Hi Group,

I expect that most of you have never heard of Sorcha Faal
(http://www.whatdoesitallmean.com).  She sometimes seems to be "way out there"
with some seemingly really crazy predictions and news information.  I have been
reading her "inside" information for many months.  Some of it is pretty wild but
it sure does cause you to think!  The message below is very important for at
least two reasons (1) it is an excellent explanation about how the news
dissemination in this county is controlled and manipulated and (2) it reveals
how we will all soon be charged for every site we visit on the "free" Internet.

If there are some of you who can send Sorcha Faal some financial support, please
let me encourage you to do so!.

Cheers,

I'm Eric, WhoRU??


The Sisters of Sorcha Faal

Dublin, Ireland
http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index1311.htm
--
   Sorcha Faal
   sorchafaal@...

[Here is the item I am in reference to above, Eric]


[Ed. Note: I wanted to give you all a heads up that it's going to be a
little bit of a rough road for us this week at WhatDoesItMean.Com as
this is the time of year we've chosen to do most of our major upgrades.

Our reason for choosing this particular week is its traditionally being
the slowest one of the year due to the holidays.

The largest project we'll be undertaking is the updating and improvement
of our servers so that they are better able to fend off the many attacks
against them, and we're not alone in having to do this, but (so far)
we've been able to fare better than most any other news and information
website and our 'up' time average for 2009 has been over 99.7%!

Even though this is one of our most expensive weeks of the year the
Sisters have taken a very low key approach in this months appeal, I wish
I could do the same but I can't.

Every single week of this past year it has been a vicious struggle to
keep you all informed about the very world you live in, and which I
remind you that your own 'mainstream' media is doing everything in their
power to keep you from knowing.

The worst offender in keeping their public from knowing anything else
that is going on in the world is (by far) the Americans, who after
watching their news media for just a day could convince everyone that
they are the only country on earth!

And the atrocity of what passes for news in America just begins there
and continues on into a never-ending stream of what they call
'infotainment', that has nothing to do with educating people, it's
simply put out there to keep the mind muddled and confused.

Now I would guess that the reason you come to this site to begin with is
that you're tired of this, and you should be.  After all, how many times
to you have to be lied to before you say 'enough is enough'!

And once you've come here to WhatDoesItMean.Com you end up staying here.
Do you ever ask yourself why?  I would venture to guess that it's
because, for maybe the first time in your life, you've been told the
truth.

But guess what? In seeing the truth, for maybe the first time in your
life, one of your programmed 'instincts' is to discount it because it is
so foreign to your mind. After all, what you see here at
WhatDoesItMean.Com simply can't be true otherwise your own media would
have told you.

To any of you left believing like this I can only say one thing..you've
got a long way to go, and very short time to get there and you better
get used to the FACT that every single one of your so called
'mainstream' media have only one agenda, to keep you as dumb and stupid
as possible so you won't be a threat.

Now the saddest part in all of this is that at the same time that
millions of people are starting to 'awaken' from their long stupor
(having jobs and homes ripped away from you so that the 'elite' classes
can get richer always has this effect) the sources for their being able
to find out what the truth really is are disappearing from public view,
and in record numbers too.

And why this is happening is simple to understand because the fact of
the matter is this.any news and information website can make more money
by charging subscriptions than remaining open to the public at large.

One of the biggest lies you've ever been told is that the Internet is
free.  Do you have any idea how ridicules it is to believe that?  Have
you ever totaled up the cost of what your computer and Internet access
costs are? Or any of the other multitudes of costs associated with your
being on the Internet are? (cell phones, text, data plans, iPods,
Blackberry's, netbooks, etc.)

And take those costs from your being just one person, or family, and
imagine the costs for those of us who work for tens of thousands of
people who visit our sites every day and then tell me how 'free'
anything having to do with the Internet is.

Don't think for a single second either that we here at
WhatDoesItMean.Com are alone in being crushed into oblivion, far from
it!  In fact, just this past week one of the largest newspapers in the
US serving the city of Miami (Miami Herald) began asking its readers for
donations so that it could survive. (Here's the link, read it for
yourself:
http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local-beat/Herald-Online-Users-Can-You-Spare-a-Dime\
-79314002.html)

At this month's World Newspaper Congress in Hyderabad, India, the most
powerful publishers on this planet were bluntly told "free costs too
much" and they are all now making their plans to begin charging for what
they produce.
(Here's the link for this:
http://www.mediaweek.co.uk/news/971194/Newspaper-publishers-told-free-expensive/\
?DCMP=ILC-SEARCH
)

Google is one of the first to adopt to this new paradigm and has already
begun restricting free access to news.
(http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8389896.stm )

But have no fear! As you've been so successful in destroying every
single news source there is, the US government is now considering
'supporting' them.
(http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704107104574569661532881656.html?\
mod=WSJ_hpp_MIDDLTopStories
)

Now there's not a lot we'll ever agree on with Rupert Murdoch (one of
the most powerful publishers in the world), but when he warns that the
prospect of the US government aiding the media is 'beyond chilling',
EVEN YOU should take notice!
(http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/391233-Murdoch_Says_Mobile_TV_Is_Key_t\
o_Future.php
)
What the future holds for you is already being planned and in 2010
you'll begin to see it implemented, and it goes basically like this.

1.)     Introduce a new communication medium that has the appearance to
the public of being 'free'.
(Radio-1920-30's/Television-1940-50's/Internet-1990-2000's)
2.)     Use this new communication medium to destroy the previous
society's means of obtaining news and information. (Radio destroyed mass
public gatherings and tens of thousands of newspapers/Television
destroyed mass influence of Radio, further destroyed newspapers/Internet
destroys EVERYTHING and becomes the SINGLE SOURCE of news, information,
music, entertainment)
3.)     Upon the destruction of each previous communication medium
establish greater control by consolidating into global government
controlled outlets. (Just 7 corporations control 98% of the news and
entertainment media.)
4.)     Once accepted by an easily duped public, and the 'free' concept
of a new communication medium is firmly established, begin rapid
destruction of all opposition by the introduction of paid services for
content. (From 'free' Radio to paid Satellite Radio/ From 'free'
Television to 'paid' Cable Television/From 'free' Internet to paid
Internet subscriptions for content)

You've got to admit, their plan of controlling EVERY SINGLE bit of
information that comes before you is working, and before you even know
what has happened you will wake up one day to find that anything you
want to know about will have a price put on it.

And if you've never heard of the term 'micropayment' you had better
start educating yourself because it's going to be your future. There
WILL be a day, and it's coming much sooner than you think, where you're
going to be charged anywhere from as little as a penny, to as much as a
dollar, for EVERY SINGLE WEBSITE YOU CLICK ON.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micropayment)

Our greatest hope is that when this day comes we (and other sites like
us) will still be around (and uncontrolled) so you'll still be able to
know the truth.

The 'powers that be', so to speak, don't want this to happen so they've
rigged everything to keep this from happening, and YOU have been their
greatest weapon against us because they know that you have been so
indoctrinated by their 'free' paradigm you're not able to see the future
ready to smash into you.

What I'm asking you to do, right now, is to stop being an accomplice to
your own destruction and start acting before it's too late to protect
those like us who have been protecting you.

Go and read the Sisters latest appeal to you and give whatever you can
to keep us alive and able to keep you informed.
(http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index1311.htm )

And for those of you who are able to give more to help out those who
truly have nothing.THAN DO IT!
This is NOT A GAME folks, this is as real and dangerous as it gets and
unless you begin protecting yourselves by helping those helping you than
all is going to be lost.

It was once said that if you don't stand for something you don't stand
for anything, I'd like to believe that you are not like this.  Am I
wrong?  I hope not for all of our sakes.

So in closing folks, I'll let others (like the Sisters) give you
Christmas cheers, I can't afford to as my 'holiday' week is going to be
spent before a spray of computer monitors keeping this site up and
running and making sure that it continues to survive.

If you've got a hand to give me in doing this I'd really appreciate it,
give what you can.

All the best,

Brian
Webmaster
Paris]
--
   Sorcha Faal
   sorchafaal@...

I Group,

This is short but to the point.  I suggest you study this message because it is
the key to understanding why we good people are always undewr the thumb of evil
tyrannical government, such asd is the government of the United States.


Of all creatures humans are the only ones that intentionally manipulate others
into a condition of servitude. No, not all humans, but enough to cause the good
to create a defensive mechanism to prevent the evil few from working their evil
ways. The problem is that no sooner do the good people create their defensive
mechanism than the evil people infiltrate and take it over and use it as their
means of imposing their evil on the unsuspecting good people who are truly so
good and trusting that they are unable to even consider that their protective
organization has been subverted by the evil few. No matter how badly the
protective organization is perverted, the good people will continue to insist
that they are free and that their government is the most wonderful ever devised.
This is because the good people have been taught this by the evil people who
control what the  general population is taught in the government
controlled"schools".


The reason the evil people have always been able to take over is because they
have made it their business to understand the fundamental nature of the human
species; which the common good people do not even think about, because, in their
goodness, they are not motivated to figure out how to control others using
continual indoctrination to impose mind control.


We humans are not born with any individual personal naturally instilled ability
to discern that what we are taught is good or bad for us on an individual basis.
Human children accept everything they are taught as being the way things are
supposed to be. This is particularly significant in regard to the societal
organization, government. For the most part the good common people are totally
devoid of any ability to even consider that there could be another way society
could be organized other than the way they were taught. I write "for the most
part" because there are a few humans who are different, a few who are actually
Naturally imbued with an ability to understand the basic nature of humans to be
susceptible to mind controlling programming. All to many of these few truly
intelligent people choose to follow the evil route and use their gift of Natural
perception to gain control over the general population. These evil people are
prone to work their way into political positions so they can manipulate society
to their personal benefit.


At times, over the centuries of human societal evolution, there have been
attempts of the good people to establish a societal organization where the evil
people would be prevented from taking over but, so far, none of these efforts
have succeeded for any significant period of time. The few intelligent good
people who truly understand what must be done to create a truly free society are
outnumbered by the general population who succumb to the socialistic bribery of
the evil few who always seem able to worm their way into positions of influence.


It seems impossible for the general population to comprehend that when the
society is designed in such a manner that the government is "recognized" as
automatically having proper authority to require compliance of anyone, in even
the slightest degree, that such society has doomed itself, ultimately, to a
condition of total subservience of everyone to the whim of the evil people who
will have wormed their way into positions of political power.


Recognizing this nature of humans will enable us to understand why the United
States has been turned into the most micro-managed subservient society ever,
and, hopefully, will enable us to save ourselves before it is too late.

Cheers,

I'm Eric, WhoRU??

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF MARION COUNTY, ARKANSAS

�@

STATE OF ARKANSAS, Plaintiff.

�@

VS. Case Numbers: S2005-1110, S2006-625,626,

S2009-997,998

�@

Eric Williams, Defendant.

�@

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Eric Williams, do hereby certify that I have on this 10th day of November,
2009, by hand delivering a copy to his office in the Marion County Courthouse in
Yellville, Arkansas,

Served Plaintiff�fs attorney:

Kenford Carter,

Deputy Prosecuting Attorney

A true and correct copy of the following paper on behalf of the above named
"Defendant":

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION

TO DISMISS ALL CHARGES AS I AM NOT A "PERSON" AS DEFINED IN TITLE 27-16-204(C)


BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION

TO DISMISS ALL CHARGES AS I AM NOT A "PERSON" AS DEFINED IN TITLE 27-16-204(C)


ITEMS OF WHICH THIS COURT MUST TAKE MANDATORY JUDICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF
MOTION TO DISMISS ALL CHARGES AS I AM NOT A "PERSON" AS DEFINED IN TITLE
27-16-204(C)

Proceeding at all times under Threat, Duress and Coercion

�@

�@

_________________________________

Eric Williams


C:\Wpdocsx\CERTSERV Eric 18.wpd

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF MARION COUNTY, ARKANSAS

�@

STATE OF ARKANSAS PLAINTIFF


VS. Case Numbers: S2005-1110; S2006-625, 626, S2009-997,998


Eric Williams DEFENDANT

ITEMS OF WHICH THIS COURT MUST TAKE MANDATORY JUDICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF
MOTION TO DISMISS ALL CHARGES AS I AM NOT A "PERSON" AS DEFINED IN TITLE
27-16-204(C)


Introduction


I come now purportedly as "Defendant" Eric Williams (incorrectly captioned as
"ERIC WILLIAMS" in this Honorable Court�fs various pleadings and documents filed
by others in regard to this matter), acting on my own behalf, to present Items
of which This Honorable Court Must Take Mandatory Judicial Notice, in support of
My Motion To Dismiss All Charges lodged against me in this matter, as I am not a
"person" subject to the Codes of Arkansas, as is indicated by the Legislature�fs
definition of the word "person" in Title 27-16-204(c), and I further state as
follows:


I contend that the items set forth in this condensed list of Mandatory Judicial
Notice items will prove, by Reasonable construction, that I am not a "person" as
the word "person" is defined in Arkansas Code, Title 27-16-204(c), and that I am
not, therefore, subject to the political nor judicial jurisdiction of the
artificial entity, Arkansas!


Additionally, I will demonstrate how it is both politically and grammatically
impossible for the Legislature of Arkansas to include in the definitions the
Legislature creates, any claim that Arkansas has direct jurisdictional authority
over any real live flesh and blood men and women who do not intentionally
volunteer themselves into such status.


Finally, I will also demonstrate how Arkansas uses subterfuge, indoctrination of
children, and blatant misrepresentation of the actual birth acquired political
status of real live flesh and blood men and women in order to seduce them into
believing they have a birth acquired obligation of patriotism to the governments
of Arkansas and the United States. I will demonstrate how Arkansas uses the name
entered on a birth certificate by the parents of their child in order to entice,
induce and seduce the free born people of Arkansas into a condition of
"voluntary servitude".


IRREFUTABLE FACTS OF WHICH THIS COURT

MUST TAKE MANDATORY JUDICIAL NOTICE


The items included in the facts below are taken from the "NOTICE OF IRREFUTABLE
FACTS OF WHICH THIS COURT IS REQUIRED TO TAKE MANDATORY JUDICIAL NOTICE" that I
filed with this court on October 15, 2009, which I presume was among the
pleadings which Judith Bearden stated from the bench during the "Motion to Quash
Subpoenas" hearing" conducted on October 16, 2009, wherein she said that she had
not taken the time to read, that I had filed to be considered by her prior to
her making her decision which she had clearly already made as indicated by the
Order to Quash that she signed, filed and mailed to Mr. Hansen in Little Rock, a
full ten days prior to the purported hearing on that matter, of which Order
Judge Bearden did not think it appropriate that I should have been informed at
the time that she signed it ten days prior to the hearing purportedly held by
her in order for her to reach her purportedly unbiased and un-predetermined
decision.


But, be that as it may, I have reduced the number of items I included in my
previous Mandatory Judicial Notice document to the most relevant to the issue
being addressed in this Motion To Dismiss All Charges As I Am Not A "Person" As
Defined In Title 27-16-204(c), to those items presented herein below:


(NOTE: In the numbering below, for reference purposes, the first number in each
item is the sequence presented in this instant pleading; the second number is
the number assigned in my previous Judicial Notice pleading; an "x" in the
second position indicates an additional explanatory item added for this instant
pleading).


1-1. Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that governments are artificial
entities that do not exist in nature.


2-3. Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that it is self evident and true,
that as governments are the artificial creation of men and that as individual
men have no natural individual authority to command other men, that those men
who create government cannot reasonably have authority to imbue their artificial
political creation with authority to command other men who have not freely,
knowingly and willingly, having been fully informed of the negative consequences
thereof prior thereto, intentionally surrendered themselves to the authority of
such artificial creation.


3-X1; Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that when born a human baby is born
free and politically sovereign over himself and is not born with any political
obligation to any artificial political entity or any other entity of any nature
what-so-ever.

4-X2 Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that no man (or combination thereof)
born prior to others, has any proper authority to claim that those born later
are born with any political obligation of any manner what-so-ever, to those born
prior.


5-13. Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that as new born infants we humans
have no naturally provided frame of reference to enable us to determine whether
what we are then first taught at that young age, is good for us or not.


6-15. That is, please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that as such children our
minds are easily manipulated into conforming to whatever degree of servitude may
be desired by the government-paid adults who have access to inflict the
government�fs mind-controlling indoctrination upon us.


7-17. Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that the government of Arkansas has
been and is engaged daily in it�fs self serving indoctrination of every child in
this state attending the government indoctrination centers euphemistically known
as "public schools".


8-19. Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that as children we humans in this
society were and have since birth, and are continually being subjected to
intense unending mind controlling indoctrination for the purpose of continually
imbuing us with feelings of obligations of servitude to the artificial
government for the purpose of continually convincing us that we owe political
fealty and loyalty to such government and that we have a duty to obey and
conform to the dictates of the government with no natural right or any right
what-so-ever to question or in any way doubt that we have such "obligations".


9-22. Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that due to the fact that
governments are artificial entities, that it cannot be reasonably denied that no
child has ever been naturally born into or naturally born under or naturally
born subject to the political dominion of any government.

///

10-26. Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that any act I may have engaged in
pertaining to my "application" for a driver license was engaged in by me as a
young adult, of only fourteen years of age, as a direct result of the intense
intentional mind-controlling indoctrination I had been subjected to prior
thereto, as a small child, while being required to attend the government�fs
indoctrination centers euphemistically known as "public schools", without me
ever being told or permitted to be exposed to the truth.


11-32. Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that a name is NOT part of the
human entity provided by Nature; that is, please take Mandatory Judicial Notice
that a "name" is an artificial attachment attached to the baby by the parents
and then recorded with the government, as a requirement of the government.


12-35. Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that as far as such authority might
pertain to those born here on this land, that the authority of Arkansas is
limited to properly extend only to those persons who have willingly, knowingly
and intentionally, having been fully informed of the negative consequences
thereof prior thereto, voluntarily agreed to submit themselves to the authority
of Arkansas.


13-36. Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that men and women who were
subjected to the intense indoctrination set forth herein above during their
childhood, who thereupon "agreed" to submit themselves to the authority of the
government that caused and instituted their indoctrination, cannot properly be
claimed to have done so in any truly voluntary manner.


14-x3. Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that the principle of Estoppel
prevents the government from claiming that men and women who had been subjected
to the intense indoctrination set forth herein above during their childhood, who
thereupon "agreed" to submit themselves to the authority of the government that
caused and instituted their indoctrination, who then later overcome and reject
the indoctrination they had been subjected to, to then properly be claimed by
the government to still be subject to the dominion of the government.


15-38. Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that when any man or woman who has
been indoctrinated throughout their life to wrongly believe that they were born
with an obligation to submit themself to the dictates of Arkansas, thereafter
acquire an awareness that they had been wrongfully and criminally intentionally
seduced into such belief by Arkansas, that such men and women then have an
absolute natural right to be immediately freed from any purported obligation
they may have been seduced into agreeing to prior thereto, and the doctrine of
Estoppel prevents Arkansas from in any way using the previous acts of submission
to Arkansas as evidence that such individual men or women owe political fealty
to Arkansas.


16-41. Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that a birth certificate is a
document created by parents at the behest of the government, wherein the "name"
of an artificial persona is therein created and entered. for the purpose of
enabling the government, as an artificial entity, to enter into a contractual
relationship with a real live flesh and blood man or woman who, as an adult,
applies to the government for a license to use such artificial persona "name".


17-42. Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that the purpose of the birth
certificate requirement is to have the driver license applicant, as an adult,
"voluntarily" claim an attachment to the artificial persona "name" created on
the birth certificate.

18-43. Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that when a child is born "in
Arkansas" that the artificial "name" chosen by the child�fs parent(s) is entered
on a birth certificate and the birth certificate together with the artificial
persona "name" created therein, is then surrendered to Arkansas. Thereupon the
ownership of the artificial "name" entered thereon is thereby transferred to
Arkansas - that is, it is the ownership of the artificial name that is
transferred to Arkansas, not the ownership of the real live flesh and blood
child.


19-45. Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that then, some sixteen years
later, the child, (at that time "legally" acknowledged as being an "adult"),
having been "properly" subjected to several years of mind-controlling
governmental preparatory indoctrination, becomes a "driver license applicant",
duly programmed by the governmental indoctrination, to present "his" birth
certificate to the local Revenue Office in order for him to be "voluntarily"
issued a driver license. Thereupon the applicant "voluntary" "officially" claims
his use of the "name" owned by "Arkansas" (entered on "his"birth certificate),
"his�f "name" is then entered on the driver license with a picture of the
"volunteer"; in a manner very similar to a fast food franchisee applicant being
"licensed" to use the McDonald�fs name, to open a licensed McDonald�fs fast food
outlet.


20-46. Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that the primary purpose of the
creation of a birth certificate is to create an artificial persona to be
registered with the government, such persona being the "name" entered on the
birth certificate. The creation of the artificial persona in the birth
certificate in regard to the birth of the child is preparatory for his later
"voluntary" legal claim thereof, after he has been "properly" programed in the
government�fs indoctrination centers euphemistically known as "Public schools".

21-47. Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that the young adults�f "official"
"voluntary" claim of his use of the artificial name entered on "his" birth
certificate constitutes his "official" "voluntary" use of government owned
property; such property being the "name" entered on what the young adult has
been programmed to believe is "his" birth certificate. Thereby the young adult
creates an acceptable nexus enabling the artificial entity Arkansas to
interrelate with the newly admitted "person", enabling "Arkansas" to function as
Sovereign over the real live flesh and blood young adult, through the youth�fs
use of the artificial persona "name" owned by the government, just like a
McDonald�fs franchisee is obligated to the McDonald�fs Corporation.


22-48. Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that in accordance with the
foregoing that the "name", is then later combined together with the applicant�fs
picture and signature on the driver license, thereby acknowledging the
applicants "voluntary" acceptance of the artificial entity Arkansas as being the
applicant�fs political sovereign. Thereby the young adult becomes a legal
"person", under the category of "natural person", as the word "person" is
defined through the use of grammatical association through apposition, in Title
27-16-204(c) of the Arkansas Codes.


23-53. Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice and acknowledge that the true
reason for the requirement of the presentation of a birth certificate, in order
for an applicant to be issued a driver license,�@is to entice the applicant into
volunteering himself into a condition of servitude, such being "voluntary
servitude", in order for the "authorities" of Arkansas to avoid a violation of
the prohibition of involuntary servitude as set forth in Section Twenty-seven of
Article Two of the Arkansas Constitution; so as to have the applicant
"volunteer" himself "officially and legally" into "citizenship", so that as a
statutorily defined "person" he can "legally" be required to pay taxes; and
wherein, he has "voluntarily" and unwittingly agreed to submit himself to every
manner of regulation possible to imagine.


24-55. Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that the nexus enabling the
interrelationship between the artificial entity Arkansas and real live flesh and
blood men and women has been established through an insidious subterfuge,
through grammatical "apposition", whereby the Legislature of Arkansas has
surreptitiously "defined" the word "person" to be an artificial persona through
grammatical association by including the term "natural person" with "firm",
"copartnerships", "association", or "corporation" in Title 27-16-204(c), the
latter four items all clearly being artificial entities, to surreptitiously
"define" the common word "person" to also, "legally", be an artificial entity;
thereby, through "reverse engineering", causing the word "person" to be defined
through grammatical apposition, by grammatical association, to be an artificial
person, in Title 27-16-204(c) of the Arkansas Codes.


25-57. Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that the term (1)"natural person"
as included in the definition of the word "person" in Arkansas Code
27-16-204(c), is intended to be and is an artificial entity similar in every
significant aspect to its definition mates, such mates being; (2)"firms",
(3)"copartnerships", (4)"associations," and (5)"corporations". That is, all five
of these artificial entities numbered herein are created by voluntary human
intellectual activity; all five have official government approved creating
documents; all five are registered with the government; all five have, through
their human agents, voluntarily obligated themselves to obey and conform to the
commands of the Arkansas Legislature; all five have a name conjured up by their
private sector creators and, last but not least, all five are required by the
government to have a government issued license.


26-58. Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice and acknowledge that the creating
document relative to the artificial term "natural person" referenced herein
above, as being included in the definition of the word "person" in Title
27-16-204(C) of the Arkansas Code, is the birth certificate created by the
parents of a newborn human baby at the time of the baby�fs birth; wherein the
baby�fs parents enter the "name" conjured up by them, and then the parents file
the birth certificate with the appropriate government office, just as do the men
and women who create firms, copartnerships, associations, and corporations, when
such men and women create the government required documents appropriate for
their particular artificial persona, including therein (but not limited to), the
"name" of their artificial persona creations, and then file such documents with
the appropriate government office.


27-59. Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice and acknowledge that when the above
mentioned birth certificate is filed with the government by the child�fs parents
that the said document then lies fairly dormant in the government�fs files for
the next 16 years, having no significant legal impact on the life of the child
whose birth is purportedly recorded therein", until some 16 years later, when
the "child", having "matured" to the recognized age of reason and
accountability, and having been, during those sixteen years appropriately and
fraudulently indoctrinated and subjected to government serving mind-control in
the government indoctrination centers euphemistically known as "public schools",
for approximately the ten previous years. Therein the child, having been
programmed to believe that he was born into citizenship with natural born
obligations of political fealty to the artificial government, applies for a
driver license. In such government "schools", of course, it has never ever been
suggested to the young adult that the government of Arkansas is in any way
"artificial". The young adult does as he has been programmed to do by going to
the local Department of Revenue Office where, being totally ignorant of the
implications, he proudly presents "his" birth certificate in order to be issued
the much coveted Arkansas driver license.


28-60. Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that when real live flesh and blood
men and women officially "voluntarily" claim the use of the artificial persona
"name" entered on "their" birth certificate as being "theirs" such men and women
therein "voluntarily" agree to their personal use of government owned property,
said property being the "name" on "their" birth certificate, and in so doing the
men and women thereby unwittingly and unknowingly, not having been in any way
previously informed of the negative consequences of their act, thereby
relinquish the individual sovereignty they were born with without ever knowing
they were actually born free and sovereign with no natural born citizenship nor
natural born obligation of political fealty to any artificial political entity.


29-65. Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that when a real live flesh and
blood man or woman "appears" in a court that is functioning as an aspect of an
artificial entity such as is Arkansas, that in order for a real live flesh and
blood man or woman to so "appear", they must, whether they realize they are
doing so or not, put on or "don" the role of an artificial persona entity, that
is, they must put on the aspect of an artificial person, such "person" being the
"natural person" as is included in and defined in Title 27-16-204(c). Such real
live flesh and blood men and women accomplish this when they agree to be there
"appearing" in court under the "name" they applied for and agreed to use when
they applied for a driver license or State issued I.D. card.


30-66. Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that the "appearance" of a "person"
before a court is accomplished only by the person�fs acknowledgment of the
person�fs artificial "name", most usually written on all "official" government
documents in all capital letters.


31-67. Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that in a court room setting the
acknowledgment of having a "name" by a real live flesh and blood man or woman
constitutes an acknowledgment by the man or woman that he or she has volunteered
to don an artificial persona and �eappear" in and participate in the artificial
realm.


32-73. Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that the acknowledgment of a birth
certificate by a real live flesh and blood man or woman is critically necessary
to the artificial entity, "Arkansas", in order for a legally acceptable
inter-relationship nexus to be established between the artificial political
entity known as "Arkansas", and real live flesh and blood men and women known in
their artificial roles as "persons".


33-x4. Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that the word "driver" is defined
in Title 27-16-204 (a) as meaning every person who is in actual physical control
of a motor vehicle upon a highway or who is exercising control over or steering
a vehicle being towed by a motor vehicle.


34-x5. Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that Arkansas Code, Title
27-16-602(a) through (d) sets forth and designates what "persons" shall be
required to have a driver license. This subsection has the word "person" used
therein eight times.


35-x6. Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that Arkansas Code, Title
27-16-602(a) provides: "No person, except those expressly exempted, shall drive
any motor vehicle upon a highway in this state unless the person has a valid
driver's license under the provisions of this act." (Please Take Mandatory
Judicial Notice that Title 27-16-204(c) defines the word "person" to mean every
natural person, firm, copartnership, association, or corporation." Please be
reminded that the definition of "person" as defined in this section does not
include or in any way grammatically imply "man", "woman", "boy" or "girl".


36-x7. It cannot be reasonably denied and this Court must take Mandatory
Judicial Notice that in the Thirteen Colonies of North America prior to July 4,
1776 that the political status of all men and women present therein who were
subjects of the British Crown were either aristocrats or commoners.


37-x8. It cannot be reasonably denied and this Court must take Mandatory
Judicial Notice, that as of July 4, 1776 all political status designations
created and existing Under King George III ceased being recognized by the said
King�fs former subjects upon their rejection of King George III as being
Sovereign over those men and women who thereupon became former British subjects.


38-x9. It cannot be reasonably denied and this Court must take Mandatory
Judicial Notice that upon the ejection of King George III on the day of July 4,
1776 that everyone present in the Thirteen Colonies who had prior thereto, been
subjects of King George III, some having been designated as aristocrats, and
some having been designated as commoners; that as of the date of July 4, 1776,
all such former British subjects became politically equal to one another, with
no one single man or woman (nor any group thereof) having any more political
authority or status than any other single individual man or woman; that is, on
July 4, 1776 everyone present became politically equal to each other.


39-x10. It cannot be reasonably denied and this Court must take Mandatory
Judicial Notice that as of July 4, 1776 there was no formal government in the
said Former British Colonies and that although any men present certainly had the
natural right to associate themselves together in any manner agreeable to each
man as decided on an individual basis, no one or any combination of those former
British Subjects who were present there at that time had any authority to
declare that everyone then present would be or was subject to the authority of
any government which any combination of them might there after choose to create.


40-x11. Based on the fact that on July 4, 1776, with the ejection of King George
III from the former British Colonies of North America, that all political
authority and or political status hierarchy established under King George III
prior thereto, thereupon ceased being recognized, and that thereupon, every
individual and all former subjects of King George, thereupon became politically
neutered, with no single individual man or woman, or group thereof, having any
authority to declare that any government they created would have authority to
require any individual or group present, to submit themself to the authority of
whatever government might be created by those motivated to create such
artificial entity.


41-x12. This Court will please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that by wilfully
taking up arms against King George III in the Revolutionary War of 1776, each
individual man thereby overtly indicated his individual intention to rid himself
of a government he did not like, based on his own individually determined
reasons; however, such reasonably presumable agreement could not reasonably be
expected to in any way establish that such Rebels could thereafter be commanded,
on an individual basis, to submit themself to any government created thereafter,
by any of their former brethren in arms.


42-x13. This Court will please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that the only way
any government created by some of the men who had successfully driven out King
George III could claim political dominion over any or each of the former Rebels,
each and any of the Rebels would have had to individually voluntarily
intentionally agreed to submit them self to such subservience on an individual
basis.


43-x14. This Court will please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that just because
the government created in the former British Colonies after July 4, 1776 was
created by those men who styled themselves as the leaders of the former
rebellion, that such status could not and did not imbue those leaders with
authority over anyone other than their own individual entities.


44-x15. This Court will please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that those former
Rebels who voted to establish the government created in the Former British
Colonies of North America, that such "voters" could not possibly have any actual
authority to mandate, through their voting procedure, the subservience to their
creation of any man or woman who chose to opt out, immediately then, or at any
subsequent time, including (but most definitely not limited to) the year 2009.


45-x16. This Court will Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that I did not
have a representative present at any election that took place during the
establishment of the artificial government created in 1787.


46-x17. This Honorable Court will please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that it
is not reasonable that those born before me can have authority to command me
merely because they were born prior to me.


47-x18. As for "voting", this Honorable Court will please take Mandatory
Judicial Notice of the following questions:


1.) Who, exactly, was it who decided that voting would be the way issues are
decided upon?

2.) Was the concept of voting decided by popular vote?

3.) If so, who was it who decided who could cast a vote in the election to
decide that decisions would be made by voting?

4.) Who was it who decided what would constitute a "majority"?

5.) Who was it that decided that in a community of one thousand people where
only fifty cast a ballot that when twenty-six votes were cast in agreement, that
such "agreement" would constitute a majority because there were only twenty-four
nay votes?

6.) Who was it that decided that the vote of only twenty-six voters would then
govern the entire one-thousand?

7.) Who decides the issues that are to be decided by voting?

8.) And who was it who decided who decided who would decide what?

9.) Where is the representation of the minority in an election?

10.) As I am always among the minority, where is my representative in the
Legislature where the majority elects the representative?

11.) How can it Reasonably be determined that deciding anything by voting is
anything other than a totally criminal act?


48-x19. This Honorable Court will please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that
voting is a criminal act! How many voting men would it take to "legalize a
robbery of Home Depot? Two? Two might not constitute a majority. How about
twenty? Twenty might still not be a majority, or even a hundred. But, surly you
would agree that the vote of a thousand robbers would constitute a sufficient
plebiscite? No? You still don�ft agree? Could there ever be a sufficient
majority of voters who could sanctify the robbery of Home Depot? No? Well, I
sure hope not, but what is the difference when the issue is taxation? Or the
growing of hemp, unquestionably the most valuable plant provided for mankind by
Nature?


49-x20. This Court will please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that other than
its self serving misrepresentation of itself as being "of the people" of
Arkansas, how is the government of Arkansas in any significant way different
than a gang of common ordinary neighborhood protection racket gun toting
hoodlums?


At all times proceeding under Threat, Duress and Coercion.


Respectfully submitted,



�@

____________________________________

Eric Williams

November 10, 2009

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF MARION COUNTY, ARKANSAS


STATE OF ARKANSAS PLAINTIFF


VS. Case Numbers: S2005-1110; S2006-625, 626, S2009-997,998


Eric Williams DEFENDANT

BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF MOTION

TO DISMISS ALL CHARGES AS I AM NOT A "PERSON" AS DEFINED IN TITLE 27-16-204(C)


Please note that a document filed with and annexed to my previously filed
documents as Exhibit "A" thereto, addressing the proper designation of
artificial entities mentioned or referred to herein; and also setting forth my
persona and Political Status, as such may pertain to these matters, is likewise
annexed and incorporated herein and hereat, in full, by reference.


