one is his TRADE NAME, nor is anyone his true name. The primary reason we are faced with the current dismal state of affairs is people's misunderstanding of the nature of their name. Whereas a sovereign uses a name only for purposes of recognizing that someone else desires communication with him/her, nearly all other people have lost sight of their own sovereign character via confusion about the name. Your true name more closely approximates who you are, but is not “corporate” “Names are divided into Christian names, as, Benjamin, and surnames, as, Franklin. No man can have more than ‘one Christian name; though two or more names usually kept separate, as John and Peter, may undoubtedly be ‘compounded, so as to form, in contemplation of law, but one. A letter put between the Christian and sumame, as an abbreviation of a part of the Christian name, as, John B. Peterson, is no part of either.” Bouvier's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, 1856. * Roughly 2% of the money supply is cash; the rest is “checkbook money” and other “credits.” Foreword Page 3 of 5 xxxixxxii like the TRADE NAME. The Legal Masters of the World have capitalized on this simple distinction between true name and TRADE NAME to ensure your continued subjugation. The primary pitfall is that an all-capital letters TRADE NAME sounds exactly like a true name when spoken (see idem sonans in Glossary). This phenomenon has no particular significance in our society—except in a courtroom, and a courtroom can be a dangerous place to be. Thankfully, this manual can help you stay out of courtrooms, but not everyone is so fortunate. Simple observation tells us that a primary function of today's private, foreign-owned and -operated court system is the transfer of personal wealth and freedom into the hands of the courts, banks, government, corporations, and tax agencies. The judge is calling out a name in one language, Legalese (he is reading from the legal documents in front of him), and the “customer” is innocently listening and answering in another, “English.” This otherwise harmless overlap of “language” is then immediately, forcefully, and unmercifully applied to the victim's profound detriment. Such deception is now indispensable in maintaining the current level of commercial profit levels of the courts (e.g. visit any traffic court for an hour and keep a tally of the proceeds)’. By following the procedures outlined in this manual, unwanted victimization at the hands of the judicial/legal system can be minimized and even avoided/bypassed altogether. The UCC provides for filing offices in each state and elsewhere so that a creditor may give formal public notice of the legal relationship between himself and a debtor. It allows for the creditor, called the “secured party,” to “perfect” (legally establish) a “security interest’ (a private lien, essentially)}—above all others, including government—in the property of the debtor, thereby ensuring repayment or specific performance by the debtor and officially precluding any third party from impairing the private contract. As shown herein, your straw- man TRADE NAME is the debtor and you, the secured party. Your exact relationship with each other is more precisely defined in a “private agreement.” A description of the property pledged by the debtor as collateral for securing the obligation is contained in a “security agreement.” Significant additions in the third edition are the copyright notice (to be published under “legal notices” in the newspaper), and the new security agreement, which has been broken up into three separate, interrelated documents. In strict accordance with Revised Article 9 dictates and the remaining articles of the UCC, this new security agreement package affords anyone the opportunity to fortify his/her position as never before, by reposing all property in an airtight package impervious to legaV/commercial attack, including that of IRS. The best time for handling trouble is before it arrives, and this new package affords such opportunity. The most dramatic aspect of the third edition is the facility for obtaining non-judicial judgment against any legal attacker who would insist upon using your private-property TRADE NAME for financial gain without your authorization—be he/she a judge, prosecutor, IRS agent, attorney, traffic cop, government agent, anyone. Heretofore, such have used your TRADE NAME to pad their own bank account. This no longer need be the case, as © Uncontestable documentary evidence proving this fact is contained within the article entitled “How to Sign When Your Signature is Demanded” in Appendix. 7 ‘The “U.S. Government” section ofthe Los Angeles telephone directory Blue Pages lists a total of 121.5 column inches of government agencies/offices and phone numbers. The moneymaking machinery of the federal court system takes up 18.5%, Le. almast 20%, ofthe listings forthe entire U.S. Government. This is where the money is made. Even the listings for the 103 U.S. Post Offices located in City of Los Angeles takes up only 9.5 column- inches of space, dwarfed by comparison with U.S. District Court listings. Page 4 of S Forewordeach such character will face financial ruin in short order should he/she insist on using your copyrighted property without your permission after having been noticed. The non-judicial foreclosure process follows closely thereafter—and no one has a monopoly on it. The code-encrypting esquires of the Money Power have crafted the UCC, and now Revised Article 9, for the high-speed transfer of wealth (yours) into Big Brother's coffers without the nuisance of consulting the courts. For this very reason, and because the Code is now cracked, regular folks can use the same procedure for thwarting would-be legal marauders —and can reverse the wealth-transferal flow against anyone who foolishly believes he can take private property without just compensation, You need not toil under the threat of “paper terrorism” of the legal system any longer. With What is available here you can, with certainty and confidence, regain control of your life and protect yourself, your family, and your property from the rapacious” Moloch® that is ‘government—and separate any would-be bandit in the employ thereof from his wealth and property if he insists on proceeding without compensating you. Helping you accomplish these things—by unraveling the mystery, exposing the key elements, and guiding you through—is the aim of this manual, Hoping your journey is a pleasant one. With admiration, The Authors ious: Excessively greedy or covetous; living on prey. * Moloch: A Semitic deity, mentioned in the Bible, whose worship was marked by the sacrifice by buming of children offered by their own parents; anything conceived as requiring frightful sacrifice. Foreword Page 5 of SPart I Section 1 Maintaining Fiscal Integrity Functional SovereigntyMaintaining Fiscal’ Integrity Functional Sovereignty Caveat’: This treatise constitutes neither the practice of law, nor the giving of legal advice, and is for informational and educational purposes only. You are responsible for yourself and your own actions. If you act on what you do not understand and cannot support through knowledge and ability, any adverse consequences you may experience are entirely a product of your own doing/omissions. Preamble. For thousands of years the Legal Masters of the World have been steadfastly constructing the system by which world commerce’ and law‘ now operate. They have developed this system by drawing from and utilizing the timeless principles of human interaction that, over the millennia, have been discovered, distilled, and codified. These fundamental, common-sense principles of commercial law, expressed in the 10 maxims found below, underlie every other form of law in existence. There is no type of legal issue, controversy, dispute, etc. that is not covered/embraced by at least one of these 10 maxims of commercial law. The creators of the system have achieved preeminence by knowing these foundational principles of human interaction and encrypting them into “codes” for their own aggrandizement, while keeping the uninitiated ignorant of such knowledge and the means for accessing it. The pinnacle of these efforts is the Uniform Commercial Code, “UCC.” All of world commerce now functions under, and is thoroughly entrenched in, the UCC. However, even though the UCC has been developed and formulated for accommodating mass exploitation and subjugation, it is but a particular codification of the universal underlying laws of commerce, and, most importantly, can now be employed for the benefit of the layman now that the Code has been substantially “cracked.” The 10 foundational maxims® of commerce, from which all codes, law, and statutes are derived and based upon, are: 1. Aworkman is worthy of his hire. 2. All are equal under the law (both moral and natural law). 3. In commerce truth is sovereign. 4. Truth is expressed by means of an affidavit. 5. An unrebutted affidavit stands as the truth in commerce. " Fiscal: Of or pertaining to financial matters generally. * Cavear: Latin, let him beware. In general a warning or emphasis for cauti * Commerce: Any and all interchange between people, including, but not limited by: the activity normally associated with the term, ie. the buying and selling (trading) of goods and services; social intercourse; sexual intercourse (original meaning). All law is contract; and in every interchange between people a contract is formed; all commerce is contract. A timeless and universal maxim of law: “Contract makes the law.” * Law: The rules, of body of rules, defining who alleges possession of what rightauthority for using deadly force (violence) against another. For Biblical origins see Maxims of Commerce in Glossary. Page 1 of 36 Maintaining Fiscal IntegrityAn unrebutted affidavit becomes the judgment in commerce. A matter must be expressed to be resolved. He who leaves the field of battle first loses by default. 2 Sacrifice is the measure of credibility (if one has neither been damaged nor incurred a risk, and is unwilling to swear an affidavit—ie. “true, correct, and complete,” the commercial equivalent of, “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth’—on his unlimited commercial liability for the veracity of his statements and the legitimacy of his actions, he has no credibility, and therefore no basis for asserting claims/charges or claiming authority’). 10.A lien or claim can be satisfied only through rebuttal by counteraffidavit point-for- point, resolution by jury, or payment. Preface. The legal/contractual status of virtually every man, woman, and child on the planet has become that of a slave,’ commercial chattel” property, a hopelessly indentured servant in perpetuity. In commerciavlegal? matters there are only two kinds of people: debtors"® and creditors."" It is an all-or-nothing affair, with no middle ground. If you want the power to exercise your innate sovereignty you must access the agreed-upon rules that provide for your recognition as a sovereign'/creditor: the Articles of the UCC. The program outlined herein is a system of simple contractual procedures providing the foundational steps for regaining control of one's commercial/legal/inancial future, and brings forth the notion of functional, if not official, sovereignty. "® Fundamentals Codified law is precise. It revolves around how words are defined. The rules of all forms of law are set forth in writing, words, syntax, grammar, efc. The way words are legally defined This issue is so profound that even known felons and perjurers are accorded instant credibility and taken at their ‘word if such will swear under oath against another. Career criminals, even suspected murderers, are taken at their ‘word and put on the witness stand if it will serve the prosecution. When one swears under oath one presumably invokes the wrath of God for bearing false witness—a dire transgression, from the reciprocal effets of which there is no escape; hence the credibility accorded anyone who so swears. For one group's formal attempt at cheating natural law and eseaping any such wrath for bearing false witness/disavowing one's sworn oath, see “Kl Nidre” in Glossary. 7 Slave: A person who is wholly subject to the will of another; one who has no freedom of action, but whose person and services are wholly under the control of another. One who is under the power of a master, and who belongs to him; so the master may sell and dispose of his person, ofhis industry, and of his labor, without his being able to do anything, have anything, or acquire anything, but what must belong fo his master. Biack’s law Dictionary, Fourth Edition (1951). * Chattl: Personal and moveable property; includes slaves, ie. permanently indentured servants (commercial chattel Property) by virtue of contract, ie, operation of commercial aw. ‘Commercial/Legal: Because the people of Earth have (unwittingly) bound themselves into (unconscionable) private contracts, and because “contract makes the law,” the terms commercial and legal are essentially interchangeable. " Courtrooms are private, commercial marketplaces enforcing private corporate policy in the administration of the courts business (separating its customers from the fruits of their labor, as well as dictating over customers’ freedom of action), "© The word “debtor” comes from the Latin debit, iterally, “he owes.” "The word “creditor” comes from the Latin credit, literally, “he trusts.” " Sovereign: One who possesses supreme power; of his own right, not under the power of another. ® Sovereignty: Supreme dominion, authority, or rule. Black’s 7. See sovereignty in Glossary. Maintaining Fiscal Integrity Page 2 of 36is the basis of the game. Words used in commercial/legal matters have different meanings than the same words used in everyday parlance. Deadly, destructive violence is attached with the words—and the meanings of said words—used in all legal documents and proceedings. In commerciaV/legal matters, simply assuming that you know the meaning of a word can cost you dearly. It is vital that you know how the words being used are defined for any hope of knowing what is happening and why. Understand the meaning of the words and you can go forward with confidence and certainty; remain in the dark about the meanings of key terms and you can lose the entire game in an instant. A Glossary of pertinent terms, with listings of key definitions re this process, has been provided. The Glossary can save you much time in your quest for understanding, and the value of its annotations cannot be underestimated, because contained therein are insights—code cracking—not offered anywhere else. However, it is strongly recommended that you supplement your use of the Glossary with one or more of the generally accepted law dictionaries, such as Black's, Bouvier's, and Ballentine’s. If you can afford it, get a copy of both the first and most recent edition (as well as others, if possible). As you will soon learn, no law/code/statute/definition is actually ever repealed. This is an advent peculiar with the UCC. In the case of a controversy between an existing law/code! statute/definition and one that has been repealed, the repealed law/code/statute/definition controls (see UCC § 1-104). Also, the difference between the first and latest editions reveals how the Legal Masters of the World attempt to guide the destiny of all by continuously redefining—and confusing the meanings of—commercial/iegal terms. In any event, find out the meanings of any term of which you are not certain. Do not take anything for granted."* Itis also recommended that you obtain a copy of the Uniform Commercial Code issued by your State, since the UCC reigns supreme throughout America and the world. All other codes and bodies of law are mere subsets of, and encompassed by, the UCC (see UCC 1- 103)—and since no part of the UCC (as well as all other bodies of law, considered as supplementing the UCC) is ever repealed, obtaining a copy of the earliest edition available would be a good idea, as well. Universal commercial law is the functional “common law" of the planet, and is ingrained in the Articles and sections of the UCC. The entire “civilized” world—i.e. the cumulative mass of all governments, banks, courts, tax agencies, and corporations—now runs strictly in accordance with the rules of commerce as set forth in the UCC. Deal with the source: the UCC."° Whereas the first two editions of this manual, of necessity—and because of the state of the art at the time of composition—dealt extensively with tactical measures for surviving the ever-present menace of the U.S. judicial and tax systems, this volume has rather simplified the entire matter, and points the way for a more wholesome, uninterrupted style of living, free of the inherent guile, treachery, and larcenous practices of contemporary “legal professionals,” taxmen, and government actors, by thwarting meritless attacks from such would-be pirates before anything can get rolling. «What you know can never hurt you. What you do not know, however, ean kill you. 'S A good source for a copy of your State’s current UCC is West Group at (800) 344-5009. Page 3 of 36 Maintaining Fiscal IntegrityThe Basis of the Con You have been deceived and betrayed, and ravaged for your kindness and trust. However, by merely confronting the exact nature of the con you can be free of it. Life no longer need be a dangerous and unpredictable affair. Without taking up historical and legal details at this juncture—which are thoroughly addressed and documented in the supplementing essays and treatises in this manual, and which are mandatory reading for a full understanding of what has happened in America, as well as in most other countries of the world—suffice it that you have been swindled out of nothing less valuable than your birthright, your sovereignty, by an insidious lexical artifice: corruption of your name. An ancient maxim of law states: “In order rightly to comprehend a thing, inquire first into the names, for a right knowledge of things depends upon their names.” Whereas, “John Henry Doe” would signify a true name’® written in accordance with the rules of English grammar and the prescriptions of law, “JOHN HENRY DOE," on the other hand, would not. A harmless variant of the original, you might say. A variant of the true name, yes—but the operative term is corruption, and it is anything but harmless. Names of men and women (and boys and girls) appearing in ALL-CAPITAL LETTERS, and even abbreviated versions (with/without initials, efc.) of true names with initial letters only capitalized, are corporate/corporately colored renditions of a true name and do not identify the being associated therewith; such names represent property, specifically intellectual property, though this fact is overlooked by almost everyone in society but the legal vampires whose existence is predicated on its exploitation. Corporate Names Checking your driver license, credit cards, bank statement, IRS correspondence, traffic tickets, efc., you will discover that government agencies, banks and other corporations, courts, and tax agencies deal with you exclusively through various corrupted versions of your true name. And these four types of organizations ruthlessly insist on dealing with you only via an all-capsiother corruption of your true name in any and all key documents, contracts, accounts, and agreements with them. Their computers are generally geared/formatted for dealing with nothing else. It is interesting that the military—an aspect of government—also designates its personnel exclusively in all-capital letters. ‘As you have seen throughout your life, corporations spell their trade names in any format, in any assemblage of letters—set in capitals, in lower case only, intentionally misspelled, with numerals, and even arbitrary, non-lingual symbols—that they wish: “SUNOCO,” “citibank,” “U-HAUL,” "Office DEPOT," "HONDA," “FOOD 4 LESS,” ‘RITE AID Pharmacy,” “Kmart,” “Toys ‘sf’ Us," "HEWLETT PACKARD," “4-Day TIRE STORES,” “VISA,” “YAMAHA,” "SEARS," “COMPAQ,” “Toys 4 Tots,” “STATE FARM INSURANCE," “Sav-on DRUGS,” etc. Construction of these man-made, corporate trade names is not restricted by the bounds of English grammar and the prescriptions of law because they are fanciful trade names, one- "True name: One’s given (Christian) name, plus the surname (family name). See true name in Glossary. Page 4 of 36of-a-kind objects of intellectual property in themselves, and signify a unique, artificial person, a legal entity distinct from all others. Even your personal-computer spellchecker acknowledges this fact (type in any random set of upper- and lower-case letters on your screen and verify spelling; then change all letters into capitals and verify spelling again: no error will be indicated). Names constructed outside the bounds of English grammar and the prescriptions of law are corporate/corporately colored trade names. Legally speaking, there isa term that identifies such entities: “ens legis,” defined as follows: “Ens legis. L. Lat. A creature of the law; an artificial being, as contrasted with a natural person. Applied to corporations, considered as deriving their existence entirely from the law.” Black’s Law Dictionary, Fourth Edition, 1951, hereinafter “Black's 4".” A trade name can also be trademarked, service-marked, and copyrighted by the owner for the purpose of restricting others from unauthorized use and unjust enrichment at the expense of the party/parties that invested in and built up the good name and reputation (good will) of said trade name in the public mind. Statutory entities must follow statutory law in such matters. Living, breathing, flesh-and-blood men and women, on the other hand, need only clain/assert their copyright under the common law. “Common Law. As distinguished from law created by the enactment of legislatures, the common law comprises the body of those principles and rules of action, relating to the government and security of persons and property, which derive their authority solely from usages and customs of immemorial antiquity, or from the judgments and decrees of the courts recognizing, affirming, and enforcing such usages and customs; and, in this sense, particularly the ancient, unwritten law of England.” Black’s 4". Meet Your Alter Ego” Everything has two inherent aspects: its physical/mentalispiritual manifestation, and the abstract label describing it. This situation is characterized in semantics as the difference between the territory and the map, i.e. the thing and its label. Whereas water is tangible and can actually be experienced by the senses, the word ‘water’ is only a symbol, an abstraction of the mind, and cannot be experienced; i.e. one cannot drink the word water. The mind is capable of imagining unlimited varieties and configurations of abstractions. These include non-tangible concepts and mental constructs such as “the people,” “nation,” “corporation,” “limited liability,” “trust,” and “government’—all entities ens legis. Other legal terms describing fictitious entities are “person” and “artificial person.” Such cannot be seen, nor touched, nor heard. Proper names set in all-capital letters, such as the one appearing on your driver license, are trade names and signify artificial persons. Your name in all-capital letters is no different from that of any other corporate trade name and signifies a legal entity separate and distinct from you, the living, breathing man/woman. The corporate, banking, taxation, legal, and governmental communities, collectively the “industrial community,” use this name exclusively when conducting business with you. Via this name—and solely because of this special name—all manner of goods and services are conveyed/transmitted"® for your benefit by all artifical-person entities ens legis in the industrial community. Such can interface with your straw man’s all-caps TRADE NAME * Alter ego: A second self; an inseparable friend, "Tn law, a “person” is not flesh-and-blood, but atificial—a creature of law or contract, ie. the contractual aspect of ‘an actual man/woman, such as a “citizen,” “driver,” and “officer of a corporation”. " For a brief but thorough explanation of this phenomenon, see transmitting utility in Glossary. Page 5 of 36 Maintaining Fiscal Integritybecause all involved/interested parties are artificial persons. Your role (as a man/woman) in this scheme will be revealed shortly, but at this point in the discussion you are inextricably linked with your all-caps STRAW MAN. Your alter-ego straw man is defined as a “front,” a third party put up in name only for the purpose of taking part in a transaction, i.e. a mere nominal party in a transaction. The legal term describing such an entity is “stramineus homo,” a Latin tern defined as follows: “A man of straw, one of no substance, put forward as bail” or surety”'.” Black Dictionary, First Edition, 1891, hereinafter “Black's 1*. Law A nominal-party straw man can be very useful because its creator can then accomplish things in the name of the straw man that would not otherwise be permitted—e.g. secretly acquire property, do business with one’s enemies, efc. A creator always puts forth a straw man for self-serving purposes, and is normally the only one that knows the true nature of the straw man. Outsider parties in a transaction usually believe that the straw-man party is unaffiliated with other parties in the transaction, thereby giving the creator the advantage of an “extra man on the field.” When your true name, written in accordance with the rules of English grammar and the prescriptions of law, is corrupted into an all-capital-letters format, a mutant straw man” is created. The new all-caps NAME is a legal entity (corporate/corporately colored) distinct from you, and is the only type of “person” with whom government, courts, taxmen, banks, and corporations will, in fact can, do business. If you do not believe this, just examine the documents you receive from these types of organizations (i.e. Social Security card, court records, credit cards, tax bills, permits, driver license, passport, bank statements, efc.). All name-entries are set in capitals exclusively—with the occasional exception of upper- and lower-case abbreviations, i.e. initials, efc., and then usually only in correspondence. When some corporate/governmental entity is coming after you for payment you will never see your true name listed as the account holder (initial letters only capitalized) in the caption of their legal briefs, only the TRADE NAME of your straw man. Why? This is the only way they can do business—and that is exactly and only what itis: business. Many grammar books and legal publications identify permissible methods” for displaying proper nouns (names), one of which is the U.S. Government style manual, A Manual of Style (2000). Chapter 17, “Courtwork," spells out with examples acceptable ways for presenting names, 52 variations in all, and never once recommends an all-caps name format in court paperwork. Despite the conspicuous absence of such mandate, the caption of every single federal (and state, county, and city) court brief—without exception—contains name of plaintiff and defendant, petitioner and respondent, efc. in all-capital-letter-format exclusively. Since there is no legal authority requiring that proper nouns/names be set in capital letters, why is this practice permitted, indeed enforced, excluding all others? ® Bail: One who becomes the surety [see footnote immediately below] for the appearance of the defendant in court. 2 Surety: A person who is primarily liable for the payment of another's debt or the performance of another's obligation.” Black’s Law Dictionary, Seventh Edition, 1990. ® Likewise, any other upper- and lower-case alteration/abbreviation of the true name, e.g. John H. Doe, John Doe, J H. Doe, erc, is also a straw man. Your true name is just that: your true name. Anything else, atleast as regards the industrial community, isa straw man, ® For a comprehensive, unimpeachable treatment of this subject, see “Memorandum of Law on the Name” in Appendix. Maintaining Fiscal Integrity Page 6 of 36The people of the world have been politically and financially ravaged because they do not know of their alter-ego, public-persona STRAW MAN. Bankrupt governments covertly create and use such straw men—TRADE NAMES, actually—for the purpose of “doing business” with said TRADE NAMES (without ever openly disclosing the practice) and siphoning wealth from otherwise sovereign men and women and conveying such proceeds into the coffers of their creditors, the masters of the Federal Reserve/IMF syndicate. After Redemption,”* ie. after redeeming/reclaiming your intellectual-property all-caps straw-man TRADE NAME, you can use the straw man for your own benefit, rather than endure its continued economic exploitation and the concomitant” economic subjugation associated therewith. Analyzing the Obvious A landmark Supreme Court case of 1795, Penhallow v. Doane’s Administrators (3 U.S. 54; 1 L.Ed. 57; 3 Dall. 54), defines governments succinctly: “governments are corporations.” Inasmuch as every government is an artificial person, an abstraction, and a creature of the mind only, a government can interface only with other artificial persons. The imaginary— having neither actuality nor substance—is foreclosed from creating and attaining parity with the tangible. The legal manifestation of this is that no government, as well as any law, agency, aspect, court, efc. thereof, can concern itself with anything other than corporate, artificial persons and the contracts between them. One might immediately dispute this statement by pointing out that people are acted upon by agents of government and are regulated, fined, imprisoned, plundered, brutalized, and killed by government officials every day. True, but let us step back from the fray and take in the whole macrocosm that we call “modern civilization.” Itis fairly obvious that a thing created can never be greater than the creator that brought it into existence. Please follow along with this syllogism”: . God created Man, and rules over Man; therefore Man can never be greater than, and can never rule over, God 2. Man created government, an artificial entity, as a service facility/slave; therefore government can never be greater than, and can never rule over, Man. 3. Government then created corporations and corporately colored entities (also artificial persons/staves), for the purpose of ruling over them (collecting revenue); therefore a corporation/corporately colored entity can never be greater than, and can never rule over, the government that brought it into existence. 4. Therefore: a corporation/corporately colored entity can never be greater than/rule over government; can never be greater than/rule over Man; can never be greater than/rule over God. Despite the logic of this example, and as pointed out above, anyone can look around and see that the above hierarchy of rule is certainly not the case in America today, and likewise ™ Redemption: The act of redeeming, or the state of being redeemed. Redeem: To recover from captivity or from total loss or alienation; hence to rescue in any way; deliver; ransom; as, to redeem goods from a pawnbroker, to ‘redeem a nation. Funk & Wagnalls New Standard College Dictionary, 1947, ® Concomitant: Existing or occurring together, attendant. % Syllogism: A logical scheme of a formal argument consisting of a major and minor premise and a conclusion, ‘which must logically be true if the premises are true, Page 7 of 36 Maintaining Fiscal Integrityalmost everywhere else.”” Simple observation tells us that government rules over people, not the reverse. What is missing from the foregoing equation is the same thing that is missing in your awareness about your life: the existence of your straw-man TRADE NAME, plus your obligations coupled therewith. In the above example you, the man/woman, are described in categories 1 and 2. Your all-caps, ens-legis straw man falls in category 3, but till now you were not even aware of its existence at any level. For purposes of ruling over flesh-and-blood people, such had to be somehow corralled into the artificial sphere, the only realm that government—being the slave of the sovereign men and women that created it—can dictate over. Here is the two-part, governmental artifice that facilitated this transformation, Government: (1) Corrupted the true names of sovereign men and women into corporately colored, “mirror image,” all-capital-letter TRADE NAMES at the time of (falsely “required”) registration® of the biological property via the birth certificate,” and omitted informing people of the creation of the new newly created, ens-legis, corporate- franchise, ‘citizen of the United States" TRADE NAME; and then (2) Deceived the flesh-and-blood men and women of the sovereign constituency into unwittingly “voluntarily” contracting as surety* for the TRADE NAME, concealing from the victims their new status, but also heartlessly*" enforcing the new obligations without benefit of explanation “Surety. A person who is primarily liable for the payment of another's debt or the performance of another's obligation.” Black's Law Dictionary, Seventh Edition, 1990, hereinafter “Black’s 7.” The device and practice under “(1)” above, committed via an officially authorized subterfuge known as a “legal fiction,"* opens the door so government actors can literally pretend a false reality into existence and then act on it without any obligation of notifying anyone about it. Under “(2),” actors in government have secretly created contracts of “suretyshij ® One of only two inhabited jurisdictions on the planet where this is not the case is tiny Sark, a one-square-mile island nation in the English Channel, and the societal paradigm most closely approximating utopia on ths, the third ‘orb from the dwarf star Sol: population: 5S0; average Sarkee net worth: approximately $10-million USD; types of taxes: alcohol and tobacco only; number of tax collectors other than for alcohol and tobacco: zero (curious taxmen are immediately arrested and placed in the dungeon, where they spend the night before being put on the first ferry off the island the next morning); other sources of goverment revenue: voluntary donations only (the only {governmental revenue-raising project undertaken in the ast 700 years was for two public tilets—all proceeds were ‘Voluntarily donated); number of tax treaties with other countries: zero; non-member of International Monetary Fund; non-member of United Nations; government leaders: 1 Seneschal and 1 Seigneur; members of parliament: 40 freehold (in allodium—see allodium in Glossary) property holders; countries with visa-free-travel for Sark passport holders: 80 (most ofall passports). There are only two other such politically uncontaminated jurisdictions on Earth ‘one is burgeoning at this writing and the other is uninhabited > Registration of anything is a voluntary act of surrender of custody of the property and the establishment of an account that can be charged) in the name given. » The birth certificate is the official security instrument for the property, ie. the name, which held (in trust) by the ‘gustodian, the State Registrar. For specifics see birth eertificate in Glossary. % The all-caps TRADE NAME is a /4"-Amendment,artficial-person, corporate-franchise “citizen of the United States,” the only kind of “U.S, citizen” in existence—as contrasted with an “American Citizen,” a sovereign, flesh- and-blood man/woman (see “The Demise of the American Constitutional Republic” in Appendix)—as well as an “individual,” ie. “US. Government employee” (see individual in Glassary). >! For an entertaining perspective on the heartless nature of commerce, see Wizard of Oz, The in Glossary. © Legal fiction: “Something assumed in law to be fact irrespective ofthe truth or accuracy of that assumption.” ‘Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law (1996). Maintaining Fiscal Integrity Page 8 of 3610 but without informing prospective sureties—thereby establishing an ongoing Machiavellian scheme whereby a sovereign man/woman can be treated as the equivalent of his/her inert, inanimate, artificial, paper-and-ink, corporately colored counterpart (STRAW MAN) once the mark (intended victim in a confidence game) has been suckered into the “contract.” Suretyship™ Suretyship is defined as: “The legal relation that arises when one party assumes liability for a debt, default, or other failing ofa second party”; and “The liability of both parties begins simultaneously. In other words, under a contract of suretyship, a surety becomes a party to the principal obligation.” Black’s 7". Suretyship is further clarified as follows: “The contract of suretyship may be entered into by all persons who are sui juris*, and capable of entering into other contracts...” Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, 1856, hereinafter “Bouvier’s 6.” **Sui juris. Lat. Of his own right; possessing full social and civil right; not under any legal disability, or the power of another, or guardianship.” Black’s 4°. A surety is equally liable for the obligations of the principal he is bonded with. However, as you can see in the Bouvier's definition above, only a sui juris man/woman is capable of becoming a surety. Examining the definition of ‘sui juris" more closely, you can discover that this is an artfully watered-down, camouflaged term for the legal equivalent of a sovereign: “Of his own right;...not under...the power of another...” Re suretyship, what this means is that, in the eyes of the law, only a sui juris, sovereign, self-governing, responsible maniwoman possesses, and can exercise, full right and power, and is legally qualified and eligible, for being hoodwinked, conned, deceived, bamboozled, swindled, shafted, cheated, hornswoggled, defrauded, scammed, duped, tricked, trapped, and suckered into becoming a surety for his/her intangible, artificial, mirror-image, paper- and-ink, straw-man TRADE NAME. Hence, the following inescapable conclusion: Were you not such a sovereign, self-governing, sui juris, responsible party in the first place, you could never have become a surety for anyone/ anything else (STRAW MAN) anytime thereafter. Thus, we have uncovered the answer for the apparent conundrum cited above re government ruling over Man: a sovereign man/woman has the sovereign right and power for contracting away his/her sovereign rights and power if he/she, in his/her sovereign capacity, so chooses—otherwise legally known as an unconscionable bargain,” but “business as usual” for the Legal Masters of the World. And your self-appointed rulers need only the » For a comprehensive examination of this most significant of subjects concerning all “citizens of the United States,” see “The Curse of Co-Suretyship” in tis ection. » Unconscionable bargain: A contract which no man in his senses, not under delusion, would make, on the one hand, and which no fair and honest man would accept, onthe other. Black's 1%. Page 9 of 36 Maintaining Fiscal Integrityminutest justification for inflicting the full fury of their wrath upon you. Until recently, all such “contracts” were secret, invisible, and unknown for everyone but the man-haters that devised them and the hellhounds that enforce them. In your particular circumstance the artificial, all-caps STRAW MAN is the principal, and you, the living, breathing, flesh-and- blood man/woman, the unwitting surety. The Underlying Con Beneath the Con Likely you are following this essay and have a good grasp of the concepts set forth so far and are interested in carrying forward and gaining more understanding about how these things apply in your life and what you can do about it. But let us digress for a moment. A great number of Americans have figured out that the all-caps corruption of their true name is somehow being used against them, and we shall thoroughly address that issue momentarily. However, there is an even subtler con underway concerning the name, and it has been so well designed and orchestrated that almost no one has even conceived of the possibility of its existence. Although knowledge of this particular stratagem’ is not necessary for application of the practical remedies contained herein, there is no surety in existence that cannot benefit from its revelation, no matter the degree of understanding. It reflects the very essence, basis, and nature of your position in American society. Let us take two entities, one actual—the man/woman known as the king/queen of the State of Great Britain—and one artificial—the State of United States® (a sub-jurisdiction under aegis of the Crown, a front for the Legal Masters of the World)—and examine a peculiar right claimed by each. The sovereign in Great Britain must consent before he/she can be ‘sued in the royal courts. United States, the “proclaimed sovereign”” on this side of the Atlantic, must also consent before it can become the subject of a lawsuit in its own courts: “The sovereign, whether the term be used with respect to a state or to the chief ruler of one, is. accorded an immunity from suit in courts of justice. This doctrine obtains both in England and in this country... It is a general rule that the sovereign cannot be sued in his own court without his consent...” From the definition of sovereign, Bouvier’s 8". How is it that any such claim of right can be made by these parties? Why must we obtain permission before suing either of them? The answer for these questions reveals a tactical source-point of the current physical, mental, and spiritual dilemma facing mankind. “Appellation” Appellation, a rather obscure word in the English language, is defined as follows: “[a. Fr. appellation (13" c., ad. L. appellation-em, of action f. appellare ...] “I. Appealing, appeal [from O.Fr. apeler.] Obs. “The action of appealing toa higher court or authority against the decision ofan ine ‘one; the appeal so made... * Stratagem: A maneuver designed to deceive or outwit an enemy in war; a deceptive scheme for obtaining an advantage. % United Staes isa singular proper noun and represents a city-state domiciled in Washington, DC. ” This is a hoax perpetrated via the doctrine of legal fiction, ie. pretending a false reality into existence. No artificial person can be sovereign/self-determined over an; The sovereign in America is the sovereign constituency, ie. the people, the American Citizens. See sovereignty in Glossary. Maintaining Fiscal Integrity Page 10 of 36 1112 “b. Ground of appeal, ttle, claim. Obs. Rare. “2, gen. The action of appealing or calling on; entreaty, or eamest address. Obs. “TL. Calling, designation {from later Fr. apeller, or L. appellare.] “3, ‘The action of calling by a name; nomenclature. “4, A designation, name of title given: a. toa particular person or thing. “b. toa class: A descriptive or connotative name.” ‘The Oxford English Dictionary, 1971. “1, A name or title. “2, The act of naming or calling.” Funk & Wagnalls Standard Dictionary of the English Language, Int'l Edition, 1958. “Act of calling by a name;...a name or designation” Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, Fifth Edition, 1947. Appellation is spelled identically in both French and English. In French, the word means: “nJf. appealing, calling, naming, appellation.” Cassell’s French-English and English-French Dictionary. Though this word has come our way through French, its ultimate origin is Latin: “Appellat o, Onis, f accosting: appeal; calling by name; name, title; pronunciation.” Burt's Latin-English Dictionary, 1926. The word accost appears prominently in the Latin origin of appellation and is defined as: “To speak to first; address; greet... “Manner or act of addressing; greeting.” Funk & Wagnalls Standard Dictionary of the English Language, Int’! Edition, 1958. This and other French words made their way into the English-speaking world courtesy of the Norman French attorneys accompanying Wiliam of Normandy, a/k/a Duke of Normandy and William the Conqueror, following the inglorious Battle of Hastings (England) in the year 1066 A.D. The corupted French dialect of the Normans was then immediately installed in the legal system, and Englishmen unlearned in the new language (ie. nearly all) were thereby effectively foreclosed from any adequate legal defense of themselves and their property against the tyrant king's esquires® in the courts—and so experienced economic annihilation. As with many other impediments in the language of the legal system, Norman French attorneys are at the bottom of the obscurity of the word appellation, as well. Of the first four definitions of appellation in The Oxford English Dictionary, hereinafter “OED,” (the world’s most respected lexical authority), we are told that three of them are obsolete (“obs."); the only “valid” one being “1,” ie. “The action of appealing to a higher court or authority against the decision of an inferior one; the appeal so made,” even though the so-called “obsolete” usages are in complete harmony with the only “modern” definition. The reason proper usage of this word is labeled “obsolete” by the king’s esquires on staff at OED; the reason this word is not defined in law dictionaries; the reason most people believe 3 Bequire: Attorney. Page 11 of 36 Maintaining Fiscal Integritythat an appellation is nothing but an archaic synonym for a name (e.g. “Christian appellation’); the reason people generally have a reverse conceptual understanding of the meaning of this obscure term is the same reason that Big Brother calls himselfiitself a “sovereign,” and you, a “subject,” and why you must first obtain permission from the Crown/United States” before suing: political subjugation and compelled allegiance (another word with Norman French origins). ‘As can be seen from the etymologies and definitions above, appellat o is the Latin root for “an appealing to," “a calling out to,” “a pronouncing of a nameftitle,” “an accosting (a speaking to, addressing, greeting of another)’—the idea of a “name” is a secondary, derivative aspect. Consulting the original Latin meaning, and later French usage, the essence of an appellation is “the action of making an appeal/calling oul/addressing another,” i.e. “an act for getting another's attention.” One makes contact with another by emitting an appellation. Even when considered as a name, an appellation is not a crippling, ball-and-chain claim on your existence; as a sovereign, your appellation is merely your cue/signal that someone is reaching out and desires communication from/with you. This is why the so-called “sovereigns,” the Crown and United States, require that their approval be obtained before suit is initiated: they evaluate the appellation and decide if they want it. Sadly, most people have identified with their name and believe that when it is called they are obligated in responding as requested/ordered, as though use of the name somehow exerted control over their freedom of locomotion and the disposition of their personal property. This is wrongheaded—but those who control the publishing of textbooks and newspapers and dictate over government, the media, and the legal system have nevertheless successfully inculcated” this infirmity into our collective consciousness. Anname is a piece of property—and can even be copyrighted. You are not your property/ not your name. An appellation differs from a name in that it is something that originates with another: it is an earnest plea for communication. The so-called obsolete-definition “2” in the OED is the true, modern meaning of the term: The action of appealing or calling on; entreaty, or earnest address.” Others use an appellation for addressing you, accosting you, calling out for you, making an appeal of you, and getting your attention—and what you do following such appeal is entirely your own choosing, This is as true for your neighbor down the street as it is for an IRS agent. When someone makes an appellation for the purpose of taking legal action against the Crown, the Crown takes note of the appellation and issues a decision. Any sovereign must agree that he can be sued and that he is liable before another can proceed against him—and this is true for any sovereign, including you, irrespective of any lack of awareness ‘on your part of your own omnipotence. People in America have lost sight of the fact that they are sovereigns and that nothing can be foisted upon them without their agreement. This is a fact of life, not an invented truth of this text. No one can be legally victimized without his/her consent. However, we have been beaten down by the legal system with such vehemence, taxed (robbed) with such righteous fervor, and brutalized and even killed by officers of our own goverment with such callous ® United States Inc. has long since waived immunity virtually across the boards based on corporate status and activity. “Imculcate: To impress upon the mind by frequent and emphatic repetition, instil, Maintaining Fiscal Integrity Page 12 0f 36 1314 indifference for so long that people have lost sight of who the boss is and who the servant is —and who they really are. A name is a piece of property; itis not the living, breathing, flesh-and-blood man associated therewith. When someone asks for your name—-and you give it to him--you voluntarily surrender your property and consensually agree with whatever he wants to do with it. In the case of a judge, this can be extremely dangerous. All the different names you have gone by throughout your life are simply means of addressing you, ways of calling you, and have no more importance than you accord them. If you choose to respond when someone uses your property (your common-law-copyrighted name) to get your attention, and then go into contract, that is your sovereign, self-determined choice. Take a look at the following exchange ("Judge could just as easily be replaced with “Officer,” “Detective,” Agent,” efc.): Judge: What is your name? Sovereign: No, it isnot. Judge: What do you mean? Sovereign: | mean ‘What’ is not my name. Judge: Jam asking for your name. Sovereign: Well, | have lots of names. Which one are you talking about? Judge: 'm talking about your real name. What is it? Sovereign: My parents call me “son,” my friends call me ‘Lefty,” and my dog calls me "Woof!" These names are very real fo me and | usually respond to each. What name are you interested in? Judge: I'm not interested in playing word games with you—and you will show respect for this court! Are you ‘JOHN HENRY DOE"? Sovereign: The name you just mentioned is common-law-copyrighted property, and | am the owner of that particular property. In fact, | have given public notice of my ownership of that property by publishing in the newspaper. If you want to use that piece of property again | need to inform you that there is a fee for its use, set forth in the Copyright Notice, and it's a fairly steep fee, but | will waive the charge you just incurred if you elect not to use it again. What would you like to do? Judge: | don't know what you think you're doing, Mister, but you're about to get into deep trouble. Sovereign: “Mister” is not a name of mine. Judge: Look, whatever-your-name-is, | am commanding you to identify yourself or be held in contempt of court! Bailif! Sovereign: | apologize for any misunderstanding, because it is certainly not my intention to show contempt for this court. 1 am only interested in protecting my property rights. Are you commanding me to surrender my private property for your use without compensating me? Judge: | most certainly am not; | am merely asking for your name Sovereign: Well, my name is my property and | do not give away any of my names for the use of others without being compensated in accordance Page 13 of 36 Maintaining Fiscal Integritywith the use-fees as published in my Copyright Notice. As far as | can tell, the only reason you want the name is to use it so the court can make money. Is that correct? Judge: That is not correct! I need to know who you are so we can proceed with the business of the court. Sovereign: You bring up a good point: If you do not know who | am, then why do you want you do business with me, and why are we here? Judge: You are testing the limits of my patience, sir. GIVE ME YOUR NAME! Sovereign: You want to know what to call me? Judge: That would do fine. Sovereign: You can call me “Secured Party.” Judge: This is not going to go on much longer, my friend! Very well, Mr. Secured Party. Where do you live? Sovereign: | live within the confines of my skin. Judge: (Dropping his head into his hands, slapping his forehead with both palms, then looking up.) WHAT IS YOUR ADDRESS?! Sovereign: don't have an address. See for yourself (slowly does a 360° spin, arms held away from body). Judge: Where do you sleep at night? Sovereign: Ina bed, usually. Sometimes, in a sleeping bag. Judge: I mean, which building do you sleep in at night? Sovereign: Like / said, I don't sleep in a building. | sleep in a bed. Judge: Sir, Secured Party, whoever you are...you can have a seat over there and we will take this up after lunch! Nothing got started, and nothing ever got started, even after lunch. The sovereign was truthful and respectful the whole time—and he never gave away his private property for the use of the court (who would open an account and lodge pecuniary" charges in it). The sovereign kept his cool because he knew that the only thing the judge wanted him to do was voluntarily surrender his private property for the use of the court—without compensation. The judge knew that the sovereign understood what was happening, and so gave up. Once you understand that this is all that is going on in a courtroom (and elsewhere), then you will be able to think on your feet and make the right moves, too. ‘The world runs on the initiative of about 5% of the people (target audience of this manual); the rest need orders. The consensus of the other 95% on the subject of one’s relationship with government, banks, tax agencies, courts, and corporations (all separate realms) is defective in that such inert abstractions have been accorded superiority over living beings. Governments are transitory mental contrivances set up by the clever few for the purpose of living off the efforts of the trusting many—a generalization, yes, but also the truth * Pecuniary: Of or relating to money. Maintaining Fiscal Integrity Page 14 of 36 1516 That you may have, at some point, lost sight of the fact that you are sovereign is not a denigration”? of who you are. The entire population of this country, this planet, has been systematically shafted through inconceivably complex mechanisms in the field of commerce, law, and finance by the same small tribe of brilliant sociopathic madmen hell- bent on its subjugation. You cannot disparage yourself because you fell prey, along with others, and were betrayed by those in whom you placed trust. But you can begin dealing with the situation from the proper viewpoint, and that is as a self-governing, fully accountable, responsible man/woman who can control—and is in control of—his/her own Politicaleconomic destiny, despite the apparently overwhelming odds stacked against you. Knowing that “you are not your name,” that you, the sovereign, can take legal possession of your name in all its forms (like any other piece of property), and that the option of accepting/rejecting any “appellation” from any party that comes your way is strictly yours in your sovereign capacity, will speed your course. The reallife, proven, practical solutions contained in this handbook are humbly tendered for assisting you in accomplishing these aims, actualizing your true nature, and enjoying the realization of your dreams. Unrevealed Obligations There are 60+ million statutes on the books and over three million different law books on file in the Library of Congress.