Introduction


1. I come now purportedly as "Defendant" Eric Williams (incorrectly captioned as
"ERIC WILLIAMS" in this Honorable Court�fs various pleadings and documents filed
by others in regard to this matter), acting on my own behalf, to present my
Brief in Support of my Motion to Dismiss All Charges lodged against me as I am
not a "person" subject to the codes of Arkansas, as is indicated by the
Legislature�fs intentions in its definition of the word "person" in Title
27-16-204(c). and I further state as follows:


2. I do not invoke the various statutes and Constitutional provisions of
Arkansas as a "citizen" "person" purportedly politically entitled to seek
protection in such references as some sort of political right. My invocation of
such references is from the perspective of a man born free on the land calling
upon those charged with the enforcement of such Statutes and Constitutional
provisions to obey their own rules and to conform to their sworn oaths in that
regard. I am entitled to such consideration because of my political heritage
which has been recognized and respected by the various Legislatures of the Fifty
Sovereign States all of whom have enacted legislation virtually identical to the
codes relevant hereto enacted by the legislature of Arkansas.

3. Additionally, the inclusion of the prohibition of involuntary servitude in
the Thirteenth Amendment to the Federal Constitution where such inclusion was
not required in order to prohibit slavery; and the inclusion of the prohibition
of involuntary servitude in the Arkansas Constitution deserves more than a
cursory dismissal as a mere off shoot of Lincoln�fs unconstitutional and
unconscionable war of aggression upon the South, especially when an honest
evaluation of the actual purpose of the Fourteenth Amendment to indoctrinate
every individual, whether they be "red and yellow black and white" to believe
they were all precious in the sight of the government, while the truth was, that
ensnaring all commoners into citizenship status was the one sure way the
"former" Aristocrat class could maintain its political dominance. Its all hidden
right out there in plain sight in the limiting and exclusionary wording of the
Preamble to the Federal Constitution, "We the People...for OURselves and OUR
Posterity..."!


4. The constitutional prohibition of involuntary servitude clauses constitute an
acknowledgment, or rather, a proclamation, that there will be a class of People
living here on this land who will NOT be subjected to involuntary servitude, and
I am among that class! There in nothing in the prohibition of involuntary
servitude clauses that in any way suggests that those of us who "crack the code"
may be deemed to have "volunteered" merely because we use Federal Reserve Notes
or derive any other manner of incidental "benefit" from our association with
those "persons" who have "voluntarily" submitted themselves to the political
dominion of Arkansas.


5. As an explanation, my use of Federal Reserve Notes results only because of my
individual contribution to this community. I receive FRNs because I provide
services to those who are willing to pay me. When I spend FRNs I enable those to
whom I pay them to sustain themselves at a higher level than they would be able
to without my support. Al in all it is a quid quo pro situation, so don�ft try
to tell me I have volunteered myself into a condition of servitude because I
engage in whatever I do in order to enjoy the life style natural to my species.
The constitutional prohibition of involuntary servitude clauses constitute a
constitutional acknowledgment that I have a natural born right to live among and
enter into any manner of interaction with my neighbors in which they are freely
willing to interact with me.


6. Additionally, I claim to be and I am of the Posterity of the Rebels of July
4, 1776. I claim my free born position on this land (both physical and
political) as a matter (1) of inherited right based on the fact that my
antecedents lent their individual physical strength and individually risked
Their Lives, Their Fortunes, and Their Sacred Honor in the cause of driving from
this continent, the army of King George III in the Rebellion improperly
characterized as "The Revolutionary War"; and (2), as a natural right derived
from Nature, and, quite frankly, I declare the latter to be superior to the
former!


7. My purpose in referencing the statutes and Constitution of Arkansas is not as
an inherent right as a citizen of Arkansas because, (1) I am not such a citizen
and, (2) not for my individual protection as such a citizen but rather, (3) for
the purpose of pointing out how the wording and phraseology of the relevant
statutes and Constitutional provisions clearly indicate that it was the
intention of the Legislature of Arkansas to provide a statutorily discernable
means whereby those politically situated such as I, could enjoy the fruit of the
success of our ancestors in their struggle to obtain freedom for their
Posterity, of which I am among.


8. My endeavors here in this matter are for the purpose of pointing out to the
enforcement officers of Arkansas that the Legislature of Arkansas has, through
the manner and style of the wording of the relevant Legislation it has created,
intentionally written me out of the political jurisdiction of Arkansas.


9. It is Axiomatic, that being an artificial entity, Arkansas cannot possibly be
imbued by the men who created Arkansas with any authority in excess of the
authority naturally held by any one single individual man among those men who
created Arkansas.


10. It is Axiomatic: (1), that no individual man has any more political
authority than any other individual man; and (2), that two or more of such men
may not unite together in order to combine their limited individual political
authority in order to cause such authority to increase to a level greater than
the authority naturally held by any one single individual man; and (3), that any
men who purport to construct such a combination are commonly known as and are,
TYRANTS!


11. The propensity for politicians to make such claims is the reason why the
Declaration of Independence includes the proclamation asserting that it is the
right of the people to alter or abolish a government that becomes destructive of
their unalienable Naturally endowed rights.


12. Not to be in any way contradictory to the foregoing is the fact that men do
indeed have unlimited authority to combine their individual physical strength
for the purpose of lifting a load heavier than any one of them could lift by
himself but unless at least one of the men lifting the load had ownership rights
to the item lifted, all of the men lifting the load would be guilty of theft. If
none of the men had ownership rights they could not acquire such rights by
agreement among themselves through a process they might call "voting"! This
would be true no matter how many of them were involved in the voting process.
How could it reasonably be otherwise construed, among honorable men?


13. My pointing out herein below, of the statutory omission of certain words and
the statutory inclusion of other words in certain sub-sections of the Arkansas
codes, is not to in any way suggest that I contend that the Legislature erred in
the phraseology it employed in creating such statutes but, rather, to the
contrary, to point out that the phraseology utilized was intended by the
legislators to specifically exclude those individuals who the Legislators knew
they had no authority to include and to include only those individuals that the
Legislature could properly legally claim owed political fealty to Arkansas, such
politically obligated individuals being referred to throughout the Arkansas Code
as "persons".


14. During a hearing held in this Honorable Court on October 16, 2009, Deputy
Prosecutor Kenford Carter alluded several times to evidence he claimed to have
in his possession that he intended to introduce during trial that would
establish that there was a birth certificate that I could use in order for me to
be issued an Arkansas driver license and Mr. Carter further contended that the
reason I do not is simply because I chose not to use such birth certificate for
such purpose.


15. Mr. Carter would be well advised to decide his personal reasons for himself
and allow others to decide theirs for themselves. Whether Mr. Carter is correct
in his contention that there is a birth certificate I could use to be issued a
driver license is not the issue to be addressed and resolved by these
Preliminary Evidentiary hearings. As a matter of fact, I am quite confident that
I could come up with a hundred or a thousand of such birth certificates that I
could use to be issued a driver license if my only concern was being issued a
driver license. However the reason I do not has nothing to do with me being
issued a driver license, it has to do with the insidious undisclosed
ramifications inherent in an applicant�fs "voluntary" claiming of the use of the
"name" entered on a birth certificate, in order to be issued a driver license!
The indoctrination of small children by the government of Arkansas, and the
government of the united States, in order to seduce such children to "volunteer"
themselves into a condition of lifetime servitude through the issuance of a
driver license is not an honorable use of such procedure, and for Arkansas to be
persecuting me because I have exposed its fraud is nothing more than a
continuation of the dishonorable activity of the government of Arkansas.


16. My reasons for proceeding in the manner that I do have nothing to do with
obstinance or contrariness as implied by Mr. Carter, but, rather, are founded on
Fundamental, Basic, Natural Principles of Freedom and Liberty and honesty in
government that this country is purported to have been founded upon, that Mr.
Carter does not seem to want to acknowledge to be in any way binding on the
artificial entity, Arkansas, or admit that such principles are in any slight
manner relevant to the relationship between myself and Arkansas.


17. The subsection provisions of the Arkansas Code, of Title 27, pertaining to
whom the provisions set forth therein are intended to apply to, are generally
elusive and obfuscatory, clearly written to confuse and obfuscate their actual
insidious purpose and intent.


18. In order to discern the intended application of the relevant subsections
certain axiomatic postulates must be brought to mind, such as: (1) it cannot be
reasonably denied that Arkansas is an artificial entity that does not exist in
nature; and (2) that Arkansas exists only as the intellectual creation of
certain men; and (3), that these men intended to imbue their creation with
certain limitations in order to prevent abuse, by the code enforcement officers,
of those individuals who were recognized by the creators of Arkansas, as not
being under the political dominion of the artificial government they created.
With the foregoing intention in mind, a careful study of the grammatical
composition of certain subsections of the Arkansas Code reveals a clearly
intentional obfuscation, hidden right out there in plain sight, readily
discernable by those who take the time to read the codes to decode the
grammatically hidden and grammatically revealed intent.


19. It is Axiomatic that the creation can not be greater than the creator. As
Arkansas is the intellectual product of men, it is not possible for Arkansas to
be imbued with more authority than the authority Naturally imbued into any one
single individual man. How could it reasonably be determined otherwise by
honorable men?

///

///

///


Discussion


1. The issues in this hearing, or in this case for that matter, actually have
nothing to do with driving without a license or presenting a birth certificate
in order to be issued such a license. The issue here is, "What, exactly, is it
that transpires in the application and issuance of a driver license? Or, put in
the context of this hearing, how does a man or woman born free and sovereign
over their own individual entity, become a "person" obligated to apply to an
agency of a totally artificial entity in order to be issued a driver license?
Or, is there actually any actual obligation for a man or woman born free and
sovereign over their own individual entity, to apply to an agency of a totally
artificial entity in order, to be issued a driver license? What is the true and
actual purpose behind the surreptitious procedure preceding the issuance of a
driver license? Is the issuance of a driver licence the true and actual reason
for the presentation of the "applicant�fs" birth certificate? Or is there
another more devious purpose for such a specious requirement?


2. The issues here are much more fundamentally important, having to do with
honesty, integrity and an acknowledgment by those "persons" administering the
government, that the purpose for the creation of government in the first place
was not to create a monster to micro manage the lives of the common people, but,
rather, to provide an orderly way for societal interactive needs to be provided
for, such as water supply, sewage disposal, and the warding off of foreign
tyrants, and was not for the purpose of establishing a home grown tyranny with
the authority to require everyone to get permission from the government in order
to use an additional square or two of toilet paper.


3. Where is the honesty in government when the wording of Section Twenty-seven
of Article Two of the Arkansas Constitution clearly and unambiguously prohibits
involuntary servitude and then Deputy Prosecutor Kenford Carter tells me that
such prohibition does not extend to driver licenses? If Mr. Carter is correct,
then what, exactly, is the nature of the protection from involuntary servitude
intended under this Constitutional prohibition?


4. If the prohibition of involuntary servitude does not include a prohibition of
mandatory driver licensing then what else is there that the government of
Arkansas may require the people of Arkansas to do against their will? A better
question is, "What, exactly, are the limitations in regard to the government�fs
ability to micro-manage the lives of everyone in Arkansas?" And an even more
relevant question is, "Where, under the natural limitations on government
examined herein above, wherein it was established that government may not
reasonably or properly be imbued with any more authority than the authority
imbued by Nature into any one single individual man, where, then, does the
government get the authority to require any "person" to be issued a driver
license prior to operating a motor vehicle on the highways of Arkansas?" Please
note that I am not stating that the government does not have such authority, I
am asking the question, "Where does this authority properly and reasonably come
from?" (Well, the word "reasonably" may be a stretch, but there is no doubt that
such authority has been legally acquired, at least as such authority applies to
"persons", as the word "person" is defined in Title 27-16-204(c)).


5. I will answer that question herein below, however, first, I contend that Mr.
Carter is wrong on this issue in regard to any purported requirement for every
man and woman to procure a "driver license" prior to operating their own
individually owned self propelled transportation unit. I further contend that in
my answer to the above question I will establish that the Legislature of
Arkansas agrees with me on the issue of driver license requirements, not with
Mr. Carter. Again, as I have reiterated several times herein, the issue we are
examining is much more fundamental than the matter of a driver license. How do I
arrive at my understanding of the intention of the Legislature? By actually
reading the words they used and adhering to them, paying attention to the
grammatical manner in which the statutes are written; giving the Legislature
full credit for creating the definitions to be grammatically correct as they are
set forth in Title 27, so that the Codes of Arkansas, written as they are, may
be readily decoded by the astute reader, and, so that the definitions included
therein are in full compliance with Section Twenty-seven of Article Two of the
Arkansas Constitution�fs prohibition of Involuntary Servitude.


6. The issue as to who is required to conform under the Arkansas Codes is based
on whether the individual is a "person" as the word "person" is defined in Title
27-16-204(c) thereof; and whether or not the individual has been successfully
and legally induced or "seduced", to "volunteer" to claim to be such "person", a
status to which I have not agreed!


(As a side comment, every individual present in Arkansas does, of course, have a
political relationship with Arkansas; mine being that I have not volunteered
myself to submit to the dominion of Arkansas by becoming a "person" as the word
"person" is defined in Title 27-16-204(c)). Therefore, I am an alien to
Arkansas.


7. As afore stated, the issue of this hearing is limited to examining and
determining whether or not I am a "person" as the word "person" is defined in
Title 27-16-204(c), wherein I would then be required to apply for a driver
license under the codes of Arkansas prior to operating a motor vehicle on the
highways of Arkansas. This takes more than a cursory examination because there
is more to it than may be found in just one subsection of Title 27. It is like
playing the computer card game, Freecell, where you often must move single cards
in the wrong way in order to be able to later move them in the right way.


8. What I will demonstrate is that all men and women born on the land area
claimed by Arkansas to be under its dominion, are, at the time of their birth,
born free and politically independent; that when born every human baby is devoid
of even the most minuscule amount of ability to evaluate whether the information
presented to it is good for it or good for "someone else", the "someone else"
being an indoctrination officer whose intention (knowingly or unknowingly) is to
program the individual child to accept a condition of virtually total servitude,
without the individual ever being informed of the existence of any optional
independent political status, or being prompted to question the validity of the
freedom negating information the "someone else" is indoctrinating the individual
with.


9. I will demonstrate a sequence of events starting with (1) the creation and
recording of the individual�fs birth on a birth certificate; (2) programing
instilled in the individual during (3) mandatory attendance in government
indoctrination centers euphemistically known as "public schools"; then, (4) how
the individual, having been appropriately subjected to mind controlling
indoctrination, (5) "voluntarily" presents himself to a local Department of
Revenue Office, where (6) the individual "voluntarily" and eagerly, and proudly,
(7) presents "his" birth certificate in order to (8) be issued the much coveted
Arkansas driver license. (The birth certificate the individual presents to the
Revenue Office is as much "his" as is "your" bus or "your" taxicab, or "your"
airplane, "yours"!).


10. The relevant Arkansas Code provides:


Title 27-16-204.Persons.

(a)"Driver" means every person who is in actual physical control of a motor
vehicle upon a highway or who is exercising control over or steering a vehicle
being towed by a motor vehicle.
(b)"Owner" means a person who holds the legal title of a vehicle or, in the
event a vehicle is the subject of an agreement for the conditional sale or lease
thereof with the right of purchase upon performance of the conditions stated in
the agreement and with an immediate right of possession vested in the
conditional vendee or lessee or in the event a mortgagor of a vehicle is
entitled to possession, then the conditional vendee or lessee or mortgagor shall
be deemed the owner for the purpose of this chapter.


(c)"Person" means every natural person, firm, copartnership, association, or
corporation.


11. It seems a little strange that the title of the section is "Persons", and
that subsections (a) and (b) both quite clearly apply to "persons" but, however,
the word "person" is not defined until after (a) and (b).


Be that as it may, Subsection (c) includes five items in the definition of the
word person:


1)natural person,

2)firm,

3)copartnership,

4)association,

5)corporation.


12. To the casual reader it will seem clear that items (2) through (5) are
artificial entities and it is will likewise seem clear to the casual reader,
that number (1) is intended to refer to real live flesh and blood men and women,
but number (1) does not clearly indicate such to be the case. To the casual
reader it would seem the intention of the statutory definition of "person" is to
legally establish that real live flesh and blood men and women are not any
different from corporations like Walmart. However, the more astute reader will
recall that we were all taught in grammar school that the definition of a word
will never ever include the word being defined in its own definition. That is, a
word cannot be used to define itself, so, when the word "person" is included in
the definition of the word "person" such inclusion is either an unacceptable
grammatical error or, more likely, the word "natural", coupled with the word
"person", somehow modifies the word "person" so that the inclusion of the word
"person" in the definition of itself does not constitute a grammatical error.


13. There can be no doubt that the legislators who created this statute were
well aware of the words "men" and "women" which might seem to have been more
appropriately used in the definition of "person", that is, if it was the actual
intent of the Legislature to legally equate real live flesh and blood men and
women with Walmart., So, Reason will indicate that the legislature�fs use
instead, of the term "natural person", was clearly intentional; that is, the
legislators intentionally avoided the use of the words "men" and "women" because
to use those words would have actually created a grammatical error, and would
have been otherwise undesirable because the term "natural person" is also a
reference to an artificial entity, as I shall explain as I go along. I contend
that everything ever written by any legislature is, if nothing else, always
grammatically correct. So then, how does the word "natural" modify the word
"person" in order to avoid a grammatical error?


14. Another question here is "What could have been the reason for the
Legislature�fs inclusion of four clearly artificial entities in the definition
of the word "person" if the purpose of the definition of the word "person" was
to indicate that such word was intended to refer to or include real live flesh
and blood men and women? Clearly such was not the purpose! So, in order to
discern the purpose we must examine the similarities of these four artificial
items as they relate to each other and then examine and determine how these
similarities apply or relate to the term "natural person", the first item in the
definition of "person", in order to avoid grammatical incorrectness?


15. The first discernment will be to conclude, in order for the definition to be
grammatically correct, that the term (1)"natural person", as included in the
definition of the word "person" in Arkansas Code 27-16-204(c), is intended to be
and is also an artificial entity, similar in every significant aspect to its
definition mates, such mates being; (2)"firms", (3)"copartnerships",
(4)"associations," and (5)"corporations". That is, all five of these artificial
entities numbered herein are (a) created by voluntary human intellectual
activity; (b) all five have official government approved creating documents; (c)
all five are registered with the government; (d) all five have, through their
human creating agents, voluntarily obligated themselves to obey and conform to
the commands of the Arkansas Legislature; (e) all five have a name conjured up
by their private sector creators and, last but not least, (f) all five are
required by the government to have a government issued license.


16. The foregoing explains how the five items in Title 27-16-204(c) are all
rive, artificial entities, so there is no grammatical error in the inclusion of
"natural person" therein, but the means by which real live flesh and blood men
and women are enticed, induced or seduced into "volunteering" themselves into
servitude, as statutorily defined "persons" equal to Walmart, takes more
examination and analysis, as I shall explain:


17. As no individual man or woman has natural authority to command
non-volunteers to obey, the human creators of Arkansas can not possibly imbue
Arkansas with authority to do so either, therefore, in order for Arkansas to be
able to command subservience of real live flesh and blood men and women Arkansas
must, somehow, entice, induce or seduce real live flesh and blood men and women
to voluntarily submit themselves to the political authority of the artificial
entity, Arkansas. So how does Arkansas do that?


18. Engaging in subterfuge and deceit, how else do politicians "get things
done"? This was not done overnight, many generations have passed thereby
enabling the ploy to be gradually implanted in succeeding generations without
hardly anyone ever questioning how it all came about.


19. There is a combination here of (1) the birth certificate and its
registration with and abandonment to the government; (2) the indoctrination of
the populace through public education when they are children; (3) the
Legislature enacting enabling legislation; and (4) the young adult�fs burning
desire to be issued their peer driven status symbol, a driver license.


` 20. It is important to understand that when born we humans have no knowledge
of any kind. It is important to be cognitively aware that everything that we
learned and absorbed as children we learned from someone else or from our
innocent observations. Our first teachers were, most likely, our own parents,
then, at about age five, it was the public school governmental indoctrination
system and this is the beginning of our intentional downhill slide into being a
"person" as the word "person" is defined in Title 27-16-204(c).


21. Although not realized by parents, the initial setup for "personhood" is when
a newborn baby�fs parents conjure up a name for their child and then enter that
name on a birth certificate and record the name and the other information
entered on the birth certificate with the appropriate government recording
office. When recording the document the parents do not reserve any ownership
rights to the name they conjured up for their child. By failing to reserve any
ownership rights to the name the parents effectively record the name and then,
abandon it, so the "owner" of the name, by default, becomes the state of
Arkansas. It is important here to understand that it is the "name" that the
state becomes the owner of, not the child.


22. At the age of five years the child is enrolled in government indoctrination
centers euphemistically known as "public schools" where the child is
indoctrinated for the next thirteen years to believe he or she was born into
United States citizenship and is likewise indoctrinated to believe that through
such birth he or she was automatically, by such birth, also born into being a
citizen of Arkansas. This court will please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that
it is physically impossible for a real live flesh and blood human baby to be
born in an artificial entity or to be born automatically into citizenship of
such an artificial entity.


23. At the age of sixteen years the child, at that time having attained the age
where he or she is recognized to be a somewhat responsible adult, is old enough
to volunteer him or her self into a condition of servitude known as
"citizenship", for which the child has been indoctrinated to believe and accept
without question that he or she was automatically born into. Among honest people
Mr. Carter, this is known as "fraudulent inducement".


24. During the first sixteen years of his or her life, and especially after
entering "High School", these young adults have been programmed to believe that
he or she must present his or her birth certificate to the local Department of
Revenue Office in order to be issued an Arkansas driver license.


25. Thereupon, the young adult presents his or her self to the said Revenue
Office where the young adult proudly presents "his" or "her" birth certificate,
whereupon, after some testing and skill examination, the young adult is issued
an Arkansas driver license, thereupon the young adult has unknowingly and
unwittingly relinquished the individual political sovereignty and independence
he or she was born with and volunteered his or her self into a condition of
voluntary servitude with the political status of a "person" as the word "person"
is defined in Title 27-16-204(c) of the Arkansas Code.


26. That is, the birth certificate created by the child�fs parents upon the
birth of the child constituted the creation of an artificial persona, such
persona being the "name" entered on the birth certificate.


27. When the child�fs parents record that document with the government recording
office the parents failed to reserve any ownership rights or interest in the
said persona created and recorded therein. Such failure on the part of the
parents constitutes the abandonment of any ownership interest the parents may
have had in the persona they created and such abandonment causes the ownership
interest to devolve upon the State of Arkansas.


28. When the child whose birth was recorded on the birth certificate presented
the birth certificate as a driver license applicant, the actual transaction had
very little to do with the licensing of the applicants operation of a self
propelled conveyance on the public way of Arkansas, the presentation of the
birth certificate had considerable to do with establishing that the applicant
was thereupon and thereafter, a "person" as the word "person" is defined in
Title 27-16-204(c) of the Arkansas Code.


29. The application for the driver license would be more properly described as
an application for a license to enable the applicant to legally use government
owned property, such property being the "name" entered on the "applicant�fs"
birth certificate. Through the application for and issuance of the driver
license, the applicant unknowingly and unwittingly agreed to function as a
"person" under the persona, under the artificial guise of an artificial entity,
designated as a "natural person", as the term "natural person" is included among
four other artificial persons in the definition of the word "person" in Title
27-16-204(c).


30. How can a "person" be construed to be an artificial entity? Only by a
skillfully contrived statutory enactment:


31. As involuntary servitude is prohibited by both the Thirteenth Amendment to
the Federal Constitution and Section 27 of Article 2 of the Arkansas
Constitution, the Legislators had to devise a clever scheme whereby it could be
legally claimed that all real live flesh and blood men and women were subject to
the statutes of Arkansas, without the scheme devised being an overt violation of
the Constitutional prohibitions of involuntary servitude. Additionally, the
scheme they devised would need to make it possible for it to be legally claimed
that real live flesh and blood men and women were subject to the jurisdiction of
Arkansas, an artificial entity. By cleverly defining the common word "person" to
include several artificial entities and include among them the term "natural
person" the legislators would be able to befuddle all but the most astute
linguists.


32. At the time the definition of the word "person" was "discovered" the
attention was cunningly focused on the Legislatures defining of firms,
copartnerships, associations, and corporations, all to be persons with many of
the Constitutionally protected rights of "natural persons", which protections
are in many ways very reasonable as corporate owners of property had legal
interests to protect and legal obligation to be met. The fact that the term
"natural person" included in the definition of "person" would be surreptitiously
used to cause real live flesh and blood men and women to "voluntarily" submit
themselves to the political authority of an artificial entity through their
"voluntary" application to use the artificial persona "name" created by the
filing of their birth certificate at the time of their birth, during their
application for a driver license, was totally missed by everyone, except those
who intentionally implemented the scheme.


33. In examining Act 241 of the 1989 Regular Session of the Legislature we find:


SECTION 3. Definitions. As used in this act, unless the context otherwise
requires:


(12) "Driver" means any person who drives, operates, or is in physical control
of a commercial motor vehicle on any public street or highway in the state or in
any place open to the general public for purposes of vehicular traffic.


34. In examining Title 27-16-204 we find additional definitions of terms having
to do with drivers:


Title 27:

27-16-201.Definitions generally.

As used in this act, the words and phrases defined in this sub-chapter shall
have the meanings respectively ascribed to them, unless the context otherwise
requires.


27-16-203:


(a)"Nonresident" means every person who is not a resident of this state;


)"Resident" means any person who:


(C)(b )(2)The term "resident" shall not include any person who is in this state
as a student.


27-16-204.Persons.

(a)"Driver" means every person who is in actual physical control of a motor
vehicle upon a highway or who is exercising control over or steering a vehicle
being towed by a motor vehicle.

(b)"Owner" means a person who holds the legal title of a vehicle or, in the
event a vehicle is the subject of an agreement for the conditional sale or lease
thereof with the right of purchase upon performance of the conditions stated in
the agreement and with an immediate right of possession vested in the
conditional vendee or lessee or in the event a mortgagor of a vehicle is
entitled to possession, then the conditional vendee or lessee or mortgagor shall
be deemed the owner for the purpose of this chapter.

(c)"Person" means every natural person, firm, copartnership, association, or
corporation.


27-16-602.Driver's license required.


(a)No person, except those expressly exempted, shall drive any motor vehicle
upon a highway in this state unless the person has a valid driver's license
under the provisions of this act.

(b)(1)No person shall receive a driver's license unless and until he or she
surrenders to the Office of Driver Services all valid driver's licenses in his
or her possession issued to him or her by any other jurisdiction.

(2)All surrendered licenses shall be returned by the office to the issuing
department together with information that the licensee is now licensed in the
new jurisdiction.

(3)No person shall be permitted to have more than one (1) valid driver's license
at any time.
(c)(1)No person shall drive a commercial motor vehicle as a commercial driver
unless he or she holds a valid commercial driver's license.

(2)No person shall receive a commercial driver's license unless and until he or
she surrenders to the office any noncommercial driver's license issued to him or
her or an affidavit that he or she does not possess a noncommercial driver's
license.


(3)Any person holding a valid commercial driver's license under this chapter
need not procure a noncommercial driver's license.
(d)Any person licensed under this act may exercise the privilege granted upon
all streets and highways in this state and shall not be required to obtain any
other license to exercise the privilege by any county, municipal, or local board
or body having authority to adopt local police regulations.


27-16-603.Persons exempted from licensing.

The following persons are exempt from licensing under this act:


(1)Any person while operating a motor vehicle in the service of the Army, Air
Force, Navy, or Marine Corps of the United States;

(2)Any person while operating or driving any road machine, farm tractor, or
implement of husbandry temporarily operated or moved on a highway;

(3)A nonresident [27-16-203: "person"] who is at least sixteen (16) years of age
and who has in his or her immediate possession a valid noncommercial driver's
license issued to him or her in his or her home state or country may operate a
motor vehicle in this state only as a noncommercial driver;

(4)A nonresident [27-16-203: "person"] who is at least eighteen (18) years of
age and who has in his or her immediate possession a valid commercial driver's
license issued to him or her by his or her home state or country may operate a
motor vehicle in this state as a noncommercial driver or may operate a
commercial motor vehicle as provided by �˜ 27-23-123; and(5)Any nonresident
[27-16-203: "person"] who is at least eighteen (18) years of age whose home
state or country does not require the licensing of noncommercial drivers may
operate a motor vehicle as a noncommercial driver only, for a period of not more
than ninety (90) days in any calendar year, if the motor vehicle so operated is
duly registered in the home state or country of the nonresident [27-16-203:
"person"] .


35. Throughout the Codes of Arkansas we find a universal use of the word
"person", even in the subsections setting forth who shall be exempted from
driver licensing there is no mention of any driver who would not be a "person"
as the word "person" is defined in Title 27-16-204(c). This repetitious emphatic
use of the word "person" is clearly intended to be interpreted by the casual
reader as a reference to real live flesh and blood men and women without overtly
including the words "men" and "women" in any way that would cause a grammatical
error to exist in the definition of the word "person", and there are innumerable
definitions of the word "person" throughout the Codes of Arkansas. None of these
many definitions include the words "men" or "women". In every instance every
definition of the word "person" includes several categories of various
artificial entities. In every one of these many definitions the very first item
included in every definition of the word "person" is the term "natural person".
In every instance the additional items included in such definitions are, without
exception, several items all clearly being some manner of artificial entity,
such as "firm", "copartnership", "association", "corporation", etc. In not one
single instance could I find a definition of the word "person" in the Codes of
Arkansas which included the words "men" or "women".


36. In the definition of "driver" in Title 27-16-204(a) we find:


"�eDriver�f means every person who is in actual physical control of a motor
vehicle upon a highway or who is exercising control over or steering a vehicle
being towed by a motor vehicle."


37. It is clear that this section�fs intention is to convey, by implication,
that the "driver" mentioned therein, who is in actual physical control of a
motor vehicle upon a highway or who is exercising control over or steering a
vehicle being towed by a motor vehicle, to be a real live flesh and blood man or
woman. It is additionally quite clear that this definition of "driver" is
intended to very clearly exclude "firm", "copartnership", "association", and
"corporation"from the definition of "driver", even though section
27-16-204(a)�fs primary candidate to be designated as a driver is expressed as
being "every person"; yes, "every person" except in this instance, the plural
term "every person" is not intended to include every artificial person included
in the definition of the word "person", because "firms", "copartnerships",
"associations", and "corporations" have no ability to climb behind the steering
wheel and be "in actual physical control of a motor vehicle upon a highway or
... exercise... control over or steer... a vehicle being towed by a motor
vehicle."! How duplicitous can a legislature get in its endeavors to avoid
revealing its true intent?


38. The clear intention here, in the definition of the word "driver", is to
include only one specific "person" among the five artificial persons included in
the definition of the word "person" in Title 27-16-204(c) and that "artificial
person" is the "person" who presented a birth certificate in order to be issued
a driver license and thereby "volunteer" to be included in the class designated
as a "natural person" in Title 27-16-204(c). The reason the Legislature could
not and did not use the words "man" or "woman" in any of its many definitions of
the word "person" in the Codes of Arkansas is because "man" and "woman" are not
words that in any way lend themselves well in references to such artificial
persons as "firms", "copartnerships", "associations", or "corporations" OR
"NATURAL PERSONS", when the term "natural person" is intended by the Legislature
to designate an artificial persona !


39. The previous careful analysis of the definitions of "person" and "driver" as
such are incorporated in the Arkansas Code enables us to construct the intent of
the legislature by use of reasonable interpretation and thereby avoid totally
absurd applications of such statutes, as was ruled by the U.S. Supreme Court in
excerpts from rulings thereof as set forth herein below in the following cases,
all of which were referenced by SCOTUS in HOLY TRINITY CHURCH v. U.S. 143 U.S.
457, 12 S.Ct. 511, 36 L.Ed. 226, Feb. 29, 1892


"In Pier Co. v. Hannam, 3 Barn. & Ald. 266, ABBOTT, C. J., quotes from Lord Coke
as follows: 'Acts of parliament are to be so construed as no man that is
innocent or free from [causing] injury or wrong [doing] be, by a literal
construction [of the statute], punished or endangered. "


"In the case of State v. Clark, 29 N. J. Law, 96, 99, [I]n what sense is the
term 'willful' used? In common parlance, 'willful' is used in the sense of
'intentional,' as distinguished from 'accidental' or 'involuntary.' Whatever one
does intentionally, he does willfully. Is it used in that sense in this act? Did
the legislature intend to make the intentional opening of a fence for the
purpose of going upon the land of another indictable, if done by permission or
for a lawful purpose? * * * We cannot suppose such to have been the actual
intent. To adopt such a construction would put a stop to the ordinary business
of life. The language of the act, if construed literally, evidently leads to an
absurd result. If a literal construction of the words of a statute be absurd,
the act must be so construed as to avoid the absurdity. The court must restrain
the words. The object designed to be reached by the act must limit and control
the literal import of the terms and phrases employed."


40. In the above opinion there can be no reasonable doubt that SCOTUS intended
its explanation of the common meaning of "wilful" to only apply where the
intentionally done act was done by an individual who was fully and properly
informed of all of the ramifications of his "wilful" act prior thereto; that an
act done as a result of intentionally misleading indoctrination of the
individual as a child, by the entity that was thereafter purporting to hold the
individual to acts done as a result of the intentional misleading
indoctrination, would be prohibited on the basis of the principle of Estoppel.
As SCOTUS stated, "To adopt such a construction would put a stop to the ordinary
business of life."