“ Your straw man—and you by default, as surety—is responsible for knowing and complying flawlessly with the letter of the law in every single statute in existence,“ because “everyone is presumed to know the law” and “ignorance of the law is no excuse." If the Word Manipulators who claim the legal title of the straw man with which you are presumed contractually unified, decide that they will tax, fine, regulate, rob, incarcerate, and possibly even kill the abstract straw man, then you, the physical/ biological being, “go along for the statutory ride" and experience the consequences in reality. In such legal status you are devoid of capacity for asserting/enforcing any rights; you have no standing in law, /.. a slave cannot sue his master/owner. Through other such governmental legal fictions, with penalties for things as innocent as paying your straw man’s Social Security payroll taxes, accepting “free” delivery of mail from the United States Postal Service, and taking out licenses issued in the straw man’s TRADE NAME, otherwise sovereign men and women are unwittingly set up to have their lives utterly destroyed by Big Brother for ‘voluntarily’ contracting as a surety for the straw man As it tus out, the STRAW MAN is also responsible, jointly and severally” with other straw- men-debtor Social Security Account-holders, for payment of the “national debt™*: thereby making any man/woman with a Social Security card in his/her possession equally liable, as a co-surety,** for payment of the national debt. Denigrate: To slander, cast aspersions on; sully; defame. © Three million average-size law books take up approximately 80 linear miles of library bookshelf space. ‘tthe inception of this country a man faced a total of only three possible crimes: Treason, Counterfeiting, Piracy. “© Origin of this saying: Hanging ofthe Witches, 1655. “Capacity: Ability; qualification; legal power or right. See eapacity in Glossary. “ Jointly and severally: In a fashion both common/shared, as well as distinct/separate; meaning that while there may bbe multiple debtors who are mutually liable for the same obligation, the entire obligation may be obtained from any single debtor. “ The so-called “National Debt” isthe financial obligation of the U.S. Government claimed by the Federal Reserve Bank, based on use of the Fed’s private property, (valueless/unredeemable) Federal Reserve Notes, as currency. © Corsurety: A surety who shares the cost of performing suretyship obligations with another. Page 15 of 36 Maintaining Fiscal IntegrityThe Social Security Account is the straw man’s account and is listed in your straw man's “TRADE NAME,” not your “True Name.” In Helvering v. Davis (301 U.S. 619, 57 S.Ct. 81 L.Ed. 1307, 804), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Social Security is neither an insurance nor a retirement program, but a welfare program.®° Because of this fact, application for, and use of, a Social Security Account Number (SSAN), for one thing, is a tacit confession that ‘one is so incompetent in managing his/her own affairs that he/she must appoint the U.S. Government as his/her “guardian” and seek eligibility for welfare payments. Such defective status is also known by other names, such as “child of the state” and “ward of the court,”*" and is legally known as the doctrine of “parens patriae,"** wherein the state is considered the legal parent/guardian of those “under disability,” and "unable to care for themselves.” ‘When you paid the first penny of the straw man’s Social Security payroll taxes you executed the contract and confirmed that the straw man—and you by default (as surety)—was a child of the state, incapable of managing its own affairs, and needful of guardianship. Also, in Flemming v. Nestor (363 U.S. 603, 4 L.Ed.2d 1435, 80 S.Ct. 1367 (1960))® the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that those who have paid in Social Security taxes over their lifetime have no vested interest in Social Security. No vested interest means that payment of Social Security benefits from the Social Security System is optional/discretionary and not obligatory. Thus, by law and by contract, when a Social Security taxpayer retires, FICA/Social Security System has no obligation for compensating the retiree/taxpayer. This is another reason why Social Security is an unconscionable bargain/contract.* All of your accounts, certificates, securities, licenses, permits, etc. are in the name of your ens-legis, straw-man TRADE NAME. All accounts are the straw man's accounts, not yours. You are the surety attached thereto, and the party that everyone goes after for payment and specific performance because, between you and the straw man, you are the only one with the warm breath capable of fogging a mirror. You are a sitting duck waiting to be blasted until you rectify this situation—and this is where the concept of “Redemption” enters in. De 9 Business Under Your TRADE NAME Corporate names, corporately colored names, trade names, marks, trademarks, and service marks are private property of someone, and all can be claimed as such. Government accepted custody of the name (property) when the newborn was registered via the original birth record/document. The straw man was “bom on the first document emitted by government that referenced the name, if not on the original record/document itself ‘Sometimes the initial document is the Social Security card; sometimes it is a “CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH." There are literally dozens of variations of the birth certificate, as harmless as “Hospital” birth certificate and as profound as “Department of Commerce” and even “Federal Security Agency’ birth certificates. However, because everything about you is notated/registered/assignedilisted/vested in the name of, and accessed via, the straw man’s TRADE NAME, all property is considered the straw man’s property for purposes of acting » See “The Curse of Co-Suretyship” Section 3 for details. 8! Wards of court: Infants and persons of unsound mind. Black’s 4°. ® Parens patriae: (Latin “parent of his or her country"] The state regarded as a sovereign; the state in its capacity as provider of protection to those unable to care for themselves. Black's 7 See “The Curse of Co-Suretyship” Section 3 for details. % For a comprehensive treatment of the Social Security confidence game and the enormous liabilities of co- suretyship, see “The Curse of Co-Suretyship” in Section 3; must-reading for anyone with a Social Security card. % The legal definition of the word “birth” in Black’s 1" accommodates both the animated life of the newborn baby and the statutory creation of the straw-man TRADE NAME: “Birth: The act of being born or wholly brought into separate existence.” Maintaining Fiscal Integrity Page 16 of 36 1718 out the charade that anyone other than the state owns anything. However superficial this policy may be in terms of what actually transpires when a citizen finds himself in one of Big Brother's shakedowns, it is nonetheless an essential public relations tool for maintaining order within the flock as individual sheep are cornered and shorn. In terms of finance, commerce, and law, the entire planet actually functions in a mirror- image world of reality, anchored by private money that represents liability—not substance— i.e, Federal Reserve Notes, “FRNs.” We all live in a corporate bubble, literally the “Federal Reserve/IMF Plantation.” Government, a bankrupt front and sham entity for the Federal Reserve/IMF creditors, has no other way of doing business with you and managing the accounting ledgers other than by using the name of the artificial person contrived from your true name set in capital letters/abbreviated: True name, initial letters only capitalized = de jure™”/solvent/sovereign/flesh-and- blood/American Citizen/creditor ALL-CAPS/abbreviated TRADE NAME. = de facto" /bankrupt/subject/ink-on-paper! "citizen of the United States"/debtor Under the current, Paradigm,” there is no other way the industrial community can do business with you®”—and that is all itis: business/commerce. Your TRADE NAME is the name by which all of your products and services are identified and known in commerce. Trademarks Trademark is defined as: “A word, phrase, logo, or other graphic symbol used by a manufacturer or seller to dis its product or products from those of others. ¢ The main purpose of a trademark to guarantee a product’s genuineness. In effect, the trademark is the commercial substitute for one’s signature.... In its broadest sense, the term trademark includes a servicemark. — Often shortened to mark...” Black’s 7" Your true name cannot be classified as a ‘word, phrase, logo, or other graphic symbol” because it is constructed in accordance with the rules of English grammar. Your true name corrupted into an all-capital-etters format, however, eminently qualifies as a ‘word, phrase, logo, or other graphic symbol” and also a “commercial substitute for one’s signature,” because such an assemblage/concoction of letters cannot be defined/classified in any other way. The ALL-CAPS realm is a corporate realm and none other. ‘Common-law trade-mark is defined as: “One appropriated under common-law rules, regardless of statutes.” Black’s 4", 5. The ownership of all property isin the State; individual so-called ownership is only by virtue of government, ice. law amounting to mere user; and use must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the necessities of the State.” See Senate Document 43, 73° Congress, 1" Session in Glossary. 8 De jure: Of right; legitimate; lawful; by right and just ttle. In this sense it is the opposite of de facto. % De facto: This phrase is used to characterize an officer, a government, a past action, ora state of affairs which ‘must be accepted forall practical purposes, bu is illegal or ilegtimat. ® Paradigm: Any patter or example; model “ For documentary proof ofthis fat from the Federal Reserve, see “How to Sign Your Signature Without Liability” on page 315 in Section 10, Handling Presentments. Page 17 of 36 Maintaining Fiscal IntegrityThis is why you need not consult statutory law and secure approval from any governmental agency in, appropriating (claiming) and enforcing a common-law copyright on your trademark,*' ie, your "TRADE NAME.” Your services (labor) are delivered, billed, and paid for via this trademark/servicemark, which encompasses everything about you in the world of commerce because it is via that entity that commercial interface is achieved. When we lost the gold-backed currency we lost personal accountability and took on corporate limited liability; we lost the capability for extinguishing (terminating) a debt with substance (gold), and took on the mechanism for merely discharging a debt (placing the debt in limbo/suspension) with privately owned liability instruments (FRNs). Your TRADE NAME/trademark is your ticket for doing business with the modern, bankrupt industrial community, and uniquely identifies all products and services brought into existence by your hand. Your only real shortcoming was that you were unaware that your TRADE NAME/trademark was just that. You have been conducting your life as though you were dealing with other true-name, sovereign men and women, when in actuality both you and the people you have been dealing with have been operating via a camouflaged, corporately colored, artificial-person TRADE NAME trafficking in privately owned, valueless Federal Reserve Notes.” The reason that all industrial- ‘community computers have only “all-caps capability” for displaying the names of customers should now be clear. Sovereignty® “The Federal Reserve is not an agency of Government. It is a private banking monopoly... The policies of the monarch are always those of his creditors." Congressman John R. Rarick, Congressional Record, February 1, 1971 The dilemma of operating in today’s political environment pans out like this: almost every government in existence has been bankrupted by the same, small tribe of Luciferian shysters, and the notion of a trustworthy, principled, and self-determined politico is a subject reserved for the history books. As Congressman Rarick so astutely pointed out 30 years ago, the actual sovereigns are the creditors in finance/commerce, not the national puppets promoted on TV and in the newspapers. The disinformation circus run by the media (also a controlled monopoly of the Money Power) is an indispensable component of the global con because the Federal Reserve creditors are so few in number they could easily be l The use of trade-marks is as old as commerce itself. The conventional trade-mark is a part of what is called ‘the symbolism of commerce” (Browne on Trade-marks, Second Edition, Sections 1, 26).” Ruhstrat v. The People of the State of Illinois, 185 Ill 133; 57 N.E. 41. © The proclaimed “value” of Federal Reserve Notes, FRNS,” is their so-called “purchasing power,” which amounts to nothing more than people's collective lack of awareness of the con. For a very brief period in history FRNs could be redeemed for lawful money, but that facility vanished with the lawful money. FRNS can no longer be redeemed for anything of value (including the debased, token metallic coins in circulation). People have confidence that FRNS will continue being accepted in exchange for items of substance, so people keep accepting FRNs in exchange for the goods and services they offer. The only “value” of a FRN is its prospect for being accepted by the next guy in exchange for the goods and services he is selling. FRNs are fiat (by decree) money issued by the holders of the monopoly on the medium of exchange, and penalties for their use are enforced via military and quasi-military measures. See Secretary in Glossary. Sovereignty: Supreme dominion, authority, or rule, Black's 7%. “Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for itis the author and source of law...”. Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356; 6 S.Ct. 1064 (1886). © Although others may exist, Congressman Ron Paul from Texas is the only contemporary DC politician that your authors are aware of who is an exception re this characterization. Maintaining Fiscal Integrity Page 18 of 36 1920 exterminated—so they believe—if identified by even a small segment of the population. People must be made fo believe that governmental leaders are acting autonomously, with the best interests of the people at heart, if the scam has any chance of enduring. When a sovereign borrows/accepts credit, he/she takes on a creditor, and the creditor inherits supreme claim over the sovereign’s realm. The “laws” of the U.S. Government are the policies of the Federal Reserve/IMF creditors—offically, corporately, legally, and otherwise.®° Politicians are now even called “policy-makers,” instead of just their original (spurious) moniker, “lawmakers.” “Public policy” is the watchword and credo of all U.S. political and judicial (legal) undertakings. The creditors dictate over the full spectrum of governmental activity in America with an iron fist—from the highest office in the land, all the way down into a governmental activity as apparently mundane as “parking tickets” (leading source of revenue for all major, and many smaller, American municipalities). A sovereign is the author and source of all law in his own realm, a subject of no one. If the creditor is the one who sets the policy (makes the laws) of the monarch, it is easily discernible that the real sovereign is the creditor of the U.S. Government, not the smiling politician chirping sound bites and performing for the camera. How does one get established as a creditor/sovereign and become the author and source of all law with which one is associated? Answer: By becoming the sole source and arbiter of all terms and conditions of every private, consensual contract under which one “does business” with Big Brother, and all others, as well. This is an apparently tall order at first glance, but realistically attainable if equipped with the right knowledge. Consensual Contracts ‘A member of the sovereign constituency is guaranteed many rights under the Constitution of the United States of America, 1787. Possibly the most significant paramount right is that of contracting with whomever one desires and, in such event, that any obligations associated therewith shall not be impaired by any outside (third) party. The most widespread, debilitating malady currently afflicting nearly all sovereigns in America is the proclivity for capitulating when pressured by one of Big Brother's operatives, e.g. attorneys, judges, traffic cops, IRS agents, efc., and consenting and doing business under whatever terms said operative dictates. This affliction is contracted in a number of ways, one of which is through ignorance of the true nature of modern government, ie. a for-profit, insolvent, commercial undertaking. Having left the realm of a de jure political operation “of, by, and for the People" upon incorporation in 1871,°° all governmental business in America today is strictly private, confirmed in Clearfield Trust Co. v. United States (318 U.S. 363; 63 S.Ct. 573 (1943): © All USS. “law” is copyrighted property of the following British corporations: the Thompson Group, LLC, LTD, with offices located in Montreal, Quebec, Canada owns, inter alia: West Publishing Company; Barclays West Group: Baneroft Whitney; Clark Bordman, Callaghan; Legal Solutions; Rutter Group; Warren, Gorham & Lamont; Lawyer's Coop: Reed Elsevier owns, inter aia: Lexis; Deerings Codes. It has also been confirmed that Black's Law Dictionary is copyrighted British law. The US. Goverment incorporated asa for-profit commercial enterprise in the Legislative Act of February 21, 1871, Foryefirst Congress, Session Ill, Chapter 62, page 419, and chartered a Federal company entitled “United States,” i.e. “United States [1871],” a/k/a “US Inc.,” a “Commercial Agency” originally designated as “Washington, Page 19 of 36 Maintaining Fiscal Integrity“Governments descend to the level of a mere corporation and take on the character of a private citizen [as an issuer of private, corporate, commercial paper, i.e. securities... For purposes of suit, such corporations and entities are regarded as an entity entirely separate from government.” ‘When an American sovereign is approached by any of the numerous kinds of government revenue agents acting on behalf of the Federal Reserve creditors, the contact is for the purpose of collecting debf” (Federal Reserve Notes = debt), not lawful money (gold and silver coin), and not for anything as far-fetched as securing the noble ideals espoused in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution, and otherwise generally associated with “the American way of life."* When Big Brother's hatchet men come calling, they grant you full importance and respect for the sovereign that you are; i.e. for knowing that all your actions are self-determined, and for knowing exactly what you are doing and with whom you are doing it. You see, all government and quasi-governmental actors are just out there beating the bushes, scaring up business, and it is fully expected that you, the sovereign, are aware of this fact. Giving you an educatign on civics and current events (national bankruptcy, non-substance ‘commercial scrip® for currency, sham government, occupation by foreign military officers,”° unconscionable co-suretyship obligations” for the debt of the U.S. Government, efc.) is not part of their job description. Therefore, whenever you enter into an exchange with a government revenue officer you provide tacit consent and “execute” the contract established thereby (government's paramount objective—above all others—is acquisition of your wealth/money/property/assets). This phenomenon is no different than walking into a restaurant, examining the menu, and then placing an order when approached by the waitress: it is expected that you know what you are doing, that you know you are fully liable for the meal you order and consume, and that you will pay the bill when it arrives. The contract so formed is called an implied contract, and is based solely on consensual conduct, rather than express (written) i.e. if you place an order for food you also tacitly consent and accept full responsibility to pay for it. Government-type ‘waiters/waitresses” (code-enforcing revenue officers) do nothing but ‘work the shop” (patrol corporate US turf), looking for “customers” (unwary, trusting, sovereign American men and women) who “wander in’ (are not aware of the difference between de facto-"US"-statutory-law and de jure-"American’-common-law jurisdictions), and “write up orders” (cite/assess code infractions) which are eventually “paid for by the customer’ (extorted from the sovereign American) on his way out the door (in exchange for the sovereign American's freedom of locomotion). D.C," in accordance withthe so-called 14 Amendment, which the record indicates was never ratified [see Utah Supreme Court Cases, Dyett v Turmer, (1968) 439 P2d 266, 267; State v Phillips, (1975) 540 P 2d 936; as well as, Coleman v. Mille, 307 U.S. 448, 59 S. Ct 972; 28 Tulane Law Review, 22; 11 South Carolina Law Quarterly 484; Congressional Record, June 13, 1967, pp. 15641-15646] © Every single type of attempt at collecting money, including income tax liens, levies, and gamishments and even parking ticket fines, is legally classified as “debt colletion”~and falls under the Fair Debt Collection Practices ct—because the object of the collection (currency/*money”) consists strictly of debt instruments (Federal Reserve Notes). Collection of Federal Reserve Notes = Collection of deb. ‘~The land of the fre and the home of the brave” has the highest per-capita incarcerationvimprisonment rate of any country in the world, an astonishing fact. © Scrip: Paper money issued for temporary use in an emergency. * For details about foreign military occupation see Section 2, “The Truth About Esquirs.” ” See Section 3, “The Curse of Co-Suretyship,” for a complete explanation Maintaining Fiscal Integrity Page 20 of 36 2122 Before any contractual encounter commences—ie. before a code-enforcement operative evokes your unwitting execution of a contract—you are considered a sovereign being who can claim all protections afforded by the Constitution from the de jure government, one of which is contracting with whomever you wish. That the code-enforcer does not represent the de jure government is of no consequence. You are also accorded, as a sovereign, respect for having full understanding of what you are getting into and with whom you are dealing, and for contracting as you best see fi. That you decide on doing business with a municipal corporation in Chapter 11 Reorganization” is a bona fide, self-determined, commercial discretion that any businessman can reasonably make, and which is warmly welcomed by those soliciting the business. The major discrepancy in the transaction is that there is no meeting of the minds, a necessary component in any valid contract, but since you are a sovereign you are nevertheless respected for any bargains you enter into, however unconscionable they may be. This all takes place, of course, in the straw man’s TRADE NAME, but that is a rather moot point when one is faced with such finalities as garnishment of wages, eviction, and the business-end of a loaded .38-caliber police special. The system justifies abuse of the American sovereign, indeed thrives on it, because the sovereign was duped “fair and square"” into becoming a surety for the TRADE NAME. The Cure for “Volunteer-itis” If you are not absolutely certain that you are a sovereign, guess what: you are not a sovereign. True sovereignty begins between your ears, and is actualized when Big Brother's operatives determine that you are certain of exactly who you are and what you are doing. How does sovereignty manifest in today's world? As of March 9, 1933, life is no longer the same in America. Currently, sovereignty is evidenced when the everyday contracts one enters into cease being one-sided, unconscionable bargains with government agents, courts, taxmen, banks, and corporations, and uniformly begin being self-determined-, consensual-, clean-hands-, full-disclosure-type relationships where each party is fully informed of the actual terms of the contract—going into the contract—rather than discovering after the fact that one has been shanghaied. How does one cease being a victim of government, forced into complying with the terms of endless unconscionable contracts? By not consenting. “Not consenting’ means just that: declining participation in the communication; not approving of that which is proposed; not taking part in the dialogue; opting out from the very beginning/first instant, before anything can be construed as having contractually begun; refusing discussion of the merits of the situation; informing the code-enforcing revenue agent that you do not wish doing business with him/her, etc. The Supreme Court has consistently ruled that no one has any compulsion to enter into any contract with anyone else—including de facto municipal corporations like United States Inc. 7 “Mr. Speaker. We are now here in Chapter 11. Members of Congress are official trustees presiding over the {greatest reorganization of any bankrupt entity in world history, the U.S. Government...” Representative James A. Traficant Jr., Congressional Record, March 17, 1993, Vol. 33. See Chapter 11 Reorganization in Glossary. “All's fair in love and war,” and the U.S. Government officially and legally declared war on the American people ‘on March 9, 1933 in the Amendatory Act of March 9, 1933 to the Trading With the Enemy Act of October 6, 1917. For a detailed explanation of your official “enemy” status see Trading With The Enemy Act of October 6, 1917 in Glossary. Page 21 of 36 Maintaining Fiscal Integrityand its myriad de facto political subdivisions such as “STATE OF FLORIDA’ (rather than “Florida Republic’) and “COUNTY OF DALLAS" (rather than “Dallas County”). There is no requirement that anyone consent with anything; the word itself means mutual approval, and if you don't approve, no contract commences. There are probably many reasons why otherwise strong-willed Americans (shadow- sovereigns) routinely submit and go along with what is forced upon them: fear, misplaced trust, anticipated harm, feelings of guilt, efc. What is missed is that the revenue agent's first objective in demanding the money is forming a contract—a contract that can be justifiably enforced at a later time, if necessary. The judge/cop/attorey/taxmanietc. is raising revenue on behalf of his/her corporate employer, and more times than not sharing in the take.” It's just business, and anyone can refuse to do business with anyone else—even with government. Granted, this can be a terrifying experience if you are the object of something as life-threatening as a “routine traffic stop,” but you can still prevail despite the odds: Motorist: (Window rolled down about one inch; both hands on steering wheel) What seems to be the problem, officer? Policeman: Would you please roll down your window a litle farther? Motorist: How can | help you, officer? Policeman: _ License and registration, please. Motorist: do not consent to this conversation. Policeman: | said, ‘license and registration,” now. Motorist: J. do not consent to this conversation. Policeman: (Placing his hand on his service revolver) /f you don’t hand over your license and registration right now I'm gonna drag you out of that car and take you to jail Motorist: (Rolling down window, smiling) Oh, well, in that case that’s an entirely different matter. Since you are using color (pretense) of law and threatening me with bodily harm and forcing me into doing business with you against my will, | am happy fo cooperate under duress. Here is my license and registration. May I have one of your business cards, please? (Policeman hands over a business card.) And here is a copy of the published Copyright Notice”® setting the terms of the consensual contract for unauthorized use of my common-law-copyrighted property. My name is copyrighted under common law and the fee for % The term “booty” is legally defined as “The capture of personal property by a public enemy on land, in contradistinction to prize, which isa capture of such property at sea... The right to booty belongs to the sovereign; but sometimes the right of the sovereign, or of the public, is transferred to the solders, to encourage them...” Bouvier’s law Dictionary, Eighth Edition (1914). Legally speaking, at least in accordance with the Amendatory Act of March 9, 1933 to the Trading With the Enemy Act of October 6, 1917, Judges and IRS agents are public enemies (Gee public enemy in Glossary) of the American sovereign constituency (American men and women), soldiers in service of foreign masters, and, appropriately, share handsomely in the booty/plunder they capture in the course of their duties. Iudges administer and enforce copyrighted law of British corporations exclusively (see bar in Glossary), and IRS, officially disclaimed as an agency of the United States Government by the United States Attorney (see Internal Revenue Serviee in Glossary), is domiciled in Puerto Rico under the Secretary of the ‘Treasury of Puerto Rico (sce Secretary in Giossary). See booty in Glossary for details. For the exact text of such a Copyright Notice, see “Copyright Notice” in the Practical portion ofthis manual Maintaining Fiscal Integrity Page 22 of 36 2324 its use is fairly steep ($500,000.00 per occurrence}, so you might want to look over the terms of the consensual contract that you would be entering into by writing my copyrighted property on any piece of paper. Policeman: What the hell are you talking about? Motorist: |. do not wish to do business with you, officer, but if you insist on it then | have an obligation to inform you of the fees associated with the use of my name, which is copyrighted. Should you decide that you would like to do business with me and accept the obligation for payment of the fees for unauthorized use of my copyrighted property then | will send you a bill, which is payable in full within 10 days of the date | send it. The terms of the contract stipulate that you pledge all your tangible and intangible property and interest in property as security for payment of the debt you incur for the unauthorized use of my name. If you do not pay within the 10-day period then legal title for all your property transfers to me and | am free to take possession of it and dispose of it as | see fit, in order to recover the costs you incurred through the unauthorized use of my name, my copyrighted property. If you will give me your home address | will bill you at home, rather than at the stationhouse. Policeman: _/ never heard this one before. Is this some kind of joke? Motorist: No, sir. This is extremely serious. My published copyright notice is also filed with the county recorder. That contract you have in your hands is official public record. Here is a certified copy of the filing. What | am saying is no secret and no joke. | do not wish to do business with you, but if you insist and force me into it | will cooperate—but you will be liable for the unauthorized-use fees for the use of my copyrighted property. Since you have threatened me with bodily harm | am very willing to cooperate under duress. At this point the choice is entirely yours. What would you like to do? Policeman: Have a nice day. So long. Wow. What just happened? The revenue agent (officer) for the insolvent municipal corporation (government) put on a show of force and attempted to coerce the sovereign (motorist) into “voluntarily” entering—and thereby accepting financial responsibility for—a commercial contract (traffic ticket) that the officer intended on generating. The con never got off the ground because the motorist never accepted any communication from the officer Until the issue of duress was established (thereby voiding any contract formed thereupon’®), adroitly establishing, on the motorist’s terms, the parameters of the non-violent, consensual contract for the officer's unauthorized use of the common-law-copyrighted TRADE NAME. The cop then decided against doing business with the motorist. This is an example, however visceral,”” of what “eliminating one-sided, unconscionable bargains with government actors" means. Please note, however, this example has not been included here as a tacit recommendation that the reader undertake this strategy if confronted by a policeman in a traffic stop—though the above is an entirely plausible 75For the four other factors sufficient for voiding any contract see contract in Glossary. ” Visceral: Pertaining to the viscera (the internal organs of the body, as the stomach, lungs, hear, efc.); instinctive ‘or emotional Page 23 of 36 Maintaining Fiscal Integrityexchange. When the reader fully absorbs the knowledge available in this volume, he/she will be fully capable of making his/her own decisions about what should be said, and how it should be said, if confronted by code-enforcement-type actors/revenue agents both in person and in writing. When someone realizes his/her creditor/sovereign standing, all confusion evaporates and he/she has knowingness and certainty of what should be said and done in any circumstance. The above sample dialogue has been provided only because it is a vivid, easily understood illustration of how people can avoid being coerced into doing business with Big Brother at any level of confrontation. Re the issue of copyright infringement: there is really no problem with people using copyrighted property—unless they use it for commercial gain,’ i.e. making money through the use of the private property without the copyright holder's authorization. As addressed elsewhere in this manual, all demands for payment constitute an issue of public currency. Remember: there is no substance money in circulation. Until 1933, Federal Reserve Notes could be redeemed in “lawful money of the United States,” meaning that Federal Reserve Notes never were, and are still not, lawful money. Having left the gold standard, we are now on the “promise to pay” standard. A promise fo pay now creates “money,” and is what funds your mortgage, auto loan, credit card purchases, and every other kind of “loan” you take out (including traffic tickets). A promise to pay is a negotiable instrument (“money”) and is defined at UCC 3-104. The traffic cop in the above example intended on “taking out a loan” in the name of the motorist's straw man’s TRADE NAME by extracting the motorist’s promise to (appear and then) pay, thus saddling him with the bill as surety for the TRADE NAME. The Copyright Notice short-circuits anyone from using your TRADE NAME for unauthorized commercial gain,”* the primary objective of virtually every single government on the face of the earth. Consent = Contract Had the motorist even rolled down the window upon the officer's opening statement he would have formed a damning contract with the officer. Two timeless and universal maxims of law are “Contract makes the law,” and “Offer + Acceptance = Contract.” The motorist's acceptance offcompliance with any offer/order from the officer—before establishing the fact of duress—finalizes a consensual (mutually approved) contract between the two whereby the motorist has “decided” that he will do business with the officer on the officer's terms, thereby providing the officer with justification for the use of any “necessary” violence in carrying out any duties associated with the contract (expropriating revenue). When one party—anyone—approaches another party seeking cooperation, information, etc. and the approached-party cooperates/provides information, the approaching party is automatically in the driver's seat and is calling the shots; i. his offers of communication are being accepted and acted upon. Police and other such professional provocateurs, especially judges, are experts in inducing cooperation and participation both through the threat of violence/incarceration and the use of deceitful communication techniques whereby the prey is tricked into entering the “contract” before becoming aware that any contract has ™ Title 17 United States Code, Chapter 1, Section 107 (statutory law) lists fair uses of copyrighted material that do ‘ot constitute copyright infringement. None of the fair uses includes commercial gain. See copyrights in Glossary. ® What is not scared off with the Copyright Notice can be crushed with either of a couple of new documents, revealed in the Practical portion of this manual, that identify the transgressing party by name and set the terms of the ‘consensual contract. Maintaining Fiscal Integrity Page 24 of 36 2526 been formed.” The pretexts used by Big Brother's henchmen for slyly establishing “contracts” with unwitting “customers” are many; the object of all such cons, however, is always the same: the victim-citizen’s wealth (money, property, assets). Code-enforcement-type actors are seeking the slightest measure of justification for carrying out their agenda. Nearly all of them know that consent is required every step of the way, though many will arrogantly storm ahead without it, thinking they are above the law. They may be above statutory law/code but no one is above the Articles of the Uniform Commercial Code governing private, consensual contracts. A unique aspect of consensual contracts is that the agreed-upon terms may be privately enforced (true commercial law) because there is no controversy/dispute needful of resolution by a third party (udge/court). The UCC is pre-judicial and non-judicial. That is why the creditor/motorist in the above example could begin seizing certain property registered in the officer's TRADE NAME following the officer's default on payment of the obligation after having been given the opportunity to back out of the contract, and after being properly invoiced—because it is so stated in the consensual contract (both the Copyright Notice and subsequent, formal contract that the creditor/motorist would send the officer if he were issued a citation). The officer would have consensually entered the contract if, after having been fully noticed of its terms, he did not fully, formally, and officially withdraw and delete/erase/destroy all traces of the motorist's copyrighted property brought into existence by him (and possibly even surrender all original documents—written, electronic, and taped—and all copies thereof, containing both the policeman’s signature and the motorist's TRADE NAME—depending on the severity of the terms of the contract set by the motorist). Creditor = Sovereign In modem global society, there are few truly sovereign jurisdictions where outside creditors, (Federal Reserve/IMF) do not have final say-so over that domain and everything in it. When anyone can dictate the terms of a contract with any government's code-enforcement personnel, that party is the creditor in the matter and a sovereign by definition. This is an inescapable fact because, based on the negative-valuefiability aspect of the currency, all such purported “valuable consideration,” e.g. FRNs (all FRNs are borrowed into existence and represent debtliability only), there is, for all intents and purposes, no other way of actualizing political sovereignty on this planet at this time. The sole possible exception might be using overwhelming military force, but any such undertaking is rare and short-lived because the same, small group behind the Federal Reserve/IMF consortium dictates over the armed forces of all major powers of the world, including United Nations, from the top. These fiends own/control all official media of exchange (currencies) and foreclosed on all governments of any stature and installed their own talking heads decades/centuries ago. Therefore, the fullness of your own political power/autonomy/sovereignty is determined solely by your personal abilities in dealing with government front men who attempt to engage you in contract at the behest of their masters, the currency/government owners/ creditors, for the purpose of expropriating your wealth, assets, and resources without exchanging anything of value. *© This phenomenon is evidenced nowhere more clearly than in contemporary American courtrooms when a judge threatens a “patriot-type” with contempt if he continues bringing up the issue of constitutional rights. Technically speaking, a traffic citation recipient (shadow-sovereign), for example, abandons the Constitution in favor of the Vehicle Code the instant he forks over his driver's license and begins doing business with a traffic cop—long before entering the courtroom, Page 25 of 36 Maintaining Fiscal IntegritySovereign political power is wielded when a would-be commercial invader/marauder withdraws and abandons his/her assault on your property/freedom based on the liabilities involved in doing business with you. When you can enforce a private consensual contract against members of the corporate government of the country you live in, despite the fact of being their declared enemy in war, you have indeed demonstrated sovereignty as well as it can be demonstrated. The real game is not in being legally detached from all commercial intercourse in society; the real game is being actively engaged in any and all desirable socialicommercial exchanges in life, just not being penalized/punished solely because one is a participant—the unfortunate status quo for most folks in America at this time. Taking Control of the TRADE NAME. Whereas the Copyright Notice officially establishes legal title re the TRADE NAME under common law and sets forth the terms of the consensual contract for its unauthorized use, the UCC is what is used for enforcing the terms of the contract. Even though the Copyright Notice does not depend on the UCC for its validity and enforceability, its provisions are written in strict accordance with UCC guidelines for facilitating easy and thorough non- judicial foreclosure proceedings on any who would attempt commercial gain at your expense through unauthorized use of your TRADE NAME. However, the paperwork-aspect of dealing with assaults/attacks on your freedom/property will not be taken up here, but rather under “Handling Presentments” in the Practical portion of this manual, “What's good for the goose is good for the gander.” if government agents, prosecutors, judges, attorneys, police, taxmen, etc. can freely engage your ens-legis, artifcial-person, straw-man TRADE NAME in business, then so can you. That their computers are rigged for listing account names in ALL-CAPITAL LETTERS only—a practice falling outside both the bounds of English grammar and the prescriptions of law—when such could just as easily be programmed for writing in English, is conclusive evidence that a different game is being played than the one advertised. Every conceivable roadblock for deflecting general comprehension of this most ingenious of subterfuges has been meticulously installed down through the centuries, with unimaginably complex safeguards for keeping even lower-level operatives in the dark. Pleading innocence and claiming helplessness based on feigned, archaic, computer-programming limitations,®" however, will no longer wash as an excuse from Big Brother's front men. Besides copyrighting the TRADE NAME under common law, the most important objective is establishing an equivalent claim under the aegis of the UCC. Since you are a different party than the ens-legis TRADE NAME, you may do business with it if you desire, and you can also obtain official acknowledgment of the contract from a government agency: the UCC. filing office. The following series of documents has been painstakingly developed and formulated for maximal protection of this contractual relationship, thereby preventing any third party from intervening and impairing the private contract. "' The National Security Agency’s modem “Echelon” computerized global electronic surveillance system, with installations in Yakima, (Washington, USA), Wailhopai (New Zealand), Geralton (Australia), Hong Kong, and Morwenstow (UK), employing Cray supercomputers capable of executing a billion transactions a second, taps into the system of Intelsat satellites and currently tracks—in real rime—all fax, telex, Itemet, email, and long-distance telephone traffic worldwide, using verbal/electronic word-recognition technology re key “trigger” words and intercepting/monitoring all such traffic. Governments, fronts for their masters, the Federal Reserve/IMF cabal, are in business strictly for extorting money from the constituency, and no expense is spared in ensuring thatthe flock is properly fleeced. If the accounting and computer systems are set up ina certain way, then that is what guarantees maximum profit, The lame, “That's just the way our computers are set up [ALL-CAPS mode]” is a hackneyed ruse that will oly work on those who stil believe that the government is here for the purpose of helping people. Maintaining Fiscal Integrity Page 26 of 36 2728 The Private Agreement Contractual Basis of the Relationship The document that establishes the contractual relationship between you, the living, breathing man/woman as the creditor, and the TRADE NAME, the corporately colored, ens- legis, artificial-person straw man as the debtor, is called the “Private Agreement.” As a Redemptor, the only requirement for forming this contract is the personal certainty that you are not the TRADE NAME and that the TRADE NAME is a bona fide legal entity, separate and distinct from you. The Private Agreement is a bargain of the parties in fact and qualifies as an “agreement” under the Code at UCC 1-102(3). A sample, two-page Private Agreement for the fictitious character “John Henry Doe” and his straw man, “JOHN HENRY DOE,” is provided in the Practical section, and should be studied for full understanding of the nature of this particular type of creditor-debtor relationship and why such an agreementicontract is entirely legitimate. Your Private Agreement is just that, private, and should never be filed in the UCC filing office nor shared with any adversary. This document is strictly between you and your straw man and forms the lawful basis of your contractual relationship with each other. As a member of the sovereign constituency, the Constitution provides that "No State shall...pass any...Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts..." Your contract with this particular person (ens legis) is inviolate and shall remain so, unimpaired by any third party. ‘The Hold-Harmless and Indemnity Agreement ‘A Most Vital Component Despite all other incredibly positive aspects and elements of this process, if the following single point is not firmly and legally addressed and established the whole effort can be nullified. As mentioned earlier in this essay, Big Brother's entrapment scheme consists of: (1) corrupting a sovereign's true name into an all-capital-etter, ‘citizen of the United States” TRADE NAME, and then (2) conning the sovereign into unwittingly “voluntarily” contracting as surety for the TRADE NAME, concealing from the victim his/her new status, but also ruthlessly enforcing the new suretyship obligations without explanation. The Hold-harmless and Indemnity Agreement is a commercial/legal document wherein the TRADE-NAME debtor expressly covenants that: (1) the creditor is neither a surety nor an accommodation party (see UCC 3-419) for the debtor; and (2) the debtor holds harmless and indemnifies the creditor (you) from and against any and all claims, legal actions, orders, warrants, judgments, demands, liabilities, losses, depositions, summonses, lawsuits, costs, fines, liens, levies, penalties, damages, interests, and expenses both issued in and associated with the debtor's TRADE NAME. This issue is extremely profound when one realizes that a man/woman in jail awaiting arraignment (legal event where the defendant enters a plea before the magistrate) is not the actual defendant, but the surety for the defendant. Through more legal trickery, the unwary and unwitting surety is duped into unconscionably identifying himself/herself as “the defendant’ when addressed by the magistrate as such, and thereby ‘voluntarily’ and magically becomes the defendant from that point forward. In this type of exchange the © Redemptor: Latin. One who buys back or reclaims. For purposes of this manual, a Redemptor is one who legally establishes the supreme claim (recovers legal title) over his/her straw man’s TRADE NAME. Page 27 of 36 Maintaining Fiscal IntegrityTRADE NAME (actual defendant) is legally and technically a “dummy,” and serves as the legal object, at least on paper, until the surety associated therewith can be suckered into taking its place (see dummy in Glossary). The Hold-harmless and Indemnity Agreement is attached with the Security Agreement (described below) and made fully part thereof by inclusion in the filing process. A certified copy of a filed UCC Financing Statement referencing a Security Agreement and Hold- harmless and Indemnity Agreement, as set forth in this manual, constitutes documentary evidence that the ALL-CAPS party named in any indictment, warrant, etc. is not the flesh- and-blood man/woman being held in captivity, but rather the artificial TRADE NAME—a fact of enormous legal significance considering the techniques used by the judicial system in attracting new customers, generating repeat business, and marketing their services. The Security Agreement Creation of a Security Interest - Importance of the Common Law A Security Agreement is a consensual agreement whereby a debtor transfers a security interest in collateral in exchange for valuable consideration, and is defined as “an agreement that creates or provides for a security interest” (UCC 9-102(a)(73)). A security interest is an interest in property that secures payment/performance of an obligation (UCC. 1-102(37) and is the UCC-equivalent of a statutory lien; .¢. a security interest is pre-judicial and non-judicial Whereas the Private Agreement lays out the terms of the commercial agreement between the two parties and is “authenticated’—meaning signed, see UCC 1-102(39)—by each, the Security Agreement concerns only the debtor's pledge of property (the collateral) and, accordingly, need only be authenticated by the debtor (there is nothing preventing the secured party from signing as well, as is recommended herein) Following execution of the Security Agreement the creditor is known as the “secured party,” because he has the benefit of a security interest in the property of the debtor; ie. he is secured, in the event the debtor does not make payment/perform as agreed. A secured party is a party in whose favor a security interest is created/provided for under a Security ‘Agreement (UCC 9-102(a)(72)). When the Security Interest is Said to “Attach” Generally, the security interest “attaches” and becomes enforceable against the collateral the moment the following three requirements are satisfied: (1) there is an adequate Security Agreement between the parties describing the collateral; (2) the secured party (creditor) gives value™ of some kind; and (3) the debtor has rights (ownership) in the collateral/power to transfer rights in the collateral (see UCC 9-203(b)). There are, however, certain types of property for which attachment of the security interest can occur only in a certain way, other than filing—meaning that mere description of the collateral in the Security Agreement is not adequate. Re value: Because of the contemporary de facto monetary system, which functions in a mirror image of reality via debt-instruments (FRNS) that carry an inherent lability (interest, income tax), rather than lawful money (gold and silver coin) that caries no such liability, the UCC-definition of value (a most significant term in the UCC) is 180° out from the one found in conventional dictionaries. The bearing of this term on UCC matters is addressed in the Practical portion of this anal Maintaining Fiscal Integrity Page 28 of 36 2930 Types of Personal Property/Collateral There are two broad types of personal property classifications: tangible and intangible. Tangible property is categorized as “goods,” which means “all things that are movable when security interest attaches,” and includes fixtures (goods that are attached with real property), some standing timber, unborn animals, crops, manufactured homes, and computer programs embedded in goods so that the software is considered part of the goods (UCC 9-102(a)(44)). All goods are subcategorized at UCC 9-102(a), based on their use in the hands of the debtor, into one of the following types: (1) consumer goods; (2) farm products; (3) inventory; and (4) equipment. Intangible personal property, on the other hand, is classified by its characteristics—rather than how the debtor uses it—and consists of the following subcategories: (1) money; (2) investment property; (3) commercial tort claims; (4) letters of credit; (5) letter-of-credit rights; (6) chattel paper; (7) instruments; (8) deposit accounts; (9) accounts; (10) documents; and (11) general intangibles. There are many more sub-classifications of personal property,” but all fall within one of the above 15 categories of tangible and intangible property. Fortunately, the intricate distinctions of and between all the different kinds of personal property are less significant for our needs than they are for those of Big Brother's henchmen. We are merely bolstering our own position for maintaining commercial integrity; Big Brother's operatives are out there playing the game of swindling people's wealth, while attempting to avoid general detection as being engaged in such activity. Remember: the substitute-money (FRNs) system is designed expressly for generating defaults and bankruptcies, and channeling all private wealth into the hands of the owners of the governments. That is why it is so important that the Money Power have encrypted codes for keeping people in the dark about the law, remedy, and recourse; and blackmailed politicians in their pocket for passing Draconian,” totalitarian legislation to crush dissenters, thwart popular movements, and establish the global plantation. Perfecting (Legally Establishing) the Security Interest Perfection of the security interest after the security interest has attached is usually accomplished by the filing of a record known as a “UCC Financing Statement” in the UCC filing office (located in each state, District of Columbia, and most of the Territories) of the jurisdiction where the debtor is located (considered a resident). Perfection of the security interest by filing is available for most types of collateral, and is discussed further below. However, a few types of collateral require that the security interest be perfected by a method other than filing in the UCC filing office. Where a Means Other Than Filing is Required for Perfection A secured party can perfect a security interest in deposit accounts (demand, time, savings, and passbook accounts maintained with a bank), electronic chattel paper, investment property, and letter-of-credit rights only by control (UCC 9-314). A security interest in cerlificated securities in registered form can be perfected only by delivery into the ™ For a comprehensive list of every kind of personal property in existence, see “Collateral” section in Security ‘Agreement in the Practical portion of this manual * "Draconian: Pertaining to Draco (an archon [magistrate] of Athens about 621 B.C.; reputed author of the first Athenian written code of laws) or his laws; hence, inflexible; severe. Page 29 of 36 Maintaining Fiscal Integritypossession of the secured party (UCC 8-301). In the two foregoing methods of perfection, the security interest both attaches and is considered perfected upon control and delivery, respectively, with no filing requirement (UCC 9-203(b)(2)).