41. However, there is another consideration as to what may or may not be
"wilful" that the Supreme Court did not mention in the foregoing:


Bouvier�fs Law Encyclopedia 3rd Rev. 8th Edition, 1914 provides the meaning of
"Involuntary" is as follows: "Involuntary, An involuntary act is that which is
performed with constraint or with repugnance, or without the will to do it. An
act is involuntary when it is done under duress."


42. It is clear that Bouvier�fs meaning conveys that an act, even though
intentionally done, is not "wilfully" done when done under duress.


43. Additionally, in the foregoing SCOTUS opined that where a literal
application of the wording of a statute would result in an absurd result, the
wording must "restrain the words".


Back to SCOTUS in Holy Trinity:


" In U. S. v. Kirby, 7 Wall. 482, 486 "The question as to the sufficiency of
this plea was certified to this court, and it was held that the arrest of Farris
[a mail carrier] upon the warrant from the state court [for murder] was not an
obstruction of the mail, or the retarding of the passage of a carrier of the
mail, within the meaning of the act. In its opinion the court says: 'All laws
should receive a sensible construction. General terms should be so limited in
their application as not to lead to injustice, oppression, or an absurd
consequence. It will always, therefore, be presumed that the legislature
intended exceptions to its language which would avoid results of this character.
The reason of the law in such cases should prevail over its letter. "


" The following cases may also be cited: Henry v. Tilson, 17 Vt. 479; Ryegate v.
Wardsboro, 30 Vt. 743; Ex parte Ellis, 11 Cal. 220; Ingraham v. Speed, 30 Miss.
410; Jackson v. Collins, 3 Cow. 89; People v. Insurance Co., 15 Johns. 358;
Burch v. Newbury, 10 N. Y. 374; People v. [143 U.S. 457, 462] Commissioners, 95
N. Y. 554, 558; People v. Lacombe, 99 N. Y. 43, 49, 1 N. E. Rep. 599; Chesapeake
& Ohio Canal Co. v. Baltimore & Ohio R. Co., 4 Gill & J. 152; Osgood v. Breed,
12 Mass. 525, 530; Wilbur v. Crane, 13 Pick. 284; Oates v. Bank, 100 U. S. 239.
"


"Among other things which may be considered in determining the intent of the
legislature is the title of the act. We do not mean that it may be used to add
to or take from the body of the statute, (Hadden v. Collector, 5 Wall. 107,) but
it may help to interpret its meaning. In the case of U. S. v. Fisher, 2 Cranch,
358, 386, Chief Justice MARSHALL said: 'On the influence which the title ought
to have in construing the enacting clauses, much has been said, and yet it is
not easy to discern the point of difference between the opposing counsel in this
respect. Neither party contends that the title of an act can control plain words
in the body of the statute; and neither denies that, taken with other parts, it
may assist in removing ambiguities. Where the intent is plain, nothing is left
to construction. Where the mind labors to discover the design of the
legislature, it seizes everything from which aid can be derived; and in such
case the title claims a degree of notice, and will have its due share of
consideration.' And in the case of U. S. v. Palmer, 3 Wheat. 610, 631, the same
judge applied the doctrine in this way: 'The words of the section are in terms
of unlimited extent. The words 'any person or persons' are broad enough to
comprehend every human being. But general words must not only be limited to
cases within the jurisdiction of the state, but also to those objects to which
the legislature intended to apply them. Did the legislature intend to apply
these words to the subjects of a foreign power, who in a foreign ship may commit
murder or robbery on the high seas? The title of an act cannot control its
words, but may furnish some aid in showing what was in the mind of the
legislature. The title of this act is, 'An act for the punishment of certain
crimes against the United States.' It would seem that offenses against the
United States, not offenses against the human race, were the crimes which the
legislature intended by this law to punish. "


44. In this instant case, the general application of the common word "person"
has been supplanted by the mere fact that the Legislature of Arkansas has
created a statutory definition of this word and the statutory meaning contrived
by the Legislature must be applied in accordance with the clear intent of such
Legislature. However true that may be, there are still imitations as to the
application thereof. As stated in the above HOLY TRINITY excerpt, SCOTUS therein
opined that a state may not, through the general application of common words or
phraseology, expand the State�fs authority beyond its reasonable boundaries.


45. By the Legislature�fs failure to include the words "men" and "women" in the
statutory definition of the word "person", the Legislature�fs clearly
demonstrated that their intent to supplant the commonly understood meaning of
the word "person" to specifically exclude real live flesh and blood men and
women, if this were not true the Legislators would have included the words "men"
and "women" in its definition of the word "person"; and would have included the
words "men" and "women" in its statutory definition of the common word "driver".


46. When taken together the definitions of the words "person" and the word
"driver" are complementary, the statutory definition of each supports the
statutory definition of the other. It is clearly the intention of the
Legislature to exclude real live flesh and blood men and women from both!


47. As the Constitution of both the United States and Arkansas prohibit
involuntary servitude the Legislature cannot and did not use phraseology such as
(or similar to) "all persons", in order to extend the authority of Arkansas
beyond its Constitutionally established boundaries. The inclusion of such
phraseology in the statutes of Arkansas may not be construed by this court to in
any way unconstitutionally expand such limited authority in order to
unconstitutionally extend such authority over individuals who have not
willingly, knowingly and intentionally, being fully informed of the negative
consequences thereof prior thereto, voluntarily agreed to submit themself to the
authority of the government of the artificial entity, Arkansas.


48. The issue here is not whether or not I could use some birth certificate in
order to be issued a driver license, that issue is of no immediate significance!
However, on that issue, why should I? Can it be reasonably denied that I have
the natural born and naturally acquired right to determine for myself whether or
not I will "volunteer"? Until I willingly, knowingly and intentionally, being
fully informed of the negative consequences thereof prior thereto, voluntarily
agree to submit myself to the authority of the government of the artificial
entity, Arkansas, the issue of whether there might be or is a birth certificate
I could use in order for me to be issued an Arkansas driver license is a totally
moot issue!


Bouvier�fs Law Encyclopedia 3rd Rev. 8th Edition, 1914 provides the meaning of
"Involuntary" as follows: "Involuntary, An involuntary act is that which is
performed with constraint or with repugnance, or without the will to do it. An
act is involuntary when it is done under duress."


49. Bouvier�fs meaning of "wilful" applies equally to an individual who was
intentionally indoctrinated with lies in order to seduce him into "voluntarily"
complying with Arkansas codes, "An act is involuntary when it is done as a
result of having been intentionally and wrongfully indoctrinated by the lying
government of Arkansas."


50. And when Arkansas was not the actual perpetrator of the criminal
indoctrination of the individual when the individual was a child, but then,
later, Arkansas intentionally attempts to reap benefits from the wrongful
indoctrination of its criminal contemporaries, the governments or the other
Forty-nine states of the Federation known as the United States, in this
particular instance such criminal contemporary being the government of the
artificial entity, California, Arkansas thereby compounds its unforgivable
insidious criminal activities!


A key word and principle here, Mr. Carter, is ESTOPPEL!


51. The issue here, as I wrote herein above, is honesty and integrity of
government in its relations with the general populace. It matters not one whit
Mr. Carter whether you have some papers you got from the FBI in regard to me, if
I did not want the FBI to have that information I would not have allowed the
Sheriff�fs Deputies of Baxter county to take my finger-prints. Go ask Sargent
Ken Hopman how many times he and his deputies tried unsuccessfully to take my
prints. Ask him how, after the judge there had already ordered my release, how I
allowed him to take my prints and how I allowed him to take additional extra
sets for him to provide to the FBI. Ken Hopman is an honorable man, he will tell
you the truth.


52. The point here is the information you purportedly have from the FBI was
elicited from me as a result of mind controlling indoctrination I was subjected
to when I was a child, using duplicity and deceit, intentional fraudulent
inducement. That which is fraudulently obtained you are Estopped from using,
according to your own rules.


53. I have no objection to some form of registration of those who operate self
propelled conveyances due to the hazzard involved, but that purpose is not the
true purpose of the use of a birth certificate nor a driver license and if you
do not understand that then you are derelict in your duties. The true purpose of
the birth certificate / driver license is to seduce the common people into a
general condition of subservience to an artificial entity , and you, Kenford
Carter, are a part of it! I once considered you to be an honorable man but the
manner in which you have conducted yourself in this travesty has outed you.


54. I have no idea where those two warrants I was arrested under were hidden
during the past five years, but I do know they were not on the police computer
otherwise they would have been exercised against me several times during the
past five years. Where was the 2005 warrant when I was issued the citation in
2006? Both of those documents reveal their fraudulent nature on their face.
Neither of them were issued on the date indicated on their face and I can prove
it any time I choose. And where were both of those warrants when I was arrested
and held in the Baxter County jail for six days in March, 2007? And where were
they when I was stopped by a State Trooper on April 18, 2008, who issued me a
warning for speeding, wherein the trooper wrote "none" on the driver license
number line?


55. I made myself available in as honorable a way as I possibly could back in
2005, waiting out there in the parking lot of the courthouse after I had paid a
court reporter $125.00 to inform the court that I was challenging the
jurisdiction thereof over me based on my political status. If Judith Bearden had
authority to issue a warrant for my arrest after you informed her of the
conversation you and I had out there in the parking lot where she had sent you
with two police officers who were present and listening, then she certainly had
authority to have me arrested at that time as I had, in good faith, as you are
personally aware, made myself available for that purpose, as the court reported
had informed her. When Judge Bearden sent you out of the court room to talk to
me and you asked me questions "for the record", which I answered "for the
record", such procedures constituted her extension of the courtroom to the
parking lot, how else could such proceedings be properly and honorably
construed? And then you two charge me with failure to appear? This should make
an interesting RICO case. If Judge Bearden had authority to issue a warrant for
my arrest at that time then she had a duty to have me arrested at that time! Her
failure to do so constituted her waiver of any jurisdiction she might have had
or indicated she had none. In either event her actions in issuing a warrant for
my arrest are properly deemed to be "BAD FAITH!" and constitute malevolent
malfeasance, misfeasance and nonfeasance, all three rolled up into one! Why did
Judge Bearden not have me arrested and brought in to court at that time? Was her
failure due to the fact I had hired a court reporter to be there to record her
bad faith antics? And for her to state she was going to make it a no bail
warrant? What on God�fs green earth had I done to deserve that? And for you to
claim during the October 16, 2009 farce, that when I come into court I thereby
acknowledge jurisdiction? So if I stay outside you all issue a no bail warrant
for my arrest and if I come in then I acknowledge your jurisdiction? You have
got to have more honor than that? As you are certainly aware, I was arrested and
released on my coerced bonded agreement to attend these farce full proceedings,
so how can you honestly claim that I am "voluntarily participating"? Every
pleading I have filed has a TDC disclaimer note at my signature. There are many
court cases that teach that the presence of an individual in court to challenge
the jurisdiction thereof may not be construed as a voluntary acknowledgment of
jurisdiction by such individual, and you know it!


56. I know many would claim that for me to add these words is just asking for
more trouble, but I am not concerned, you can do no more than kill me and I will
soon die anyway so at least I have the pleasure and knowledge that you know that
I know what you really are.


57. There is no way that you can prove me wrong by application of reason! For
Judith Bearden to suggest I should move to Mexico is an insult not worthy of an
honorable man�fs response. It is she who should move if she cannot stand the
sweet smell of the sweat exuded by those of us who have dedicated Our Lives, Our
Fortunes and Our Sacred Honor to the cause of Freedom and Liberty. But I expect
that to "persons" such as you two, the smell is more a stench that must be
eradicated. I am 75 years of age, I have enjoyed a very successful life, I have
nothing to be ashamed of. If I stand as a single man, by myself, with all of you
against me, I still win, because truth will always win, sooner or later. You
scoffers will be held accountable, the Truth of the Creator is in your own very
soul and you dare to flaunt your arrogance as though you will never be held to
account for your evil lying ways. Woe be unto you for your Creator shall hold
you to answer for your crimes against Freedom and Liberty!


58. Truth is like the tides of the ocean; lies are like sand castles on the
beach. You may have the immediate power to destroy me but I am not the Truth, I
am but its messenger. Ultimately the Truth will wash away you and your sand
castle lies and although I may not be here to see the victory, I will none the
less be the victor!


59. 5-13. (These items presented herein below, with these index numbers, are
excerpts from the Mandatory Judicial Notice document filed concurrently
herewith). This Honorable Court will please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that
as new born infants we humans have no naturally provided frame of reference to
enable us to determine whether what we are first taught as young children is
good for us or only good for the government.


60. 25-57. This Honorable Court will please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that
the term (1)"natural person" as included in the definition of the word "person"
in Arkansas Code 27-16-204(c), is intended to be and is an artificial entity
similar in every significant aspect to its definition mates, such mates being;
(2)"firms", (3)"copartnerships", (4)"associations," and (5)"corporations". That
is, all five of these artificial entities numbered herein are created by
voluntary human intellectual activity; all five have official government
approved creating documents; all five are registered with the government; all
five have, through their human agents, voluntarily obligated themselves to obey
and conform to the commands of the Arkansas Legislature; all five have a name
conjured up by their private sector creators and, last but not least, all five
are required by the government to have a government issued license.


61. I contend that any such "evidence" that Mr. Carter may have in his
possession was created only because I was subjected to fraudulent inducement
constituting intentional mind control, and therefore should be and is Estopped
from being used for any purpose what-so-ever, other than to demonstrate the
insidious means the men who created and operate the government of Arkansas (and
the governments of the other 49 co-operating states) will resort to, in order to
achieve their nefarious purposes.


62. Procedures that originate through fraud gain no honorable application or
acceptance even though such procedures have previously been and are currently
widely adhered to and universally believed and accepted as common ordinary
custom and practice by the ignorant government indoctrinated general population!


63. The Constitutional chains, purported by the Founding Fathers to bind the
government within Reason, have been diced and spliced into mince meat by the
insidious tyrannical legislation enacted by the Legislature of Arkansas (and
likewise by the 49 other legislatures in their own purported domains) for the
purpose of subverting and denying the free born choice of everyone born or
migrating into the land area known as Arkansas (and the United States).


THEREFORE: As it is clear that I, Eric Williams, have never ever willingly,
knowingly, and intentionally, having been fully informed of the negative
consequences thereof prior thereto, voluntarily agreed to relinquish the
individual sovereignty I was born with, in order to submit myself to the
artificial government of Arkansas; and as I have clearly established that I am
not a "person" as the word "person" is defined in Title 27-16-204(c);


I, Eric Williams, respectfully demand that the charges lodged against me be
dismissed due to the fact that Arkansas has no legitimate claim of political
jurisdiction over me, and that I be accorded any and all additional relief to
which I might be entitled.


Proceeding at all times under Threat, Duress and Coercion


�@

�@

____________________________________

Eric Williams,
November 10, 2009


C:\Wpdocsx\Dismiss All Charges I am Not a Person Brief in Support of Motion to x
1.wpd

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF MARION COUNTY, ARKANSAS

�@

STATE OF ARKANSAS PLAINTIFF


VS. Case Numbers: S2005-1110; S2006-625, 626, S2009-997,998


Eric Williams DEFENDANT

NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION

TO DISMISS ALL CHARGES AS I AM NOT A "PERSON" AS DEFINED IN TITLE 27-16-204(C)


Please note that a document filed with and annexed to my previously filed
documents as Exhibit "A" thereto, addressing the proper designation of
artificial entities mentioned or referred to herein; and also setting forth my
persona and Political Status, as such may pertain to these matters, is likewise
annexed and incorporated herein and hereat, in full, by reference.


Introduction


1. I come now purportedly as "Defendant" Eric Williams (incorrectly captioned as
"ERIC WILLIAMS" in this Honorable Court�fs various pleadings and documents filed
by others in regard to this matter, acting on my own behalf, to present my
Motion requesting that all charges lodged against me be dismissed as I am not a
"person" subject to the codes of Arkansas, as is indicated by the Legislature�fs
definition of the word "person" in Title 27-16-204(c). and I further state as
follows:


2. I am not invoking the various statutes and Constitutional provisions of
Arkansas as a "citizen" "person" purportedly politically entitled to seek
protection in such references as a Constitutional right. My invocation of such
references is from the perspective of a man born free on the land . I claim to
be and I am of the Posterity of the Rebels of July 4, 1776. I claim my position
on this land (both physical and political) as a matter of an inherited right. My
antecedents lent their individual physical strength and risked their lives,
their fortunes, and their sacred honor to the cause of driving from this
continent, the army of King George III. My purpose in referencing the statutes
and Constitution of Arkansas is not for my individual protection but rather, to
point out how the wording and phraseology of the relevant statutes and
Constitutional provisions clearly indicate that it was the intention of the
Legislature of Arkansas to provide a statutorily discernable means whereby those
politically situated such as I, could enjoy the fruit of the success of our
ancestors in their struggle to obtain freedom for their Posterity, of which I am
among.


3. My endeavors here in this matter are for the purpose of pointing out to the
enforcement officers of Arkansas that the government of Arkansas has, through
the manner and style of the wording of the relevant Legislation it has created,
intentionally written me out of the political jurisdiction of Arkansas.


4. My pointing out of the statutory omission of certain words and the statutory
inclusion of other words is not to in any way suggest that the Legislature erred
in the manner of the phraseology it employed but, rather, to the contrary, to
point out that the phraseology utilized was intentionally designed by the
legislators to exclude those of us who choose to avail ourselves of our
inherited legacy, to follow our own will rather than be led, like sheep, by the
will of others.

Discussion


1. The issues in this case actually have nothing to do with driving without a
licence or failing to appear; the issues here are much more fundamentally
important, having to do with honesty, integrity and an acknowledgment that the
purpose of the common people is not to be care givers or sustenance providers
for the government as seems to have been the evolutionary development of this
political society. It is fairly well known by those who pay attention to such
things, that the Federal Government has created huge underground bunkers large
enough to sustain all the members of Congress and other "high ranking"
government executives, with no such provisions for the common people; and that
the Congress of the United States has created health care for itself to an
unconscionably high level. Additionally, they have provided that after only one
two year term in the Federal Congress that a member thereof can retire and
receive his or her full salary for the rest of his or her life, while at the
same time Social Security for the common people is reputed to be bankrupt.


2. How can this reasonably be done under a system of government where everyone
is politically equal and where everyone is expected to earn and pay their own
way every day? Not slide through a political playground for two years and then
retire on the backs of the common people for the rest of their lives, at full
pay and with full medical benefits.


3. Where is the honesty in government when Section 27 of Article Two of the
Arkansas Constitution prohibits involuntary servitude and Kenford Carter tells
me that such prohibition does not extend to driver licenses? What, exactly is
the nature of the protection from involuntary servitude under this
Constitutional provision if it does not include a prohibition of mandatory
driver licenses? What else is there that is not included? A better question is
what, exactly, are the limitations in regard to the government�fs ability to
micro-manage the lives of everyone in Arkansas?


4. But I contend that Mr. Carter is wrong on this issue and I further contend
that the Legislature of Arkansas agrees with me on the issue of driver licenses,
not with Mr. Carter. How do I arrive at my position? By paying attention to the
way the statutes are written; giving the legislature credit for setting up the
rules so that the Codes of Arkansas may be readily decoded by the astute to not
apply to those individuals who cannot reasonably be determined to have
volunteered themselves into obligations of political fealty to Arkansas.


5. The issue for this hearing is limited to examining the issue of whether or
not I am a "person" as the word "person" is defined in Title 27-16-204(c), who
would be required to apply for a driver license under the codes of Arkansas.
However, as I wrote herein above, the actual issue to be addressed and resolved
is more fundamental; how can Kenford Carter properly establish that my claim of
being outside of Arkansas�f political subjugation, based on my claim of my
political status devolving upon me as an inherited right, being that I am of the
Posterity of the Rebels of July 4, 1776 is invalid?


6. As I have previously pointed out, the relationship of my standing to Arkansas
is a political issue, it is not a judicial issue. This court does not have
standing to determine my political status any more than would this court have
standing to determine the political status of the Queen of England. This is true
because the political status of everyone can only be determined by each
individual based on their own choice. How can it be reasonably established that
those born prior to me have authority to declare I am subject to their whim? Or,
that I can be subjected to the whim of a so called "majority" in a so called
"election"?


7. The explanation as to how my political status is outside the jurisdiction of
this court and outside the jurisdiction of the State of Arkansas is set forth in
my brief attached hereto and filed and submitted concurrently herewith, and
incorporated herein and hereat, in full, by reference; and likewise, as to my
List of Mandatory Judicial Notice items also filed concurrently herewith, and
incorporated herein by reference.


I, Eric Williams, respectfully demand that the charges lodged against me be
dismissed due to the fact that Arkansas has no legitimate claim of political
jurisdiction over me, and that I be accorded any and all additional relief to
which I might be entitled.


�@

�@

Proceeding at all times under Threat, Duress and Coercion


�@

�@

____________________________________

Eric Williams
November 10, 2009


�@

�@

�@

�@

�@

�@

�@

�@

�@

C:\Wpdocsx\[Dismiss all Charges I am not a Persom - ERIC 11--9-09\Dismiss All
Charges I am Not a Person Motion to 1.wpd

OBAMACARE ENDORSEMENTS: WHAT THE BRIBE WAS

By DICK MORRIS & EILEEN MCGANN

Published on TheHill.com on November 6, 2009

Printer-Friendly Version

As the suicidal Democratic congressmen proceed to rubber-stamp the Obama
healthcare reform despite the drubbing their party took in the '09 elections,
the president trotted out the endorsements of the AMA and the AARP to stimulate
support. But these -- and the other endorsements -- his package has received are
all bought and paid for.

Here are the deals:

* The American Medical Association (AMA) was facing a 21 percent cut in
physicians' reimbursements under the current law. Obama promised to kill the cut
if they backed his bill. The cuts are the fruit of a law requiring annual 5-6
percent reductions in doctor reimbursements for treating Medicare patients.
Bravely, each year Congress has rolled the cuts over, suspending them but not
repealing them. So each year, the accumulated cuts threaten doctors. By now,
they have risen to 21 percent. With this blackmail leverage, Obama compelled the
AMA to support his bill...or else!

* The AARP got a financial windfall in return for its support of the healthcare
bill. Over the past decade, the AARP has morphed from an advocacy group to an
insurance company (through its subsidiary company). It is one of the main
suppliers of Medi-gap insurance, a high-cost, privately purchased coverage that
picks up where Medicare leaves off. But President Bush-43 passed the Medicare
Advantage program, which offered a subsidized, lower-cost alternative to
Medi-gap. Under Medicare Advantage, the elderly get all the extra coverage they
need plus coordinated, well-managed care, usually by the same physician. So more
than 10 million seniors went with Medicare Advantage, cutting into AARP Medi-gap
revenues.

Presto! Obama solved their problem. He eliminates subsidies for Medicare
Advantage. The elderly will have to pay more for coverage under Medigap, but the
AARP -- which supposedly represents them -- will make more money. (If this galls
you, join the American Seniors Association, the alternative group; contact
sbarton@.... This e-mail address is being protected from
spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .)

* The drug industry backed ObamaCare and, in return, got a 10-year limit of $80
billion on cuts in prescription drug costs. (A drop in the bucket of their
almost $3 trillion projected cost over the next decade.) They also got
administration assurances that it will continue to bar lower-cost Canadian drugs
from coming into the U.S. All it had to do was put its formidable advertising
budget at the disposal of the administration.

* Insurance companies got access to 40 million potential new customers. But when
the Senate Finance Committee lowered the fine that would be imposed on those who
don't buy insurance from $3,500 to $1,500, the insurance companies jumped ship
and now oppose the bill, albeit for the worst of motives.

The only industry that refused to knuckle under was the medical device makers.
They stood for principle and wouldn't go along with Obama's blackmail. So the
Senate Finance Committee retaliated by imposing a tax on medical devices such as
automated wheelchairs, pacemakers, arterial stents, prosthetic limbs, artificial
knees and hips and other necessary accoutrements of healthcare.

So these endorsements are not freely given, but bought and paid for by an
administration that is intent on passing its program at any cost.



Go to DickMorris.com to read all of Dick's columns!
________________________________________________________________________________\
__________________________________________

PLEASE FORWARD THIS E-MAIL TO FRIENDS AND FAMILY AND TELL THEM THEY CAN GET
THESE COLUMNS E-MAILED TO THEM FOR FREE BY SUBSCRIBING ATWWW.DICKMORRIS.COM!

THANK YOU!

***COPYRIGHT EILEEN MCGANN AND DICK MORRIS 2009.  REPRINTS WITH PERMISSION
ONLY***

Hi Group -

Yhis is a motion we will be filing here locally within the next few days.  There
is an Exhinit "A" thereto which I will post as the next message.

Cheers,

I'm Eric, WhoRU??

	 IN THE COURT OF YOUR COUNTY, YOUR STATE




YOUR COUNTY 	     				 PLAINTIFF

VS. 		 Case Number(s):   12345

I Don't Sweat It 						 DEFENDANT



NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION
FOR AN EVIDENTIARY HEARING
OF PLEA BY WAY OF ESTOPPEL
and
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION
FOR DISMISSAL BY WAY OF ESTOPPEL
FOR FRAUDULENT CONSTRUCTION OF EVIDENCE
and
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION
FOR DISMISSAL BY WAY OF ESTOPPEL  FOR
FRAUDULENT CONSTRUCTION OF JURISDICTION
  ESTOPPING PLAINTIFF'S ABILITY TO ESTABLISH
THAT THIS COURT HAS STANDING TO PROCEED

Please note that reference is hereby made to exhibit "A" annexed hereto, such
exhibit addresses the style of the various names and AKAs of the several
artificial entities referenced in this pleading.  Such exhibit is incorporated
herein and hereat, in full,  as though set forth herein and hearat, in full.

I come now as "Defendant" I Don't Sweat It to request this Honorable Court
conduct a preliminary hearing to consider the egregious conduct that Insanity,
in concert with the Forty-nine other States, all being members of the Federation
known as the United States, perpetrated upon me in order for Insanity to cause
the conditions to exist that formed the basis for Insanity' persecution of me
for daring to refuse to acknowledge Insanity' FRAUDULENTLY contrived claim of
political sovereignty over me!


As this is a political question, it is clear that the  judiciary of Insanity
would have no standing to proceed absent an establishment of political 
jurisdiction over me by the Executive Authority of Insanity.   Although ARCrP
Rule 37 pertains directly to those convicted and incarcerated, I none-the-less
contend that Rule 37 reasonably applies to all individuals when and where there
is a serious need for a clear and unambiguous explanation of the determination
of Insanity' political jurisdiction over a specific individual man or woman. 
Therefore, in the interest of justice, I hereby invoke the below ruling of the
Supreme Court of Insanity requiring that every point I raise herein below be
responded to in writing, for the reasons stated herein below:


Evidentiary Hearing
Melvin DULANEY v. STATE of ARKANSAS
CR 98-49 ___ S.W.2d ___
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Opinion delivered September 16, 1999
	 1. Appeal & error -- postconviction relief -- written findings required when
evidentiary hearing is held. -- Written findings must be made whenever an
evidentiary hearing  is held.
	 2. Appeal & error -- post conviction relief -- rule requiring written findings
applies to any Rule 37 issue. -- The rule that written findings are required
whenever an evidentiary hearing is held is mandatory; the requirement of written
findings of fact applies to any issue upon which an Ark. R. Crim. P. 37 hearing
is held.
	 3. Appeal & error -- post conviction relief -- matter remanded where court
failed to make sufficient written findings. -- Where the circuit court's order
addressing ineffective assistance of counsel did not address the numerous
allegations listed in appellant's petition nor those reiterated on appeal and
was conclusory in nature, the supreme court remanded the case in accordance with
Ark. R. Crim. P. 37.3(c) for fact-findings on the issues of ineffective
assistance of counsel set forth in appellant's Rule 37 petition; reversed and
remanded.

As stated in the above ruling the purpose of an evidentiary hearing is to
evaluate the evidence and is NOT to be used by either party, or the judge, as a
soap box to present their personal views or conclusions based on extraneous,
predetermined self-serving "justifications" such as, "How would the government
be able to continue if everyone were to make the claims made by Eric Williams,
whose teachings are presumed to have erroneously induced me, I Don't Sweat It,
to commit the "heinous crime" of insisting on adhering to the truth?".  Such
self-serving considerations, which seem to be all too prevalent among the
Judiciary,  constitute a conflict of interest, are not relevant, and make it
impossible for such courts to be fair, just, impartial  and honorable (see
paragraph 15, herein below).

Moreover, there are certain facts critical to establishing my position where the
law constituting such facts are only discernable through constructive
presumption based on  existing irrefutable factual previously observable
evidence:

	 Bouvier's Law Encyclopedia 3rd Rev. 8th Edition, 1914: "Presumptive evidence is
that which shows the existence of one fact, by proof of the existence of another
or others, from which the first may be inferred; because the fact or facts shown
have a legitimate tendency to lead the mind to the conclusion that the fact
exists which is sought to be proved."

	 "Presumptive evidence has been divided into presumptions of law and
presumptions of fact."

///
	 "Presumptions of law, adopted from motives of public policy, are those which
arise in certain cases by force of the rules of law, directing an inference to
be drawn from proof of the existence of a particular fact or facts. They may be
conclusive or inconclusive."

The entire concept of "public policy" is seriously suspect in a society where
such policy has been established and is continually  reestablished through the
intentional subjection of the general populace to intensive mind-controlling
indoctrination,  as is clearly the case in the United States and Insanity as is
evidenced by the universal acceptance and belief that everyone born on this
land, is automatically by such birth, automatically a citizen thereof, when
Reason would clearly indicate such status so derived, to be not only totally
impossible but, totally absurd.  A proper reading of both the Thirteenth and
Fourteenth amendments deny such automatic citizenship acquisition and
designation, even though it is commonly erroneously widely believed the 14th
Amendment does establish such citizenship, automatically, by birth.

	 Ibid:  "Conclusive presumptions are those which admit of no averment or proof
to the contrary.   Thus, the records of a court, except in some proceeding to
amend them, are conclusive evidence of the matter there recorded, being presumed
to be rightly made up."

Yes, the records of a court are presumed to be rightly made up as to the matters
presented in such court records, but such presumption does not establish that
the information included in such records to be true, only that the record
thereof was "rightly made up".   Additionally, we have among those items which
are "true", and rightly made up, many other items which are none-the-less,
still, totally fraudulent (or based on fraud). Such an item as the presumptive
acceptance that when a litigating participant claims to be or admits to being a
citizen of the United States or a citizen of Insanity, that such claim or
admission of such "citizenship" constitutes a recognition by the individual of
an actual existence of Insanity, existing as an entity in its own right, and
that when an individual is purportedly born "in Insanity" (an impossible event)
such individual, by such purported birth,  is automatically thereby imbued with
an obligation of servitude to "Insanity", an entity, that in truth, only exists
in the imagination of those who have been indoctrinated to adhere to such
fraudulent belief when such individuals were impressionable small children with
no cognitive ability to evaluate the truth of what they were then taught.

This Honorable Court is required to take Mandatory Judicial Notice of the
undeniable fact that Insanity "citizenship" is a subservient status most
commonly acquired by the "voluntary" claim of an individual who has been
indoctrinated by the government of Insanity  to accept such status through
fraudulent inducement that the individual had been intentionally subjected to
through mandatory attendance in government indoctrination centers,
euphemistically known as  "public schools".

This Honorable Court is required to take Mandatory Judicial Notice of the
undeniable fact that when a human infant is born, the infant's mind is totally
devoid of any cognitive ability to evaluate the information it is exposed to in
order to determine whether what it is being exposed to is beneficial or harmful
to itself.  That is, when born, a human infant is totally at the mercy of the
adults who are responsible for the education of the infant, and that such adults
have a moral and legal obligation to teach the child only that which is
beneficial to the child.  Such adults have no proper authority to indoctrinate
the child into a condition of servitude to any artificial political entity; to
the contrary, such adults have an absolute  responsibility and obligation to
teach such children that any participation by the children in any artificial
political entity is totally voluntary, and that if such children voluntarily
choose to participate in such artificial political entity the said children will
thereby be voluntarily giving up the individual freedom they were naturally born
with and will thereby be submitting themselves to a lifetime condition of total
servitude to the whims and whimsy of those men who manipulate the artificial
political entity for the good of themselves, and NOT for the good of anyone who
"voluntarily" opts into such citizenship.

The fact that the indoctrinating adults failed and refused to teach such
children the truth constitutes the worst kind of fraud imaginable and
constitutes an Estoppel, prohibiting the introduction of any and all reference
to such participation to be used in these proceedings as evidence that the
individual's previous adherence and participation as such citizen constitutes
such individual's voluntary and willing submission to the authority of any
artificial political entity, including, but not limited to, Insanity!

	 Ibid: "Formerly the questions regarding estoppel arose almost entirely in
relation to transfers of real property, and the rules in regard to one kind of
estoppel were quite fully elaborated. In more modern time the principle has come
to be applied to all cases where one by words or conduct wilfully causes another
to believe in the existence of a certain state of things, and induces him to act
on that belief or to alter his own previous position."

	 Equitable estoppel, or estoppel by conduct, is said to have its foundation in
fraud, considered in its most general sense; Bisph. Eq. § 2S2. It is said
(Bigelow, Estop. 437) that the following [five] elements must be present in
order to constitute an estoppel by conduct:

	 1.  There must have been a representation or concealment of material facts.

1A: "There must have been a representation of material facts".  The fact that
children in attendance in public schools are indoctrinated therein to believe
and accept it to be a fact that when they were born in the land area claimed by
the United States to be under its dominion that such birth made them
automatically to be citizens of the United States is so well known that this
Court is required to take Mandatory Judicial Notice of the representation of
such material fact.

1B: "That there must have been a concealment of material facts".  The fact that
when born every human baby is born totally politically free and independent is
likewise of such a self evident nature that this court must likewise take
Mandatory Judicial Notice thereof.

The question here is, did the State of Insanity or the Federation engage in
misrepresentations or concealment of material facts when I, as a child, was
required to attend the indoctrination centers maintained and operated by members
of the Federation?

The fact that the Federation continually instructs children attending its
indoctrination centers that when" born in the United States" such children are
thereby automatically citizens thereof or are deemed to be such citizens due to
provisions of the Fourteenth Amendment, is so well known that this court must,
once more, take Mandatory Judicial Notice of such irrefutable fact.

In conjunction therewith, it is likewise well known that nowhere in any of the
indoctrination centers maintained by the Federation is it taught or even
suggested that any one purportedly born "in the United States" is born in a
condition of political independence or individual sovereignty and therefore,
this court must take Mandatory Judicial Notice thereof.

Finally, on this point, it is equally well known that the indoctrination centers
operated by this Federation strive to instill in all of its victims that they
have a patriotic duty to serve Insanity and or United States in whatever manner
Insanity or the United States decides to command them.

	 2. The representation must have been made with knowledge of the facts.

2A: Is it not self evident that those adults who represent themselves to be
qualified to "teach" children are, in such a representation, representing
themselves to be fully competent and qualified to teach truth to the children
charged to their care?  Is it not their duty to have ensured that they are fully
aware of the true political status of a human when born, that human infants,
although physically dependent on the adults caring for them at the time of their
birth, they are none-the-less totally politically independent of any mandatory
service to any political entity or of any obligation of any mandatory service to
anyone or any entity of any and every nature what-so-ever?  That any obligation
of service that the person might choose to enter into after attaining maturity
shall be upon the decision and determination of the individual himself and such
determination should not and may not be induced by fraudulent misrepresentations
or omissions by the adults charged with the care and raising up of such human
infants and children.

This court is charged with taking Mandatory Judicial Notice that the
misrepresentations made to me were with the full knowledge of the facts by those
adults who subjected me to such misrepresentations when I was a child charged
into their care.

	 3.  "The party to whom it was made must have been ignorant of the truth."

3A: Would it be in any way possible to find a party more ignorant of the truth
of things than a new born human infant?  Although we gradually become
cognitively aware of the physical changes we experience as we mature from
physical infancy, to physical childhood to physical maturity as an adult, we do
not usually take any cognitive notice of our intellectual development from
infancy to maturity.  We rarely ever take even a moment to think of when it was
that we were, intellectually, no longer a child.  Among those few who make it a
profession to study the human mind, it is well known that the human mind is more
easily trained in the manner desired by those who are intent on indoctrinating
it for devious purposes than any other creature.

This is why during Adolph Hitler's dictatorship over Germany his government was
able to induce thousands of young maidens to allow themselves to be impregnated
by total strangers and then induced them to surrender their infants to the
German Nazi government on the very day the infants were born, in order that such
children could be raised totally under the dominion of the Nazi government with
no influences of father, mother or family.

Al though the government of the United States has not yet sunk this low, just
last week we had a news report that a school in the United States had presented
a video to all of its children teaching them to pledge allegiance to President
Obama.

  This court is required to take Mandatory Judicial Notice that I was ignorant of
the truth of the matter in regard to my naturally acquired political status as a
free man on the land at the time I was born and also that I was likewise totally
ignorant of the insidious intent of those government indoctrination officers
euphemistically known as "public school teachers" at the time I was subjected to
the indoctrinating mind-control they instilled in me when I was a child under
their care.

	 4. It must have been made with the intention that the other party would act
upon it.

4A: The intention that I would act on the indoctrination instilled in me was
not, and is not, left up to me to determine.  I was indoctrinated to believe
that if I did not and do not adhere  strictly to the rules laid down by the
government that I would be subjected to all manner of punishment and even
incarceration.  As high school students we were even subjected to tours of the
county jail so that we would see what we would experience if we got out of line.
It was never suggested to me that I had any choice.  And none of us students
ever thought to question how it could be that while we were taught that we were
free, we were indoctrinated into a condition of servitude so encompassing that
there was no room in our developing minds to ever question the extent of the
control we were trained to accept as being "normal".

This court is required to take Mandatory Judicial Notice that the indoctrination
I was subjected to was not only intentionally oriented to induce my compliance
but that it was maliciously intentionally presented in such a way that I would
be afraid to fail to comply.  That it was not only with the intention that I
would act upon the programing instilled in me by the government's indoctrination
officers, but it was the intention of those subjecting me to this 
indoctrination to instill in me a fear of the punishment I would be subjected to
if I were to merely fail to comply; heaven forbid that I would intentionally do
so, as evidenced by the proceedings which have caused me to create and present
this instant writing.

	 5. The other party must have been induced to act upon it.

5A:  The proof of the intent and success of the indoctrination officers is the
fact that until recently I did indeed comply with the mind controlling
indoctrination I had been intentionally subjected to.

This court is required to take Mandatory Judicial Notice of the intent and
effectiveness of the indoctrination of the government's indoctrination officers
due to the fact that I and millions of other victims have indeed acted on the
indoctrination.

The fraudulent teaching of the children "born in Insanity" by the indoctrination
officers of the "Public Schools" of Insanity who have a clear duty to speak up
and teach the truth to the children under their care, cause the children "of
Insanity" great and irreparable harm.

These indoctrination officers teach the children under their care that such
children were born free in the "freest country" on the entire planet, when the
truth is that Insanity and the United States are the most micro-managed
societies in the entire universe:

	 Ibid, "The rule of equitable estoppel is that where one by his acts,
declarations, or silence where it is his duty to speak, has induced another, in
reliance on such acts, declarations, or silence, to enter into a transaction, he
shall not, to the prejudice of the person misled, impeach the transaction."

I was induced by "Insanity" through its indoctrination officers, to believe that
as my "parents" had informed me that I was "born in Insanity", that such birth
automatically made me to be a citizen of the United States and a citizen of
Insanity, neither of which are possible in the real world, as it is totally
impossible for a real live flesh and blood human child to be born into
citizenship of, or with any obligations of fealty to, or any manner of service
obligation what-so-ever to, any individual or group thereof or to any artificial
political entity created by any one or any combination of other humans merely
because such creating humans so declared.

This inducement of me by the indoctrination officers of Insanity or of the
Federation was totally and criminally fraudulent!  The fact that such
indoctrination officers believed that their indoctrination of me was for my own
good can not and does not in any way justify their lying to me.  Such
indoctrination officers had an obligation to teach me the total, absolute, and
untainted truth, and then allow me to decide for myself whether or not I would
agree that my participation in the support of Insanity or the Federation as a
citizen thereof would beneficial to me.

At this time, "President" Obama has "ordered" the Senate of the United States to
raise the debt limit of the United States to twelve trillion dollars.  This will
constitute an individual obligation of every individual in the United States in
the amount of some $60,000.00 per individual.  Such flagrant abuse of government
authority does not deserve my support and I refuse to volunteer to participate
in such outrageous squandering of the resources of the populace of this land! 
And, as I have previously mentioned, some of the school children of this land
are now being taught to pledge allegiance to "President" Obama, born in Kenya;
"Hiel Obama!"

	 Ibid: "He who by his language or conduct leads another to do what he would not
otherwise have done shall not subject such person to loss or injury by
disappointing the expectations upon which he acted."

It is far too late for Insanity or the federation to undue or even appreciably
mitigate the damage I have suffered caused by the flagrant disregard of the
foregoing excerpt from Bouvier's Law Encyclopedia by the enforcement officers
employed by Insanity or the Federation and or the political subdivisions
thereof.  The most that can be accomplished at this time is for Insanity to
acknowledge its responsibilities and its culpability by having this Honorable
Court do the honorable thing by ordering these charges dropped and all reference
to them expunged, and to order the Department of Revenue Office in Yellville,
Insanity to provide me with an official  identification document with an entry
in the computer files of Insanity instructing all enforcement officers in or of
Insanity or of the Federation , to not stop or detain me for any reason
what-so-ever!

	 Ibid: "Representations, in order to constitute an estoppel must be made to
induce the other party to act, and he must have been induced so to act ...
572;to his injury ... They must amount to misrepresentation or concealment of
material facts ... of which the other party is actually and permissively
ignorant ...or such negligence as amounts to fraud in law".

	 Ibid: "In some cases it is held that there need not be intent to deceive".

	 Ibid Rule 37: "Inconclusive or disputable presumptions of law are those where a
fact is presumed to exist, either from the general experience of mankind or from
policy, or from proof of the existence of certain other facts, until something
is offered to show the contrary. Thus, the law presumes a man to be sane until
the contrary appears, and to be innocent of the commission of a crime until he
is proved to be guilty.  So, [in regard to] the existence of a person, or of a
particular state of things being shown, the law presumes the person or state of
things to continue until something is offered to conflict with the presumption.
"
	 "See Best Presumption, ch. ii."

Part of the purpose of this motion is to offer evidence to show and establish
the contrary in regard to the presumption that Insanity has any ability to claim
political jurisdiction over me without providing evidence which establishes that
I willingly and knowingly abandoned the individual sovereignty I was born with,
having been fully advised and informed of the negative consequences thereof
prior thereto, in order for me to have voluntarily intentionally surrendered
myself to the jurisdiction of Insanity.

Moreover, the evidence I will present herein below will irrefutably establish
that Insanity has itself, through its failure to provide me (and other men and
women similarly situated) an alternate means of qualifying to be issued a driver
license,  other than through our presentation of a birth certificate of which no
man or woman can have personal knowledge of the origin thereof, that Insanity
has thereby admitted it does not have and therefore can not properly claim or
exercise political dominion over me; such an inability creates an Estoppel
preventing any further attempt of Insanity to persecute me due to my choice of
opting out of participation in the artificial entity, Insanity, or of the
Federation.

Therefore, I do not hereinafter offer any conclusory  opinions not clearly
supported by the facts presented; I merely present facts and reasonable,
lawfully sound conclusions inferred therefrom which, as is stated by the Supreme
Court above referenced, must be responded to in writing by the judicial officer
addressing this matter!

This court is required to take Mandatory Judicial Notice of the following self
evident facts and conclusions based thereon which cannot be reasonably refuted
or denied:

1.  This Honorable Court will Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that it is
true and self-evident that governments are artificial entities that do not exist
in nature.

The fact that over many centuries the nature of the human species has indicated
a requirement that  some form of social organization be established to address
and resolve disputes and punish criminal acts does not change the fact that
governments do not exist in nature!  It just makes it more difficult to devise
and implement the proper means of addressing the manner in which issues are to
be peaceably determined and resolved.

A critical aspect of such resolution is a fair evaluation and determination of
those acts which actually constitute a crime.  It can not be appropriate to
create statutory rules which exceed the authority of the men who create statutes
merely because such men are purported to have been appointed by what they choose
to call "the electorate".

  The association together of men in great numbers may very well increase power,
but such numerical association cannot have any reasonable ability what-so-ever
to increase their authority beyond the authority of any one individual man!

Creating an organization that assumes power in excess of that naturally held by
any one of its human creators thereby enabling itself to more intently afflict
the populace with injury worse than what the organization was established to
prevent and correct cannot Reasonably be recognized as proper or acceptable.

2.  This Honorable Court will Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that it is
true and self-evident that, as governments are the artificial creation of men
and, as individual men have no natural individual authority to command other
men, that the governments such men create cannot Reasonably be imbued by such
men with more authority than the authority any one of such men was imbued with
by Nature!

As the foregoing is self-evidently true, then how can it be possible for the
artificial governments created by such men to be imbued by their creators with
authority not naturally acquired or held by any one single individual man who
participated in the creation of such government?

That is, how is it that any combination of men can properly acquire or in any
way imbue themselves with authority due merely to their numerical combination
(or otherwise) to regulate the normal and usual activities of other men in the
community, absent the willing and intentional voluntary submission of such other
men, such other men not having been in any degree informed of the negative
consequences thereof prior thereto?

That is, how is it that men who create government can acquire any proper
authority to "vote" themselves or their government into a position of authority
over other men when such other men have not and do not willingly and
intentionally, being fully informed of the negative consequences thereof prior
thereto, agree to be bound by such voting procedures?

3. This Honorable Court will Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice, based on the
foregoing, that the Executive Branch of Insanity must present irrefutable
evidence to prove that I willingly and intentionally, being fully informed of
the negative consequences thereof prior thereto, agreed to submit myself to the
authority of the artificial government, Insanity; that until such proof is
brought forward and placed on the record, Insanity and the Federation is
Estopped from further proceedings against me!

	 Bouvier's Law Encyclopedia 3rd Rev. 8th Edition, 1914 provides the meaning of 
"Involuntary" to be as follows: "Involuntary, An involuntary act is that which
is performed with constraint or with repugnance, or without the will to do it. 
An act is involuntary when it is done under duress."


Is it not particularly relevant that Bouvier provides that an act is involuntary
even when intentionally done when it is done under duress?

That is, where is the irrefutable evidence in the records of Insanity or any
other political subdivision of the United States or the Federation, that I had
been fully and properly informed that United States citizenship is a condition
of servitude and that if I voluntarily claimed such citizenship I would be
submitting myself to a lifetime condition of servitude limited only by the grace
of the men who manage what they have created?

4.  This Honorable Court will Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that in
order to answer these questions that this Court must consider the self evident
fact that when we humans are born we have no intellectual ability to evaluate in
any degree what-so-ever that what we are taught as children is conducive to our
own individual well-being or not.

That is, as new born infants, is it not true that we have no naturally provided
frame of reference, that is, as such children are we not totally at the mercy of
those adults who are charged with our upbringing and education?

That is, is it not true that as adolescent children our minds are easily
manipulated into conforming to whatever degree of servitude may be desired by
the unscrupulous adults who have access to inflict their self-serving
indoctrination upon us?

5.  This Honorable Court will Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that it is
self-evident and undeniable that the government of Insanity and the Federation
has been, and is, engaged daily in it's self-serving indoctrination of every
child in this state attending the government indoctrination centers
euphemistically known as "public schools".

6.  This Honorable Court will Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that it can
not be reasonably denied that such children are in attendance in such "schools"
only because the governments of Insanity and the Federation have mandated their
attendance, purportedly for their own good, while the truth is that the purpose
is to indoctrinate the children into being docile taxpayers, for the benefit of
those men who are in control of Insanity and the Federation.

7.  This Honorable Court will Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that it can
not be reasonably denied that no child can properly be claimed to have been, or
ever has been born into, or under, or subject to, the political dominion of any
artificial entity, government, Insanity, the Federation or otherwise.

Is it not true that as such artificial political entities have no proper
authority to claim such dominion, that it is also  therefore true that when
governments assert such claim that such claims are a self-serving misuse and
abuse of the power of government?

8.  This Honorable Court will Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that it can
not reasonably be denied that any act I may have engaged in pertaining to my
"application" for a driver license, or other government "benefit", was engaged
in by me as a result of the intense intentional indoctrination I was subjected
to as a child while attending the government's indoctrination centers known as
"public schools", without me ever being told or permitted to be exposed to the
truth while I was in attendance in such indoctrination centers, and that,
therefore, any such evidence is Estopped from being brought forward.

Is it not true that the truth that was withheld from me by the indoctrination
officers in the government indoctrination centers was that I was born free with
no naturally acquired obligation to apply for a "driver license" or other
government mandated identification paraphernalia? Especially, when I was
indoctrinated to believe that my ability to travel on the public way could only
be properly exercised through my  presentation of a document known as a "birth
certificate" to the government's driver license issuing office in order for me
to be issued a driver license?

9.  This Honorable Court will Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that it can
not be reasonably denied that when born a human infant has at that time not
acquired the cognitive ability to take notice of any of the facts pertaining to
its birth.
That is, is it not true that at the time of its birth a human baby has no
ability to know where it was born, when it was born, who its own mother was, or
whether a birth certificate was created in regard to its birth, or to even know
what a birth certificate is, or to even know its own gender or to be aware that
there is such a gender designation as boy and girl?

Is it not true that a human infant at birth has not even the ability to know
that it has two arms, two legs, ten toes, ten fingers or anything else
what-so-ever provided to the infant by Nature?

Is it not true that when born the human baby is totally at the mercy of the
adults who will teach the child all these things?

Is it not true that as children we humans in this society were and are being
continually subjected to intense unending government initiated indoctrination to
imbue us with feelings of obligations of servitude to the artificial government
for the purpose of continually convincing us that we owe fealty to government
and that we have a duty to obey and conform to the dictates of the government
with no natural right or any right what-so-ever to question or in any way doubt
that we have such "obligations"?

Is it not true that we are taught as impressionable children that it is shameful
and unpatriotic to ever question any of the foregoing?

10.  This Honorable Court will Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that it can
not reasonably be denied that there is no possible way that any man, woman, boy
or girl can have even the slightest personal knowledge that a specific birth
certificate has anything what-so-ever to do with their own birth.

11.   This Honorable Court will Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that as
far as such authority pertains to those born here on this land, it can not
Reasonably be denied that the authority of Insanity' dominion and of the
Federation is limited only to those persons who have willingly, intentionally,
knowingly, having been fully informed of the negative consequences thereof 
prior thereto, voluntarily  agreed to submit themselves to such authority.

12.  This Honorable Court will Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that it can
not reasonably be claimed that men and women who were subjected to the intense
indoctrination, set forth herein above, during their childhood, who thereupon
"agreed" to submit themselves to the authority of the government that caused and
instituted their indoctrination, have done so in any truly voluntary manner.

	 Bouvier, "An act is involuntary when it is done under duress."

13.   This Honorable Court will Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that it
can not reasonably be denied that the authority of the State of Insanity is
limited to extend only to and over those men and women who have willfully and
intentionally agreed thereto, having been fully informed of the negative
consequences thereof prior thereto.

14.  This Honorable Court will Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that it can
not reasonably be denied that when any man or woman who has been indoctrinated
throughout their life to believe that they were born with an obligation to
submit themself to the dictates of Insanity or the Federation thereafter acquire
an awareness that they were wrongfully and criminally intentionally seduced into
such belief by Insanity or the Federation, that such men and women then have an
absolute natural right to be immediately freed from any purported obligation
they may have been seduced into agreeing to prior thereto.

15.  This Honorable Court will Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that during
the proceedings in the District Court of the County of Marion, that the judge
thereof, Judith Bearden determined that my use of FRNs to purchase the
necessities of life had placed me under the political dominion of Insanity. 
Judge Bearden refused to allow me an opportunity to rebut her erroneous
presumption.  Not allowing me an opportunity to speak to Judge Bearden's
inability to provide any evidence what-so-ever that I had ever  previously been
informed that such use of FRNs would cause me to relinquish the individual
sovereignty I was born with, caused her ruling to be  void, ab initio, due to
the principle of Estoppel.  Insanity cannot reasonably establish a condition for
the issuance of a driver license that is  impossible for me to comply with, and
then prosecute me for failing to comply.  Such a situation could not be more
absurd!

The preceding referenced proceeding occurred during motion hearings immediately
prior to trial.  During those proceedings Judge Bearden also purported to
address the matter of my individual political sovereignty. During her
uninterruptible monolog on this matter she expressed her extensive 25 year
history claiming to have dealt with " exactly these same issues" many times in
the past; she emphatically stated that she had heard it all before and was not
about to listen to any more of it at that time.  Then, without allowing me any
opportunity to rebut her outrageously  frivolous, nonsensical and totally
inaccurate assessment of my position, she proceeded then to move forward,
whereupon she became aware that I intended to call Deputy Prosecutor Kenford
Carter as a witness during the "trial".

Thereupon, Judge Bearden ordered a one week  continuance to July 24, 2009, so
that an alternate Deputy Prosecutor could be brought in to replace Kenford
Carter.

This one week continuance gave me an opportunity to evaluate what I might expect
from Judge Bearden during "trial".  As Judge Bearden's court is a court of no
record she is able to run as roughshod over anyone as she pleases with little
concern that she would be challenged or held accountable for her outrageous
misconduct.  Therefore, during that week I determined to avail myself of the
"Trial De Novo", which I had been led to believe was a Constitutionally
protected means by which an accused who had cause to believe he was being
rail-roaded by the District Court could move his matter to a court of record and
be accorded a trial by jury.  This was my reason for changing my plea to "nolo
contendere".  Little did I know the farcical nature of the administration of
this "Constitutional protection".

In consideration of the fact that the trial proceedings originally scheduled for
the July 25th date would not take place due to my decision to apply for a Trial
De Novo in Circuit Court, in order to minimize the inconvienience of bringing in
an alternate Deputy Prosecutor to replace Kenford Carter, I contacted both the
District Court Clerk and Mr Carter by telephone to inform them of my decision to
change my plea.  Additionally, I filed a written motion to that effect with the
District Court Clerk and served a copy thereof on Mr. Carter.  I was informed
that it was too late, that arrangements had already been made for Deputy
Prosecutor Christopher Carter to appear in place of Kenford Carter for the July
24th proceedings.

But be that as it may, during the proceedings in that inferior court on July
24th, Judith Bearden informed me, in regard to me securing my presence in this
Circuit Court, that I would have to provide a new bond in the amount of $500.00.
Judge Bearden informed me, and in response to my several objections, Judge
Bearden repeatedly insisted that the $720.00 bond that I had previously posted
to secure my presence in the District Court could not and would not serve as a
bond in this Circuit Court.  When I steadfastly resisted this ruling of Judge
Bearden, Deputy County Prosecutor Christopher Carter voluntarily chimed in to
offer his explanation to me in support of Judge Bearden's factually erroneous
contentions.   Judge Bearden insisted that I must procure the signatures of two
Marion County property owners to sign bond guarantee documents.  Mr. Christopher
Carter supported her in this fallacious contention.  These pretentious
allegations were blatantly and maliciously false and totally contrary to
Insanity Rule 36.

I vehemently insist that both Judge Bearden and Christopher Carter knew, and had
a duty to know, that what they were insisting constituted their intentional
misrepresentation of the truth.  In plain words, they both intentionally LIED to
me regarding the bond requirements.

  Judge Bearden repeatedly informed me that I must secure and present the
signatures of two Marion County property owners on bond documents guaranteeing
the new $500.00 bond to her in District Court the following Tuesday, being July
28, 2009, in order to move this matter to this Circuit Court.

///
Over the weekend of July 25-26 I thereupon prepared a motion asking Judith
Bearden to reconsider her $500.00 bond order, extensively citing therein the
appropriate sections of Rule 36.  I filed this motion for Bearden's
reconsideration of her ruling with the Clerk of the District Court on July 27,
2009, in which motion I raised these Rule 36 issues, whereupon the Clerk of that
court informed me that there would be no need for my presence in the District
Court on July 28th as she (the clerk) would provide me the certified copy of the
record as soon as I paid her the required $5.00 fee.

I contend that the lies of these two "Officers of the Court" (Bearden and
Carter) in regard to bond requirements I must comply with in order to move this
matter to this Circuit Court constituted an intentional conspiracy; a criminal
conspiracy, which, as I understand it, is a felony!

I hereby incorporate my motion for reconsideration of the District Court's July
24th ruling as an exhibit hereto, as though the entire motion was set forth in
full herein and here at.

I hereby make a claim on Judge Judith Bearden's bond, in its entirety!

16.  This Honorable Court will Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that the
Legislature of Insanity has established that driver licenses will only be issued
to applicants who present a birth certificate with the applicant's application
in order for the applicant to be issued a driver license.

17.  This Honorable Court will Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that the
purpose and intention of the birth certificate requirement is to have the
applicant, as an adult, "voluntarily" claim the use of the artificial persona
"name" created on the birth certificate at the time of the applicant's birth, at
least sixteen years prior, thereby, through such claim the applicant
"voluntarily" creates an acceptable nexus establishing a subservient fealty
"obligation" of the applicant to serve the artificial entity Insanity, thereby
enabling the artificial entity Insanity to secure dominion over real live flesh
and blood men and women, in "full compliance" with the prohibition of
involuntary servitude set forth in Section Twenty-seven of Article two of the
Insanity Constitution.

18. This Honorable Court will Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that none of
the following can reasonably be denied, (i) that the ownership of the artificial
"name" entered on a birth certificate was surrendered to Insanity when the birth
certificate was filed with Insanity by the parent(s) of a new born child at
least sixteen years prior to a driver license applicant's initial presentment of
the birth certificate in order for the applicant to be issued a driver license,
(ii) thereby the applicant created  a lawfully acceptable nexus enabling the
artificial entity Insanity or the Federation to interrelate through the
artificial persona "name" entered on the birth certificate owned by Insanity or
the Federation, as being  "sovereign" over the real live flesh and blood men and
women who claim the use of the government owned "name" by presenting such birth
certificates with their driver license applications in order to be issued a
driver license, (iii) such real live flesh and blood men and women unknowingly
thereby cloaking themselves with an artificial persona such persona having been
designated and defined as being the artificial person designated as  "natural
persons" in several subsections of Title 27 of the statutes of Insanity and the
Federation  included in Title 27 along with other artificial persons in various
and several of the subsections of the statutes of Insanity, Title 27, when (iv)
the real live flesh and blood men and women officially "voluntarily" claim the
use of the artificial persona "name" entered on "their" birth certificate as
being "theirs" when (v) the real live flesh and blood men and women apply for a
driver license.

19.  This Honorable Court will Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that
Insanity Constitution Section Twenty-seven (27) of Article Two (2) prohibits
involuntary servitude in the State of Insanity.

And, that it is also true that Bouvier's Law Encyclopedia 3rd Rev. 8th Edition,
1914 provides the meaning of  "Involuntary" is as follows: "Involuntary, An
involuntary act is that which is performed with constraint or with repugnance,
or without the will to do it. An act is involuntary when it is done under
duress."

And likewise, that the rules pertaining to Estoppel prohibit Insanity, in
concert with the Federation (or otherwise), to contrive a scheme where innocent
individuals are improperly and fraudulently enticed to "voluntarily" surrender
their natural birth-acquired individual sovereignty, who thereafter realize they
have been improperly induced, enticed and seduced into a condition of total and
complete servitude to an artificial entity, in this case, Insanity, who then
remove themselves from such condition by thereafter declining to use the
"Positive ID" paraphernalia provided by the Artificial Entity, for the
Artificial Entity to then persecute such "reborn" individuals in the manner that
I am being persecuted in these instant proceedings!

20.  This Honorable Court will Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that it can
not reasonably be denied that this Constitutional prohibition of involuntary
servitude clearly imbues Insanity and the Federation with an implied obligation
and a clear duty to provide those men and women who opt out of Insanity'
political dominion to protect such men and women from the enforcement officers
of Insanity and all of its political subdivisions.

21.  This Honorable Court will Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that, in
regard to the issuance of a driver license, it can not be reasonably denied that
as the government of Insanity has failed to provide an alternate means or
procedure for those of us who refuse to make a fraudulent claim to a birth
certificate of which we know it is impossible for us to have any personal
knowledge of such document's relevance to ourselves  in order for us to apply
for and be issued a driver license, that such failure on the part of Insanity
clearly constitutes Insanity' acknowledgment that Insanity can make no proper
claim to, and has no proper ability to, command or in any way govern any real
live flesh and blood man and woman who is unwilling to commit a fraud by
voluntarily "appearing" in the artificial domain of Insanity using an artificial
persona, "name" entered on some birth certificate, and that the principle of
Estoppel prevents any such information to be used against him or her or any of
us.

22.  This Honorable Court will Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that it can
not reasonably be denied that Insanity and the Federation has a Constitutional
and moral duty to provide me with some manner of passport document and / or
other appropriate identifying paraphernalia to protect me from the enforcement
officers of Insanity and its political subdivisions and of the Federation.


23.  I hereby request that this Honorable court immediately order the dismissal
of all and any charges lodged against me  that have caused me to expend all of
the effort that I have to prepare this instant document and that this Honorable
court immediately order the Revenue Office of Yellville, Insanity to immediately
provide me with an identification card similar to an Insanity driver license and
license plates for all of the vehicles that I might operate including the decal
currently provided to family and friends of the Insanity State Police, together
with notations entered in the police computers of Insanity that when the police
encounter me on the highways of Insanity or the Federation that such police be
informed through their police computers that I should not be stopped or
detained.

24.  This Honorable Court will Please take Mandatory Judicial Notice that as
Insanity is operating as a Trust and that all individuals who live in the land
area claimed to be under Insanity' dominion are considered to be the
beneficiaries of such Trust.  As such a beneficiary I hereby appoint this Court
as my Trustee and I hereby instruct this Court to order all charges lodged
against me be dismissed and the record thereof totally expunged, and that this
Court, as Trustee,  order all monies I have been required to pay due to these
inconveniences returned to me, including reasonable damages, for a total of
$5,000.00.

25.  Be hereby advised, I freely acknowledge that I am subject in every respect
to the common law and may be held accountable under the common law for any
injury I might be responsible for in a properly established common law court.

As previously stated herein above, from Bouvier's, " An act is involuntary when
it is done under duress."


_________________________________
	 I Don't Sweat It, TDC * (123) 456-7890
	 c/o P.O. Box xxx, Yellville, Insanity 72687
	 September xx, 2009

Hi Group -

This item was sent to me and at first blush it appears to be a bonifide
explanation of much of what we have been suffering under written by an insider,
but a more xcarefil reading brought to my attention numerous typographical and
grammatical errors that cause serious doubts as to its origin or author.  I
offer it to you to with my concerns to enable you to consider the validity of
the author's claim, and credentials.

Here below are notes relating to specific concerns that we have noticed in this
writting:

Cheers,

I'm Eric, WhoRU??

(*)Asterisk indicates notation or comment pointing out inconsistencies or
questionable assertions by the author, not necessarily to expound on or provide
any particular corrections of such.

There are unnecessary, gratuitous, and many misuses of quotation marks, commas,
parentheses, apostrophes, brackets, semi-colons; not to mention out-right
misspellings of words.

There are many "red flags" which draw attention to the possible
untrustworthiness of this author's material beyond simple grammatical and
sentence structure errors a "learned" and experienced individual such as a judge
would be expected to not make.

There are the following "red flag" questionable statements, references or
concepts:

The usage or misapplication of the terms and/or phrases such as

"Sovereign American People"

"Sovereign People",

"We the people",

"the people",

"Loyalist",

"martyr",

"citizen",

"fiction",

"legal fiction",

"represent themselves",

"adhesion contracts",

the "Amero",

ALL CAP and "Admiralty" and "corporate fiction" patriot gibberish.

Dwelling on the extinct, defunct and irrelevant first 13th Amendment
(prohibition of "titles of nobility");

Failure to discuss the current 13th Amendment and its so very important
political implications;

Usage of the term "We the People" as equal to or a substitution for the people
who call themselves "citizens";

Failure to provide "cites";

Author anonymity!


THE MATRIX AND THE U. S. CONSTITUTION

By: no name (hidden for his safety)

INTRODUCTION:

During my twelve years service as a Judge, I always insisted on the truth and
placed justice above law and order! I could have prepared this article
indicia(*?) of a research paper however; people tend to lose interest when
articles of this nature become too technical. Science has taught us that, "For
every action there is a positive reaction!"(*Huh?)

If your life on earth resembles a Matrix, it is because you're seeing things for
the first time, with eyes wide open, but you feel confused! That feeling of
confusion is appropriate because the information you are now digesting,
contradicts much of the information you have been spoon fed throughout your
life! I named this paper after the movie "The Matrix," written by the
Wachowsi(*sp) brothers. After reading this, watch the movie and you will notice
many similarities.

In 2002, my brother ran into a problem with the IRS and to help him out, I began
to research the Tax Code. One thing led to another and suddenly I was uncovering
information about our government, which was directly in conflict with the U. S.
Constitution and what I have been led to believe throughout my life. In time I
began to interface with people from every state in the Republic, who was(*sic)
doing the same thing I was doing; some for the same reason and others for
different reasons. We began to trade our research and the facts I uncovered
was(*sic) totally in contradiction to the history of America, which had been
taught to us in public school and the principals of law, I had absorbed during
my service as a Judge. I began to assist people to prepare and file suits in the
courts and I filed several of my own. At one point, because of the information
I'm about to provide to you; I became extremely depressed. After about three
months, I eventually shook it off and continued on with my research.

My hope in writing this is to help you, the reader, make sense of it all, which
will require you to wash your mind clean of the brainwashing you were subjected
to by our government, our government controlled public schools and
church's(*sic) and reeducate yourself. When you understand the actions, the
reactions will make sense, and it should anger you! Eventually, you will have a
choice to make; a choice that will define: "How to survive life in, The Matrix?"
In `The Matrix' nothing is real however, your mind has been conditioned to
believe it is real! The Matrix is far too big to defeat; no one can escape it,
and we haven't the means or intelligence to beat those in control! Through my
research, I discovered that America is a society of functional illiterates! I
remind you that this is not my opinion, I'm just the messenger!

The people in charge of the Matrix represent the most powerful and intelligent
humans on earth. When gifted children appear in the public schools of the world,
they are courted with scholarships, money and eventually memberships into secret
societies! They will be introduced to very persuasive intellectuals, who will
convince

Page 1

these young gifted people, that it is their place and duty to be a part of the
elite who rule the worlds population, because the rest of the worlds(*sic)
population are(*sic) too stupid to make decisions for themselves (their comment
- not mine)! When the "New World Order" is officially and openly in control,
only the extremely intelligent will be allowed to propagate. Everyone else will
be sterilized or murdered through staged pandemics, used to eliminate excessive
populations! Every Foreign Revolution, the World Wars, the Depression,
Prohibition, Korea, Vietnam, the Middle East conflict and the Influenza Epidemic
during World War I; was planned and orchestrated by these people!