*° Also, the filing of a financing statement against property covered under any certificate-of- title statute, as well as any other non-UCC central filing statute, is neither necessary nor effective for perfecting the security interest (see UCC 9-311). Certiicate-oftte statutes, for example, provide for perfection of the security interest directly on the face of the certificate (where secured party is called "Lien Holder’) and cover such things as automobiles, trailers, mobile homes, boats, farm tractors, and the like. Other federal statutes cover items such as aircraft, ships, trademarks, copyrights, and patents (common-law trademarks and copyrights are not governed by statute), and the filing of a financing statement is likewise ineffective for perfecting the security interest. The Redemptor is in a unique position to establish legal control of these types of property in that he can form another contract with the Debtor (e.g. storage contract) that must be satisfied before any lien holder can legally take possession ofisell the property (discussed in the Practical portion of this manual). Though the filing of a financing statement will perfect the security interest in all other subcategories of collateral, the Code also allows for perfection of the security interest by simple possession of the following types of collateral: negotiable documents, goods, instruments, money, tangible chattel paper, and certificated securities (see UCC 9-313). For this reason, the sample Security Agreement contained in this volume contains a statement wherein the debtor (TRADE NAME) acknowledges having delivered all such property into the possession of the secured party, thus covering these particular types of collateral by both filing and possession. Power of the Common Law Perfection by possession is a species of common-law lien” (i.e. non-statutory), and is effected with a simple statement at the top of the Security Agreement whereby the Debtor acknowledges delivery of all such property—in which a security interest can be perfected by possession—into the hands of the secured party (cited in previous paragraph), ‘A “common-law lien” is a species of lien defined as: “One known to or granted by the common law, as distinguished from statutory, equitable, and maritime liens.... It is a right extended to a person to retain that which is in his possession belonging to another, until the demand or charge of the person in possession is paid or satisfied.” Black's 4". Thus, you have the non-statutory, non-judicial, common-law origin of your claim of right of possession of the negotiable documents, goods, instruments, money, tangible chattel Paper, and certificated securities associated with your straw-man debtor's TRADE NAME. You have a common-law right for retaining possession of all such property until the obligation is satisfied (paid off) by the debtor (your straw man). Unless and until the obligation is satisfied in full, neither the straw man, nor anyone else, may lawfully remove a single piece of any of this property, ie. the collateral, that has been delivered into your (the secured party's) possession * For a complete list of exceptions where filing is not required for perfecting the security interest see UCC 9-310(b). Lien: A qualified right of property which a creditor has in or over specific property of his debtor, as security for the debt or charge or the performance of some act. Black's 1". Maintaining Fiscal Integrity Page 30 of 36 3132 The common law (see Glossary) is ancient and immutable, established by usage and custom since before recorded history. As strange as it may seem, the common law is still in full force and effect today. People just don't know it because they have been conned into believing it doesn’t exist (courtesy of the Federal-Reserve-Note-currency-monopoly scheme/cabal), and unwittingly consent (surrender privacy, grant jurisdiction) with virtually every single advance made against them by government and legal/commercial predators. in fact, our impossibly complex legal/udicial system and its billions of pages of codified law—including the UCC—has been developed over the last millennia by the creditors (moneychangers) for the express purpose of circumventing the protections afforded debtors by the common law (through lexical trickery, deceit, and obfuscation). The UCC is the culmination of these efforts. However, despite the universal power of the UCC, it is still junior in the face of the common law, as attested by this excerpt from one of the world's most respected authorities on the UCC, Anderson on the Uniform Commercial Code (1981): ““§1-103:6. Common Law. “The Code is ‘complementary’ to the common law which remains in force except where displaced by the Code. ‘In attempting to codify a large body of law it is almost impossible to anticipate all the factual situations that may arise. And it is for this reason that courts have adopted the principle of statutory construction that a statute will not be construed so as to overrule a principle of established common law, unless it is made plain by the act that such a change in the established law is intended.’ “A statute should be construed in harmony with the common law unless there is a clear legislative intent to abrogate the common law.” ‘Courts should be hesitant to improvise new remedies outside the already intricate scheme of Articles 3 and 4. However, this new cause of action would not interfere with that scheme but extend its principles to a situation not specifically foreseen by the drafters. The Code cannot be read to preclude a common law action." Whereas any item of property that is registered in a public registration scheme (ie. with a government agency) should be specifically identified in the Security Agreement, a description of all other personal/real property “is sufficient, whether or not it is specific, if it reasonably identifies what is described," with a few minor exceptions (UCC 9-108). A properly done Security Agreement is vital for maintaining fiscal integrity, ie. maintaining control of every single piece of property under the sun, moon, and stars that is considered private property of the TRADE NAME. Remember: the entire artificial-person, insolvent industrial community—functioning as it does solely on debt/iability-instruments (FRNs)—is incapable of establishing accounts and doing business with solvent, sovereign creditors; only bankrupt, subject debtors, such as your all-caps TRADE NAME and, of course, the surety (the shadow-sovereign in his inferior, degraded status) associated therewith. The sample Security Agreement provided in the Practical portion of this manual between John Henry Doe and JOHN HENRY DOE is certainly many hundreds, if not thousands, of man-hours in the making. Big Brother's “legal experts” will not be pleased with the soundness of this document. Full realization of its integrity and value will come only with eamest study unless, of course, one simply begins using it as needed and observes the response from the legal professionals that are confronted with it. * North Carolina Nat. Bank v McCarley & Co, (1977) 34 NC App 689 SE2d 583, 23 UCCRS 455. ® Starkey Constr. Inc. v Elcon Ine. (1970) 248 Ark 958, 978A, 457 SW2d 509, 7 UCCRS 923, % United Bank v Moss N. O. Nelson Co, (1979) 121 Ariz 438, 590 P2d 1384, 25 UCCRS 1113 * Girard Bank v Mt. Holly State Bank (1979, DC, NJ) 474 F Supp 1225, 26 UCCRS 1210. Page 31 of 36 Maintaining Fiscal IntegrityThe UGC Financing Statement Perfecting (Legally Establishing) the Security Interest by Filing Besides perfecting by control, delivery, and possession as described above, the secured party can perfect the security interest in most types of collateral by filing. The UCC filing office is a public venue for the registration of notice of private contracts. Since the only legal-tender currency in America is the private scrip of the Federal Reserve, all exchange of this so-called “money” has private implications. Hence the advent of the pre-judicial and non-judicial (i.e. private) UCC in 1954, and the UCC filing office, which keeps track of the ever-increasing stream of private contracts (registered therein by those in the know) wherein Federal Reserve Notes comprise the ‘valuable consideration” between the contracting parties. UCC filing offices provide a central forum where a creditor/secured party can receive official, governmental acknowledgment of the private contract between himself and a debtor, as well as establish seniority over other creditors based on date and time of filing. The foundational filing document is a simple form known as a “UCC Financing Statement,” formerly called a “UCC-1 Financing Statement’ (before July 1, 2001) containing: (1) the name of the debtor; (2) the name of the secured party; and (3) a sufficient indication of the property pledged by the debtor as collateral in the transaction (see UCC 9-502(a)) The financing statement only puts third parties on notice of the secured party's perfected security interest in the debtor's collateral; the Security Agreement is what creates the security interest, and must reasonably identify the collateral described. Whereas the financing statement can be general in its description of the collateral (see UCC 9-504(2)), the Security Agreement must meet certain requirements (see UCC 9-108), but the collateral indicated in the financing statement must jibe (match up) with the collateral described in the Security Agreement for the effectiveness of either in securing the collateral. /.e. the financing statement and Security Agreement are complementary components—neither is effective without the other. There is no requirement that a copy of the Security Agreement be included with the filing of the UCC Financing Statement, only a sufficient indication of the collateral covered (UCC 9- 502(a)(3)). The only requirement is that the Security Agreement be authenticated, i.e. signed, by the debtor (see UCC 9-203(b)(3)(A)). Public Filing vs. Privacy ‘When a secured party voluntarily makes public the intimate details of the private Security Agreement (between secured party and debtor) by including it in the filing of the financing statement in the UCC filing office—where anyone can easily obtain the information simply by paying for it—he/she foregoes any privacy protections afforded under common law and the Fourth Article of Amendment of the Constitution. There is no compulsion for making public the private contractual relationship between secured party and debtor. Therefore, it is recommended that the Security Agreement be only accurately identified in the UCC Financing Statement, and not filed along with it. ® The financing statement must cover the collateral described in the Security Agreement for valid perfection of the security interest by filing. If the Security Agreement does not describe the collateral indicated in the financing statement, perfection cannot not occur via filing because no security interest ever attached re the collateral in question, Maintaining Fiscal Integrity Page 32 of 36 3334 Here is a real-life example, from a December 31, 2001 article in the obituary section of the Los Angeles Times (p. B11) on the late lan Hamilton, revealing the liabilities that come with voluntarily placing private information in the public record. Hamilton had created notoriety for himself by writing an unauthorized biography on J.D. Salinger, called “J.D. Salinger, A Writing Life." Salinger opposed publication of the book for several reasons, but the only line of attack available was in suing for Hamilton's use of Salinger’s common-law-copyrighted material for commercial gain, i.e. insertion of about 70 of Salinger’s private letters (written to publishers, editors, and friends between 1939 and 1962) in the book. Here is a portion of the artic! ‘The biographer and publisher won the first round when a New York federal judge ruled “Hamilton’s book cannot be dismissed as an act of commercial voyeurism or snooping into a private being’s private life for commercial gain. It is a serious, well-researched history of a man who through his own literary accomplishments has become a figure of enormous public interest. “‘Hamilton's use of Salinger’s copyrighted material is minimal and insubstantial,’ the judge continued in his 33-page decision, which was seen as a victory for the 1“ Amendment, ‘[and] does not exploit or appropriate the literary value of Salinger’s letters.” “But in early 1987, a federal appellate judge overturned that decision and banned publication of the letters. The U.S. Supreme Court upheld the ban, “Biography Revised After Court Feud “Both writers, as it turned out, won some and lost some. Salinger won his goal to keep his letters out of the biography. But thanks to his civil suit, the letters became part of the public record, more accessible than ever.” “Hamilton recouped, excising the letters, but revising the biography to include insights gleaned from the bitter court feud. He published ‘In Search of J.D. Salinger’ in 1988...” Salinger’s private, common-law copyrighted material was just that—until, that is, Salinger voluntarily made it part of the public record by entering it into the lawsuit. Salinger successfully stopped publication of Hamilton's original book (because it contained the letters, Salinger’s common-law copyrighted property), but officially placed into the public domain the very information he wished kept confidential. Though the actual letters themselves were not used in Hamilton's second book, all the information contained within the letters was now in the public realm, fully accessible and available for anyone's use, including Hamilton's. Noteworthy points: (1) a common-law copyright is a supreme claim; and (2) voluntary surrender of information is a waiver of privacy and security protections afforded by Article IV of the Constitution. However, there are many more ways of surrendering one’s privacy/ sovereignty than anything as extreme as a court case and, like J.D. Salinger, nearly every sovereign American man and woman repeatedly and inadvertently does this throughout his/her life on a regular basis.°° Any degree of agreement with the advances of an aggressor constitutes acceptance of an offer, and forms a contract. Something as innocent as leaving the front door of your house (and likewise, the door of your car) unlocked admits and grants jurisdiction. Even responding with a policeman’s demands for communication through a locked door of your house can form a contract and justify destroying the door and coming in anyway (cuphemistically called “dynamic entry”). Responding with any request for information of any kind—no matter how slight—from a code-enforcement agenUoffier forms an unconscionable contract that can worsen very quickly. By consensually participating in the seemingly most harmless of conversations with any type of investigator (even Page 33 of 36 ‘Maintaining Fiscal IntegrityThe sample Security Agreement in this handbook is designed for keeping private as much information as possible and need not be publicly filed along with the financing statement; merely authenticated (signed) by the debtor. This Security Agreement is also believed legally impregnable by third parties—and a Redemptor who understands and knows the proper use of this document can begin to enjoy the profound benefits associated with its use. Financing statement is defined as: “...a record or records composed of an initial financing statement and any filed record relating to the initial financing statement” (UCC 9-102(a)(39)). Modifications, changes, and adjustments of the original financing statement are implemented with what is called a "UCC Financing Statement Amendment,” formerly called a UCC-3" (before July 1, 2001) in most jurisdictions, and a "UCC-2" in others. As revealed in the definition of financing statement above, any subsequent, related UCC Financing Statement Amendment filed qualifies as *...any filed record relating to the initial financing statement’—i.e. any amendment is absorbed by, and automatically becomes part of, the original financing statement. Recap Publishing a notice of common-law copyright re the straw man's trade-name/trade-mark establishes common-law control of the TRADE NAME, ie. the debtor in the relationship. Filing at the county recorder’s office further solidifies the ownership of the common-law copyright. The foundational contractual document between debtor and creditor is called the Private Agreement, and evidences the commercial agreement and the rights and duties by and between the parties in the mutually beneficial (consensual) commercial transaction. The debtor indemnifies the creditor in the Hold-harmless and Indemnity Agreement and the legal distinction between the two is made clear. The creditor establishes a bona fide claim, called a security interest (equivalent of a lien), in the property pledged by the debtor as collateral by giving valuable consideration. The Security Agreement is a document authenticated (minimally) by the debtor and contains a description of the collateral that secures the indebtedness in favor of the creditor, who is now called the secured party. When the debtor authenticates the Security Agreement the security interest aftaches and becomes enforceable. Except for a few types of collateral, when the secured party files a UCC Financing Statement and references an existing, authenticated Security Agreement therein, the secured party's security interest in the collateral is considered perfected (legally established). Generally, the earlier date and time of filing determines priority in the debtor's collateral between competing creditors. Any desired changes in a financing statement are effected using a UCC Financing Statement Amendment, which becomes part of the original financing statement upon filing. ‘over the telephone) you are putting yourself into the line of fire. How important is it that you prove what a nice, ‘cooperative guy you are? Any information about you collected by government and code-enforcement personnel can and will be used against you at the first possible instant. The sole purpose for collecting information in the first place is the extraction of wealth and the infliction of control. Never unnecessarily voluntarily publicly reveal anything about yourself with Big Brother. Maintaining Fiscal Integrity Page 34 of 36 3536 Why Revised Article 97 ‘As near as is discernible, the primary aim of the new Article 9, which deals with Secured Transactions, is the establishment of wholesale methods for foreclosing on a defaulting debtor's property (the collateral) without using the courts; i.e. the high-speed transfer of wealth (yours) into the hands of the Money Power and its minions. Even the UCC itself, it appears, has been formulated as an entirely new system for circumventing the ancient protections in a debtor's property (collateral in a transaction) afforded by possession under the common law.** The UCC, and now Revised Article 9," have introduced sophisticated methods for obtaining the debtor's consent and agreement concerning disposition of the collateral in event of default at the time the contract is formed. This means fewer headaches for your friendly credit-lender (bank) in seizing the property of victim-debtors as the defaults roll in, an inexorable eventuality under the current financial scheme® (non- substance debt-currency). In accordance with Revised Article 9, contemporary commercial contracts, mortgages, loan agreements, credit applications, etc. have also been cleverly formulated for obtaining the borrower's consent for converting all the debtor's “after-acquired” (after execution of the contract) property into collateral, but without the borrower's awareness of the fact, and then foreclosing on/seizing such property upon default without any need for a court order. People who enter into such contracts without a Security Agreement (against their TRADE NAME) firmly in place have no protection over property acquired after entering into a loan agreement should they default—and remember: the monetary system is expressly designed to create defaults in loan transactions so the owners of the system can “legally” expropriate the victim's property without arousing suspicion of foul play. ‘A major character flaw of modern Americans in general (that the entire UCC is designed to prey upon) is their propensity for accepting "loans" of credit (‘something for nothing”) and living beyond their means. The take of the credit-lending vampires would be significantly diminished if people stopped asking for hand-outs (borrowing, using credit) and began surviving strictly through their own efforts and living within their means. This might mean a temporary reduction in standard of living, but at least one would be on solid ground financially, living within reality, and free of the inherent fear of default, foreclosure, and financial ruin that is part and parcel with “keeping up with the Joneses.” The system cannot easily dominate those who do not borrow. Some wise words from William Shakespeare's Hamlet appearing in the front of this book are re-quoted here: “Neither a borrower nor a lender be: For loan oft loses both itself and friend, And borrowing dulls the edge of husbandry.” % «Possessi -tenths of the law.” % Expect revisions in Article 3 (Negotiable Instruments) and Article 4 (Bank Deposits and Collections) before 2010. * Defaults and bankruptcies are a mathematical certainty in a credit-money system. When money is loaned into circulation, only the principal amount is created. Any payments of interest must come from the amount loaned out, the principal. It is easly seen that paying off both principal and interest is a mathematical impossibility because the total money in circulation consists only of the principal amount loaned: e.g. a loan of 10 credit-units with an annual interest rate of 10% requires a pay-off, after one year, of 11 credit-units—but there are only 10 credit-units in existence. If interest payments were made for 10 consecutive years (payments totaling 10 credit-units), the money supply would vanish—but the principal amount would still be owed. The only way of satisfying the requirement of ‘making interest payments yet maintaining an adequate supply of currency in circulation is through borrowing—an gyer-worsening debt scenario (the “National Debt” is owed to the Federal Reserve Bank). *" Husbandry (OE hus house + bonda freeholder): Economy; thrift. Shakespeare Lexicon and Quotation Dictionary. Page 35 of 36 Maintaining Fiscal IntegrityBenefiting from the UCC and Revised Article 9 The complexity of today’s multifaceted judicial, taxation, financial, and political systems and the breadth and depth of collusion and complicity within and amongst their ranks cannot be exaggerated. Management personnel in each, beginning at the bottom and going all the way up, know that continued financial gain is predicated solely on the establishment of commercial accounts in people's mirror-image, artificial-person, all-capital-letters TRADE NAME, and the execution of billing, collection, and foreclosure procedures against said name. Experience with actors at all levels in each of the above sectors has revealed that all are familiar with the nature of the game, and the higher the level, the more knowledgeable about ensuring its perpetuation. Operatives within the system, each an integral cog in the revenue-extortion conveyor belt, are generally afforded virtual, if not complete, immunity by the Powers That Be for crimes committed “in the line of duty” (judges could not operate without immunity). In case you do not know it already, the only time an out-of-control bureau-rat will “reform” and change his/her ways is when faced with the possibility of personal liability/loss/damage/etc. Heretofore, there have been few solutions for bringing about such results. The essential difference between those who “work” in modern government and those who work in the private sector is that the latter must, for the sake of survival, produce a valuable productideliver a valuable service that someone else will voluntarily exchange money! something of value for. Generally, government and other code-enforcement types (IRS, for one, is not part of government—see Glossary) are insulated/exempted from this otherwise most basic requirement for survival in today's society, living instead off wealth extorted from others who actually do the work and produce articles/services of value. Modem governments, using valueless, Federal Reserve/IMF scrip as the exclusive medium of exchange, are sanctimonious, self-protecting, self-aggrandizing, parasitic, bankrupt, commercial front operations for their shyster-creditor masters. Offered herein are simple procedures for using the same techniques against those who would deceitfully subjugate you and enrich themselves courtesy of your labor and misplaced trust. The self-preservation process depends on your awareness of (1) your True Name and TRADE NAME as legal entities (artificial persons) separate and distinct from you; and (2) your common-law right to be compensated for the use of your private property,” and the methods afforded by the UCC for enforcing this right. A reminder of how things can actually be, if enough people stop consenting with tyranny in any form: “...We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. ‘That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness...” Declaration of Independence, 1776. (Underline and bold emphasis added) %* “Property may not be taken by government...even for public advantage or welfare, without just compensation.” Louisville Bank v. Radford, 295US. 555, 601, 602; United States v. Butler, 297 U.S. 1; Railroad Retirement Board y. Alton R. Co., 295 US. 330. ‘Maintaining Fiscal Integrity Page 36 of 36 37Section 2 The Truth About Esquires Undressing the U.S. Judicial System40 The Truth About Esquires Undressing the U.S. Judicial System Probably the most fundamental, foundational datum that must be confronted by today's student of the law, if such student has any hope of achieving ongoing success in the application of knowledge of law, is that all law—and this statement includes every genre of codified law in existence, capped off by the Uniform Commercial Code—has been stealthily and artfully converted into private, corporate policy, and that the administrators of this corporate policy are none other than actors within and without the insolvent (bankrupt) commercial enterprise known as “United States,” and its creditors, the Federal Reserve! International Monetary Fund syndicate. Governments use /aws; corporations use policy. This is one reason why the term, ‘public policy,” has replaced its predecessor, “public law,” in common legal parlance, the news media, and elsewhere You may have wondered why the term “United States” in the previous paragraph is not preceded by the word “the.” “The United States" is a solecism’ institutionalized by constant use over a long period of time.