Many early writers researched much of this history and were forced to fund their
own publication and the distribution of their work. Most never received the
acclaim they deserved, and never knew our government was responsible for their
failures! I am prepared to supply anyone interested with mounds of research in
support of what I have written herein!

When I've conveyed parts of this information in court documents, the
opposition's lawyer, responds to their clients that, "I'm just crazy," and if
the judge is within earshot of that comment, he will nod his head in judicial
agreement! Well, I guess that caps it! If a lawyer and a lawyer judge, both
contend that I am crazy, then I must be crazy! They wouldn't lie to you!
.......... or would they?

THE motive of our Founding Fathers was totally self-centered. It was their
personal greed that inspired them to accept the task of writing the Constitution
of the United States and not patriotism! In actuality, the United States is not
a land or a place: `It is a corporation, a legal fiction that existed well
before the Revolutionary War.' [See: Republica v. Sween, 1 Dallas 43 and 28 U.
S. C. 3002 (15)].

The Constitution of the United States was written in secret by the Founding
Fathers and was never presented to the Colonists for a vote. Surely, any
document as important as this demanded the approval of the people it governed!
Well, it wasn't presented for a vote because the Constitution wasn't created for
"We the People," it was created by and for the Founding Fathers, their family,
heirs and their posterity! The Constitution is a business plan and any reference
contained within it that appears to be the safeguard of a `Right' is there
because none of the Founding Fathers trusted each other. The safeguards were
intended to prevent any one or group of them from cutting out the others!
Proving that; "There's no honor among thieves!"

Americans are not unlike all other humans who inhabit the earth. All human
beings possess malleable minds, which are minds that can be shaped and
controlled; and when government shapes and controls a mind, it's called
"brainwashing." Brainwashing causes the subject to become `functionally
illiterate.' In America, our functional ignorance excels in the areas of
history, government and law, which really are one in the same. Ninety-eight
percent of the officials in public office are lawyers and these so-called
representatives set policy and created the laws that govern this society. Their
use of Greek and Latin terms in law and the habit of changing definitions and
usage of common words is intentional. The intent is to

Page 2

confound and confuse the general public; and to hide the treason they are
implementing; and so that members of the public are forced or decide to hire a
lawyer out of frustration, rather than try to represent themselves in our,
`fictional courts of law.' As you read on I'll explain to you why and how, our
courts and laws are fictional!

There has never been a law on the books created by the Congress, which made it
illegal for a common man to practice law. Every Judge of a District, Circuit or
Appeal Court, except Justices and Magistrates, is a lawyer and a member of the
Bar. These Judges have the authority to establish local rules of court and those
mentioned, have created a local rule that prevents common people from
representing any other person in their court or `to practice law without a
license!' A license requires that you produce your Bar Association number. For
those who don't know, the Bar Association is simply a `Lawyers Union,' and when
lawyers are accepted into the Bar, they are required to swear allegiance to a
foreign power! The American Bar Association is a branch of a national
organization titled; "The National Lawyers Guild Communist Party" and can be
found recorded in the United States Code at: [28 U. S. C. 3002, section 15a].
They have become so big and entrenched that they no longer fear reprisal!

Whenever I tell people that there is no actual law that makes it a crime to
represent another person in court, their reaction is, "liar!" I remind them that
Abraham Lincoln and Clarence Darrow never went to law school or passed the Bar,
but their reaction is understandable because the Bar is a very powerful
organization and its members have infiltrated every nitch(*sic) of American life
and business. How many times in your life have you heard, "You can't practice
law without a license?" I've heard it said in numerous movies spanning one
hundred years; in my mother's soaps and by comedians in jokes and in theatrical
skits. I've seen the phrase in print in newspaper articles, magazines and heard
it on the radio! Before I learned the truth about this fact, even my personal
lawyer made that comment to me! We all have been brainwashed to believe a lie
and because we've heard it so often from people we trust, and who are supposed
to have our best interest at heart; we all just assume it must be true! How many
other lies have you assumed, "it must be true?"

Our America(*sic) society has been lied to by their government and lawyers more
times than you will sign your name in your lifetime, and we have been
indoctrinated "brainwashed" to believe that the Constitution was created for "We
the People." The purpose behind these lies is to make you believe that you are
free, safe, protected and secure, and it is all an hallucination! How many of
you have studied each line of the Constitution; the Statutes at Large and the
Articles of Confederation, armed with a reputable dictionary or a law dictionary
from that era?

If you take the time to do this, you will soon discover that the true purpose of
the Constitution was to create a business plan and to establish a Military
Government, for the protection of the Founding Fathers, the Kings commerce,
protection of his Agents and the future control of his subject Slaves! Even the
preamble of the U. S. Constitution is a clue to the lie and which states, "...to
ourselves and our posterity!" If you never saw the title, "The Constitution,"
and you were never told what this document was about; what do you

Page 3

think would be your first impression upon hearing or reading: "...to ourselves
and our posterity!" The CONSTITUTION is not for "We the People" and AMERICA is a
Matrix of misinformation. In the eyes of those in control; America is nothing
more than a large Plantation and "We the People" are the Slaves. In many U. S.
and World Treaties, the term "high contracting powers" is used to define your
Masters! Everyone else is considered by them to be their Slaves!

All of the Founding Fathers had two things in common. They all shared the gift
of a good education or were gifted individuals, and they all came from families
of business and or substance. These men all suffered from, "visions of
grandeur!" They viewed America as their one opportunity to make them powerful
and wealthy "..........to ourselves and our posterity!" Initially, their plan
was to steal America away from the King; despite the fact that King George
funded the exploration of the New World, which legally gave him first claim to
all new continents discovered.

The seizure of the Americas by the Kings(*sic) explorers was not as it has been
depicted in our history books, presented to us by our government, in our
government controlled public schools. Native Americans (the Indians) were
murdered, their villages burned, many were enslaved, infected by diseases
brought from England and their lands taken by force and the threat of force, by
these early explorers! The Indians were labeled savages by these immigrant
explorers from England, but the true savages were our English ancestors!

One thing the Founding Fathers did not know, was that all of the Kings lands and
all future acquisitions such as the AMERICAS, had been given and pledged by King
John to Pope Innocent III and the Holy Roman Church, by the Treaty of 1213.
After that fact was proven to the Founding Fathers; King George and
representatives from the Vatican; decided to use the Constitutional draft
created by the Founding Fathers, to further their plan to control the Colonists!
Control attained by bringing the Colonists to their knees in debt! Any way you
read it, the Constitution was never written with the intent of benefitting the
American people!

Did you know that 98% of the Law Schools in America and England do not include
Constitutional Law as a part of their law curriculum? The reason for this
phenomenon is because Constitutional Law does not apply to or affect the
enforcement of statutes, codes or administrative regulations, which have
replaced constitutional law, the common law, public law and penal law and which
have been designed to control you; [e.g.] Constitutional Law is taught as an
elective at Harvard, Yale and Cambridge, and only for students of law who are
planning a future career in government. This should make sense to you as you
read on.

In the true History of America, neither side WON the Revolutionary War! At
first, the appearance of English troops in the Colonies; was simply a show of
force by King George, intended to intimidate the Colonists and force them to pay
him taxes. Factually, back in England; English soldiers refused to take up arms
against the Colonists because they were English citizens and relatives.

Mr. Mayer Amschel Bauer, founder of the Rothschild Banking Empire; by this time,
owned the King! Mr. Bauer had extended unlimited credit to the King and arranged

Page 4

contracts with him, which permitted the Rothschild Tax Collectors to represent
and collect the Kings(*sic) Tax from the Kings(*sic) subjects. [This is the
origin of the concept behind the establishment of the IRS]. It was Bauer who
suggested to King George that he enforce a Tax against the Colonists in the New
World, since the tax being collected in England was barely enough to pay the
interest on the Kings(*sic) loans. When English soldiers refused to fight; Mr.
Bauer negotiated a contract with unemployed Russian/Germanic soldiers, to fight
for King George, at a cost of 50¢ a day. Bauer then informed King George that he
had hired these soldiers in the Kings name but at a cost of $1.00 a day! King
George utilized these soldiers; dressed them in English soldier uniforms and
ordered his career Officers to command them. When his show of force in the
Colony's(*sic) failed; Mr. Bauer suggested that King George finance the
Colonists in their War efforts against him, and bring the Colonists to their
knees in debt! The King succeeded in accomplishing this through his appointed
civilian figurehead's(*sic) in charge of his government of France. Mr. Bauer
wanted to expand his Banking Empire into the Colonies. He discovered that the
Colonist didn't trade in gold or silver but used script as the basis of their
economy! The script money used, were promissory notes printed by the Colonists.
All the Colonists agreed that they would consider these notes, the lawful
currency of the colonies. Mr. Bauer wanted gold or silver and induced the King
to demand that his Tax in the Colonies be paid in gold or silver! It was that
condition, "that broke the camels back" and caused the "Boston Tea Party!"
"Whoever controls the money - controls the country!" [Rothschild]

Surreptitiously, King George infiltrated the Colonies and their feudal attempt
to form a new government, using spy's(*sic)' composed of English lawyers and
English aristocrats, loyal to him. The spy's assignment was to infiltrate the
new government; carry out the plan to defeat the Colonists through debt and
establish regular reports to the King! The Church also had their appointed
representative in place to protect and insure that their interest is being
observed. Much of the loans received from the French, went into the pockets of
the  Founding Fathers!

The Founding Fathers eventually conceded to King George and the Holy Roman
Church's demands, by and through the intervention and persuasiveness of the
Kings spy's(*sic). Ironically, the common denominator or glue that eventually
bound King George, the Founding Fathers, the English lawyers and English
aristocrats together was a secret society called the "Illuminati." Even Paul
Revere and Benjamin Franklin, were members of the Illuminati! This secret
society had a criminal and deadly past in Europe and in America they were
eventually renamed, "The Free and Accepted Masons." The majority of the regular
membership of the Free and Accepted Masons; do not know about the "Illuminati
influence" within their rank and file! The Illuminati members operate out of
special secret societies separate from the regular Masonic membership and are
found in every branch of the Free and Accepted Masons of the World!

Think about the Colonists who we have been taught to revere by our public school
system! All of these individuals were members of this secret society and all
were Traitors. Our history books also instruct us to apotheosize the Founding
Fathers, but don't hold them in reverence, hold them in contempt! By and through
their intervention, "Slaves you are and

Page 5

Slaves you will ever be!"

An example of a man in history we have been taught to revere is Benjamin
Franklin. Would it shock you to learn that he was on the Kings(*sic) payroll and
his many trips to England, was(* sic... "were") actually to report on the
colonial government to King George? The Declaration of Independence is another
story omitted from our American history books. Of the fifty-one men involved in
the creation of the Declaration of Independence, twenty-one were actually
(traitors) and on the Kings(*sic) payroll. During the Revolutionary War; English
Officers were provided the names, addresses and family members of these thirty
(loyalists)(*sic) involved in the creation and signing of the Declaration of
Independence. The English soldiers had been ordered to hunt down and murder all
thirty (loyalists)(*sic), their wives, children and all relatives, with further
instructions to burn their bodies inside their homes. The soldiers were to leave
no trace of these men and their families; to wipe out their existence for an
eternity! The history of civilizations has taught us all that martyrs are
dangerous to men of power and King George didn't want to leave any martyrs! It
is pretty obvious who provided the detailed information about the thirty
(loyalists)(*sic), their family and addresses!

(* The terms "loyalist" and "martyr" are just so wrongly used in the preceding
paragraph!)

At first glance, it appeared that Guy Madison of Virginia; was so concerned
about lawyers holding any position in American government, that he championed
the 13th Amendment, which barred lawyers from holding any public office in
government! The 13th Amendment was ratified, but never made it into print in our
government controlled school books and public classrooms. The Amendment was
surreptitiously removed and replaced by the 14th Amendment. The 15th Amendment
became the 14th and so on. Madison's efforts appear admirable but his later
actions, as a member of the 1st Congress; suggests that his only real concern
was to block lawyers from undermining the theft that he and his compatriots' had
planned for America!

Once the cost of the Revolutionary War sufficiently placed the Colonists in
debt; the English soldiers were ordered to dispense with their efforts, recover
their arms and within the next eight years they eventually returned to England.
The Colonists were so glad to see the fighting stop; that they allowed the
soldiers to retreat and exit America peacefully.

There is an old legal Maxim that states: "The first to leave the field of battle
- loses." Pursuant to this Maxim, the Founding Fathers proclaimed the Colonists
the victors! A Maxim is a legal truth that is time honored and incorruptible. In
reality, the War was just a diversion! The Colonists had no chance of succeeding
in their efforts. Examine the facts for yourself! During this era; England had
the largest Army and Navy in the World. King George owned England, Ireland and
France(*Really? Where is that documented?), having a combined population of
about 60 million subjects. The Colonists were poorly educated, poorly armed and
composed of farmers, tradesmen, bonded slaves, women and children and boasted a
total population of only 3 million subjects. And considering the undermining
that was occurring to their nation by the Kings(*sic) spy's(*sic) and the
Founding Fathers; the Colonists didn't have a prayer of defeating the English!

Americans have been indoctrinated by our federal and state governments and
through government controlled public schools and literature; government
controlled media and

Page 6

government controlled churches [YES, EVEN THE CHURCHES]; to believe that America
defeated the English! We celebrate that victory and our so-called Independence
each year on the 4th of July, and it is all a bunch of propaganda; a carrot to
lead the horse and keep this society stupid and passive! We boast today that our
country represents the finest schools in the world, but in reality, we're no
smarter than the first Colonists! We only know more about other things because
of new technology(*sic)developments during the last 250 years and yet the
average IQ of America is 70.




Documented proof that the Constitution was not for us can be found at:
Padelford, Fay & Co. v. The Mayor and Aldermen of the City of Savannah, [14
Georgia 438, 520]. This was a Court case wherein the Plaintiffs sued the City of
Savannah, for violating what they believed were their constitutionally protected
rights! The decision of the Judge says it all: "But indeed, no private person
has a right to complain, by suit in Court, on the ground of a breach of the
Constitution, the Constitution, it is true, is a compact but he [the private
person] is not a party to it!" [Emphasis added]

The United States Constitution was converted into a (Trust) and the legal
definition of a Trust is: "A legal obligation with respect to property given by
one person (donor), to another (trustee), to the advantage of a beneficiary
(Americans)." The property in this Trust includes all land, your personal
possessions that you believe you own and your physical body. The donor of the
Trust is the King of England and the Holy Roman Church. The Trustee's are all
federal and state public officials, which means that they truly are Agents of a
foreign power; the King and the Vatican.

The reason the Constitution was converted into a Trust is because, as a
non-trust business plan; The Constitution completely bound the hands of our
government officials! By their converting it into a Trust, our public officials;
were then free to make any changes they desired to this government, without
their constituents knowledge! The rules of a Trust are secret and no trustee can
be compelled to divulge those rules, and the rules can be changed by the
trustees without notice to the beneficiary!

The one pitfall confronting them and their plan was the fact that by converting
the Constitution into a Trust, our public officials had to legally assign a
beneficiary; and the beneficiary chosen could not offend or be in contrast to
the numerous International Treaties that were in force. Our public officials
wanted to stay in control of the Trust as the trustees; however a trustee cannot
also be a beneficiary! So even though the Constitution was never designed or
written for the Sovereign American people; they unknowingly became the
beneficiary of this secret Trust and hence, the creation of the "propaganda"
regarding our Constitutional Rights!

(* The author's proposal of the theory of the Trust and its donor, trustee, and
beneficiary parties is his mischaracterization of the actual three-party
relationship of the citizens, the Constitution and the true members of the
political class "We the People", the aristocrats. Cannot a donor to the trust
also be a beneficiary and even appoint the trustee?)

All high ranking public officials, lawyers and judges; laugh at the ignorance of
people who claim that their Constitutional Rights have been violated! Lawyers
are actually taught to treat the members of the general public as inferior
individuals! This also explains the `air of arrogance' that most lawyers convey
in their demeanor and speech!

Page 7




The more powerful Agents of the states and the federal government however, have
been stealing the benefits from the Trust through numerous maneuvers that have
the appearance of being lawful. In their defense; many former public officials
(Agents) were not corrupt to begin with but, by accepting bribes or as the
result of enjoying an arranged extramarital relationship; they became the victim
of an extortion plot and succumbed to the threat to expose the bribe or their
elicit affair, to their constituents! By becoming an (Agent), all was forgiven
and forgotten! The people, who arranged the bribes, also arranged the
situations, and applied the pressure to force honest men to become dishonest!
[An example of this could be a sudden demand by a Bank to pay off a loan, based
upon a hidden clause in the loan contract and which could result in a
foreclosure, bankruptcy and scandal]!

There are no remaining public federal employees in America! All employees
who(*sic) you believe to be a part of America's government, are actually agents
of a foreign government and this definition includes the [President]. The
federal elections are a joke on us! All of the candidates have been (jointly
preselected and prescreened) by the National Boards of the Republican and
Democratic Parties, well before the Election process. All of our federally
elected officials, appointed administrators, federal police and Judges; receive
their paychecks through the Office of Personnel Management. OPM is a division of
the International Monetary Fund, which is owned by the Rockefeller and
Rothschild families and their Banking Empires, which operates in tandem with the
United Nations. The IRS and Interpol; are owned by the International Monetary
Fund, which has been identified in an earlier version of the U. S. Army Manual,
as a Communist Organization!

Those Americans, who do not know how to assert their beneficiary status; are
treated by the government and their courts, as a corporate fiction! The
corporate governments and their courts, only have jurisdiction over
corporations. Corporations have no rights or jurisdiction over living people and
are only provided considerations, which have been pre-negotiated in contracts by
their directors. Otherwise, they're governed totally by commercial law, and so
are you!

(* Those "Americans" who do not know how to assert their sovereignty (by
invoking the 13th Amendment prohibition of Involuntary Servitude) are treated as
citizens, over whom the court does have jurisdiction by means of the 14th
Amendment.)

  At this point, I believe I should address a "corporate fiction" for you by
creating a situation you can relate to.

SITUATION: [You've decided to go into business for yourself and you thought up a
clever name for your business. Everything you've read and the advice received
from a lawyer or friend; suggests that you should incorporate your business! To
incorporate is to create a business on paper. It isn't real(* It isn't?); it is
a business in theory, which makes it a fiction! The lawyer or accountant you
hired to prepare your corporation; records your business with the state as a
state corporation and identifies you as president of the board of directors, not
the owner. Your business is now "a corporate fiction" and by recording the
business as a state corporation; you no longer own it, the state owns it! You
just gave your business away and made yourself an employee]!

Our presumed government representatives have done the same thing to each of us.
They changed each of us from "a sovereign" into "a corporate fiction." Your
corporate name is easily identifiable, in that it is expressed in all capital
letters(* So what?!) on all your documents and all communications received from
every government agency!

Page 8




The reason for converting every Sovereign American into a corporate fiction
dates back to the Principal of Law under the King! The King is a Sovereign
Monarch and dictator, who by his authority, creates the laws that govern his
subjects. He is the Source of Law and therefore the law cannot be enforced
against him! In America, the Source of Law is the Sovereign People(* Who is
that?) and therefore no laws can be enforced against the Source, except for
those specifically agreed to or defined by the original Constitution. Those laws
are defined as Theft, Assault and Criminal Mischief(* Not rape, murder, robbery
and trespass?); but since the Colonists never voted on the Constitution, none of
these offenses are enforceable against a living Sovereign! They are enforceable
however against a corporation or corporate fiction!

In theory and according to the common law; before any Sovereign can be arrested
for one of these crimes; a complaint must be filed with the elected Sheriff. The
Sheriff, by his own authority, assembles (a common law jury) of the accused
Sovereigns immediate neighbors, called a Grand Jury. The neighbors hear the
complaint and evidence presented to them by the complainant. They are permitted
to ask questions of any witness and can subpoena anyone else who can shed light
on the allegations. A majority must then decide if the accused Sovereign is to
be tried by a court. All of this is done without [a judge or prosecutor in
attendance]! This is a real Grand Jury proceeding, which is far removed from the
joke perpetrated by our corporate government and courts today!

What happened to our Grand Jury rights of old? The Bar Association has
successfully stolen that right away from the Sovereign people, little by little,
through rewrites of the Judiciary Act, so that now the American public believes
that the Grand Jury is an instrument subject to the jurisdiction, right and whim
of the prosecuting attorney! The prosecuting attorney controls the entire
proceeding and who testifies. The judge then tells the jury what the law is and
the members of the panel are always denied the opportunity to view the written
law!

All of our governments are corporations and are responsible for the creation of
about 800 thousand laws called statutes, which are designed to control the
Sovereign people of America. Just like the King; these statutes cannot be
enforced against the Source of Law, which are the living, breathing, flesh and
blood Sovereign people.

All of the Agents in power beginning with the King, the Vatican, the Founding
Fathers and now our presumed public officials, wanted to obtain power and
control over America and the Constitution pretty much prohibited them from
achieving those ends! So they began to devise ways to change the Sovereign
Americans into [a corporate fiction]. These Agents also decided and reasoned
that they cannot educate the masses, without exposing their treachery, and so
our private and public education must be controlled!

Without any real Constitutional basis, the U. S. Department of Education was
created. The Constitution made it the responsibility of each state to educate
their people and several states challenged the Congress in the courts. The
matter was eventually heard by the U. S. Supreme Court, which has never been a
Constitutional Article III Court from its inception, which I will explain. The
Supreme Court ruled that the federal government was entitled to oversee the
educational requirements of "United States Citizens" by virtue of their
Constitutional powers to regulate Commerce! Bad law is bad law, no matter how
you turn

Page 9

the paper and that ruling gave the federal government the green light to
initiate its "brainwashing" process of the American public.

Let me explain how the Court arrived at its ruling because these are not
ignorant men! On every form you file to receive "government benefits" and even
the "voter registration form," there is a question that asks: Are you a United
States Citizen? YES / NO and everyone circles the YES answer. Didn't you? Now
look up the definition of a "United States Citizen," in a reputable law
dictionary. You will discover that a United States Citizen is a phrase designed
to identify a "corporate fiction!" Clever, isn't it? You and every other
American had no idea that you were admitting you were a corporate fiction when
you circled that YES answer, and you did it under penalty of perjury!

The sovereign states had been abolished in 1790 by the adoption of Article 1 of
the Statutes at Large, which converted all the sovereign states into federal
districts and gave the federal government lawful jurisdiction everywhere. In
consideration of the fact that the federal government is a corporation and that
corporations can lawfully own other corporations; and all the American subjects
to be educated have admitted under penalty of perjury that they are
corporations; the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the corporate federal
government. [See how sneaky and tricky lawyers can be? And all the more reason
why lawyers should never be allowed to serve in government or in judgment of
us]!

Under our corporate governments, no Sovereign can lawfully be tried or convicted
of any statutory crime! I recently discovered how to avoid prosecution under the
Trust, when a Sovereign is taken before a corporate prosecuting Attorney or a
Judge:

First: "the Sovereign must inquire if we are on the record, and if not, insist
upon it! Say nothing, sign nothing and answer no questions until you are
convinced that the proceedings are being recorded!"

Secondly: all a Sovereign has to say for the record is: "I am a beneficiary of
the Trust, and I am appointing you as my Trustee!"

Thirdly: the Sovereign then directs his Trustee to do his bidding! "As my
Trustee, I want you to discharge this matter I am accused of and eliminate the
record!"

  Fourthly: if the Sovereign suffered any damages as a result of his arrest, he
can direct that the Trust compensate him from the proceeds of the Court by
saying; "I wish to be compensated for [X] dollars, in redemption."

This statement is sufficient to remove the authority and jurisdiction from any
prosecuting attorney or judge. The accused will be immediately released from
custody, with a check, license or claim he identifies as a damage. It doesn't
matter what the action involves or how it is classified by the corporate law as
a civil or criminal action! It works every time!

All of the Codes, Statutes and Regulations throughout the United States are a
Will from the Masters to their Slaves. A Will is defined as, "An express command
used in a dispositive nature." When individuals in America are charged with a
crime and warehoused in a jail; it is because they went against the Will of the
Masters, and not because they harmed another

Page 10




person! Remember that: The Will demands from us, all that we are; keeps us in
check and promises us nothing!

The police officer, who arrested you, has been "brainwashed" into believing that
he is doing the right thing, when in fact he is nothing more than an "armed
slave acting as a henchman" and hired to bully and intimidate all other Slaves
into submission of the Masters Will! This statement will probably offend most
police officers but this is fact and it is not their fault! Most police officers
believe they are performing a public service and doing the right thing in the
performance of duty. They have been lied to by the government and in most cases
police officers are pumped full of lies more so than anybody else!

Recently, the Police have all been ordered to complete (paramilitary training)
and were told that this is essential because of the new threat of Terrorism! The
people responsible for this training and brainwashing are the same people and
foreign Agents who have been controlling all of us since our birth! NOTE: I'll
bet that nobody told these police officers that these suspected Terrorists may
come at them from their very own government officials!

So now our government officials have our police officers training to act as a
military unit. [e.g.] Follow our orders and don't think! They have succeeded in
placing these officers on edge, so that their every reaction; will be an
over-reaction to the situation, just like Hitler's Gestapo! Near the end of this
paper, I will disclose to the reader about a situation that has been planned by
our government officials and is soon to unfold! The police paramilitary training
and their extensive brainwashing has been implemented specifically for this
event! It is expected that police officers will over-react and begin killing
innocent Americans, and once they are no longer of use, the officers and their
families will all be ordered to receive vaccinations that will kill all of
them(* Hyperbole?)! My guess is that after this planned mass genocide has
occurred, the Russian and Chinese military will replace them in the field.

Part of the Fraud perpetrated against "We the People" by this Will, is the fact
that there are actually no criminal laws in America. The Rules of Procedure used
by every Local, State and Federal Court are Civil Rules, not Criminal! Court
officials simply substitute the word criminal for civil, depending upon the case
at hand. Rule 1 of the Rules of Civil Procedure Reads: "There shall be but one
form of action, a civil action." This means that the Criminal laws promulgated
and enforced by the police and our corporate governments are all civil and are
being fraudulently enforced against our "corporate fictions" as criminal. When
anyone goes to jail, it is for a civil infraction of the Masters Will. That
makes all of our jails, debtors prisons! "Does that Ring a Constitutional Bell?"

Title 18, Federal Crimes and Offenses: was never voted on by the Congress, which
means that these federal laws are NOT positive law in America! Now, if you were
a part of a government conspiracy to destroy America and soon to commit a mass
genocide of its population; would you really want to vote Title 18 into positive
law? My belief is that the Congress intentionally omitted its passage, so that
members of Congress could use that as a defense, should they be caught and tried
for Treason!

Page 11

Do you believe the lawyers hired or appointed to represent all the individuals
accused of federal crimes, knew about this fact? You bet they know!

Armed with this fact: Now look at the number of convicted people sitting in
federal prisons, who believe they have been lawfully convicted of violating a
federal crime! How many do you imagine have been put to death? How many were
shot and killed during the arrest? How many were killed attempting to escape
from their illegal confinement?

The Internal Revenue Code relies upon Title 18 to convict people of Tax Evasion,
which (only applies to corporations). Look at all the people sitting in federal
prisons who were convicted of this so-called crime? What makes it worse is the
fact that the Queen of England, entered into a Treaty with the federal
government for the taxing of alcoholic beverages and cigarettes sold in America.
The Treaty is called The Stamp Act and in this Act, the Queen ordained that her
subjects, the American people, are exonerated of all other federal taxes! So the
federal income tax and the state incomes taxes levied against all American's is
contrary to an International Treaty and against the Sovereign Orders of the
Queen! Like it or not, the Queen is our Monarch and Master! The Tax is illegal
and still people have been prosecuted and imprisoned, contrary to law!

One hundred percent (100%) of the people sentenced and held in all American
Jails have either been convicted of crimes that are not positive law or were
convicted of civil crimes, and are being detained there by their consent! That's
Right! The lawyers and judges representing our legislature and judicial system;
created maneuvers to insure that anyone who is accused of a so-called crime and
posts bail, (signs a contract to appear and consents by that contract to the
proceedings scheduled). Anyone who applies for a public defender, signs the same
contract without knowing it and anyone who privately hires a lawyer to represent
them in a Court proceeding, consents to the same contract upon the lawyer filing
a "Notice of Appearance!" When you hire a lawyer, you signed a Power of
Attorney. He is required to file his Notice of Appearance in that case and that
Notice of Appearance offers your consent and binds your appearance to the
proceedings!

Absent these aforementioned contracts; the Court cannot proceed against you!
When that occurs; the Judge and the Prosecutor, attempt to trick and intimidate
you into giving your consent! If you don't know how to invoke your Sovereignty,
and you take what they throw at you, and stand your ground; they will be forced
to release you after 72 hours has elapsed! I'm not a bleeding heart liberal who
believes that we should open up the jails and let everyone out! There are people
in our jails who need to be there, despite the fact that they have been
incarcerated illegally! My vote is to leave that hornets nest alone!

We American's are so proud of the fact that we live in a Democracy! Now look up
the word "Democracy," in a reputable Law Dictionary and see the legal meaning.
Democracy is defined as: "A Socialist form of government and another form of
Communism." Do you remember the lies that President Reagan, the Congress and the
Media told America?

Page 12

The lie was that, "The Iron Curtain fell without a shot being fired!" The truth
is that the Iron Curtain came down because Communist Europe found an ally in the
West and there was no longer a need for walls! PS/ Your Federal Taxes
constructed the Worlds largest automated vehicle and munitions plant for the
Soviet Union, during the dismantling of the Berlin Wall! PPS/ The attempt to
assassinate President Reagan occurred because he had disclosed to the American
people that: "None of the federal income tax paid by the American people is ever
deposited into the United States Treasury and is being deposited into the
Federal Reserve Bank for its use and benefit!" Shortly after making that
statement, Reagan was shot by John Hinkley, who was quickly declared insane, so
that there never would be a public trial! If you recall, President Reagan was
never the same after that incident! The Masters don't play around - they
eliminate problems or radically curve attitudes!

On September 17, 1787, twelve State delegates of the Thirteen State Colony's
approved the United States Constitution, not the Colonists, and by their doing
so, the States became "constitutors." A "constitutor" is defined under civil law
as, "One who by simple agreement becomes responsible for the payment of
another's debt." [See: Blacks Law Dictionary, 6th Edition].

Many early immigrants to the United States arrived here as Bonded Slaves. A
person of wealth or substance became the [payor] by offering to pay or promising
to pay or [bond] the debts of another person, and usually paid the cost of his
or her voyage to America. This made the payor a [constitutor] and gave him title
as [master] over the debtor [slave] by written contract. A "Bonded Slave" is a
corporate fiction. The payor's new title and power as the "Bond Master" of the
debtor, causes the immigrant to become "a Bond Slave" and the property of the
Master until such time he is paid back his investment by the Bond Slave or by
someone else. This means that the Bond Master can buy and sell these contracts!

If a Bonded Slave was mistreated by his Bond Master; the law did not represent
him because the Bond Slave (a corporate fiction) had no human rights afforded to
him by any law! Corporate fictions have no rights. If the Bonded Slave desired
rights, he was obligated to negotiate them in his contract with the Bond Master
before accepting the contract. If the Bonded Slave runs away from his abusive
Bond Master; the law in place however, attached a bounty, hunted him down and
returned him to the Bond Master. Remember also that the first Slaves in America
were (Indian) and then Caucasian, of English, French, Irish and German ancestry.

The Constitution is not for "We the People:"

As mentioned before, the Colonists were never presented the Constitution to vote
on its passage and approval because the Constitution was never written for them
and has been rewritten two more times since then, but only our government
officials know about that! And now, so do you!

1) Article ONE of the Constitution allows the Congress to borrow against the
full faith and credit of the American people without end(* Accuracy?). It keeps
us eternally in debt and makes all

Page 13

loans the government received from the King or any other entity, valid and
enforceable against "We the People!" How is that good for us?

2) Article ONE, Section EIGHT, Clause (15) of the Constitution reads that it is
the Militias(* sic) job to execute the laws of the Union. The Militia is a
military unit something like the Police or National Guard, and is composed of
members of our local community. The new State Constitutions however, make
Militias illegal except in time of war and authorizes the Police to arrest the
members of a Militia, should they attempt to reform their ranks! How is that
good for us?

3) Article ONE; Section EIGHT of the Constitution gives the Congress complete
power over the Military. What do we do when it's the Congress, who we need to
have arrested for Treason and Peonage? How is that good for us? President Obama
has changed the Military Oath. Soldiers no longer swear to support or defend the
Constitution but rather to support and defend the President! Now, isn't that
convenient?

4) Article SIX, Section ONE of the Constitution is the law that makes American
Citizens responsible to file income tax returns and not because of Title 26 of
the United States Code. Parts of our flawed history, taught to you by our
government controlled school system, accurately described that the English
people had been taxed into a state of poverty by King George and was one of the
reasons the Colonists fled Europe for the New World. So how is this good for us?

The IRS is not a U. S. Government Agency, they are Agents of a Foreign Power,
operating under a private contract and your obligation to pay and file federal
taxes is a scam! Only federal employees and persons born in Washington, DC and
the federal territories were ever obligated to pay and file(* Accuracy?), prior
to The Stamp Act but we were never informed of that fact!

Our government has brainwashed us into believing that the National Debt is all
our responsibility, and a patriotic responsibility to pay our fair share! Here's
the Truth about that subject!

The National Debt is a Federal Debt, and always has been! The name change was
the clever use of "propaganda" intended to invoke our civil patriotic pride! The
foreign Agents in charge of our government; have been borrowing funds to line
their pockets with, to buy influence, make business deals and seal Treaties with
communist Third World Countries and Dictators, which will never benefit "We the
People." They have lied to us, enslaved us, imprisoned us and sold our gold to
the Vatican in 1933 and invested the proceeds for their selves! The money they
have been borrowing since 1933; is not real money but, "negotiable debt
instruments," which is the same thing as monopoly money! This means that in
order to pay off the Federal/National Debt; all they ever had to do was print a
money order, without any account numbers on it, for the entire debt, sign it and
present it to the lender [The Federal Reserve Bank] and the debt is paid in
full(* Accuracy?)! The foreign agents who purport to be our public officials;
are responsible for eliminating the strength of the American Labor Unions, the
elimination of our jobs, the erosion of our

Page 14

inalienable rights, and have instigated every war or conflict we have ever
become involved with in history and (they convinced us that it was the other
guys fault)! They have converted us into corporate fictions, and sold us as
securities to foreign corporate investors(* Accuracy?), and have denied us our
heritage! Everything they have been doing is designed to undermine our freedom,
liberty and representative form of government! Their goal and final blow
against, "We the People," is our mass genocide and the total conversion of our
government to communism!

5) The SIXTEENTH AMENDMENT to the Constitution, regardless of the dispute of how
it was adopted; permits the Federal Government to assess and collect a direct
tax against "We the People"(* Against whom, really?). Most Americans do not know
that the Federal Government is and always has been financially self sufficient,
the result of tariff's imposed upon imports, exports and commerce. Not one penny
of the Direct Federal Income Tax, paid through the IRS, is ever for or deposited
into the United States Treasury. Those Taxes are deposited into the Federal
Reserve Bank for the Masters use. So how is this direct tax good for us?

You may be wondering about now, how the United States government can collect
taxes from, "We the People," when we are Slaves, own nothing and are not a party
to the Constitution? Despite its legality, it is done under a process known as
"debt collection" through private contractors [the IRS] and through a private
contract, the United States Constitution. The IRS belongs to the International
Monetary Fund, who also owns the Federal Reserve Bank. The IMF holds the
controlling interest in all the banks in America! The IMF is the Rockefeller and
Rothschild Empires, along with the eleven wealthiest families in the World. When
you see or hear of a Bank closing - it is a diversion and is intended to injure
and panic the public! The condition of the economy in the World today is being
manipulated by these people! Their schedule for the adoption of the New World
Order is close at hand and these public Agents need to scare us into believing
that this new form of government is our salvation! Factually, it will only be
good for them and it will be our ruin!

6) Article 12 of the Articles of Confederation promises the full faith and
credit of the American people to repay all loans made by the United States
government. The money borrowed by the United States to finance the Revolutionary
War came from France. Who owned France? (King George!)(* Documentation?). Who
was the opposition in the Revolutionary War? (England.) Our Founding Fathers
promised our labor, equity, full faith and credit, to repay those debts that
will, in theory, never come to an end! So how is that good for us?

7) The Bill of Rights was not for your protection. They're laws that represent
one mans(* sic) ability, with the assistance of the State, to control another
mans actions, and since they're included under the U. S. Constitution, they're
not for you! So how is that good for us?

8) The Thirteenth Amendment (* The "missing" defunct 13th Amendment) barred
lawyers from ever holding a seat in public office. The Amendment was ratified
however, during the second secret writing of the Constitution, this Amendment
was dropped and replaced by the 14th Amendment and the 14th Amendment was
replaced by the 15th Amendment and so on. The replacement  Constitution is the
Law of the Land and was designed to regulate our government! The

Page 15

13th Amendment still (* How is that possible?) is positive law but now about 98%
of our public officials are lawyers; so if we filed motions to remove them from
office, who would sign them? Wasn't that convenient for them?

9) On August 4, 1790; Article ONE of the U. S. Statutes at Large, pages 138 -
178, abolished the States of the Republic and created Federal Districts! (* How
is that properly possible without the state's consent to self-extinguish? The
states are the creators of the Federal Constitution and therefore NOT inferior
to the Fed.) In the same year the former States of the Republic reorganized as
Corporations and their legislatures wrote new State Constitutions, absent
defined boundaries, which they presented to the people of each State for a vote!
Why this time? Because the new State Constitutions fraudulently made the people
"Citizens" of the new Corporate States.

A Citizen is also defined by law as a "corporate fiction." (* Where is the
cite?) The people were bound to the Corporate State and the States were bound to
the Corporate United States and fraudulently obligated all of us to pay the
debts of the Federal Government owed to the King! This was necessary because the
United States was officially bankrupt on January 1, 1788 and the politician's
(our Founding Fathers) who benefitted the most by these Revolutionary loans,
required a guarantee to present to the King! Absent that guarantee, they were
personally obligated to repay the debts!

The state constitutions were rewritten again during the Clinton Administration,
except now they are called the Constitutions of Interdependence! These
Constitutions read just like the Declaration of Independence, except that "We
the People" have been eliminated. This is the Magna Carta of the public
officials, to protect them under The New World Order Communist Government! The
public was never informed of this, like everything else and the media never
reported any of the Fraud being perpetrated against America by their public
officials!

I could go on and on, discussing Articles and Amendments of the Constitution but
suffice it to say that the `benefits' the government dangled in front of our
"naive noses," has been used as an inducement for us to volunteer(* "Inducement
to volunteer", now there it is in a nutshell, eh?); and that all of these
`benefits' are received by us at a terrible cost! When we apply for government
benefits, the foreign government in charge; converts our living sovereign person
into a corporation and then records our person as, "government asset property"!
The States use(* sic) to provide protection, stability and security for the
people but over time the focus of their attention has changed to the control of
our minds, bodies, spirit and assets. To take a loyalty oath to support, defend
and obey the Constitution; now is to swear an oath to your Masters to be ever
loyal to them! "Slaves you are and slaves you will ever be!"

More evidence of our Slavery is as follows:

a) The primary control and custody of infants is with the corporate state
government(* Accuracy?) through the filing of government issued Birth
Certificates, which are held in a State Trust and therein each applicant is
recorded under the Department of Transportation as a State owned Vessel and
financial asset. A government issued Birth Certificate was never needed as proof
of birth because a baptismal record or a family bible entry of birth, was and is
an exception to hearsay and constitutes legal proof of birth! Had your parents
never applied for a government issued Birth Certificate, none of the Federal or
State Statutes, Codes or

Page 16

Regulations in place, would be enforceable against you, and no government
official or agency could ever tell you how to raise your children; declare you
an unfit parent, or take your children away from you!

We all made fun of the Amish of Pennsylvania and yet the government cannot touch
them because they do not participate in anything these corporate governments
have to offer. The title to their land is recorded as an Ecclesiastical Trust.
The Vatican (the Holy Roman Church) actually owns all the land, territories and
insular possessions called America and as long as the Amish remain an
Ecclesiastical Trust and remain a passive Christian Society, the Vatican will
protect them. The Holy Roman Church possesses the power to protect or crush
anyone and anything! [See: Tillman v. Roberts, 108 So. 62 [and] Title 26 U. S.
C. 7701 [and] 18 U. S. C. Section 8].

b) Social Security is not a Trust or Insurance policy or Insurance against
disability. The U. S. Supreme Court has ruled that Social Security is a
government giveaway program funded by a government Tax; which is why and how the
Congress can periodically dip into the assets of the fund(* What "fund"?)
anytime they want and never have to pay it back! The back of the Social Security
card states that the card is the property of the government and not you!

Your birth name appears on the front of that card and has been modified, the
same way as your birth certificate; from upper and lower case letters to all
capital letters, pursuant to the U. S. Government Printing Manual, which
instructs government agencies on how to subtly convert a living man into a
corporation. The actual Director of our Social Security Fund and Administration
is the Queen of England(* Documentation?) and from which she is paid a generous
salary. Your Social Security Card is issued by the United Nations through the
International Monetary Fund and your Social Security Number is actually your
International Slave Number! On the reverse side of that card is an "E" letter
followed by eight numbers. That is a "cusip" number, which is required on all
securities! Yes! You have been converted into a marketable security, like a
bond, and your person was offered for sale and sold to domestic and foreign
corporate investors!

c) A Marriage License Application is a request to your "Masters" for permission
to marry. If you ever had any claim of sovereignty before that date; you lost it
completely when you applied for and married under a marriage license(* Or any
license, for that matter). Sovereignty means: "To assert ones independence and
to claim to be self-governing." The license isn't necessary and never has been
because a marriage has always been just a contract, witnessed by God, between a
man and a woman! Who told you that you must apply for a license? It is the
official you chose to conduct your ceremony? The official just happens to be a
licensed government official and his license prevents him from conducting
marriage ceremonies without the issuance of a marriage license. Did Moses or
Jesus ever say or profess that a marriage is not recognized by God, without a
license?

Here's the Fraud behind the License:

Those who apply for and marry pursuant to a marriage license have now added a
third party to their marriage contract! The third party is the Master, by and
through his Agent, the Corporate State. The marriage license bestows the State
with the legal right to decide the fate of the husband, wife and the possessions
they procured during their marriage, should the marriage fail. Their divorce
must now be decided by and through the States(* sic) Corporate

Page 17

Court by a Corporate Judge, and the Judges(* sic) first and foremost concern is
the "interest of the State." The interest of the bride and groom is now
secondary.

[See: VanKosten v. VanKosten, 154 N.E. 146]. A comment by the Judge deciding
this divorce says it all! "The ultimate ownership of all property is the State:
individual so called ownership is only by virtue of government, [i.e.] laws
amounting to mere use must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the
necessities of the state." [Also See: Senate Document No. 43 of the 73rd
Congress, 1st Session] and [Brown v. Welch, U.S. Superior Court].

d) The term "license" is defined in law as, "A permit to do something illegal."
[See: Blacks Law Dictionary, 6th or 7th Edition]. Therefore, all licenses are
permits to violate the only real law(* Logic?)! Inalienable rights are the
rights bestowed upon all living men, by God at birth! All other laws are
subordinate to God's law. The controlling government wants us to rely on their
laws, so they demand that we apply for a license! Another example is a "Drivers
License." It is your God given right to travel the roadways of this nation and
no government has any right to restrict, tax or license your pursuit of
happiness! The only exception is a Driver of a Commercial Vehicle. The
governments have a right to regulate Commerce, which means trade. Anyone
operating a vehicle in Commerce must be licensed but all others are absolutely
free to travel without one! The foreign Agents in power; have changed the common
meanings of words to encapsulate and control every Sovereign. They succeed in
this intimidation through the corporate courts and police enforcement by
officers who have been brainwashed and reinforced by mandatory training
programs.

e) The use of "Trusts" by the Masters and their Agents; is for a good reason! A
Trust by law is secret and neither the Masters nor their agents [the Corporate
Government and Courts] can be compelled to expose the rules or regulations of
the Trust and those regulations can change with the wind, without notice to the
participants! [See: The Law of Trusts].

f) Slaves cannot own property. Look at the Deed to your home. You are identified
as the [Tenant] of the property and never the Owner and your Local and State
land tax is actually a "rent or use fee" assessed by the State for the lease on
the land. You gave them the land after closing via your Lawyer. Did he ever tell
you that? After closing, your Lawyer recorded the deed with the Court. The law
only suggests recording the deed, it doesn't mandate it! Upon recording, you
gave the land back to the State, who then leases it back to you for as long as
you live there! Isn't that where you have constructed your home, your castle?
I'm paying for it, doesn't that make the land mine, you ask?

If you fail to pay the States assessed "rent or use fee," which has been
cleverly disguised as a direct state tax; you will be evicted from your castle
and land, and the state will take title and sell your home under commercial law.
Commercial Law ordains that, "Anything permanently attached, is retained by the
owner!" Who is the owner of the land? Why the State because you so graciously
donated it to them.

Page 18

Oh, I almost forgot; your Lawyer receives a fee from the State for recording
your deed for their use and benefit! How do you feel about your lawyer now?
Didn't you pay him to represent "your interests" at the closing? Now you see why
lawyers are the brunt of numerous jokes and have such a poor reputation! Its
because they deserve it!

g) Foreclosures are nothing more than evictions, based on a different kind of
fraud. The illusion of a debt [Mortgage] that never existed! No individual or
family who has been foreclosed on and evicted from their home in the United
States is legal(* Wrong! Individuals and families are legal. And foreclosures
too, can be legal! Is this author dyslexic in his sentence organization?)! The
only exception to this is owner-financing!

Other than owner-financing, the people who purchased their homes through a
Mortgage Company, actually owned their homes "completely" on the day of the
closing(* Dyslexia strikes again! Where is the common sense in this assertion?).
The real legal definition of a "closing" means that all legal interest as to
title is concluded. [See: any reputable Dictionary from the 1800's]. The
definition has been changed by our government lawyers to conceal the fraud.

[Explanation of the above statement] (* What explanation?)

First you must know that the federal government took America off the gold
standard in1933, during a staged bankruptcy called the "Great Depression" and
replaced the gold with an economic principle known as, "Negotiable Debt
Instruments." [YES, THE GREAT DEPRESSION WAS STAGED!] The government needed to
create a catastrophe to implement standards that were designed to steal your
possessions and God-given rights!

The process of creating a catastrophe was discovered by behaviorists! (* No, the
process of creating the RESULTANT OUTCOME of a catastrophe was discovered by
behaviorists,...maybe) Take away a persons food, comfort and safety long enough
and they won't care or question the illusion provided, as long as their stomach
is full, they have shelter, a comfortable bed and the means (real or imagined)
to keep or continue their comfort!

President Roosevelt unconstitutionally collected America's gold by Executive
Order and sold it to the Vatican by way of China, to conceal its true ownership.
The gold in Fort Knox belongs to the Vatican and not the United States! Absent a
gold base, Commerce now essentially trades in "debts." So if you borrowed money
for a Mortgage and there's no gold or real value to support the paper called U.
S. Currency; what did you actually borrow? Factually, you borrowed debt! The
Mortgage Company committed the ultimate fraud against you because they loaned
you nothing to pay off the imaginary balance, not even their own debt
instruments. They then told you that you owe them the unpaid balance of your
home and that you must pay them back with interest, in monthly installments!

Here's how they did it. (* B.S.)

At your Closing, the Mortgage Company had you sign a "Promissory Note" in which
you promised your sweat, your equity, full faith and credit against an unpaid
balance. Then without your knowledge, the Mortgage Company sold your Promissory
Note (your credit) to a Warehousing Institution such as, Fannie Mae or Freddie
Mac. The Warehousing Institution uses your Promissory Note (your credit) as
collateral and generates loans to other people and corporations with interest.
Collateral is essential to a corporation because corporations have no money or
credit. They're not real, they're a fiction and require the

Page 19

sweat, the equity, the full faith and credit of living individuals to breathe
and sustain the life of the corporation. Corporate Governments operate under the
same principle.

The Warehousing Institution makes money off the "Promissory Note" (your credit)
and even though the profits made are nothing more than new (Negotiable Debt
Instruments), those instruments still have buying power in a (Negotiable Debt
Economy). These debt instruments are only negotiable because of the human
ignorance of the American people and the human ignorance of people in other
countries of the World, who have all been lied to, told this has value, and the
people don't know the difference!

Did you ever give your permission to the Mortgage Company to sell your credit?
So where is your cut of the profits? If the Mortgage Company invested nothing of
their own in the purchase of your home, why are you making a monthly Mortgage
payment to them with interest? (* Because you agreed to it!) And where do they
get off foreclosing on or against anyone or threatening to foreclose?

They do it by fraud and the Masters and their Agents (the governments, the
courts and the banks) all know it! Everything done to us and against us is about
sustaining their lives, the lives of the corporate governments they command and
to keep "We the People" under their complete control! They accomplish this
control by taking away or threatening to take away your comfort and
independence! They all use fraudulent means, disguised as law!

Note: When you applied for a Mortgage, the Mortgage Company ran a credit check
on you and if you had a blemish on your credit record, they charged you points
(money) to ease their pain and lighten the risk (a credit risk) of their loaning
you a Mortgage! More Fraud! Why are you paying points, when they never loaned
you a dime! The credit report is just another scam. If you have a high credit
report, the government and banks identify you as an "Obedient Slave" and yet
your "Promissory Note" sold for the same value as the "Promissory Note" endorsed
by the man who is (a credit risk)! Credit didn't matter. The fact that you are a
living person is what matters!

More Fraud:

The Mortgage Company maintains two sets of books regarding your Mortgage
payments. The local set of books, is a record that they loaned you money and
that you agreed to repay that money, with interest, each month. The second set
of books is maintained in another State office, usually a Bank because the
Mortgage Companies usually sell your loan contract to a Bank and agree to
monitor the monthly payments in order to conceal the fraud!

In the second set of books, your monthly Mortgage Payment is recorded by the
bank as a savings deposit because there is no real loan! (* No real loan? Huh?
Didn't you get the house?) When you pay off the fraudulent mortgage, the Bank
waits (90) days and then submits a request to the IRS. The request states: "That
someone, unknown to this facility; deposited this money into our facility and
has abandoned it! May we keep the deposit?" The IRS always gives their
permission to the bank to keep the deposit and your hard earned money just
feathered the nest of the Rockefeller, Rothschild and eleven other wealthy
families in the world!

Equity Law, which once controlled Americas'(* sic) Corporate Courts, has been
replaced with Admiralty/Maritime Law (* So what if it did? Then what?), pursuant
to Title 28 of the United States Code and the Judiciary Act of 1789. This is the
Law of Merchants and Sailors.

Page 20

Under Admiralty/Maritime Law; the Courts presume you owe the Mortgage or the Tax
or that you committed a crime defined as a Criminal Statute and it is your
obligation to prove you're innocent! (This means, you're guilty until you prove
you're innocent), which is the same standard and procedure used in a Military
Court Martial. Haven't we always been told that, "You are innocent - until
proven guilty?" Lies, Lies and more Lies!

We are not free men; we are slaves, and bound to our Masters by adhesion
contracts(* Huh? Explain that!) and secret Trusts. The goal of the Masters and
their (agents) our elected officials, is to keep the people oppressed and
subservient to them! As the Masters (* sic) agents, they utilize propaganda
techniques through government controlled schools; churches; the media and mind
control by force and or the threat of force through the courts and police
enforcement!

Police officers in America have been pumped full of more bullshit than a manure
spreader and because of their trust, public school conditioning and training,
they haven't the ability to see what is going on! Many have been conditioned by
previous military service, not to think for themselves but just follow orders,
which makes many of them as dangerous as a Terrorist! Now ask yourself; who are
the real Terrorists in America?

Guess what; "the Constitution isn't for the Police either" and still they are
forced to swear an oath to defend it!" The more regulations, statutes and codes
created, and the greater the number of regulatory officers and agencies created
to enforce them; the greater the Masters (* sic) control over their Slaves and
that is mind control by force and threat of force, by the very people we rely
on, to protect and serve!

At some point in history the foreign Agents in control of our Federal
Government, decided that they needed to create Federal Police Agencies to
protect them! I can't blame them! If I was a part of a conspiracy that could
result in the American people hanging me for Treason, I'd want bodyguards too!
Now, if you are one of these public officials; how do you justify the employment
and expense of bodyguards, when nobody is trying to injure you, and you don't
want anyone to know that you are committing Treason? Instead of confessing your
motives; you must find a way to accomplish your objective and blame it on
someone else!

HENCE: The birth of a bad law, The Volstead Act and the beginning of
"Prohibition!" Enterprising people began to make money and others organized.
Those who organized became mobs and when the mobs began killing each other, the
free lance boot-legers and innocent people in drive by shootings; our federal
officials sat back and enjoyed the show! They did absolutely nothing until the
public was literally breaking down the doors of the Capitol Building: [Just like
they had planned it!]

The FBI existed before this time. They were a small investigative unit under the
Attorney Generals Office. The Agents had no arrest powers and were prohibited
from carrying guns. Their only authority was to investigate federal employees
and make reports to the attorney general, who then decided if the matter was
serious enough to concern the government and whether to prosecute the employee!
The FBI was eventually armed, expanded and provided national jurisdiction to
fight the gangsters! None of which would have been necessary had it not been for
The Volstead Act! Slowly, the agency has grown into the giant it is now and
ironically; the Legislature never authorized their expansion. Everything was
done by the

Page 21

AG administratively! Where does it say in the Constitution that a federal
employee has the authority to create law, create a police authority or expand a
current one?

Do you see how our government has circumvented the restrictions placed upon them
by the Constitution and manipulated the American people? Every catastrophe,
calamity or disaster has been planned and financed by our so-called public
representatives with an ulterior motive in mind. The creation of Homeland
Security was done in the same way! A Terrorist attack was staged by hired men
having connections to the Middle East. I'm not going to go into the conspiracy,
other than to say that President Bush and the FBI were as guilty as the men who
high-jacked the commercial airplanes! The director of the FBI confessed to the
Congress of his Agencies(* sic) involvement under Presidential Order. He was
relieved of his position and Congress took no action against President Bush and
the media did not report any of this to the American people! Treason charges
were filed against President Bush, Vice-President Cheney and the FBI by a two
star General from the Pentagon and no action has ever been taken and nothing was
ever reported to the American public, upon the orders of President Obama.

This was just another government catastrophe designed to make you (the public)
beg the government to come to your aid and protect you! Each time one of these
catastrophe's are staged; our representatives steal more of our liberty and
freedom from us, but America doesn't care because now they feel safe once again!
And that's what these foreign Agents want us to believe and feel!

We complain today that government has eroded our rights! It's true because we
were lied to directly and indirectly and told to believe something other than
truth! The correct term here is: "Propaganda" and all government controlled
entities and institutions mentioned, are quite expert in the use of it! When I
was a child; during a period labeled "the Cold War;" I remember my teacher's(*
sic) telling the class how expert the Communists are in the use of "propaganda!"
I can say now with absolute certainty that no one is as expert as the American
government! In fact I believe that our government officials taught the World!

I don't blame my teachers. Most of them were subjected to and spoon fed the same
propaganda under direction of these foreign Agents and corporate entities that
now employ them. Our teachers are simply spoon feeding our children with the
same propaganda that was fed to them! Naturally, if a teacher becomes too
creative and steps outside the box, or thinks outside the box, the penalty for
such creativity is the termination of employment, their future profession and
benefits! Generally, the reason used for termination is: "Failure to adhere to
the established curriculum and or meet the needs of this establishment!" Who
established the needs and curriculum? Why the government agents under the U. S.
Department of Education, acting through the foreign Agents representing the
Masters!

During the Bush Administration, a Treaty called the North American Alliance was
negotiated and signed but the content was not reported to the American public.
The Treaty guarantees that the boundary lines dividing Mexico, the United States
and Canada will dissolve and become one country to be called North America, upon
the installation of the New World Order Government! The currency for North
America is being manufactured by

Page 22

the United States Mint. They are gold coins called AMEROS. I have pictures of
these coins being minted, that were taken by an employee and smuggled out!(*
Documentation?)

Everything in your life has been controlled from birth and you're still being
controlled! The free-thinkers of the world have either been murdered or
institutionalized in asylums. Freethinkers are a detriment to the Masters and
their Agents! They have the potential to become (Martyrs), especially if the
populace begins to pay attention to what the free-thinkers have to say or teach!
Look at what happened to Jesus; John Kennedy; Bobby Kennedy; John Kennedy, Jr.
and Martin Luther King, Jr.! If you believe John Kennedy, Jr. was an accidental
death, then you probably believe that on 911, the attack on the twin towers was
a real Terrorist attack!

[If you still think this way, after what you have read: Please stop reading; put
your thumb in your ass and close your eyes! You are much too gullible, ignorant
and brain dead to be helped and you deserve the treatment you and your family
are certain to receive!] (* A well-educated "judge" would write crass language
such as this?)

Contrary to popular belief, nothing has changed since the day of Jesus! If Jesus
was(* sic...should be "were") alive today, he would be declared a Terrorist and
locked up in an asylum and slowly poisoned to death through the use of drug
combinations that are designed to slowly consume life instead of heal. As long
as free-thinkers profess their thoughts, they will be institutionalized until
their death! Society will be told that these men are dangerous and or they will
be classified as Terrorists!

The entire World is a `Slave Plantation' and is set up under this same principle
by the Masters, "the high contracting powers," who have been identified in
certain International Treaties as the Pope/Vatican, the United Nations, the
King/Queen of (England or United Kingdom) and principals of the International
Monetary Fund.

The coming of a "One World Government," which public representatives and the
media have been talking about, actually began in 1790 with the passage of the
Articles of Confederation! These Articles and the principles therein, were first
suggested in the Magna Carta and later became the foundation of the U. S.
Constitution but, "there not for you!" (* sic..."their")

The Capitol City of the World has been identified as New York City, according to
the United States Code. The United Nations with the blessings of the Vatican,
keeps the World divided and in flux, under the principle of "Divide and
Conquer," and all religious orders within the United States are instructed to
keep us passive! People, populations, economies, religions and political agendas
of every country on earth are manipulated by the Masters, which keep each
Country in a euphoric flux against the other.

Partial proof of such Power:

We are presently living under the Babylonian Talmud, which was introduced to
England in 1066 and has been enforced by the Pope, various Kings and every
religious Order since.

Page 23

This Babylonian Talmud represents total and relentless mind control in that
people are taught to believe in fictions, things that do not exist [e.g.]
Private International Law is now Commercial Law, which only deals in fictions;
"fictions called persons, money, politics, government and authority." The
Uniform Commercial Code, known as the Law of Merchants, which is 6000 years old,
was derived from ancient Babylon and is now Private International Law. [See: The
Uniform Commercial Code, section 1-201]. PS/ Human rights do not exist in
fictions!

Prior to 1066, many of the Kings(* sic) subjects [Lords and Dukes] held allodial
deeds to land, which are land grants from the King or past Kings and which
prevented the present King or his agents from taxing, trespassing or enforcing
his will upon those subjects. Land protected by an allodial deed and improved by
a home made the subjects, Sovereigns in their own right and the king of his
castle. In 1066, William the Conqueror defeated England and stole the Kings(*
sic) Title, his lands and the lands belonging to his subjects. From William I
(1066) to King John (1199), England found itself in dire straights because it
was bankrupt! During this span of time, parishioners routinely passed their land
onto(* sic) their family or to the church without the Kings(* sic) permission.
So the King invoked the ancient, "Law of Mortmain," also known as "the dead
man's hand," which is our modern day probate law.

The Pope and the Vatican objected to the "Law of Mortmain" because the King owed
the Vatican a lot of gold he had borrowed and this law now prevented the church
from receiving gifts of land. In 1208, England was placed under Papal
interdiction (prohibition) and King John was excommunicated. King John was
ignorant of the teachings of the Bible and was made to believe by Pope Innocent
III, that the Pontiff was the "Vicar of Christ;" (* Was King John really that
credulous??) the ultimate owner of everything on earth, and the only one who
could grant the King absolution for his sins; providing the King make a suitable
gesture of repentance to the Pope and the Holy Roman Church!

The word "VICAR" is defined in Webster's 1828 English Dictionary, to mean, "A
person deputized or authorized to perform the function of another, a substitute
in office," and thereafter, all of the Popes since Pope Innocent III, pretend to
be Jesus Christ on earth. In his attempt to regain his stature, King John
offered the Pope and the Holy Roman Church his Kingdom, plus 1000 gold marks
each year as payment of a lease on the land, and he accepted the Pope's
appointed representative [appointed ruler] and swore submission and loyalty to
Pope Innocent III and the Holy Roman Church. In 1213, a Treaty was entered into
between the King and the Pope. The Treaty made the King a tenant of his former
Kingdom and a trustee to the Pope and the Holy Roman Church. The Kings ancestors
were later appointed Treasurer of the Vatican Bank and continue to serve in that
capacity to date. [See: Treaty of 1213; and the Papal Bulls of 1455 to 1492; and
The Selected Letters of Pope Innocent III concerning England from 1198 - 1216,
Thomas Nelson and Sons, Ltd. 1956].

In 1215, the Barons of England reacted to the loss of their rights and
privileges they once enjoyed before the 1213 Treaty, and so they revolted
against King John and stormed the castle. Under the threat of death, they forced
him to sign a document that recognized their stature and spelled out their
individual rights! The document was named the Magna Carta.

Page 24

When Pope Innocent III was informed by King John about the Barons(* sic) revolt
and the Magna Carta; the Pope condemned the document and declared it null and
void. In his written declaration to the Barons, the Pope stated that, "The
Declaration of Human Rights embodied in the Magna Carta, violated the tenets of
the church." Imagine that--- a church that does not believe in human rights ---
but has a prohibition against abortion! I believe that is called an, Oxymoron!
[See: The Selected Letters of Pope Innocent III concerning England 1198 - 1216,
Thomas Nelson and Sons, Ltd. 1956].

The Treaty of 1783, known as the Treaty of Peace, signed subsequent to the
Revolutionary War; was a Treaty between King George, the Holy Roman Church and
the representatives of the Corporate United States. The opening statement is
written in Olde English and when interpreted means: "The King claims that the
Pope is the Vicar of Christ and that God gave the King the power to declare that
no man can ever own property because it goes against the tenets of his Church,
the Vatican/The Holy Roman Church and because he is the Elector of the Holy
Roman Empire." [This is why no person or company can ever own real estate in
America!] And the Founding Father's agreed to that Declaration!

The Treaty of Verona, which took place on November 22, 1822, was another Treaty
between the King of England, the Pope and the "high contracting powers" of the
World and exemplifies the power that the Pope and the Vatican weld(* sic) in the
World and magnifies their interest in the Republic of the United States. It also
explains what has happened to us in America.

The Treaty of Verona:

Article I: Basically states that the "high contracting powers" [the Masters]
agree and decree that all representative forms of government and governments
that recognize the individual sovereignty of ordinary people, is incompatible
with "divine right" and all agree to use all of their efforts to bring an end to
such governments, wherever they may be found or exist. [Isn't the United States
supposed to be a representative form of government, which recognizes individual
sovereignty? At least that's what the Declaration of Independence promised].

Article 2: That the "high contracting powers" agreed and decree that freedom of
the press is a detriment to there(* sic..."their") existence and all promise to
adopt measures to suppress the press in all of Europe. [If Americans want to
know what is happening in the United States, they need to tune into the Foreign
News Service because the American Press is suppressed beyond belief, ever since
the Nixon administration and the Watergate scandal. Americas(* sic) Press
however, will talk badly about other countries and the Foreign Press
reciprocates the favor. Do you remember my earlier comment about, "Divide and
Conquer?" If you want to know what is happening in America, you need to watch
and listen to the Foreign Press!

Article 3: Convinced that religion contributes powerfully to keep the people in
a state of passive obedience, all of the "high contracting powers" agree to take
measures to insure(* sic..."assure" or "ensure") its continuation and a written
accolade is directed to the Pope for his efforts to create and continue those
measures. [An example of the measures they are speaking of involves the King
James Bible.]

Page 25

[e.g.] The King James Version of the Bible was concocted by the King under the
guidance of Pope Innocent III. [This is the same King who was convinced by the
Pope, that the Pope was God's representative on earth!] This collaboration was
kept secret to conceal the truth of their manipulation of the prophet's written
word. If you can locate an ancient manuscript of the Bible, which predates the
King James Version; you will discover that [during the crucifixion of Christ],
it is written in the ancient text that Jesus said: "Forgive them NOT, for they
know what they do!" In the King James Version, it is written that Jesus said:
"Forgive them Father, for they know NOT what they do." The King James
interpretation represents a passive version and is in keeping with the purpose
and the accolade mentioned in Article 3 of the Treaty of Verona.

The King James Version of the Bible is the most popular version today and is
presented to the masses by all government controlled Christian religions.
[Passive obedience however is not taught or practiced in the Muslim religion].
What was the lie our government used to explain the involvement of the armed
forces of the United States and England, in the Middle East? I remember Muslim
leaders screaming that this was a "Jihad," [a holy war] and our so-called
leaders denied the allegations. When the American people were later questioned
by the media, they responded with disdain and disbelief! Is there any wonder why
there are now Muslim paramilitary camps being formed on American soil? And when
our government officials were questioned why they permit these paramilitary
camps to exist; their response was, [The U. S. Constitution protects their right
to exist!] I remind you that this is the same Constitution that we are not a
party too; has been circumvented by our government officials and fails to
protect any rights of, "We the People!" The reason the foreign Agents posing as
our federal representatives, are not concerned by the formation of these camps,
is because of the mass genocide planned for the American population in the fall!

Korea is now in the news for testing nuclear weapons. Our government is making
Korea look like the aggressors when in fact Korea does not want to be a part of
the New World Order government and they are reacting out of fear! They simply
want to live their lives as they see fit and our government officials and the
United Nations are trying to bully them into submission!

The following further exemplifies the power of the Vatican in America: "If the
Sovereign Pontiff should nevertheless, insist on his law being observed, he must
be obeyed." [Bened. XIV, De Sgn Dioec., lib., ix, c vii, n 4. Prati., 1844].
"Pontifical laws moreover become obligatory without being accepted or confirmed
by secular rulers." [Syllabus, prop. 28, 29, 44].

"Hence, the jus nationale, (Federal Law) or the exceptional ecclesiastical laws
prevalent in the United States; may be abolished at any time by the Sovereign
Pontiff." [Elements of Ecclesiastical Law, Volume I, pages 53 and 54].

Page 26

[This passage is saying that the government has no authority to abolish or
change ecclesiastical law in America and that only the Pope has the power to do
that].

Keys to the Conspiracy:  "Alice in Wonderland," a famous children's story
written by Leo J. Carroll (* sic... Lewis Carroll), which was his pen name. The
author's true profession was that of a lawyer, a lawyer who had a conscience,
"another oxymoron!" Leo J. Carroll(* sic) was English and was privy to the early
scheme and conspiracy to destroy all the Worlds(* sic) governments and
eventually replace them with a "One World Government!" So he instituted his own
plan to inform the Worlds(* sic) population about this nefarious conspiracy, by
writing about it in a children's story! He figured that parents would buy his
book, read the story to their children and when the real conspiracy began to
unfold; the parents would identify with his story and rise up against this evil!