® There is nothing plural about the contemporary use of the term, "United States.” United States is a singular proper noun, and correct usage does not include the antecedent definite article the. United States is a corporate trade name, like General Motors, and identifies a corporation,’ albeit federal and municipal, but a corporation nevertheless. Just as “General Motors” does not imply a plural number of "motors" that are somehow ‘general’ in nature, United States does not imply a plural number of “states” that are somehow “united.” Just as proper English does not include “the Canada,” “the Finland," “the Egypt,” and the like in common parlance, it likewise does not include “the United States’—and the implication of a plural number of states slyly and injuriously implants an erroneous notion in the mind of readers/listeners. Just as “the State of Great Britain” appears in the Declaration of Independence (1776), and “the State of Israel” is mentioned daily in the news media, “the State of United States” is far more accurate an identifier for what is erroneously conveyed by use of the solecism, “the United States.” United States,* the proper recital of the name, identifies the for-profit, bankrupt, commercial enterprise incorporated on February 21, 1871 in Washington, DC," presently managed by the receiver in bankruptcy, Secretary of the Treasury of Puerto Rico,” a/k/a/ Secretary of the Treasury.” * Solecism: An ungrammatical combination of words in a sentence. 2 “From 1776 to 1789 the United States were a confederation; after 1789 it was a federal nation.” Excerpted from the definition of federal in: A Standard Dictionary of the English Language, Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1903. >The U.S. Government incorporated as a for-profit, commercial enterprise in the Legislative Act of February 21, 1871, Forty-first Congress, Session III, Chapter 62, p. 419, and chartered a Federal company entitled “United States,” ie, “United States [1871],” ak/e “US Inc.,” a “Commercial Agency” originally designated as “Washington, D.C,” in accordance with the so-called 14" Amendment, which the record indicates was never ratified [see Utah Supreme Court Cases, Dyett v Turner, (1968) 439 P2d 266, 267; State v Phillips, (1975) 540 P 2d 936; as well as Coleman v. Miller, 307 U.S. 448, 59 S. Ct, 972; 28 Tulane Law Review, 22; 11 South Carolina Law Quarterly 484; Congressional Record, Sune 13, 1967, pp. 15641-15646] ““The United States government isa foreign corporation with respect to a state.” 19 Corpus Juris Secundum S41. 5 “Location of United States. The United States is located in the District of Columbia.” Uniform Commercial Code, “UCC,” Section 9-307(h), * Secretary of the Treasury of Puerto Rico was appointed receiver over bankrupt United States in Reorganization Plan No. 26 (1950), Title, United States Code, Section 903, Public Law 94-564 (Legislative History, p. $967). Secretary. ‘The Secretary of the Treasury of Puerto Rico.” Title 27, Code of Federal Regulations, Section 250.11. The title, “Secretary of the Treasury,” is a euphemistic abbreviation of the actual ttle, “Secretary ofthe Treasury of Puerto Rico,” also known simply as “Secretary” (see Seeretary in Glossary), Page | of 26 ‘The Truth About EsquiresA Most insidious Jurisdiction The following legal precept, however simple, reveals the source of more personal and international grief, misery, suffering, despair, chaos, and loss of life than can presently be imagined by nearly anyone outside the inner circle, and that is: “Payment (consideration) sets the form of law.” Le. the mode of payment in any particular transaction sets the applicable jurisdiction for resolution of any dispute/controversy arising out of any matter concerning that transaction. This unassuming little aphorism® points the way—for the serious student of history, politics, and economics—past all the highfalutin? “authorities,” and through the looking glass, and into the sprawling spectacle of the most pervasive and all-consuming confidence game in the history of the world. It transcends all national boundaries and establishes venue for the unqualified commercial conquest of mankind: the artificial, private, corporate “jurisdiction” of Federal Reserve Notes." All courtrooms in America today are commercial marketplaces dealing in matters bearing exclusively upon the private, commercial scrip'’ known as “Federal Reserve Notes." The notion of the ‘halls of justice” is an ancient fable. Today's courtrooms are impersonal businesses—under the jurisdiction of a foreign, occupying, military’? power—that are managed from the "bench" (from the Italian banca: bank) by merchant bankers called “judges” and “magistrates” who enforce private, copyrighted, corporate policy (known as code) wholly owned by British corporations."? The “business of the court” consists of admitting attorneys'* wishing “to conduct business,” and adjusting and balancing accounts between debtors and creditors transacting in Federal Reserve Notes, “FRN's,” who come before it and consent to have disputes resolved in this, America's modem judicial forum. Esquires Esquire, from Middle French escuier, esquire shield bearer, from Lower Latin scutarius, from the Latin scutum shield + arius -ary, is defined as: © Originally, a shield-bearer or armor-bearer, an attendant on a knight; in modern times, a title of dignity next in degree below knight and above gentleman. Webster's Revised Unabridged College Dictionary. (Underline emphasis added) * Aphorism: A short saying stating a general truth, * Highfalutin: Am. Slang, Pompous, bombastic. © Numerous Caribbean, Central American, and even South American countries have adopted the U.S. Dollar as their national currency. Foreign banks that keep Federal Reserve Notes on deposit are subject to all Federal Reserve regulations, examination, and disclosure requirements "" Scrip: Paper money issued for temporary use in an emergency. The Merriam-Webster Dictionary. " America is currently under military occupation by the conquering foreign creditors of the Federal Reserve/IMF ts garrison troops, the British esquires of the bench and the bar associations. The term mission statement is strictly a military designator and any organization with a mission statement is a military unit. All 15 bureaus of the Puerto Rico-based Department of the Treasury (including Internal Revenue Service, Securities and Exchange Commission, and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms), all state tax agencies, and all bar associations operate under a mission statement. Esquires (judges and attorneys) are military officers of the Crown (another front for Federal Reserve/IMF) carrying out the overall mission of the bar. Its ironic thatthe various branches ofthe United States military—the U.S. Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, and Coast Guard—do not tout a mission statement. © The Thompson Group, LLC, LTD, with offices located in Montreal, Quebec, Canada owns, among other things: West Publishing Company; Barclays West Group; Bancroft Whitney; Clark Bordman, Callaghan; Legal Solutions; Rutter Group; Warren, Gotham & Lamont; Lawyer's Coop; Reed Elsevier owns, inter alia: Lexis; Deerings Codes. Black’s Law Dictionary is copyrighted British law and, like all the rest, private, non-public-domain property. ‘Attorney: Strictly, one who is designated to transact business for another. Black's 7" ‘The Truth About Esquires Page 2 of 26 4142 © In English law. A title of dignity next above gentleman, and below knight. Dictionary, First Edition, 1891. (Underline emphasis added) Black’s Law © A man belonging to the higher order of English gentry, ranking immediately below a knight... Applied to various officers in the service of a king... Asa title accompanying a man's name... In the U.S. the title belongs officially to lawyers... The Oxford English Dictionary, 1971. (Underline emphasis added) “Dignity” and “nobility” are synonymous, interchangeable terms, and the Word Manipulators use each to deflect attention from the other whenever needed: the peerage, as the ies which constitute distinction of rank in civil society, according to the customs or laws of the country, that eminence or dignity which a man derives from birth or title conferred, and which places him in an order above common men...” Webster's 1828 Dictionary, hereinafter “Webster's 1828.” (Underline emphasis added) ‘© “Dignity. In English law. An honor; a title, station, or distinction of honor. Black's 1*. The state of being noble; an elevated title or position; a person holding an elevated title; a right to hold a title of nobility, which may be hereditary ot for life. Black's 7". Elevation; honorable place of rank or elevation; the rank or title of a nobleman.” Webster's 1828. As can be seen above, an esquire is a title-of-nobilty-holding shield-bearer for the King/ Queen of England and takes the lead against any with whom the Crown desires to engage in battle. Officially, all bench officers (bar-member judges and magistrates) and attorneys in ‘America are “esquires,” officers in service of the Crown; in legalicommercial terms, they are foreign-based merchants in commerce (see UCC"? 2-104) enforcing the private corporate policy of their British liege lords and employers"® against unruly Colonial belligerents (American “customers") who are deceived and coerced into using the commercial scrip “currency” of the private, foreign-owned Federal Reserve Bank (FRN's), and who also—out of ignorance, bewilderment, and the instinctive urge for survival—continually attempt avoidance, and sometimes even “unlawful” evasion, of the corporate policy (e.g. Internal Revenue Code) governing the “privilege” and “benefit” (albeit compelled) of using such. Today, all crimes, including murder, are classified, categorized, and addressed strictly as commercial/pecuniary"” charges by the militaristic merchants who own and operate the legal system, issue the codes, and dictate over government. This fact Is officially acknowledged at Title 27 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 72.11."° This single section of Title 27 alone confirms the undeniable supremacy and applicability of the UCC in all legal matters in every American courtroom, as well as others throughout the world. UCC: Uniform Commercial Code. "© Statutory Instrument “1997 No. 1778, SOCIAL SECURITY, The Social Security (United States of America) Order 1997, Made 22nd July 1997, Coming into force 1st September 1997 At the Court at Buckingham Palace, the 22nd day of July 1997, Present, The Queen's Most Excellent Majesty in Council...FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF ‘THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND: William Marsden (Americas Director, FCO), FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Timothy E. Deal, (Minister, Embassy of the Untied States of America)” For complete text: http:/www.hmso.gov.uk/legis htm, Pecuniary: Of or pertaining to money. See “Crime is Commerce” in Appendix. Start looking more closely atthe articles in the newspaper, especially in the Business section; it is increasingly common for hearing about criminal charges being “resolved” out of court, ie. vvia payment. Page 3 of 26 ‘The Truth About EsquiresDebunking the Mythical “License to Practice Law” Newspapers and television media chant incessantly about the so-called “license to practice law." Bar-association attorneys do not possess any such ‘license to practice law” but they are nevertheless accused of it in California Business & Professions Code. In what can only be hailed as lexical legerdemain (brilliance in the devious use of words) of the highest order, the code-encrypting esquires in government have successfully bamboozled even their own kind in convincing all of the existence of the almighty “license to practice law.” The following analysis should thoroughly disabuse"® anyone of any such misconception. Whereas the notion of a “license to practice law” is scarcely mentioned in state and federal codes, the requirements and parameters surrounding every other kind of license in existence are spelled out in mind-numbing detail (e.g. Vehicle Code, Internal Revenue Code, etc.). The sacred “license to practice law,” however, is as undefined and elusive as the wind: where it comes from; which agency of government issues it; whose signature is on the certification; how it is conferred; where one goes so he can see one of these things and examine it; what the tenor (duration, effective period) of the license is; what the cost of the license is—these and other intensely pertinent questions remain unanswered by the Codes that foist the implication of its existence upon us. Here is a front-row seat for observing the word-manipulating esquires—both in and out of government—in action. California Business & Professions Code, “Cal, B&P"—the 6000 series of which is also known as “The State Bar Act'—at Section 6002 is the solitary code section in all of California Code that proclaims that any such license was ever issued, but it does not also tell us which government agency issued it, and likewise where one can go to. see one of these things. Section 6125 of the same Code discusses the practice of law and bar membership: “6125. Necessity of Active Membership in State Bar. “No person shall practice law in California unless the person is an active member of the State Bar.” “6002. Members. “The members of the State Bar are all persons admitted and licensed to practice law in this State...” These two cites appear innocent enough, but a glaring outpoint is that they reference entirely different jurisdictions: § 6125 is applicable only in "California"; § 6125 pertains only “in this State.” California means the original, de jure California Republic as described in the 1849 California Constitution. In this State,”” however, per California Revenue & Taxation Code, means the de facto federal territory under control of District of Columbia, a/k/a “United States,” and expressly excludes the de jure California (California Republic). Whereas California has a sovereign constituency, i.e. flesh-and-blood men and women living on the land under the common law, in this state signifies the federal “State of California,” with its subject-‘citizen of the United States” persons existing under statute in an artificial realm. There is no other plausible, coherent explanation for not using the identical term in each Section. For this reason, and this reason alone, §§ 6125 and 6002 bear no meaningful relation with each other. "? Disabuse: To free from error, fallacy, or misconception. ® Per California Revenue & Taxation Code §§ 6017, 11205, 17018, and 23034, the terms "inthis state,” "this state,” and "State” are defined for tax jurisdiction purposes as “District of Columbia,” a/k/a "United States." ‘The Truth About Esquires Page 4 of 26 4344 Both Sections cite only “persons.” The only persons in California are corporations and other corporately colored entities (TRADE NAMES). Since the de jure California essentially disappeared from the legal scene with the arrival of the U.S. bankruptcy in 1933, § 6125's proclamation makes as much sense as the Vehicle Code asserting “No person shall drive an 18-wheeler on Route 66” unless that person is a member of the Teamsters Union." What is “The State Bar of California”? A potentially fatal discrepancy in both Sections cited above is that the entity named, ie. the *State Bar,” a/k/a “The State Bar of California,” does not legally exist. The California State Constitution, Article 6, Section 9, and the California State Bar Act, codified at Cal. B&P 6001, respectively, make the following proclamations: “SEC. 9. The State Bar of California is a public corporation.” “6001. The State Bar of California is a public corporation.” Al bona fide corporations, public and otherwise, must be registered with the secretary of state. The corporate seal promoted on the letterhead of the State Bar of California indeed bears an incorporation date of July 29, 1927, but the secretary of state's office informs this author that, per their records, State Bar of California, as a public corporation, does not exist (see "State Bar not a Registered Public Corporation” in Appendix for a printout of State Bar's missing listing as a public corporation in the California Secretary of State's online records of corporations). Speaking with twelve (12) different personnel at the headquarters of the State Bar in San Francisco—as high up as the Executive Director's office—no one can answer the following questions: ‘© What type (legal classification) of organization is the State Bar of California? * What is the significance of the alleged date of incorporation, July 29, 1927, on the corporate seal touted by the State Bar of California on their stationery? * Why does the State Bar of California advertise a corporate seal if the alleged corporation attached thereto is non-existent/defunct and unregistered? * Why is there no record of the State Bar of California as a public corporation at the secretary of state's office when both the State Bar Act (at Cal. B&P 6001) and the California State Constitution, by amendment (November 8, 1966), at Article 6, Section 9, specify that the State Bar of California is a public corporation? As of this writing (February 2002), the Office of the Executive Director of the State Bar of California is circulating a memo within State Bar offices that describes the nature of the organization for all employees. As quoted over the phone by a very helpful senior administrative assistant at the offices of the State Bar (who shall remain unnamed): “The State Bar of California is a constitutional agency in the judicial branch of State government, and the purpose of the State bar is to act as the administrative arm of the California Supreme Court in matters relating to the regulation of the legal profession. (Underline emphasis added) ® Route 66: Former undivided highway running between Chicago, Illinois and Santa Monica, California, officially decommissioned in 1985, Page 5 of 26 The Truth About EsquiresThe only problem with the above advisory memo is that “constitutional agency” is not how the Constitution and the State Bar Act (Cal. B&P 6001)—legislative acts that created the State Bar—identify State Bar of California; both specify that it is a public corporation, not a “constitutional agency.” Complicating matters, California Secretary of State refuses fo issue a ‘Certificate of Non- filing” ($5.00 fee) a standard form for any unregistered, non-fiing public corporation, for “State Bar of California,” claiming that the State-Bar public corporation was formed by statute (legislative act), and therefore not formed in accordance with the California Corporations Code, hence lack of statutory authority for Secretary of State to issue the certificate. State Bar of California is broadly and openly touted as a public corporation, but has cleverly exempted itself from registration (to conceal its books and records). Resolving the paradox” and revealing the utter deceit and criminal intent of the State Bar and the dissemblers® that created it, is the following obscure cite from 7 Corpus Juris Secundum 9: “In view of decision that creation of public corporations by special acts is prohibited by state constitution, state bar act creating state bar corporation as public corporation has no viability and designation of state bar_as ‘public corporation’ has no legal efficacy.” Bridegroom v. State Bar, 550 P.2d 1089, 27 Ariz.App. 47. (Underline and bold emphasis added) The State Bar Act creating the State Bar as a public corporation “has no viability,” and the public corporation formed thereby has “no legal efficacy’—but State Bar enjoys the best of both worlds anyway: an apparent agency of government, enjoying the power and protection of the state, including exemption from taxation, but in actuality a pirate institution without legal basis, a conglomerate of sycophantic flunkies (attorneys) at the beck and call of the judicial system (that enforces copyrighted law of British corporations), operating outside the bounds of law that the rest of us must contend with every day just to survive. How could we expect anything less from the “profession” whose very existence is predicated on the ‘ongoing ignorance of its victim-customers re its practices and policies. Bar Membership Section 6002 tells us "members of the State Bar are admitted and licensed to practice law.” Admitted into what? Licensed by whom? The word mastery of this simple proclamation in both satisfying the reader's perfunctory” inquisitiveness, yet firmly establishing ambiguity, boggles the mind. Reading these two Cal. B&P Sections, one might get the idea that State Bar members are the only ones who can ever obtain a “license to practice law.” However, because of the way Section 6002 is worded, non-members of the State Bar are not excluded from being ‘admitted and licensed to practice law in this State.” Similarly, as shown below, bar membership is a result of, i.e. follows, being “admitted and licensed to practice law in this state,” whereupon the admitted party is then granted membership in the State Bar and a bar card—not the other way around: “Generally, membership in a bar association is optional with the individual attorney, but where a unified or integrated state bar organization is established, membership and payment of dues may be required as conditions of practicing law in the state...” 