  \Kudos to Leo J. Carroll(* sic), but unfortunately his plan was too quick and
the pace of the conspiracy was too slow and methodical for anyone to make the
connection!

Consider this information:

1) During my research, I discovered a Congressional Record from the 1930's,
which was a report compiled by an expert in counter intelligence hired by the
British Parliament. The report detailed a plan or method to be employed by
Parliament and the United States government, for the complete take over and
destruction of the U. S. representative form of government! The report was sent
to our Congress for review and then there was an argument from certain members
of Congress who insisted that the report be recorded as "Top Secret," out of a
fear of reprisal, should the American people discover its existence! The
opposition members of Congress argued that the American people are functionally
illiterate and too preoccupied with their own personal comfort, to be concerned
about what we do! The report was entered into the open record of Congress and
was never discovered until 2002! I have this Congressional Record in my computer
documents! (* Where's the cite?)

WARNING: [BEWARE AMERICA]!

2) I met a man who was once employed by Military Intelligence. He is now
diseased. (* sic... "deceased"?) We became close friends and over time he
confided in me something that had been bothering his conscious (* sic...
"conscience") for many, many years! During his employment in the Military; he
happened upon a scientific report by MI, prepared for the Congress. The report
detailed a plan titled; "How to reduce the population of the United States." The
conclusion reached in the report was through mass vaccinations to cure a
fictitious pandemic!

NOTE: As of June 2009, a former scientist, once employed by a large
pharmaceutical company in the United States; has disclosed that before resigning
from his employer, former President Bush, signed legislation that defers and
eliminates the Federal Food and Drug Administrations mandatory product testing;
defers and eliminates disclosure of possible dangers to the public; and defers
and eliminates civil liability on the part of the FDA and the pharmaceutical
company.

27

NOTE: This scientist revealed that the President and Congress are expected to
order mass vaccinations for a (fictitious swine flu pandemic) in the fall of
2009 and that the vaccine to be used; contains small amounts of Bird guano, a
substance known to cause serious illness and death and in several tests, killed
the lab animals that were injected! This scientist suggested that most of the
soldiers, who have died in the Middle East conflict, have died from these
vaccinations, but no one is talking!

NOTE: The people who have died of (swine flu) so far, died because they were
vaccinated with the vaccine that is planned to be given to the American
population in the fall of 2009 and half of the Worlds(* sic) population. The
World Health Organization is expected to declare a (pandemic) and will request
that President Obama and Congress order mandatory vaccinations in the United
States! Any one who refuses to take the "death vaccine," will be arrested as a
Terrorist and will be committed into internment camps! As a Terrorist, no one is
permitted a lawyer, a hearing or a judge, pursuant to the new Patriot Act passed
by Congress after 911.

The World Health Organization is owned by and under the direction of the
Rockefeller and Rothschild families! Do you now see the pattern unfolding?

NOTE: Police officers, Sheriff's Deputies, U. S. Military personnel and their
families will not escape this mass genocide! All will be compelled to take the
"death vaccine" right along with the rest of the general public!

My guess is that the federal or state governments will install another police
authority to replace our Police, Sheriff's Deputies and Military. My belief is
that they will be using army personnel of the USSR and China. These armies are
now occupying former military bases in each state that was closed down under the
guise of budget cuts. Fort Dix in New Jersey now occupies a battalion of the
Russian Army. I don't know which bases are being occupied in the other states.

NOTE: One closed military base in each state, has also been converted into an
"Internment Camp." The Halliburton Corporation was hired by the federal
government to modify each base and install maximum security buildings. Why would
the United States require so many large Internment Camps? One camp should be
sufficient! Because these camps are expected to receive thousands of innocent
Americans who simply refuse to submit to the "death vaccine!"

NOTE: Homeland Security is in charge of these camps and they have been training
personnel to man these facilities since 911. According to one informant, the
personnel have been told that anyone committed into their custody are members of
a home grown Terrorist  organization suspected of inflicting biological warfare
upon America! The

Page 28

innocent people shot or interned will be blamed for the planned mass genocide
being committed by our own government leaders! The "want ads" in the newspapers,
and on the internet by Homeland Security, seeking to employ people to help fight
Terrorism, are the jobs they are attempting to fill at these Internment Camps!

What I don't understand is why the members of the Press continue to follow
Orders by not reporting anything when, from what my group of Internet
Researchers have been able to determine; only members of the Congress, the Bar,
Federal Police and their families will be protected and exempt from these
vaccinations! The members of the press will be forced to submit to this "death
vaccine" the same as everyone else!

NOTE: I have pictures of hundreds of thousands of plastic coffins purchased by
our government, which are being stockpiled in New Jersey. These coffins are for
the burial of dead Americans during this planned mass genocide. I also have the
statement by the scientist. He has been making Radio Announcements from a Pirate
Radio Station in Chicago, attempting to warn the public of this planned mass
genocide!

And I have copies of a complaint and restraining order, recently filed with the
FBI, by an Australian Journalist, charging that the FDA, the World Health
Organization and the U. S. Federal Government is planning a World Pandemic
against the population of the earth and that the United States population is
expected to be decimated!

BEWARE - BEWARE]

3) I met an elderly gentleman while living in Virginia. Somehow our conversation
moved from the weather to the death of JFK and then the death of Franklin D.
Roosevelt. I confessed to the gentleman that I had located Executive Orders
signed by President Kennedy, six months before his assassination and that in
those Executive Orders, President Kennedy disclosed that he and his brother
Bobby, the Attorney General, have uncovered evidence that the Federal Reserve
Bank was instituting a plan to undermine the American Economy!

President Kennedy "Ordered" the dismantling of the Federal Reserve Bank by these
Executive Orders and "Ordered" that the U. S. Mint begin printing and
circulating Silver Certificates to replace the Federal Reserve Notes in
circulation. These facts were never presented to the special commission
appointed to investigate JFK's assassination and these Executive Orders were
never repealed however, the Federal Reserve was never dismantled and after JFK's
assassination, the U.S. Mint ceased the printing of Silver Certificates. In the
years to follow, the Federal Reserve Bank attempted to remove all of those
Silver Certificates from circulation and destroy them. Only coin collectors
possess any of the original Silver Certificates. The Collectors can trade or
sell them between each other but they are prohibited now by law, from
circulating them back into the American

Page 29

economy! Imagine that, the Congress passed a law prohibiting the circulation of
lawful currency!

4) This same elder gentleman told me that when he was a child of 12, his father
was a Mortician in Washington, DC and his family resided at the Funeral Home
where his father was employed. This Funeral Home was eventually engaged by the
White House to embalm the corpse of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, upon his
death. The elder gentleman then asked me; "Do you know why FDR's funeral was a
closed casket, when he died of natural causes?" I didn't know the answer! Then
the elder gentleman responded: "Because my father didn't know how to hide a
bullet hole to the head!"

The man went on to elaborate how the Secret Service and FBI had visited the
funeral home during this timeframe and made everyone swear under threat of
death, not to reveal what we saw or knew! Nothing was ever reported to the
public or printed about it in the history books and, "I'm too old now to give a
shit about their threats!"Just in case the old guy was simply trying to best my
research on JFK; I wrote down the name of the Funeral Home and his last name,
once I entered my vehicle. Later that afternoon I began to research FDR's death
and burial and discovered that the name of the Funeral Home matched! I then
found a censes (* sic..."Census"?) report for Washington, DC of that year and
discovered that the old gentleman's father was in fact a Mortician and he
resided at the Funeral Home with his wife and two children!

5) Not knowing as much then as I do today; I telephoned the Washington Post and
spoke to Bob Woodward, who was one of the two famous investigative reporters
responsible for bringing down the Nixon Administration. I told Mr. Woodward
about the possibility that FDR had been assassinated in office and was covered
up! I gave him what information I could and told him that I hoped he would be
able to solve this incident as well! This was seven years ago and nothing was
ever printed, discussed in the Post or was ever released by any news service!
Two years ago, I found the evidence of the Treaty of Verona and many other
details discussed herein, which strongly suggests that freedom of the press no
longer exists in America, (if it ever did!)

Some of you "Doubting Thomas's" (* sic) may want to argue with me that: "If this
is such a huge conspiracy; how is it that you and your Internet friends can
research everything on computers and write about it?"

The answer is that our Masters and their government agents are quite full of
themselves! They have intelligence, wealth, influence and absolute power and
control over everything and everyone on this earth but, they are human and
suffer the same common frailties that every powerful leader has endured since
the beginning of time; "fame and the desire for recognition!" They can't talk or
brag about their conspiratorial accomplishments while they are alive out of a
fear of retaliation, which is in direct conflict with their human egos!

Page 30

So they are forced to settle for their accomplishments to be recorded in
expectation that one day the MATRIX will be revealed and they will be
recognized, revered and ogled by future generations of their kind!




THE END




Page 31

Speech before the House of Representatives
by David (Davy) Crockett

Not Yours to Give

One day in the House of Representatives, a bill was taken up appropriating money
for the benefit of a widow of a distinguished naval officer. Several beautiful
speeches had been made in its support. The Speaker was just about to put the
question when Mr. Crockett arose:

"Mr. Speaker --- I have as much respect for the memory of the deceased, and as
much sympathy for the suffering of the living, if suffering there be, as any man
in this house, but we must not permit our respect for the dead or our sympathy
for a part of the living to lead us into an act of injustice to the balance of
the living. I will not go into an argument to prove that Congress has no power
to appropriate this money as an act of charity. Every member upon this floor
knows it. We have the right, as individuals, to give away as much of our own
money as we please in charity; but as members of Congress we have no right so to
appropriate a dollar of the public money. Some eloquent appeals have been made
to us upon the ground that it is a debt due the deceased. Mr. Speaker, the
deceased lived long after the close of the war; he was in office to the day of
his death, and I have never heard that the government was in arrears to him.

"Every man in this House knows it is not a debt. We cannot, without the grossest
corruption, appropriate this money as the payment of a debt. We have not the
semblance of authority to appropriate it as a charity. Mr. Speaker, I have said
we have the right to give as much money of our own as we please. I am the
poorest man on this floor. I cannot vote for this bill, but I will give one
week's pay to the object, and, if every member of Congress will do the same, it
will amount to more than the bill asks.

"He took his seat. Nobody replied. The bill was put upon its passage, and,
instead of passing unanimously, as was generally supposed, and as, no doubt, it
would, but for that speech, it received but few votes, and of course, was lost.

"Later, when asked by a friend why he had opposed the appropriation, Crockett
gave this explanation:

"Several years ago I was one evening standing on the steps of the Capitol with
some other members of Congress, when our attention was attracted by a great
light over in Georgetown. It was evidently a large fire. We jumped into a hack
and drove over as fast as we could. In spite of all that could be done, many
houses were burned and many families made homeless, and, besides, some of them
had lost all but the clothes they had on. The weather was very cold, and when I
saw so many women and children suffering, I felt that something ought to be one
for them. The next morning a bill was introduced appropriating $20,000 for their
relief. We put aside all other business and rushed it through as soon as it
could be done.

"The next summer, when it began to be time to think about the election, I
concluded I would take a scout around among the boys of my district. I had no
opposition there, but, as the election was some time off, I did not know what
might turn up. When riding one day in a part of my district in which I was more
a stranger than any other, I saw a man in a field plowing and coming toward the
road. I gauged my gait so that we should meet as he came to the fence. As he
came up, I spoke to the man. He replied politely, but, as I thought, rather
coldly.

"I began: 'Well, friend, I am one of those unfortunate beings called candidates,
and--'

" 'Yes, I know you; you are Colonel Crockett. I have seen you once before, and
voted for you the last time you were elected. I suppose you are out
electioneering now, but you had better not waste your time or mine. I shall not
vote for you again.'

"This was a sockdolager... I begged him to tell me what was the matter.

" 'Well, Colonel, it is hardly worth-while to waste time or words upon it. I do
not see how it can be mended, but you gave a vote last winter which shows that
either you have not capacity to understand the Constitution, or that you are
wanting in the honesty and firmness to be guided by it. In either case you are
not the man to represent me. But I beg your pardon for expressing it in that
way. I did not intend to avail myself of the privilege of the constituent to
speak plainly to a candidate for the purpose of insulting or wounding you. I
intended by it only to say that your understanding of the Constitution is very
different from mine; and I will say to you what, but for my rudeness, I should
not have said, that I believe you to be honest....But an understanding of the
Constitution different from mine I cannot overlook, because the Constitution, to
be worth anything, must be held sacred, and rigidly observed in all its
provisions. The man who wields power and misinterprets it is the more dangerous
the more honest he is.'

"I admit the truth of all you say, but there must be some mistake about it, for
I do not remember that I gave any vote last winter upon any Constitutional
question.

" 'No, Colonel, there's no mistake. Though I live here in the backwoods and
seldom go from home, I take the papers from Washington and read very carefully
all the proceedings in Congress. My papers say that last winter you voted for a
bill to appropriate $20,000 to some suffers by a fire in Georgetown. Is that
true?'

"Well, my friend, I may as well own up. You have got me there. But certainly
nobody will complain that a great and rich country like ours should give the
insignificant sum of $20,000 to relieve its suffering women and children,
particularly with a full and overflowing Treasury, and I am sure, if you had
been there, you would have done just as I did.'

" 'It is not the amount, Colonel, that I complain of; it is the principle. In
the first place, the government ought to have in the Treasury no more than
enough for its legitimate purposes. But that has nothing to do with the
question. The power of collecting and disbursing money at pleasure is the most
dangerous power that can be intrusted to man, particularly under our system of
collecting revenue by tariff, which reaches every man in the country, no matter
how poor he may be, and the poorer he is the more he pays in proportion to his
means. What is worse, it presses upon him without his knowledge where the weight
centers, for there is not a man in the United States who can ever guess how much
he pays to the government. So you see, that while you are contributing to
relieve one, you are drawing it from thousands who are even worse off than he.
If you had the right to give anything, the amount was simply a matter of
discretion with you, and you had as much right to give $20,000,000 as $20,000.
If you have the right to give to one, you have the right to give to all; and, as
the Constitution neither defines charity nor stipulates the amount, you are at
liberty to give to any thing and everything which you may believe, or profess to
believe, is a charity, and to any amount you may think proper. You will very
easily perceive what a wide door this would open for fraud and corruption and
favoritism, on the one hand, and for robbing the people on the other. No,
Colonel, Congress has no right to give charity. Individual members may give as
much of their own money as they please, but they have no right to touch a dollar
of the public money for that purpose. If twice as many houses had been burned in
this county as in Georgetown, neither you nor any other member of Congress would
have thought of appropriating a dollar for our relief. There are about two
hundred and forty members of Congress. If they had shown their sympathy for the
suffers by contributing each one week's pay, it would have made over $13,000.
There are plenty of men in and around Washington who could have given $20,000
without depriving themselves of even a luxury of life. The congressmen chose to
keep their own money, which, if reports be true, some of them spend not very
creditable; and the people about Washington, no doubt, applauded you for
relieving them from the necessity of giving by giving what was not yours to
give. The people have delegated to Congress, by the Constitu- tion, the power to
do certain things. To do these, it is authorized to collect and pay moneys, and
for nothing else. Everything beyond this is usurpation, and a violation of the
Constitution. So you see, Colonel, you have violated the Constitution in what I
consider a vital point. It is a precedent fraught with danger to the country,
for when Congress once begins to stretch it's power beyond the limits of the
Constitution, there is no limit to it, and no security for the people. I have no
doubt you acted honestly, but that does not make it any better, except as far as
you are personally concerned, and you see that I cannot vote for you..'

"I tell you I felt streaked. I saw if I should have opposition, and this man
should go to talking, he would set others to talking, and in that district I was
a gone fawn-skin. I could not answer him, for the fact is, I was so fully
convinced that he was right, I did not want to. But I must satisfy him, and I
said to him: Well, my friend, you hit the nail upon the head when you said I did
not have sense enough to understand the Constitution. I intended to be guided by
it, and thought I had studied it fully. I have heard many speeches in Congress
about the powers of Congress, but what you have said here at your plow has got
more hard, sound sense in it than all the fine speeches I ever heard. If I had
ever taken the view of it that you have, I would have put my head into the fire
before I would have given that vote; and if I ever vote for another
unconstitutional law I wish I may be shot.

"He laughingly replied: 'Yes Colonel, you have sworn to that once before, but I
will trust you again upon one condition. You say that you are convinced that
your vote was wrong. Your acknowledgment of it will do more good than beating
you for it. If, as you go around this district, you will tell people about this
vote, and that you are satisfied that it was wrong, I will not only vote for
you, but will do what I can to keep down opposition, and perhaps, I may exert a
little influence in that way.'

"If I don't [said I] I wish I may be shot; and to convince you that I am earnest
in what I say I will come back this way in a week or ten days, and if you will
get up a gathering of the people, I will make a speech to them. Get up a
barbecue, and I will pay for it.

" 'No, Colonel, we are not rich people in this section, but we have plenty of
provisions to contribute to a barbecue, and some to spare for those who have
none. The push of crops will be over in a few days, and we can then afford a day
for a barbecue. This is Thursday; I will see to getting up on Saturday week..
Come to my house on Friday, and we will go together, and I promise you a very
respectable crowd to see and hear you.'

"Well, I will be here. but one thing more before I say good-bye. I must know
your name.

" 'My name is Bunce.'

"Not Horatio Bunce?

" 'Yes.'

"Well, Mr. Bunce, I never saw you before though you say you have seen me, but I
know you very well. I am glad I have met you, and very proud that I may hope to
have you for my friend.

"It was one of the luckiest hits of my life that I met him. He mingled but
little with the public, but was widely known for his remarkable intelligence and
incorruptible integrity, and for a heart brimful and running over with kindness
and benevolence, which showed themselves not only in words but in acts. He was
the oracle of the whole country around him, and his fame had extended far beyond
the circle of his immediate acquaintance. Though I had never met him before, I
had heard much of him, and but for this meeting it is very likely I should have
had opposition, and had been beaten. One thing is very certain, no man could now
stand up in that district under such a vote.

"At the appointed time I was at his house, having told our conversation to every
crowd I had met, and to every man I stayed all night with, and I found that it
gave the people an interest and a confidence in me stronger than I had ever seen
manifested before. Though I was considerably fatigued when I reached his house,
and, under ordinary circumstances, should have gone early to bed, I kept up
until midnight, talking about the principles and affairs of government, and got
more real, true knowledge of them than I had got all my life before. I have
known and seen much of him since, for I respect him --- no, that is not the word
--- I reverence and love him more than any living man, and I go to see him two
or three times a year; and I will tell you sir, if everyone who professes to be
a Christian, lived and acted and enjoyed it as he does, the religion of Christ
would take the world by storm.

"But to return to my story. The next morning we went to the barbecue, and, to my
surprise, found about a thousand men there. I met a good many whom I had not
known before, and they and my friend introduced me around until I had got pretty
well acquainted --- at least, they all knew me. In due time notice was given
that I would speak to them. They gathered up around a stand that had been
erected. I opened my speech by saying:

"Fellow-citizens --- I present myself before you today feeling like a new man.
My eyes have lately been opened to truths which ignorance or prejudice, or both,
had heretofore hidden from my view. I feel that I can today offer you the
ability to render you more valuable service than I have ever been able to render
before. I am here today more for the purpose of acknowledging my error than to
seek your votes. That I should make this acknowledgment is due to myself as well
as to you. Whether you will vote for me is a matter for your consideration only.
"I went on to tell them about the fire and my vote for the appropriation and
then told them why I was satisfied it was wrong. I closed by saying:

"And now, fellow-citizens, it remains only for me to tell you that the most of
the speech you have listened to with so much interest was simply a repetition of
the arguments by which your neighbor, Mr. Bunce, convinced me of my error.

"It is the best speech I ever made in my life, but he is entitled to the credit
for it. And now I hope he is satisfied with his convert and that he will get up
here and tell you so.

"He came upon the stand and said: " 'Fellow-citizens --- It affords me great
pleasure to comply with the request of Colonel Crockett. I have always
considered him a thoroughly honest man, and I am satisfied that he will
faithfully perform all that he has promised you today.'

"He went down, and there went up from that crowd such a shout for Davy Crockett
as his name never called forth before.

"I am not much given to tears, but I was taken with a choking then and felt some
big drops rolling down my cheeks. And I tell you now that the remembrance of
those few words spoken by such a man, and the honest, hearty shout they
produced, is worth more to me than all the reputation I have ever made, or shall
ever make, as a member of Congress.

"Now, sir," concluded Crockett, "you know why I made that speech yesterday.
There is one thing now to which I wish to call to your attention. You remember
that I proposed to give a week's pay. There are in that House many very wealthy
men --- men who think nothing of spending a week's pay, or a dozen of them, for
a dinner or a wine party when they have something to accomplish by it. Some of
those same men made beautiful speeches upon the great debt of gratitude which
the country owed the deceased --- a debt which could not be paid by money ---
and the insignificance and worthlessness of money, particularly so
insignificance a sum as $10,000, when weighed against the honor of the nation.
Yet not one of them responded to my proposition. Money with them is nothing but
trash when it is come out of the people. But it is the one great thing for which
most of them are striving, and many of them sacrifice honor, integrity, and
justice to obtain it." David Crockett was born August 17, 1786 at Limestone
(Greene County), Tennessee. He died March 06, 1836 as one of the brave
Southerners defending the Alamo.

Crockett had settled in Franklin County, Tennessee in 1811. He served in the
Creek War under Andrew Jackson. In 1821 and 1823 he was elected to the Tennessee
legislature. In 1826 and 1828 he was elected to Congress. He was defeated in
1830 for his outspoken opposition to President Jackson's Indian Bill - but was
elected again in 1832.
In Washington, although his eccentricities of dress and manner excited comment,
he was always popular on account of his shrewd common sense and homely wit;
although generally favoring Jackson's policy, he was entirely independent and
refused to vote to please any party leader.

At the end of the congressional term, he joined the Texans in the war against
Mexico, and in 1836 was one of the roughly 180 men who died defending the Alamo.
Tradition has it that Crockett was one of only six survivors after the Mexicans
took the fort, and that he and the others were taken out and executed by firing
squad.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF MARION COUNTY, ARKANSAS


MARION COUNTY 				 PLAINTIFF

VS. 		         Case Numbers: S2005-1110; S2006-625, 626,
							  S2009-997,998

Eric Williams 						 DEFENDANT


NOTICE OF MOTION AND
MOTION FOR ADMISSIONS TO BE RESPONDED TO BY ARKANSAS GOVERNOR MIKE BEBEE
There are certain facts critical to establishing my position where the law
constituting such facts are only discernable through constructive presumption
based on  existing evidence:

	 Bouvier's Law Encyclopedia 3rd Rev. 8th Edition, 1914: "Presumptive evidence is
that which shows the existence of one fact, by proof of the existence of another
or others, from which the first may be inferred; because the fact or facts shown
have a legitimate tendency to lead the mind to the conclusion that the fact
exists which is sought to be proved."

	 "Presumptive evidence has been divided into presumptions of law and
presumptions of fact."

	 "Presumptions of law, adopted from motives of public policy, are those which
arise in certain cases by force of the rules of law, directing an inference to
be drawn from proof of the existence of a particular fact or facts. They may be
conclusive or inconclusive."

The entire concept of "public policy" is seriously suspect in a society where
such policy has been and is continually reestablished through the intentional
subjection of the general populace to intensive mind-controlling indoctrination,
as is clearly the case in the United States as is evidenced by the universal
acceptance and belief that everyone born on this land is automatically a citizen
thereof merely due to the incidence of such birth when Reason clearly indicates
such status so derived to be totally impossible and where a proper reading of
both the Thirteenth and Fourteenth amendments deny such automatic citizenship
designation, even though it is commonly erroneously believed the 14th Amendments
so provides.

	 Ibid:  "Conclusive presumptions are those which admit of no averment or proof
to the contrary. Thus, the records of a court, except in some proceeding to
amend them, are conclusive evidence of the matter there recorded, being presumed
to be rightly made up."

Yes, the records of a court are presumed to be rightly made up as to the matters
presented in such court records but such presumption does not establish that the
information included in such records to be true, only that the record thereof
was "rightly made up".

	 Ibid: "Inconclusive or disputable presumptions of law are those where a fact is
presumed to exist, either from the general experience of mankind or from policy,
or from proof of the existence of certain other facts, until something is
offered to show the contrary. Thus, the law presumes a man to be sane until the
contrary appears, and to be innocent of the commission of a crime until he is
proved to be guilty. So, the existence of a person, or of a particular state of
things being shown, the law presumes the person or state of things to continue
until something is offered to conflict with the presumption. "
	 "See Best Presumption, ch. ii."

The purpose of this Request for Admissions  is to develop evidence to show and
establish the contrary in regard to the presumption that Arkansas has any
reasonable or proper ability to claim political jurisdiction over me without
first establishing that I willingly and knowingly abandoned the individual
personal sovereignty I was born with, with Arkansas providing proof that I had
been fully advised and informed of the consequences thereof prior thereto, in
order for me to have knowingly voluntarily surrendered myself to the
jurisdiction of Arkansas.

Moreover, the evidence that will be established through these Admissions will
irrefutably establish that Arkansas has itself, through its failure to provide
anyone with an alternate means of qualifying to be issued a driver license other
than through an applicants presentation of a birth certificate, that Arkansas
has thereby admitted that as an artificial entity Arkansas can not properly
claim or exercise dominion over any real live flesh and blood man or woman who
does not acknowledge an artificial connection through the claim of an artificial
person designation acquired through the voluntary presentation of a birth
certificate.

Additionally we have the ruling of the Supreme Court of the United States in the
case  HOLY TRINITY CHURCH v. U.S. 143 U.S. 457, 12 S.Ct. 511, 36 L.Ed. 226; Feb.
29, 1892, wherein we find:

	 "... Walpole Warren was, prior to September, [143 U.S. 457, 458] 1887, an alien
residing in England. In that month the plaintiff in error made a contract with
him, by which he was to remove to the city of New York, and enter into its
service as rector and pastor; and, in pursuance of such contract, Warren did so
remove and enter upon such service. It is claimed by the United States that this
contract on the part of the plaintiff in error was forbidden by chapter 164, 23
St. p. 332; and an action was commenced to recover the penalty prescribed by
that act. The circuit court held that the contract was within the prohibition of
the statute, and rendered judgment accordingly, (36 Fed. Rep. 303,) and the
single question presented for our determination is whether it erred in that
conclusion."

Correspondingly, Eric Williams is a man native to the area of North America
claimed by the artificial government of the United States to be under it's
dominion, who removed himself to Arkansas in the year 2000 and has made his home
there in the area designated by the artificial entity, Arkansas, to be known as
the County of Marion.  Upon his arrival in the said County of Marion Mr.
Williams did present himself  at the Department of Revenue Office in Yellville,
Arkansas, and did then attempt to apply for an Arkansas driver license.  Mr.
Williams, not having any ability to remember any of the events pertaining to his
birth or to even remember that he had been born, had no ability to provide a
birth certificate to the clerk at the said office and was thereupon refused to
be issued a driver license.  Initially it would seem that the one and only
single question presented to be determined is whether Mr. Williams, who has
procured financial responsibility coverage in the event of an incident, and is
otherwise fully qualified to proceed as a motorist, is statutorially precluded
from traveling on the public way as a motorist under these circumstances, simply
because Arkansas will not issue him a driver license because he does not
remember when he was born and is unable to present a birth certificate that he
has personal knowledge actually pertains to his birth.

However, a more indepth consideration will bring an even more fundamental issue
to the fore: "Does Arkansas have any jurisdictional authority to in any way
regulate anyone who has not  willingly and knowingly abandoned the individual
sovereignty they were born with, being fully advised and informed of the
consequences thereof prior thereto, in order for them to have voluntarily
surrendered themselves to the jurisdiction of Arkansas."

  Then, in the sane case of Holy Trinity Church we also find:

	 "It is a familiar rule that a thing may be within the letter of the statute and
yet not within the statute, because not within its spirit nor within the
intention of its makers. This has been often asserted, and the Reports are full
of cases illustrating its application. This is not the substitution of the will
of the judge for that of the legislator; for frequently words of general meaning
are used in a statute, words broad enough to include an act in question, and yet
a consideration of the whole legislation, or of the circumstances surrounding
its enactment, or of the absurd results which follow from giving such broad
meaning to the words, makes it unreasonable to believe that the legislator
intended to include the particular act. As said in Stradling v. Morgan, Plow.
205: 'From which cases it appears that the sages of the law heretofore have
construed statutes quite contrary to the letter in some appearance, and those
statutes which comprehend all things in the letter they have expounded to extend
to but some things, and those which generally prohibit all people from doing
such an act they have interpreted to permit some people to do it, and those
which include every person in the letter they have adjudged to reach to some
persons only, which expositions have always been founded upon the intent of the
legislature, which they have collected sometimes by considering the cause and
necessity of making the act, sometimes by comparing one part of the act with
another, and sometimes by foreign circumstances."

Correspondingly, it must be conceded that the act of Mr. Williams is within the
letter of this section [requiring a driver license], for it seems clear that his
action in operating a motor vehicle without a driver license is clearly
prohibited under the statute. Not only are the general words 'driver' and
'license' both used, but also, as it were to guard against any narrow
interpretation and emphasize a breadth of meaning, to them is added 'of any
kind;' and, further, there are no exceptions, which strengthens the idea that
every kind of operation of a motor vehicle was intended to be reached by the
statute. While there is great force to this reasoning, we cannot think the
Arkansas Legislature intended to denounce with penalties a transaction like that
in the present case. It is a familiar rule that a thing may be within the letter
of the statute and yet not within the statute, because not within its spirit nor
within the intention [or authority] of its makers. This has been often asserted,
and the Reports are full of cases illustrating its application. This is not the
substitution of the will of the judge for that of the legislator; for frequently
words of general meaning are used in a statute, words broad enough to include an
act in question, and yet a consideration of the whole legislation, or of the
circumstances surrounding its enactment, or of the absurd results which follow
from giving such broad meaning to the words, makes it unreasonable to believe
that the legislator intended to include the particular act. As said in Stradling
v. Morgan, Plow. 205: 'From which cases it appears that the sages of the law
heretofore have construed statutes quite contrary to the letter in some
appearance, and those statutes which comprehend all things in the letter they
have expounded to extend to but some things, and those which generally prohibit
all people from doing such an act they have interpreted to permit some people to
do it, and those which include every person in the letter they have adjudged to
reach to some persons only, which expositions have always been founded upon the
intent of the legislature, which they have collected sometimes by considering
the cause and necessity of making the act, sometimes by comparing one part of
the act with another, and sometimes by foreign circumstances.'

Therefore through these Admissions I will not offer any conclusory
determinations not clearly supported by the facts presented; such facts having a
legitimate tendency to lead the mind to the conclusion that the fact(s) exists
which I seek to prove, such fact(s) being in conflict with long held erroneous
beliefs instilled in the general populace by intentional mind controlling
governmental indoctrination of small impressionable children, clearly a criminal
act known as "fraudulent inducement"!
///
These Admissions were intentionally construed not merely to present facts not
commonly brought to our attention but to expose a gigantic fraudulent hoax
perpetrated intentionally upon the general population not limited to the United
States but of the entire planet and to therefrom establish reasonable lawful
conclusions properly inferred therefrom.

Please be advised that as a 75 year old man I am well aware of the necessity of
a strong expensive government and of the need for a reliable means of funding
same, however freedom cannot exist where taxation is employed to fund a
government purportedly established to protect us from armed robbing
tax-collectors, among other fraud based tyrants.

This court is required to take mandatory judicial notice of the self evident
facts and conclusions based on these admissions which cannot be reasonably
refuted or denied:

	 Bouvier's Law Encyclopedia 3rd Rev. 8th Edition, 1914: "Presumptive evidence is
that which shows the existence of one fact, by proof of the existence of another
or others, from which the first may be inferred; because the fact or facts shown
have a legitimate tendency to lead the mind to the conclusion that the fact
exists which is sought to be proved."

Please either admit or deny:

1.  Please either admit or deny that governments are artificial entities that do
not exist in nature.

2.  Please either admit or deny that creating an organization that assumes power
in excess of that naturally held by its human creators thereby enabling itself
to more intently afflict the populace with injury worse than what the
organization was established to prevent and correct cannot Reasonably be
recognized as proper or acceptable.

3.  Please either admit or deny that it is self evident and true, that as
governments are the artificial creation of men and that individual men have no
natural individual authority to command other men, that those men who create
government cannot reasonably have authority to imbue their artificial political
creation with authority to command men who have not freely, knowingly and
willingly, having been fully informed of the consequences thereof prior thereto,
intentionally surrendered themselves to the authority of such artificial
creation.

4.  Please either admit or deny that if such as the foregoing is true then it
can not be possible for the artificial governments created by such men to be
imbued by their creators with authority not naturally acquired or held by any
one single individual man who participated in the creation.

5. Please either admit or deny that it is impossible for any combination of men
to properly acquire or in any way imbue themselves with authority, due merely to
their numerical combination (or otherwise), to regulate the normal and usual
activities of other men in the community, absent the willing and intentional
voluntary submission of such other men, such other men not having been in any
degree informed of the consequences thereof prior thereto.

6.  Please either admit or deny that it is impossible for men who create
government to have any proper authority to in any way "vote" themselves or their
government into a position of authority over those persons who have not and do
not willingly and intentionally, being fully informed of the consequences prior
thereto, agree to be bound by such voting procedures.

7.  Based on the foregoing, please either admit or deny that Arkansas has no
evidence what-so-ever to prove in any way that I have ever willingly, knowingly
and intentionally, being fully informed of the consequences prior thereto,
voluntarily agreed to submit myself to the authority of the artificial
government, Arkansas.