7 Corpus Juris ‘Secundum 8, In re Gibson, 4 P.2d 643, 35 N.M. 550. (Underline emphasis added) ® Paradox: A statement that seems contrary to common sense and yet is perhaps true. ® Dissemble: To conceal or disguise one’s true nature, intentions, etc. so as to deceive. ™ Perfunctory: Done merely forthe sake of getting through; mechanical and without interest ‘The Truth About Esquires Page 6 of 26 4546 Cal. B&P §§ 6125 and 6002 are the only two code sections that bring bar-association attorneys into the realm of legitimacy. A recap of significant discrepancies: * Only State Bar members can practice law in de jure California, which was, for all practical purposes, disposed of on March 6, 1933—i.e. § 6125 is pure camouflage; * Though the media and courts would have us believe otherwise, non-State Bar members are not excluded from being “licensed to practice law in this State”; * State Bar members have been “licensed to practice law,” but when and where and how and by whom we are not told; and * California Business & Professions Code requires membership in a non- existent/defunct public corporation. The State Bar of California does not issue licenses—cannot issue licenses—because it is nothing more than a freewheeling, private trade union posing as agency of government. Quoting from a statement issued by Governor Pete Wilson's office in a May 30, 1998 article from the LA Times entitled “Wilson Suggests Changes to Let Bar Survive’: “The bar now ‘acts as a trade organization promoting the legal profession, while continuing to regulate and discipline attorneys—a dual responsibility that many of its own member attorneys call a conflict of interest,’ said a statement issued by Wilson’s office.” (Underline emphasis added) If the State Bar were indeed the source of the mysterious ‘license to practice law,” then it would be an absolutely indispensable component of the California State government (an impossibility), without which no attorney could be “licensed.” Proving the impotence of the State Bar of California and the falsity of the licensing myth associated with it, is the following article from the April 14, 1998 edition of the LA Times: “Beleaguered State Bar Faces Uncertain Fate — Agencies: It will begin going out of business as a result of Wilson veto unless Legislature acts quickly” “Critics two years ago launched a referendum on whether to abolish the bar, but with just over half the state’s lawyer’s voting, the bar survived. About 65% of the respondents ‘opposed dismantling it. “The bar has escaped other brushes with death. In 1985, the Legislature refused for several months to allow the bar association to collect dues because of its abysmal record in disciplining lawyers.” (Bold and Underline emphasis added) If the existence of the bar association hinges on an intemal vote of disgruntled “critics,” i.e. bar-association attorneys complaining about paying dues and disciplining themselves—and could have easily been abolished in 1985 and 1996—the State Bar of California can be dismissed as irrelevant as the source of any so-called “license to practice law." However, the apparent intent is to bring about the idea in the mind of the public that an attorney's bar card is his “license to practice law.” Regarding the conduct and professional standards of esquires, there is no state or federal regulatory agency in America governing such matters. Quoting Oceanside, California Republican Assemblyman Bill Morrow, who sponsored a bill for overhauling and shrinking the bar in 1998, in the same LA Times article immediately above: Page 7 of 26 ‘The Truth About Esquires“Morrow said that he is not worried that lawyer discipline will lapse. If no legislative breakthrough is reached by summer, the legislature will simply transfer lawyer discipline to the State Department of Consumer Affairs, the lawmaker said.” (Underline emphasis added) Bar associations function merely as labor unions, like the Teamsters. Just as membership in the Teamsters Union does not confer the privilege of driving, membership in the bar association likewise does not confer the privilege of practicing law. Rather, membership in the bar association is a result of being “admitted and licensed to practice law.” The notion that a bar association has any obligation to discipline its members is fantasy, and whatever ‘occurs is gratuitous. State bar associations cannot be very different than their parent, the ‘American Bar Association (a “voluntary membership association of attorneys” per their web site); each is one substantially nothing more than a union of local mercenaries (military personnel for hire) carrying a foreign title of nobility and operating under the aegis” of the Judicial system, which has a vested pecuniary interest in the proliferation of its members. “Attorneys at Law” Cal. B&P 6067 specifies that it is merely a “person"— not a “member of the State Bar’—that must have a certificate of his oath of office indorsed upon his/her license: “Every person on his admission shall take an oath to support the Constitution of the United Siates™ and the Constitution of the State of California,” and faithfully to discharge the duties of an attorney at law to the best of his knowledge and ability. A certificate of the oath shall be indorsed upon his license.” (Underline emphasis added) We are not told what is meant by “admission” in this Code Section (revealed below), but if the bar card were the so-called ‘license to practice law” then the above-referenced oath would be inscribed upon it in certificate-form and indorsed. No bar card—a credit-card sized piece of plastic—has any such indorsed certificate of oath of office upon it. The only text appearing on the bar card of the State Bar of California concerns annual union dues: “This certifies that the person whose name appears on this card has paid the annual fee required by statute.” Punctuating this whole matter, your authors are personally acquainted with more than one “practicing attorney at law” who is not a member of the bar. If such “attorneys at law” are “admitted and licensed to practice law in this State” (Cal. B&P 6002)—and do so—yet are not members of the bar association, upon exactly which “license” is their “oath to support the Constitution of the United States” indorsed? The Actual So-Called “License to Practice Law” The reason British esquires can practice law without a state-issued license in American courtrooms is that the courtrooms are no longer de jure government instrumentalities/ operations, but rather private, monopolized, commercial venues/marketplaces for enforcing the private, copyrighted, corporate policy (statutory law/code) of the owners of the codes Aegis: Shield; protection; patronage; sponsorship. % ‘The de facto “Constitution of the United States” (1871) represents the legislative democracy; the de jure “Constitution of the United States of America” (1787) represents a constitutional republic. ® ‘The 1849 California Constitution is the de jure Constitution of California; the post-US incorporation 1879 Constitution (containing no effective date) ofthe State of California is the de facto, federally colored constitution, ‘The Truth About Esquires Page 8 of 26 47and the FRN’s, as mentioned earlier. Possession of a bar membership card, as in any labor union, means only that a particular esquire has attained at least some degree of expertise and that his/her union dues are current. Nothing else. The answer for the above uncertainties apparently lies in California Business & Professions Code Section 6064, “Admission on examiner's certification; Admission certificate”: “Upon certification by the examining committee that_the applicant has fulfilled the requirements for admission to practice law, the Supreme Court may admit such applicant as an attorney at law in all the courts of this State and may direct an order to be entered upon its records to that effect. A certificate of admission thereupon shall be given to the applicant by the clerk of the court.” (Underline and Bold emphasis added) First of all, the fact that a separate body, “the examining committee,” must certify that an applicant “has fulfilled the requirements for admission to practice law’ is further evidence that simple bar membership does not confer a ‘license to practice law’—otherwise Section 6002 would be sufficient in itself, with no further requirement for being “licensed.” Regarding the true importance of the so-called “examining committee” referenced above in Section 6064: the chief justice of the Supreme Court can unilaterally overrule its decision and admit any applicant that has been rejected as unfitjunqualified. “Admission to practice law’ is controlled ultimately by the chief justice of the Supreme Court of the jurisdiction: “Supreme Court has inherent power and authority to admit an applicant to practice law in this State...despite unfavorable report upon such applicant by Board of Governors of State Bar.” (Underline emphasis added) Lacey, In re (1936) 11 CA2d 699, 81 P2d 935. “The authority of the Committee of Bar Examiners is limited to investigating and recommending for admission those applicants found by it to be of the prescribed standards. Only the Supreme Court has the plenary”* power to admit applicants who, in the opinion of the court, meet the prescribed test, whether or not the Committee agrees with the conclusion of the court.” Greene v. Zank (1984, 2d Dist) Cal App 3d 497, 204 Cal Rptr 770. (Underline emphasis added) Other sections of the Code reveal that the “license to practice law” follows “admission to practice law,” not membership in the bar-association: “6060.5. Neither the board, nor any committee authorized by it, shall require that applicants for admission to practice law in California pass different final bar examinations depending upon the manner or school in which they acquire their legal education. "6060. To be certified to the Supreme Court for admission and a license to practice law, a person who has not been admitted to practice law in a sister state...shall... (Bold and underline emphasis added) 6064.1. No person who advocates the overthrow of the Government of the United States or of this State by force, violence, or other unconstitutional means, shall be certified to the Supreme Court for admission and a license to practice law.” (Und and bold emphasis added) Plenary: Full in all respects or requisites; entre; complete; also, complete, as embracing all the parts or members. Page 9 of 26 ‘The Truth About Esquires 48‘A reablife example of the true nature of the so-called “license to practice law,” taken from a November 10, 2001 article in the LA Times entitled “Clinton Resigns From High Court Bar’: “*,..Former President Clinton hereby respectfully requests to resign from the bar of this court,’ his lawyer, David E. Kendall, said in a two-page letter to the high court’s clerk...” “Clinton's resignation from the Supreme Court bar will have little practical impact. Clinton has not practiced before the Supreme Court and was not expected to argue any cases in the future...” (Underline emphasis added) Clinton resigned only from the Supreme Court bar, and from no other bar. The former so- called ‘license to practice law’ in question is the certificate of admission issued by the British-esquire chief justice of the Supreme Court; just like the one issued in de facto State of California, where the chief justice has final say-so over who gets “licensed” (chief justice is the Supreme Court). Every other “license to practice law ” held by Clinton for doing business in all other courtrooms remains intact. The only possible “license to practice law,” the certificate of admission, does not fit the definition of “license” per se, but is a de facto license, as proven below, issued by the Supreme Court of the jurisdiction. ‘Source of the “License” and the British Title of Nobility Since the Code painstakingly avoids ever actually naming/identifying the imaginary “license to practice law,” we must look deeper to discover the true nature of the certificate of admission and why it is construed as a “license to practice law.” An underlying aspect of the certificate of admission—and likely the only reason we are ever even told of a “license to practice law'—is because it is the equivalent of the “right to practice law,” revealed at 7 Corpus Juris Secundum 4 (page 801) and the actual referenced case: “In this state, the right to practice law is conferred by letters-patent, issued under the great seal of the state by its chief executive... The right to practice law is a property right existing by virtue of...letters patent, from the state as the sovereign. 168 A. 229; 114 NJ. Eq. 68. (Underline and bold emphasis added) The word patent is defined as follows: ‘+ “L. a. Manifest or apparent to everybody; requiring no search to discover; conspicuous; evident; plain; as, the fraud was patent. 2. Covered or protected by letters patent; secured from interference by government protection... 3. Open for general inspection, as letters patent.... n. ...3. Law. A grant of any privilege, franchise, efc., made by sovereign authority.” A Standard Dictionary of the English Language, Funk & Wagnalls Company (1903). (Bold and Underline and emphasis added) + “L.A government protection to an inventor, securing to him for a specific time, the exclusive right of manufacturing, exploiting, using, and selling an invention; the right granted. 2, Hence, any official document securing right.” Funk & Wagnalls Standard Dictionary, International Edition (1958). (Bold and underline emphasis added) The true relationship between Crown and United States should be coming into focus: the source of a patent, as well as /etfers patent (described below), from the beginning has always been the sovereign, the Crown, the originator of this device. Because the Crown had a supreme need for disguising its commercial interests in America, while continuing to ‘The Truth About Esquires Page 10 of 26 4950 conduct business in the name of its straw-men’? esquires, the notion of a “sovereign” artificial person (United States), a so-called “sovereign state,” had to be concocted and introduced into the legal world. Officially proclaiming United States a “sovereign” thereby endowed the enterprise with a sense of legitimacy and propriety, while still controlling utterly, however, the destiny of the new corporation via its esquires. For esquires, the chain-of-command still runs to the Crown. [Historical Note: 24 of the 56 Founding Fathers—almost half—were king's esquires] The actual case cited from Corpus Juris Secundum above (168 A. 229; 114 N.J. Eq. 68.) sheds more light on this phenomenon: “In this state, the right to practice law is conferred by letters-patent, issued under the great seal of the state by its chief executive. In re Branch, supra. This has been the custom from the very beginning of the Province of New Jersey. In re Hahn, supra. So that attorneys-at- law in New Jersey are the holders of a franchise granted by the state, through the governor, by letters-patent, by the same authority as formerly was exercised by the British crown. 1 Pollock & Maitland's History of English Law 191. A franchise is a ‘royal privilege, or branch of the king's prerogative, subsisting in the hands of a subject.’ 2 BI. Com. 37. A special privilege conferred by government on individuals and which does not belong to the citizens of the country generally by common right. Ang. & A. Corp. P 4...” “Since the right to practice an ordinary calling, business or profession is property (State v. Chapman, supra), it follows that the right to practice a profession conferred by the state as a franchise by virtue of what was originally the king's prerogative, is a property right.” 168 A. 229; 114.NJ. Eq. 68. (Underline and bold emphasis added) Investigating letters patent, we find: ‘© “Hist. A document granting some right or privilege, issued under government seal but open to public inspection.” Black’s 7". (Bold and underline emphasis added) + “An instrument proceeding from the government, and conveying a right, authority, or grant to an individual...” Black's I". (Underline emphasis added) ‘© [From within the definition of letter:] “Letters patent, an open document under seal of the government, granting some special right, authority, privilege, or property, or conferring some titl A Standard Dictionary of the English Language, Funk & Wagnalls Company (1903). (Underline and bold emphasis added) No attorney can produce a valid, state-issued “license to practice law,” and no such “license” exists. However, there is such a thing as a “right to practice law,” which is a special property right and, as confirmed above within Corpus Juris Secundum, said right is granted by means of letters patent. The so-called “license to practice law’ can be none other than the letters-patent “certificate of admission’—a document that can only be construed as the fabled “license to practice law,” and then only covertly, by and within the judicial system. As confirmed in the dictionary-definition of letters patent immediately above, the British-esquire-run Supreme Court, in the granting of letters patent, tacitly confers the British title of nobility, Esquire. Attomeys at law are free to begin using their new title upon receipt of the certificate of admission. Bar membership is incidental (non- essential re the “right to practice law’), follows in the wake of the letters patent, and establishes a sham straw man between the judicial system and the people. ® Straw man. A “front”; a third party who is put up in name only to take part in a transaction, Black’s 6%. Page 11 of 26 ‘The Truth About EsquiresSince there is no requirement that an attorney at law identify himself as an esquire, there must be some other factor at play that induces such extraneous behavior: “Admission to the practice of law is membership in an ancient and honorable profession that has for its goal the furtherance of the administration of justice, and the attorney is an instrument for the achievement of such noble purpose.” McFarland v. George, App., 319 S.W.2d 662, (Bold and underline and emphasis added) “Profession includes much more than the mere management of the prosecution and the defense of litigated cases.” Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Wheeler, 73 Pa. Super. 164. “Accepting employment entails duty to courts and faithful performance of services.” 7 Corpus Juris Secundum 4, page 801. (Underline emphasis added) “One who is admitted to practice as attorney at law, both by virtue of his oath of office and customs and traditions of the legal profession, owes to the court the highest duty of fidelity.” 97 N.W. 2d 287; 255 Minn. 370 In re: Lord. (Underline and bold emphasis added) What better way of advertising one's true colors (‘military service,” per Merriam-Webster Dictionary}—re the source of one’s newfound power than by voluntarily affixing the addendum, (king's) "Esquire,” on the end of one’s name. British corporations have now copyrighted, and own, every type of Code within the entire U.S. judicial system (as cited in Footnote 13 on the second page of this treatise). The private policy of British corporations is being enforced in American courtrooms in the form of a property right bestowed upon a special class of ‘citizens’ who become British esquires.”” Black’s Law Dictionary is copyrighted British law. Whereas the bar association is presented as the supreme force in the legal realm, it is actually only a club of private henchmen under the control of the Supreme Court, which grants a special “property right" (to practice /aw) in letters patent disguised as “certificates of admission,” thereby covertly conferring the title of “esquire” upon recipients. The corrupt, unregistered, and illegitimate bar association dutifully slinks along behind the master— nevertheless a vital tool in the designs of the Legal Masters of the World—a storefront for deflecting public scrutiny and providing a semblance of piety” within the legal profession. Esquires carry out the business of the Crown, i.e. extraction of both participatory payments arising out of the original commercial joint venture between the Colonies and the Crown, and war reparations—called “war contributions” (see war contributions in Glossary)—from ‘American Colonial belligerents (you). The Fox Guards the Henhouse Besides the fact that all three branches of what passes for “government! in America— the legislative, judicial, and executive branches of bankrupt, de facto US Inc.—are run almost exclusively by personnel operating under a British title of nobility, every prosecuting attorney at every level of government operates in a manner that makes a mockery of the “separation of powers” doctrine. Under “Attorney & Client’ in Corpus Juris Secundum (1980) we have: % Ex-Mayor of New York Rudy Giuliani is the most recent recipient, but apparently the past many American presidents have each been honored with knighthood (“Sir ttle of nobility) bestowed by the Crown, " piety: Fidelity to natural obligations. ‘The Truth About Esquires Page 12 0f 26 5152 “His first duty is to the courts and the public, not to the client, and wherever his client conflict with those he owes as an officer of the court in the admi justice, the former must yield to the latter. The office of attorney is... vital to the well-being of, the court.... Attorneys as officers of court have duty to maintain respect due court which duty should exceed that imposed upon the public generally and which duty should not be looked upon lightly and cannot be shirked under the guise of representing interest of a party litigant. 7 Corpus Juris Secundum 4 (Bold and underline emphasis added) “Duty of attorney is to court if litigant client's interest threatens a state interest. 7 Corpus Juris Secundum 43. (Bold and underline emphasis added) “One who is admitted to practice as attorney at law, both by virtue of his oath of office and customs and traditions of the legal profession, owes to the court the highest duty of fidelity. 7 Corpus Juris Secundum 4, (Underline and bold emphasis added) “It is generally accepted that an attorney is an officer of the Court and, as such, an officer and arm of the state.” 7 Corpus Juris Secundum 4, Virgin Islands Bar Association v. Dench, D.C. Virgin Islands, 124 F. Supp. 257 (Underline and bold emphasis added) The internal memo from the Executive Director of the State Bar of California referenced earlier is in complete harmony with the above cites from Corpus Juris Secundum: “The State Bar of California is a constitutional agency in the judicial branch of State government, and the purpose of the State bar is to act as the administrative arm of the California Supreme Court in matters relating to the regulation of the legal profession. (Underline and bold emphasis added) ‘As abundantly shown above, the duties and obligations of bar-association attorneys lie with the court and the “public” (government interests), and never the client. “Clients” are fodder for the wealth-confiscation and freedom-usurpation activities of the court. Attorneys are elevated above others with a special property right and title of nobility and empowered with quasi-immunity to ensure that the courts get their daily ration of Code-ignorant “customers.” Prosecuting attorneys are, by definition, part of the executive branch, but because all attorneys are “officers of the court” and members of the judicial branch, prosecutors must first genuflect® for the judge—his/her lifeline in the marketplace—and second for the executive branch, which issues his/her paycheck. “While the attorney general is a part of the executive branch of government, as an attorney he is also an officer of this court. When he appears in court in a legal matter, he is acting as an attorney.” 255 Minn. 370; 97 N.W.2d 287. This factor confirms the most egregious™ conflict of interest in government today, in that a prosecuting attorney's first duty is drumming up business for the courtjudicial branch (private commercial enterprise enforcing policy of British corporations). This arrangement is a self-initiating business monopoly operating under the charade of government altruism, where the prosecuting attorney's actual agenda is pleasing the judge” and the judge's % Gemuflect: To bend the knee as an act of reverence or worship. ® Egregious: Notably or conspicuously bad; flagrant. As much as one-third of all court proceeds goes into a judge's retirement fund, a wartime practice described inthe 4efinition ofthe term booty: “The capture of personal property by a public enemy on land, in contradistintion to Page 13 of 26 ‘The Truth About Esquiresforeign masters by bringing in sacrificial client-victims from the “enemy camp" (Main Street, USA)—not in “standing guard as a sentinel of freedom" as a member of the executive branch and ensuring that justice prevails.°> This philosophy manifests for non-prosecuting attorneys, as well: at a 1999 private get- together, a junior of LA's former City Attorney, Gil Garcetti, revealed in conversation with an associate of your authors that his primary duty as “third-in-command’ at the city attorney's office was “generating new business for attomeys." The judicial system is a private business monopoly posing as an agency of government that dispenses justice and preserves and upholds the U.S. Constitution. Upon investigation, its actual agenda is found to be “herding unwary/unwitting victims into court for sacrifice at the judicial altar.” The judge-attorney Brotherhood deals in secret-clubhouse, members-only code words, language, and procedure specially formulated to ensure that non-insiders do not comprehend what is transpiring. There is an almost infinite number of legal trap doors, escape hatches, and secret diversionary techniques used for shunting knowledgeable customers when they get too close with the workings of the operation. The original, un-enacted 13" Article of Amendment of the Constitution reads as follows: “If any citizen of the United States shall Accept, claim, receive, or retain any title of nobility or honour, or shall without consent of Congress, accept and retain any present, pension, office, or emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince, or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of them.” (Bold emphasis added) The entire purpose of the Crown’s (England's) War of 1812 with America (despite having signed the Paris Peace Treaty only 29 years earlier) was the destruction of the official records containing the first 12 States’ approval of the new Article of Amendment, housed in the Library of Congress. Ratification by three-quarters of the 17 states was necessary before the Amendment could be enacted and Virginia was the only state that had not voted. The so-called War of 1812 was initiated before this could occur (although Virginia later passed the Amendment as proposed). Once the building and its contents were destroyed by fire the ‘war’ was over, the British withdrew, and members of Congress were pressured in various ways to retain only extant prohibitions® in the Constitution, which state merely that the U.S. Government cannot grant a ttle of nobility, and that “Consent of the Congress” is required to accept any such title. The moneychangers overseeing the Crown thereby arranged for the continuing, unfettered commercial conquest of America by stacking all three branches of government with de facto British military officers. Had the Library of Congress not been destroyed, we would have no British agents/esquires/attorneys holding political office in America—and no XIV ize, which is a capture of such property at sea... The right to booty belongs to the sovereign; but sometimes the right of the sovereign...is transferred to the soldiers, to encourage them...” Bouvier's 8°. © The supreme prosecuting attorney in America, the U.S. Attomey General, is also, per the 1994 U.S. Government ‘Manual (p. 390) ...the permanent representative to INTERPOL...” INTERPOL is the International Criminal Police Organization, a 169-member-nation intelligence-gathering/-dissemination group whose constitution requires that any such representative expatriate his/her citizenship, further identifying the foreign status of this particular esquire. *SNo Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kkind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.” The Constitution for the United States of America, Article I, Section 9, Clause 8. ‘The Truth About Esquires Page 14 of 26 5354 Amendment, no U.S. incorporation in 1871, no XVI Amendment, no Federal Reserve Act of 1913, no U.S. bankruptcy in 1933, no personal income tax, no $6-Trillon national debt, and no Social Security Ponzi scheme”—and numerous other social/economic/political calamities—all handiwork of the King’s esquires. Sugar-Coating the Deceit The reason Hollywood cranks out so many feel-good lawyer movies where the selfless, kindhearted, benevolent attomey is played by a box-office superstar, the reason there are 0 many attractive, popular actors in an ever-increasing number of engaging courtroom-, judge-, and attorey-related TV shows; the reason all judges carry a quasitttle of nobility, °? ie. ‘the Honorable...”; the reason the media carries on the charade disguising the true nature of bar associations and the phony “license to practice law,” efc. is to obliterate the truth and persuade the masses, via continuous bombardment with subliminal messages, that judges and attorneys are a swell bunch of patriotic guys and gals who take up for the little guy and work tirelessly for “truth, justice, and the American Way.” Such propaganda gushes forth with increasing frequency as required damage control for the devastating societal impact of the wholesale destruction of lives at the hands of esquires.” The entire operation is predicated on keeping victim-customers ignorant of the meaning of the secret code words and rituals employed in the process, an unfeeling, cold-blooded, reptilian mentality.“° The life of an esquire, i.e. all bench officers and all attorneys, is an ultra-deceitful, quasi- genocidal undertaking in charlatanism where a successful career is determined by the esquite’s efficiency in separating the esquire’s clients, and sometimes even adversaries of the esquire’s clients, from their wealth/freedom. Esquires deserve no sympathy from anyone because they play by a different set of rules than everyone else. Attorneys win only 50% of their cases, a mathematical fact, but a moot point because attorneys always get paid, win or lose. Whereas other professionals are paid based strictly on results and the quality of their work, attomeys collect their inflated fees in full even when they fail—and payment of attomey fees is enforced by the judicial system—conclusive proof of the inherently criminal nature of the U.S. judicial system and all its collaborators. After all, what is a criminal but someone in possession of a valuable commodity that was acquired without exchanging something else of value for it? Half of all fees collected by attorneys are obtained without fair exchange—not much different than extortion, ransom, and solicitation of bribes. The true nature of the Legal Brotherhood gets clearer and clearer: the judicial system enforces payment of legal fees by judicial decree—even when the attomey fails—so the attorney community will continue bringing “business” into the court. What other profession gets paid in full for complete failure? ® Ponzi scheme: (pon-zee). A fraudulent investment scheme in which money contributed by later investors generates artificially high dividends for the original investors, whose example attracts even larger investments. ‘Money from the new investors is used directly to repay or pay interest to old investors, usu, without any operation or revenue-producing activity other than the continual raising of new funds. This scheme takes from Charles Ponzi, ‘who in the late 1920's was convicted for fraudulent schemes he conducted in Boston. Black’s 78. For details on the true nature of Social Security see “The Curse of Co-Suretyship,” in Section 3 ofthis manual. % Judges are accorded official immunity because conducting business would be impossible without such a built-in exemption for crimes committed. The quasi-ttle of nobility, “The Honorable...” “His Honor,” etc., accorded judges is an absolute public relations necessity and a permanent attempt in convincing all that—at least according to the squires of the judicial system—the judge is honest, even if few, if any, of his/her customers/victims would concur. » The contemporary legal profession actually exerts a negative (parasitic) influence on the Gross National Product in that its functionaries ereate no value, but continuously siphon off enormous sums of wealth and money. “Better to be a mouse in the mouth of a cat than a man in the hands of an attorney.” Spanish proverb. Page 15 of 26 ‘The Truth About EsquiresMoney Motivation When the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, “FDCPA,” was enacted on September 20, 197 (Public Law 95-108) the Act exempted from its provisions ‘any attorney collecting a debt as an attorney on behalf of and in the name of a client.” Seizing on the obvious advantage (a debt collector could not threaten legal action, for example, but an exempted attorney could), the number of attorneys handling consumer collection accounts quickly surpassed the total number of lay" collectors in the entire industry. Representatives of a major national law firm, testifying in a hearing before a subcommittee of the U.S. Senate on May 25, 1983, estimated that in 1982 alone it received 365,471 consumer accounts for collection, representing a total dollar value of more than $355 million, roughly fen (10) times the volume collected by the average ACA (American Collectors Association) member agency, as determined by national survey. This law firm also testified that nearly 92% of the consumer collection accounts it handled that year did not involve legal action; i.e. no lawsuit was necessary for 92% of the money it collected. Quoting from the House Report (99-405 (1986)) from which the above is taken: “The application of several provisions of the Act to attorneys collecting debts are worthy of note. The restrictions of sections 804 and 805(b) on contacts with third parties [neighbors, employers] regarding a consumer's debt are intended to protect the privacy of consumers! financial affairs. These contacts are not legitimate collection practices and result in serious invasions of privacy, as well as the loss of jobs. The Committee discerns no reason to make any distinction based upon the identity of the debt collector.” (Underline emphasis added) Besides threatening the entire lay collection industry with extinction within five years of inception of the FOCPA, the practices of the debt-collecting esquires generated so much enmity*? in American consumers/voters that Congress was besieged with demands for help and, in 1986, officially removed the attorney exemption. As cited in the House Report, the original basis for the exemption was a belief that state bar associations would adequately police attorney violations, but the evidence revealed a different scenario: “..the main concern of state and local bar associations is not the protection of consumers, but the protection of lawyers.” Despite their setback with the FDCPA, attorneys still have a license for subterfuge, deception, and thievery, courtesy of the monopoly over the field of law held by the bench officers, another covin* of esquires. When you begin doing asset searches on judges and government attorneys, the magnitude of the con begins to come into focus. Many of these characters are fabulously wealthy, and a great many of them (especially judges) have transferred title of all real property from their name into the name of a trust. The potential of getting nailed under their own name for misdeeds (crimes) committed against an unending stream of unhappy “customers™* is certainly enough reason to take such measures. 4 Lay: Of or el of a particular subject. © Eamity: The spirit ofan enemy; hostility © Covin: A secret conspiracy or agreement between two or more persons to injure or defraud another. Black's 1% ‘A secret contrivance between two or more persons to defraud and prejudice another in his rights. Bouvier's 8°. «We always say that we have the most unhappy customers in the world,” he said. “They are either being sued or are defendants in a criminal case or are defendants in a family law case." Gerald Kippen, Los Angeles County ‘The Truth About Esquires Page 16 of 26 to the laity (the mass of people as distinct from those of a particular field); lacking knowledge 5556 Esquires are motivated by money, the lowest form of motivation, proven by the very nature of their profession: an exclusive cult*® with foreign allegiances whose members thrive on withholding vital information from clients, adversaries, and other marks (intended victims in a confidence game), and who will casually and callously trash the life of anyone for the sake of personal financial gain, depending utterly on the ignorance of victim-clients to perpetuate the con and stay in business. Based on firsthand knowledge and experience: the loftier the position, the more perfidious the esq Government-Esquire Debt Collectors Even though regular attorneys must comply with the FDCPA in the collection of debt, government-esquire debt collectors do not. Government officials, ie. U.S. Attorneys and Assistant U.S. Attorneys, are exempted from the Act and labor under no such restraints in conducting business. As mentioned earlier, all crime is commercial (Title 27, Code of Federal Regulations, Section 72.11), with a commercial (financial) charge attached therewith; and any occupational demand for money is classified as “debt collection.” Government-debt-collecting esquires bring in tremendous sums of cash for themselves and their masters, unhindered by the restrictions of the FDCPA. A revealing, related fact concerning debt-collection personnel at IRS: while government officials are expressly exempted from the FDCPA, IRS officials are not. Section 5.1.1.6 (01- 24-2001) of the Internal Revenue Manual reads as follows: “Fair Debt Collection Practices Act “IRC*’ 6304 requires the IRS to comply with certain sections of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). These deal with: ‘© “Contacts regarding unpaid tax, and “Harassment and abuse of taxpayers. “The law applies to contacts with all taxpayers, including corporations and partnerships. FIRS were an agency of the U.S. Government there would be no mention of the FDCPA in its manuals. IRS is not part of government,“* so IRS esquires are bound by the restraints of the FDCPA just like all other non-governmental debt collectors. Military Courtrooms The law of the flag tells us that the colors (flag) flown in any forum/on any vessel dictates the law form and jurisdiction under which that entity is conducting business. Original legislation describing the American Flag is found at Title 4 USC, Chapter 1, Sections 1, 2, and 3. Flags not meeting these exact specifications are expressly excluded as American flags. The flag that files in today’s courtrooms is not the American flag described in Title 4, Superior Cour’s Northeast District court administrator for 40+ years, as quoted in “Manager Keeps Order inthe Court” (LA Times, February 1, 2002). * Cult: A group of persons having an excessive interest in something; extravagant devotion to a person, cause, or thing, The Doubleday Dictionary For Home, School, and Office, 1975. “ Perfidious (Latin per through + fides faith): Characterized by or guilty of perfidy (treachery; faithlessness); treacherous; involving a breach of faith; contrary to loyalty and truth “7 IRC: Internal Revenue Code. “ IRS's two biggest expenses are postage and rent—but government agencies do not pay postage and rent. See Internal Revenue Service in Glossary for additional proof Page 17 of 26 ‘The Truth About Esquiresbut rather a gold-fringed,*® military flag of war enforcing the private, general equity, admiralty/maritime law of the same merchant bankers and shippers who swindled America’s gold® and bankrupted and conquered the U.S. Government between 1907 (Money Panic of 1907) and 1933 (depletion of gold stocks and repudiation of obligations, i.e. could not make good on promise for redeeming gold certificates = insolvency/bankruptcy). “Placing of fringe on the national flag, the dimensions of the flag, and arrangement of the stars are matters of detail not controlled by statute, but within the discretion of the president as commander-in-chief of the Army and Navy.” 34 Ops. Atty. Gen. 483 (1925). ‘American courtrooms are stacked with foreign military personnel (esquires), in quest of a military objective (mission statement of the bar association) doing battle with enemies (debtors) of the Crown (creditor) and extracting war reparations (‘war contributions"/taxes) from belligerents (American sureties*’) in the field (battleground/Colonies). By law, an} courtroom flying a military flag is a military courtroom/tribunal under martial-law rule, Admiralty is a unique jurisdiction in that it carries criminal penalties for civil offenses—the only jurisdiction where military might is employed to enforce private contracts. Under martial law the accused is guilty until proven innocent, and a judge (master of the ship/vessel) rules summarily in an “administrative” proceeding without a jury, as it is done in traffic and misdemeanor cases in America. In such matters the customer has two choices: (1) appear before a bench officer and attempt to prove himself innocent; (2) simply concede guilt and mail in the payment. Failure to convene a jury for felonies and certain other circumstances can make for too much bad publicity, and so is avoided. Conquest Through Commerce You may have wondered why China is on the mind of so many American politicians, and why actors within the U.S. Government have been such vocal and legislative champions of China's cause in obtaining “most favored nation” trading status and being allowed admittance into World Trade Organization (WTO). China, which represents the largest source of cheap labor in the world (China can undercut Mexican labor by as much as 90%), was bankrupted in 1933 along with America and every other noteworthy government at the time, and was thereafter converted into a communist state in 1949. The “mother lode of manpower” has now been successfully hamessed for dominating (by out-producing and undercutting the labor force of every nation in existence) the planetary economic free-for-all that quietly began upon China's entrance into the WTO. © See Army Regulation 840-10 and 260-10, 34 Ops. Atty. Gen. 83, and Presidential Executive Order 10834 of ‘August 21, 1959. Per Army Regulation, only in military courtrooms are such flags flown, % For an entertaining and insightful discourse on the theft of America’s gold, see Wizard of Oz, The in Glossary. ® Surety: A person who is primarily liable for the payment of another's debt or the performance of another's gbligation, Black's 7°. % A distinction exists between “martial-law rule” and “martial law.” Martial-law rule has been the normal operating condition in America since 1861, when rulership devolved into the hands ofthe “President of the United States” in his capacity as Commander-in-Chief of the military. Martial law, on the other hand, is a state of express, undisguised military rule, with troops in the street and the military serving as police, governing all civilian functions. Americans will know that the country is officially under full-fledged martial law if the president, in a televised address from the Oval Office, ever has a red-fringed flag displayed by his desk. ‘The Truth About Esquires Page 18 of 26 5758 The inevitable denouement? of the clandestine love affair between beltway commies and Chinese labor is portended™ nowhere more clearly than in an article from the January 27, 2002 edition of the LA Times ("Cranes Lift Upstart Above Competition,” p. C1): “SAN FRANCISCO—Beneath autumn skies, a freighter carrying four of the world’s largest container-cargo cranes glided into San Francisco Bay, squeezing under the Golden Gate Bridge en route to the docks of Oakland. “That day in the fall of 2000 was a spectacular, but not singular triumph for an upstart Chinese company that dominates manufacturing of the most important piece of maritime machinery other than ships...” “The story of ZPMC’s [Shanghai Zhenhua Port Machinery Co.'s] rise illustrates the gathering, and at times controversial, economic might of China as it dominates new sectors of global commerce...” “After being launched in 1992, ZPMC took just six years to become the leading maker of ship-to-shore cranes, and the company has remained at or near the top. “In U.S. ports, where the company sold dozens of towering cranes for $5 million to $7 million, the formula for success was simple: Bid low and build alliances. “Using its own Chinese labor and its own fleet of delivery ships to cut costs, ZPMC consistently underbid the competition by hundreds of thousands of dollars or more...” China’s role in the Chosen Masters’ attempted conquest of Earth is that of “the great equalizer,” i.e. the commercial force that amalgamates all competition into a homogenous mass of ineffectual workers and consumers—and the banker-front men in District of Columbia have spared no effort to ensure that China's needs receive top priority. Did you ever ask yourself how China (and Russia) ended up on the U.N. Security Council at its inception? Business as usual for the same gang that conceived (beginning in 1931 in New York City), organized, financed, precipitated, orchestrated, and dictated strategy and tactics for United Nations's® “coming out party,” World War Il.°° Article 1, Section 10, Clause 6 of the Constitution says, “No State shall...pass any...Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts.” Because treaties are “voluntarily entered-into international contracts'—and the obligation of contracts is inviolate—treaties take precedence over the Constitution by default, and we are hopelessly mired in the entanglements of the politica/military/ecological obligations that the DC-based executive superstructure has decided is good for us, /.e. enforcement of the will of its masters, the owners of the FRN’s. The global political landscape is changing—and it doesn't have as much to do with national boundaries as it does with the most common medium of Denouement: (da-nd0-man ) The final unraveling or solution of the plot of a play, novel, or short story; issue; ‘qutcome; any final issue or solution. + Portend: To give a sign or warning of beforehand. % As in the case of “United States,” “United Nations” is a singular proper noun, requiring an apostrophe-s for the possessive, “The primary objective behind instigation of WW II was establishment of United Nations, a centralized, global police force; a secondary objective was the utter decimation, depredation, and denigration of the German people and the complete commerciaV/fiscal subjugation of Germany (WW Part II, coming only 20 years after WW Part I, was ‘mandated because WW Part I had failed in establishing League of Nations). Page 19 of 26 ‘The Truth About Esquiresexchange.” Anywhere in the world you find FRN’s changing hands you will also find IRS. Why? IRS is a private, Puerto Rico-based, intelligence-gathering, accounting, and collection agency responsible for policing the travels of every single FRN in existence and penalizing/fining anyone that comes in contact with one of these things.” If such an unwitting recipient does not carry a U.S. passport, no problem: virtually every government on earth is bankrupt to the same bankers, so there is not too much concern about where the tax is collected. It all ends up in the coffers of the owners of the banking system. An Indispensable Tool of the Chosen Masters ‘A major turning point in the history of Western Civilization was the gory, one-sided Battle of Hastings in 1066 A.D., wherein a tranquil English society was forever transformed by an invasion of barbarians under the tyrant, William, Duke of Normandy (William the Conqueror), a pawn of the Chosen Masters. The most significant aspects of the conquest were those in the field of law: * Anglo-Saxons were stripped of rights and privileges they had enjoyed for 300 years; + An effective dictatorship was established, with Wiliam collectivizing the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government under his solitary control; and + Lastly, but possibly the most detrimental, long-term consequence of all, was the introduction of Norman French attorneys, who brought with them a new language that destabilized the fabric of society and made legal mincemeat of the defenseless Englishmen unlearned in the new French dialect™: “Law French. The corrupted form of the Norman French language that arose in England in the centuries after William the Conqueror invaded England in 1066 and that was used for several centuries as the primary language of the English legal system.” Black’s 7. All the foregoing are classic tactics and stratagems" of the Legal Masters of the World, a modus operandi that reappeared in America: + “The land of the free and the home of the brave” has more people in prison per capita than any other country (former rights and privileges are now crimes); *” FYE: There are three particular items that can be traded (bought and sold) only in Federal Reserve Notes: gold, oil, and medium-term notes (medium-term notes are Eurodollar-denominated bank debentures/obligations issued in face-value amounts of 10-, 25-, 50, and 100-Million U.S. Dollars with one-year and 10-year tenors. * More evidence that IRS is part of a foreign military occupation of the de jure States of the Union (under Secretary of the Treasury and Commissioner of Internal Revenue, both domiciled in Puerto Rico) is an affidavit signed by Russell K. Stewart upon his appointment as IRS attorney. This affidavit may be seen in Appendix under “IRS Appoints Apparent Communist as Attorney.” In his standard “Appointment Affidavit” for securing employment as an IRS attomey, Stewart lined out/deleted the portion of the affidavit stating that he was neither a subversive, nor a communist, nor a fascist, and that he was not a member of any organization that advocates the overthrow of “the constitutional form of Government of the United States.” The lined-out segments comprise approximately fifty percent (50%) of the affidavit. Stewart appears to be a subversive/communisV/fascist, and also appears to advocate overthrow of the American constitutional form of government, but IRS doesn’t have a problem with that. What is the purpose of the affidavit if it need not be sworn to? How many other IRS attorneys share Stewart’s philosophy? » J possible source of inspiration for Shakespeare's famous line: “The first thing we do, let's Kill all the lawyers.” The Second Part of King Henry the Sixth, Act IV, Scene 2. “ Stratagem: A maneuver designed to deceive or outwit an enemy in war; a deceptive scheme for obtaining an advantage. ‘The Truth About Esquires Page 20 of 26 5960 * Courtesy of the Trading With the Enemy Act of October 6, 1917, as amended, and Emergency War Powers (12 Stat 319; 50 USC §§ 21, 213, 215, Appendix 16; 26 CFR Ch. 1, § 303.1-6(a); and 31 CFR Ch. 5 § 500.701 Penalties) the president retains supreme dictatorial power over all aspects of American life and government (like William) as commander-in-chief of the military (e.g. no Congressional approval needed for war; all courtrooms in America flying the gold-fringed flag of war are military tribunals under the president's direct control; complete power over all commerce, transportation, agriculture, communication, efc.); and ‘+ Its the foreign language of attorneys (Latin) and the encrypted codes—the stock in trade of esquires—that keep them elevated above the “sheep that must be shorn.” Founding-Father Esquires A glaring and alarming historical fact is that the Paris Peace Treaty of 1783 between Great Britain and United States of America was negotiated on America’s behalf by three prominent King’s esquires—Benjamin Franklin, John Jay, and John Adams, and each is so- identified in the Treaty, e.g. “John Jay, Esqr.” Curiously, Franklin, the principal negotiator, spent most of his time during the war years traveling between England and France, where George ruled as king simultaneously over both (and Ireland, as well). Despite’ apparently having just been defeated in war, it was King George, not Congress, who convened the Treaty of Peace. He was represented by another officer of the Crown, David Hartley, Esqr. Since America supposedly won the war, thereby becoming Great Britain's international equal, it is illogical that we would afterwards seek “rights” granted by King George at the Treaty of Peace. How could George be in any position for granting ‘America anything in the Treaty, such as its own land—the land that he supposedly had just officially lost control of and ‘relinquished via military defeat? Why would America’s “negotiators” enter a contract that would effectively nullify the sovereignty we had just achieved? The Treaty was signed neither on the soil of the apparent victor (America), nor the apparent loser (Great Britain), but in a third jurisdiction, France, also decided upon by King George. If we won the war, why were we incapable of dictating the terms of a treaty with a vanquished former foe from a position of strength? The Jay Treaty of 1796, authored by one of the same negotiating esquires, John Jay, also confirms the dubious nature of the outcome of the War. Whereas the king promises hasty withdrawal of his “armies, garrisons, and fleets” in the Peace Treaty of 1783, we find that his forces are still in place 13 years later: “The Paris Peace Treaty “Article 7. “There shall be a firm and perpetual peace between his Britannic Majesty and the said states...and his Britannic Majesty shall with all convenient speed...withdraw all his armies, garrisons, and fleets from the said United States, and from every post, place, and harbor within the same...” (Underline emphasis added) “The Jay Treaty “ARTICLE Il “His Majesty will withdraw all his troops and garrisons from all posts and places within the boundary lines assigned by the Treaty of Peace to the United States...” (Underline emphasis, added) Page 21 of 26 ‘The Truth About EsquiresThe Jay Treaty also reveals who holds the upper hand in finance and commerce: requiring the U.S. Government to repay certain debt owed British merchants by American civilians (Article VI); prohibiting trade of molasses, sugar, coffee, cocoa, and cotton with any country in the world other than Great Britain (Article Xil); and outlawing trade of numerous items easily construed as war contraband with any enemy of Great Britain (Article XVII). An independent confirmation of the United States of America’s inferior negotiating status is contained in an excerpt from a 1795 Supreme Court Case, Penhallow v. Doane's Administrators (3 U.S. 54; 1 L.Ed. 507; 3 Dall. 54): “...On 14th January, 1779, Congress resolved that they would not conclude a truce or treaty with Great-Britain, without the consent of France...” The plausibility of a different practical outcome of the Revolutionary War, at least commercially, cannot be denied. That the American negotiators in the Treaty of Peace legally identity themselves as officers of the Crown holding a British title of nobility alone should excite a thorough investigation.°" World Domination Through Deceit The tradition of deceit and treachery has not faded with time—and the importance of the role of the Norman-French-attorney King’s esquires in the ongoing subjugation of mankind cannot be exaggerated. Corporations, artificial creatures of the state operating under statutory law, are under the exclusive control of attorneys, who have the final word in all corporate activity and legal matters. Flesh-and-blood men and women, on the other hand, ‘speak and act for themselves under the common law. However, based on the duplicitous use of people's name corrupted into a corporately colored, all-capital-letter format, judges and attomeys have justified proceeding against trusting, unwary victims as though they were a corporation, and have convinced virtually all Americans (and the bulk of the rest of mankind)—by specious” behavior, deliberate omission of the truth, and official insistence upon contrived falsehoods" —that they require an attorney, are bound by the same codes and statutes as corporations, and are therefore no different than an inert, abstract corporation (slave of the state). John Quincy Public, naively believing that "The Honorable Judas S. Squire” would never mislead him, now dutifully seeks an attorney in virtually all legal matters, voluntarily cementing his enslavement as a ‘ward of the court” and a “person of unsound mind,” and conceding that he is incapable of speaking and acting for himself. Without such trickery enforced by underling esquire judges and attorneys in the judicial system, the Chosen Masters could not prevail © This essay will not indulge in further exposition on these issues. Rather, the reader should form his own opinion based on the facts. The source of most of the above revelations and more concerning this seminal period in ‘American history is “The United States is Still «British Colony,” by lames Montgomery ® Specious: Seeming desirable, reasonable, or probable, but not really so; pleasing or atractive in appearance, but deceptive; fair-seeming © By use of what is called a “legal fiction” any judge can literally arbitrarily pretend a false realty into existence and then hold you accountable for the imaginary reality without informing you of what he has done. A legal fiction is defined as “Something assumed in law to be fact irrespective of the truth or accuracy of that assumption” (Mertiam- Webster’ Dictionary of Law, 1996), and judges employ such wholesale. Customers of attorneys are called clients. “Clients are also called ‘wards of the court’ in regard to their relationship with their attomeys” (Corpus Juris Secundum, 1980, Section 4). “Wards of court: Infants and persons of unsound mind” (Black's 4), ‘The Truth About Esquires Page 22 of 26 61