	 Bouvier's Law Encyclopedia 3rd Rev. 8th Edition, 1914 provides the meaning of
"Involuntary" as follows: "Involuntary, An involuntary act is that which is
performed with constraint or with repugnance, or without the will to do it.  An
act is involuntary when it is done under duress."

8.  Please either admit or deny that it is significant and relevant that Bouvier
Law Encyclopedia provides an act willfully done is none-the-less involuntary
done when it is done under duress.

9.  Please either admit or deny that in order for a man born free on this land
to sustain himself he must of necessity and as a normal activity of the human
species of which he is a member, interact commercially with others of his kind
in order to procure the basic necessities required to sustain his life, which
includes, but is not limited to, the use of Federal Reserve Notes.

10.  That is, please either admit or deny that there is no  irrefutable evidence
in the records of Arkansas or any other political subdivision of the United
States, to prove that I had been fully and properly informed that United States
citizenship is a condition of servitude and that if I voluntarily claimed such
citizenship I would be submitting myself to a lifetime condition of servitude
limited only by the grace of the men, such being politicians, who manage the
artificial entity they have created for their own personal benefit.

11.  Please either admit or deny that as new born infants we humans have no
naturally provided frame of reference to enable us to determine whether what we
are then taught at that young age is good for us or not, that is, please admit
or deny that as such children we are totally at the mercy of government-paid and
government-controlled  adults who are charged by the government to inflict us
with government biased mind controlling indoctrination.

12.  That is, Please either admit or deny that as such children our minds are
easily manipulated into conforming to whatever degree of servitude may be
desired by the government-paid adults who have access to inflict the
government's mind-controlling  indoctrination upon us?

13.  Please either admit or deny that this court must consider the fact that
when we humans are born we have no intellectual ability to evaluate in any
degree what-so-ever that what we are taught is conducive to our own individual
well-being or not?

14.  Please either admit or deny that the government of Arkansas has been and is
engaged daily in it's self serving indoctrination of every child in this state
attending the government indoctrination centers euphemistically known as "public
schools".

15.  Please either admit or deny that the children of "Arkansas" are in
attendance in such "schools" primarily because the government of Arkansas has
mandated their attendance purportedly for the good of the children, but in
truth, for the good of the government.

16.  Please either admit or deny that as children we humans in this society were
and have since birth, been continually subjected to intense unending mind
controlling indoctrination to imbue us with feelings of obligations of servitude
to the artificial government for the purpose of continually convincing us that
we owe fealty and loyalty to such government and that we have a duty to obey and
conform to the dictates of the government with no natural right or any right
what-so-ever to question or in any way doubt that we have such "obligations"?

17. Please either admit or deny that we are taught as impressionable young
children that it is shameful and unpatriotic for us to ever question any of the
foregoing?

18.  Please either admit or deny that the truth concerning the purpose of
"requiring" the children's attendance in such government controlled
indoctrination centers is to facilitate the indoctrination of  the children into
being docile taxpayers.

19.  Please either admit or deny that it cannot be reasonably denied that no
child has ever been naturally born into or naturally born under or naturally
born subject to the political dominion of any artificial entity, government.

20.  Please either admit or deny that as government is an artificial political
entity deriving its authority from the limited authority of the men who created
it, that such government cannot possibly have any proper authority to claim such
"educational" dominion over any child.

21.   Please either admit or deny that it is therefore also true that when the
government asserts such "educational" dominion over children that such assertion
is nothing more than a self-serving misuse and criminal abuse of the power of
government.

22.  Please either admit or deny that any act I may have engaged in pertaining
to my "application" for a driver license was engaged in by me as a young adult
of only fourteen years as a result of the intense intentional minf-controlling
indoctrination I had been subjected to as a child while being required to attend
the government's indoctrination centers euphemistically known as "public
schools", without me ever being told or permitted to be exposed to the truth.
///
23.  Please either admit or deny that the truth that was withheld from me by the
indoctrination officers in the government indoctrination centers euphemistically
known as "public schools" was that I was born free, with no naturally acquired
"citizenship" or any obligation what-so-ever to apply for a "driver license" or
other government mandated identification paraphernalia.

24.  Please either admit or deny that the foregoing was especially true  when I
was indoctrinated to believe that my ability to travel on the public way could
only be properly exercised through my  presentation of a document known as a
"birth certificate" to the government's driver license issuing office in order
for me to be issued a driver license.

25.  What is the actual significance of a birth certificate?  Please admit or
deny that when born a human infant has at that time not acquired the cognitive
ability to take notice of any of the facts pertaining to its birth, such as the
creation of a birth certificate or that it has been "blessed" with an artificial
designation known as a  "name".

26. Please either admit or deny that at the time of its birth a human baby has
no ability to know where it was born, when it was born, who its own mother was,
or whether a birth certificate was created in regard to its birth, or to even
know what a birth certificate is, or to even know its own gender or to be aware
that there is such a gender designation as boy and girl.

27. Please either admit or deny that a human infant at birth has not even the
ability to know that it has two arms, two legs, ten toes, ten fingers or
anything else what-so-ever provided by Nature.

28.  Please either admit or deny that when born the human baby is totally at the
mercy of the adults who will teach the child all these things?

29.   Please either admit or deny that there is no possible way that any man,
woman, boy or girl can have even the slightest personal knowledge that a
specific birth certificate has anything what-so-ever to do with their own birth.

30.  Please either admit or deny that as far as such authority might pertain to
those born here on this land, that the authority of Arkansas is limited to those
persons who have willingly, knowingly and intentionally, having been fully
informed of the consequences thereof  prior thereto voluntarily  agreed to
submit themselves to the authority of Arkansas.

31.  Please either admit or deny that men and women who were subjected to the
intense indoctrination set forth herein above during their childhood, who
thereupon "agreed" to submit themselves to the authority of the government that
caused and instituted their indoctrination, have not done so in any truly
voluntary manner.

	 Bouvier, "An act is involuntary when it is done under duress."

32.  Please either admit or deny that the authority of the State of Arkansas is
limited to extend only to and over those men and women who have willfully and
intentionally agreed thereto, having been fully informed of the consequences
thereof prior thereto.

33.  Please either admit or deny that when any man or woman who has been
indoctrinated throughout their life to believe that they were born with an
obligation to submit themself to the dictates of Arkansas acquire an awareness
that they were wrongfully and criminally intentionally seduced into such belief
by Arkansas, that such men and women then have an absolute natural right to be
immediately freed from any purported obligation they may have been seduced into
agreeing to prior thereto.

34.  Please either admit or deny that Arkansas has established that driver
licenses will only be issued to applicants who present a birth certificate with
their application in order to be issued such license.

35.  Please either admit or deny that the purpose of the birth certificate
requirement is to have the applicant, as an adult, "voluntarily" claim an
attachment to the artificial persona "name" created on the birth certificate.

36.  Please either admit or deny  that when a child is born "in Arkansas" that
the artificial "name" chosen by the child's parents is entered on a birth
certificate and the birth certificate is then surrendered to Arkansas, that the
ownership of the "name" thereon is thereby transferred to Arkansas - that is,
the ownership of the name is transferred, not the ownership of the child.

37.  Please either admit or deny that then, some sixteen years later, the child,
now a young adult, having been "properly" subjected to several years of
mind-controlling governmental preparatory indoctrination, becomes a driver
license applicant and presents his birth certificate to the local Revenue Office
in order to be issued a driver license.

38.  Please either admit or deny that the young adults' "official" claim of the
use of the name entered on the birth certificate constitutes his "official"
"voluntary" use of government owned property, such property being the "name"
entered on what the young adult has been programmed to believe is "his" birth
certificate thereby creating an acceptable artificial nexus enabling the
artificial entity Arkansas to interrelate with the real live flesh and blood
young adult through the artificial persona "name" as being  "sovereign" over the
real live flesh and blood men and women who file such birth certificates in
order to be issued a driver license.

39.  Please either admit or deny that there is no possible way that any human
being can have personal knowledge as to the events of his birth.  That no one
has any ability to have personal knowledge as to when they were born, where they
were born or who their own mother was and no individual can possibly have any
ability what-so-ever to have personal knowledge as to the creation of a document
known as a birth certificate regarding their own birth.  That all of such
information is learned by everyone many years later and quite often, due to the
moral decay of this society, the birth certificate's indication as to the father
of the individual does not necessarily reflect the person's actual sperm donor.

40.  Please either admit or deny that the true reason for the requirement of the
presentation of a birth certificate in order for an applicant to be issued a
driver license is to ensnare the applicant into a condition of voluntary
servitude, in order to comply with the prohibition of involuntary servitude
prohibited in Section Twenty-seven of Article Two of the Arkansas Constitution,
and to have the applicant "officially" volunteer into "citizenship", so that the
person can be required to pay taxes and submit himself to every manner of
regulation possible to imagine.  The foregoing is done in order to have the
applicant agree officially to his voluntary use of government owned property,
such property being the "name" entered on the birth certificate the applicant so
proudly  presented to the local Arkansas Revenue Office in order to be issued a
driver license.

41.  Please either admit or deny that the nexus enabling the interrelationship
between the artificial entity Arkansas and real live flesh and blood men and
women has been established through an insidious subterfuge whereby the
Legislature of Arkansas has been able to define the word "person" through
grammatical association of the term "natural person" with "corporations",
"partnerships" and "co-partnerships", the latter three all clearly being
artificial entities, to surreptitiously define "person" to also be an artificial
entity, thereby, through "reverse engineering, causing the word "person" to be
defined by association as an artificial person in Title 27 of the Arkansas
Codes.

42.  Please either admit or deny that the Arkansas Legislature could not use the
words "man", "woman", "boy", or "girl" in the definition of the word "person"
because "man", "woman", "boy", and "girl" are not in any way able to be
construed to be artificial entities able to associate directly with the
artificial entity, Arkansas.

43.  Please either admit or deny that the term "natural person" as included in
the definition of the word "person" in the Arkansas Codes is intended to be and
is an artificial entity similar in many respects to its definition mates;
corporations, partnerships and copartnerships.  That is, all four or these
artificial entities are created by voluntary human intellectual activity; all
four have creating documents; all four are registered with the government; all
four are obligated to obey and conform to the commands of the Arkansas
Legislature and, last but not least, all four have a name conjured up by their
private sector creators.

44.  Please either admit or deny that the creating document relative to the term
"natural person" referenced herein above, is the birth certificate created by
the parents of a newborn human baby at the time of the baby's birth wherein the
baby's parents enter the "name" conjured up by them and then the parents file
the birth certificate with the government just as do the men and women who
create corporations, partnerships and copartnerships create the appropriate
creative documents, including (but not limited to) therein the name of their
artificial person creations and file such documents with the appropriate
government office.
///
///
45.  Please either admit or deny that when the above mentioned birth certificate
is filed with the government by the child's parents that the said document lies
fairly dormant in the government's files for the next 16 years.  This situation
continues until the child named therein, having "matured" to the recognized age
of reason and accountability, and  having been appropriately fraudulently
indoctrinated and subjected to government serving mind-control in the government
indoctrination centers euphemistically known as "public schools" for
approximately the ten previous years, therein programmed to believe that he was
born into citizenship with natural born obligations of political fealty to the
artificial government, applies for a driver license.  In which "schools", of
course, it has never ever been suggested to the young adult that the government
of Arkansas is in any way "artificial".  The young adult does as he has been
programmed to do by going to the local Department of Revenue Office where he
proudly presents "his" birth certificate in order to be issued an Arkansas
driver license.

46.  Please either admit or deny that when real live flesh and blood men and
women officially "voluntarily" claim the use of the artificial persona "name"
entered on "their" birth certificate as being "theirs" such men and women
therein "voluntarily" agree to their personal use of government owned property,
said property being the "name" on "their" birth certificate, and in so doing the
men and women thereby unwittingly and unknowingly, not having been in any way
previously informed of the consequences of their act, thereby relinquish the
individual sovereignty they were born with without ever knowing they were
actually born free and sovereign with no natural born citizenship nor natural
born obligation of fealty to any artificial political entity.

47.  Please either admit or deny that Arkansas Constitution Section Twenty-seven
(27) of Article Two (2) prohibits involuntary servitude in the State of
Arkansas.

48.  Please either admit or deny that there is relevant significance in the fact
that Bouvier's Law Encyclopedia 3rd Rev. 8th Edition, 1914 therein provides the
meaning of  "Involuntary" as follows: "Involuntary, An involuntary act is that
which is performed with constraint or with repugnance, or without the will to do
it. An act is involuntary when it is done under duress."

49.  Please either admit or deny that this Constitutional prohibition of
involuntary servitude clearly imbues Arkansas with an implied obligation and a
clear duty to provide those men and women who opt out of Arkansas' political
dominion to protect such men and women from the enforcement officers of Arkansas
and all of its political subdivisions.

50.  Please either admit or deny that in regard to the issuance of a driver
license that, as the government of Arkansas has failed to provide an alternate
means or procedure for those of us who refuse to make an unsupportable claim to
a birth certificate of which we know it is impossible for us to have any
personal knowledge of such document's actual relevance to ourselves  in order
for us to apply honestly  for and be issued a driver license, that such failure
on the part of Arkansas clearly constitutes Arkansas' acknowledgment that
Arkansas can make no proper claim  and has no proper ability to command or in
any way govern any real live flesh and blood man and woman who is unwilling to
commit a fraud by voluntarily "appearing" in the artificial domain of Arkansas.

51.  Please either admit or deny that for the government of Arkansas to maintain
and insist that I should not operate my own private conveyance on the public way
of this land because the statutes of Arkansas require all such operators to be
issued a driver license prior thereto, would be a total absurdity in the context
of my political status, as may be reasonably inferred.  Such reasonable
inference was recognized and stated by the Supreme Court in Holy Trinity Church
v. United States, supra.

  Another point in regard to the word "appear".  As I understand it, to "appear"
means to suddenly materialize, in a somewhat magical or artificial  manner, such
as is done when an actor in a screen play or stage play dons a role as a
fictional character.   As I understand it, in order for me to "appear" in an
Arkansas court, I would have to "don" the role of an artificial character,
through my voluntary use of government owned property, such property being a
"name" entered on a birth certificate filed with the government at the time of
my birth, neither of which could I possibly have any knowledge of or control
over.  I have never ever willingly, knowingly, intentionally, being fully
informed of the consequences thereof prior thereto, given up the individual
sovereignty I was born with and thereby ever agreed to submit myself to the
political jurisdiction of Arkansas or any other artificial entity, government.
///
///
52.  Please either admit or deny that at the time of his or her birth a human
baby is born sovereign over his or her own self with no naturally acquired
obligation(s) of fealty or servitude.

53.  Please either admit of deny that the natural born independence and
sovereignty of the individual is recognized in Section Twenty-seven of Article
Two of the Arkansas Constitution wherein involuntary servitude is prohibited in
Arkansas.

54.  Based on the foregoing please either admit or deny that when a real live
flesh and blood man or woman "appears" in court that they do so only by donning
an artificial entity.

55.  Please either admit or deny that the appearance of a person before a court
is accomplished only by the person's acknowledgment of the person's name.

56.  Please either admit or deny that in a court room setting the acknowledgment
of a name by a real live flesh and blood man or woman constitutes an
acknowledgment by the man or woman that he or she has volunteered to participate
in the artificial realm.

57.  Please either admit or deny that the acknowledgment of a birth certificate
by a real live flesh and blood man or woman is critically necessary to
establishing an acceptable inter-relationship with the artificial political
entity known as government.

Please be advised, I have been informed by various government officers both in
California and Arkansas, that if I were to somehow procure a birth certificate
wherein the information entered thereon could reasonably apply to me and use it
to apply for and be issued a driver license, that my life would be much easier. 
Arkansas State Police Corporal Matthew Sheeley informed me during a "routine"
traffic stop on April 17, 2009 of a vehicle where I was riding as a freeloader,
that he didn't care where I got a birth certificate just so long as I got one.

Based on the foregoing:

58.  Please either admit or deny that if I were to somehow procure a birth
certificate and present it to be issued a driver license that my life would be
much easier.

59  Please either admit or deny that if I were to do as advised and use
information obtained from a grave marker in a cemetery to procure a "legitimate"
birth certificate that I could present such a birth certificate to the local
Revenue Office and be issued a driver license based on such a presentation.

60.  Please either admit or deny that if I were to do as advised that such an
act on my part would constitute an intentional fraudulent act on my part.

61. Please either admit or deny that if I were to do as advised and Corporal
Sheeley were to discover such, that Sheeley would then arrest me and charge me
with criminal fraud.

62.  Please either admit or deny that an honest man does not have a chance of
being respected by the government of Arkansas.

63.  Please either admit or deny that Arkansas has a Constitutional and moral
duty to provide me with some manner of passport document and other appropriate
paraphernalia to protect me from the enforcement officers of Arkansas and its
political subdivisions.

In some quarters it is believed that the courts of the United States and of
Arkansas are operating under Admiralty or Maritime rules and that the society is
operating generally under Admiralty or Maritime rules.  This is purportedly
evidenced by the wide use of nautical terms within the commercial community such
as "hyway" related to high seas", and trucks delivering to "docks"; Babies being
"birthed"; "islands" along the highways; The use by  truckers of "bills of
lading" rather than "waybill"; "currency" from "currents" of the seas, which
"flows" throughout the states; opening the "cargo bay" to unload "cargo";
highways have "shipping lanes"; cars or other vehicles carry "passengers", just
like ships; "commerce" is defined as the movement of cargo on the high seas

64.  In consideration of the foregoing information, please either admit or deny
that the courts of Arkansas are operating at any time under either Maritime or
Admiralty rules.

65.  In consideration of the foregoing information, please either admit or deny
that the courts of Arkansas are operating under  Maritime or Admiralty rules in
matters not clearly and obviously related to international commerce.

66.  In consideration of the foregoing information, please either admit or deny
that this District Court in Marion County, Arkansas, is operating under either
Maritime of Admiralty rules in regard to this case that we are herein
litigating.

67.  I hereby request that the Honorable Governor of Arkansas who is purportedly
the person responding to these Admissions,  immediately order the dismissal of
all and any charges lodged against me  that have caused me to expend all of the
effort that I have to prepare this instant document and that the Honorable
Governor of Arkansas immediately order the Revenue Office of Yellville, Arkansas
to immediately provide me with an identification card similar to an Arkansas
driver license and license plates for all of the vehicles that I might operate
with notations entered in the police computers of Arkansas that when the police
encounter me on the highways of Arkansas that such police be informed through
their police computers that I should not be stopped nor detained.

68.  Be hereby advised, I freely acknowledge that I am subject in every respect
to the common law and may be held accountable under the common law for any
injury I might be responsible for in a properly established common law court.

As previously stated herein above, from Bouvier's, " An act is involuntary when
it is done under duress."


_________________________________
	 Eric Williams, TDC *
	 c/o P.O. Box 413, Yellville, Arkansas 72687
	 August 17, 2009


* Proceeding under Threat, Duress and Coercion
C:\Wpdocsx\Please Admit or deny re Gov Bebee 1.wpd

Eric Williams
c/o P.O. Box 413
Yellville, Arkansas 72687
ewrbn@...
August 9, 2009


Mike Bebee, Arkansas State Governor
State Capitol, Room 250
Little Rock, AR 72201
(501) 682-2345

Dear Governor Bebee,

This letter is intended to be my good faith attempt to resolve a serious
situation that can only be properly resolved at the level of your office as the
Chief Executive of Arkansas.

There are those of us who do not like the way the various governments of this
country micro manage the lives of everyone. Some of us have done considerable
research and have determined that all governments are nothing more or less than
artificial entities purportedly created to resolve conflicts inevitable among
our species; (please understand that we do not consider this to be a bad thing)
however when government causes more problems than it solves and takes upon
itself certain authority such as requiring all those it chooses to classify as
drivers to have a driver license, (which again, is not necessarily a bad thing)
then government also assumes the responsibility to provide a means of issuing
such license to all otherwise qualified applicants, other than limiting issuance
of such license to only those applicants who claim and present such a specious
document as is a birth certificate.

Such responsibility on the part of government seems so obvious and the solution
so readily apparent that the need for such alternate provision cannot possibly
not have been considered by the legislature, not only of Arkansas, but likewise
of the other 49 states. Why have none of these fifty legislatures so provided?
This is a most critical question affecting the very basic structure of
government!

In my research and attempts to survive in this society as a man who honestly
acknowledges that I can have no personal recollection of the events of my birth,
I have concluded that, as I have no personal recollection thereof, that I cannot
in good conscience honestly claim a birth certificate as pertaining to my birth
in order for me to be issued a driver license. However, there is much more to it
than that.

In my considerable research I have determined certain irrefutable facts in
regard to the relationship of government to the individual men and women of the
general population. The first being that, as Arkansas is an artificial entity
created by men, Arkansas cannot possibly have been imbued by such men with more
authority than that imbued by Nature into any single one of those men.

That is, as no single individual man has natural authority over another it is
not then reasonably possible for several (or any number) of such men to create
an artificial entity and then imbue that artificial entity with more authority
than any one of the men who created the artificial entity individually naturally
possessed. This principle establishes that it is impossible for such men to
imbue their creation with authority to command others who have not willingly and
knowingly agreed to submit themselves to the authority of such artificial
entity. This principle is set forth in the Arkansas Constitution in the words:
"Involuntary servitude shall not exist in Arkansas".

Likewise it is irrefutably true that neither can voting in and of itself
possibly properly construct such authority: "How many men would it take to
properly and democratically vote the panties off your wife or daughter? " To
change the subject of that offensive question to taxation in order to be
"politically correct" would serve to immediately defuse it�fs impact, but there
is actually not one whit of difference! An honest evaluation of voting, when the
outcome is purported to have authority to command compliance of those who
object, is clearly a criminal act!

It has become clear to me that in order for Arkansas to have "properly" acquired
and exercised the unnatural authority to micro-manage the lives of the populace
that it does indeed exercise, Arkansas must have first in some manner secured
the voluntary agreement of each man and woman on an individual basis.

I contend that the acknowledgment of the truth of the foregoing was the intent
and purpose of the federal legislators when they wrote the prohibition of
involuntary servitude into the 13th amendment to the Federal Constitution and of
the state legislators when they likewise wrote such prohibiition into Section
Twenty-seven of Article Two of the Arkansas Constitution.

So then, how is it that Arkansas has "properly" achieved such authority?

An historical review reveals that the very same legislators who wrote the 13th
Amendment also wrote the work-around thereof which they provided in the 14th
Amendment. That is, a careful and grammatical reading of the 14th Amendment will
reveal that such Amendment does not in any way provide or declare that persons
"born in the United States" are, by such birth, automatically citizens of the
United States or of Arkansas! Part of the reason is because it is impossible for
anyone to ever be born into a legally mandatory obligation to any pre-existing
entity and certainly not to an artificial one.

That is, in order to comply with the Constitutional prohibition of involuntary
servitude, the acquisition or "assignment" of "citizenship", state or federal,
must have been voluntarily entered into or applied for on an individually
voluntary basis by each and every man and woman unwittingly ensnared into such
servitude status! But only after such men or wemen attained adulthood.


The foregoing is true because Reason will indicate that it is impossible for a
child to be born in or to be born into membership of an artificial entity. It is
therefore clear that no one has ever been born in the United States or in
Arkansas or born into a condition of citizenship servitude thereof.

So then, how does Arkansas, an artificial entity, gain sovereignty over real
live flesh and blood men and women? A careful reading, understanding and
acceptance of the inclusion of the word "person" in the definition of the word
"person" in Title 27 of the Arkansas Codes as being grammatically correct will
reveal how this has been deviously but "properly" accomplished, as follows:


Although the assignment and use of names by our species is fairly universal it
must none-the-less be acknowledged that a name is an artificial designation not
provided or assigned by Nature. Bearing the foregoing in mind can any of the
following be reasonably denied, (i) that upon the birth and naming of a child
"in Arkansas" that the ownership of the artificial "name" entered on the birth
certificate by the child�fs parents was surrendered to Arkansas by the parents
when the birth certificate was filed with Arkansas? (That is, the ownership of
the "name" was transferred, not the ownership of the child- children are not
owned by their parents).

(ii) Then, sixteen years later the child (having been (in)appropriately
subjected to mind controlling indoctrination in the government�fs indoctrination
centers euphemistically knows as "public schools" for approximately 12 years)
becomes a driver license applicant and as such presents "his" or "her" birth
certificate to the local Revenue Office in order to be issued a driver license.

The applicant, then being recognized as an adult in his or her own right,
thereby officially acknowledges his or her "voluntary" acceptance and use of
property owned by Arkansas; such property being the artificial "name" entered on
the birth certificate some sixteen years prior. The applicant thereby officially
"volunteering" into U.S. and Arkansas citizenship. Akansas has thereby at least
technically not violated the constitutional prohibitions of involuntary
servitude.

(iii)The acceptance and claim of the "name" by the young mind controlled adult
thereby creates a legally acceptable artificial nexus enabling the artificial
entity Arkansas to "properly" inter relate through the artificial persona "name"
as being "Sovereign" over the name and the use thereof by the real live flesh
and blood man or woman, thereby Arkansas "properly" establishing control over
real live flesh and blood men and women who voluntarily present such birth
certificates in order to be issued a driver license and to officially volunteer
themselves into the servitude status of "citizenship".

(iv) Such real live flesh and blood men and women were never expected to
understand that they were ignorantly identifying their physical selves as being
artificial "natural persons" (actually claiming themselves to be an artificial
entity "persona" created through the filing of "their" birth certificates with
an artificial government by uninformed and ignorant mind controlled parents).

The artificial entity "natural person" is mentioned in the definition of
"person" in several subsections of Title 27 of the statutes of Arkansas having
to do with operating or driving motor vehicles; being included therein along
with other artificial persons: corporations, partnerships, co-partnerships, etc.
No where in the Arkansas Codes do we find "Men", "women", "boys" or "girls"
included in the definition of "person". Is it not clear that the reason for such
omission is because "men", "women", "boys" and "girls" are real live flesh and
blood entities, not artificial entities, and that it would g be grammatically
incorrect to include real live flesh and blood men, women, boys or girls
together with artificial entities such as corporations, partnetships,
co-partnerships, etc.? And is not the actual reason for such omission because as
an artificial entity Arkansas can only inter-relate with other artificial
entities, such as are "natural persons"?

(v) Such real live flesh and blood applicants not realizing that what they
were/are actually doing through their application for a driver license was
surrendering the natural individual sovereignty they were born with and that
they were thereby volunteering themselves into a lifetime condition of total
servitude to an artificial entity that does not exist in nature, such entity
being Arkansas!

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that I am aware of the foregoing and
to call upon you to acknowledge the accuracy of my reasoning and instruct your
enforcement officers to respect my political status as being outside of the
jurisdiction of Arkansas, Arkansas being their only proper jurisdiction.

I additionally request that you instruct your subordinate in the Transportation
Department to instruct the Revenue Office in Yellville, Marion County, to
provide me an identification card in the style of an Arkansas driver license but
not actually being a driver "license"as I am not subject to such restrictions
but such document being actually, a passport, and additionally, that such office
provide me with "license plates" for my various "motor vehicles", with an
appropriate entry being entered into all Arkansas police computers instructing
all law enforcement officer of Arkansas that if they run the number of my
passport or of the "license" plate of my automobile or other conveyance in their
police computer they shall encounter instructions therein to not stop or
otherwise detain me.

I freely recognize that I am subject to the common law and may be properly
prosecuted in a common law court for violations of the common law (rape,
robbery, murder or trespass) but I may not be prosecuted therein for violations
of Arkansas statutes or prosecuted under any circumstances in a statutory court
of Arkansas.

I contend that you are obligated to provide such passport media to me as such is
clearly implied in Section 27 of Article Two of the Arkansas Constitution. The
prohibition of involuntary servitude constitutes a clear acknowledgment by
Arkansas that everyone is born free and independent and not born with an
automatically acquired obligation of fealty to anyone nor to any artificial
political entity. There is nothing in this Constitutional prohibition that in
any way suggests that those of us who choose to opt out must leave the area
claimed by Arkansas to be under its dominion. There is nothing in this
prohibition to suggest that we who opt out must go live in a cave naked and
starve to death! To the contrary, the clear implication is that we have an
absolute natural born right to live here on this land and to engage in every
activity normal to our species. There is nothing in this prohibition that in any
way suggests that our use of the money medium, Postal Service, Internet or other
"benefits" would constitute our free will agreement of our political submission
to the authority of Arkansas. If any of this were true then why would Arkansas
need to employ the subterfuge of the birth certificate and insist that everyone
under its dominion claim a name? Why would Arkansas not provide an alternate
means for those without a birth certificate to be issued a driver license?

Bouvier�fs Law Encyclopedia 3rd Rev. 8th Edition, 1914 provides as follows:
"Involuntary, An involuntary act is that which is performed with constraint or
with repugnance, or without the will to do it. An act is involuntary when it is
done under duress." (Emphasis added).

Such is also my birthright as I am of the Posterity of the Rebels of July 4,
1776.

If you can provide a reasonable source of authority to negate what I have
presented herein then you have an obligation to do so. If you do not respond
with such an explanation within ten (10) days of the date hereof such
non-response must be acknowledged by your subordinates to constitute your
agreement that everything I have presented herein above is correct and
constitutes your agreement and acknowledgment that the enforcement officers of
Arkansas and all of its sub-entities have no authority to detain me or interfere
in my use of the public way in order for me to engage in the normal and
honorable activities necessary for me to sustain my life.

The foregoing is presented in good faith as my reasonable attempt to resolve
this seeming impasse.

Sincerely and respectfully yours,

�@Eric Williams
c/o P.O. Box 413, Yellville, Arkansas 72687
ewhoru@...
August 9, 2009

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF ______ COUNTY, ________

___________ COUNTY 			 PLAINTIFF

VS. 	 Case Number:   _____________

____________ 				 DEFENDANT

NOTICE OF MOTION AND
MOTION FOR EVIDENTIARY HEARING
Under Ark. R. Crim. P. 37
and
NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR DISMISSAL FOR INSUFFICIENCY OF THE EVIDENCE

Comes now "Defendant" _____________ to request that this Honorable Court conduct
a hearing to evaluate and determine the sufficiency of the evidence to establish
that State of Insanity has political dominion over me.  As this is a political
question it is clear that  the judiciary of State of Insanity would have no
standing to proceed absent an establishment of such jurisdiction by the
Executive Authority of State of Insanity.  Although ARCrP Rule 37 pertains
directly to those convicted and incarcerated I none-the-less contend that Rule
37 reasonably applies to all individuals when and where there is a serious need
for a clear and unambiguous explanation of the determination of State of
Insanity' political jurisdiction over a specific individual man or woman. 
Therefore, in the interest of justice I hereby invoke the below ruling of the
Supreme Court of State of Insanity requiring that every point I raise herein
below be responded to in writing, , for the reasons stated herein below:

Evidentiary Hearing
Melvin DULANEY v. STATE of State of Insanity
CR 98-49 ___ S.W.2d ___
Supreme Court of State of Insanity
Opinion delivered September 16, 1999
1. Appeal & error -- postconviction relief -- written findings required when
evidentiary hearing is held. -- Written findings must be made whenever an
evidentiary hearing is held.
2. Appeal & error -- postconviction relief -- rule requiring written findings
applies to any Rule 37 issue. -- The rule that written findings are required
whenever an evidentiary hearing is held is mandatory; the requirement of written
findings of fact applies to any issue upon which an Ark. R. Crim. P. 37 hearing
is held.
3. Appeal & error -- post conviction relief -- matter remanded where court
failed to make sufficient written findings. -- Where the circuit court's order
addressing ineffective assistance of counsel did not address the numerous
allegations listed in appellant's petition nor those reiterated on appeal and
was conclusory in nature, the supreme court remanded the case in accordance with
Ark. R. Crim. P. 37.3(c) for fact-findings on the issues of ineffective
assistance of counsel set forth in appellant's Rule 37 petition; reversed and
remanded.

As stated in the above ruling the purpose of an evidentiary hearing is to
evaluate the evidence not to be used by either party or the judge as a soap box
to present their personal views or conclusions based on extraneous predetermined
self serving "justifications" such as "how would the government be able to
continue if everyone were to make the claim made by ____(your name)____?" as
such considerations are not relevant and make it impossible for the court to be
fair, just, impartial  and honorable.

Moreover, there are certain facts critical to establishing my position where the
law constituting such facts, are only discernable through constructive
presumption based on  existing evidence:

Bouvier's Law Encyclopedia 3rd Rev. 8th Edition, 1914: "Presumptive evidence is
that which shows the existence of one fact, by proof of the existence of another
or others, from which the first may be inferred; because the fact or facts shown
have a legitimate tendency to lead the mind to the conclusion that the fact
exists which is sought to be proved."

"Presumptive evidence has been divided into presumptions of law and presumptions
of fact."

"Presumptions of law, adopted from motives of public policy, are those which
arise in certain cases by force of the rules of law, directing an inference to
be drawn from proof of the existence of a particular fact or facts. They may be
conclusive or inconclusive."

The entire concept of "public policy" is seriously suspect in a society where
such policy has been and is continually reestablished through the intentional
subjection of the general populace to intensive mind controlling indoctrination,
as is clearly the case in the United States as is evidenced by the universal
acceptance and belief that everyone born on this land is automatically a citizen
by such birth when Reason clearly indicates such status so derived to be totally
impossible and where a proper reading of both the Thirteenth and Fourteenth
amendments deny such automatic citizenship designation, even though it is
commonly erroneously believed the 14th Amendments provides otherwise.

Ibid:  "Conclusive presumptions are those which admit of no averment or proof to
the contrary. Thus, the records of a court, except in some proceeding to amend
them, are conclusive evidence of the matter there recorded, being presumed to be
rightly made up."

Yes, the records of a court are presumed to be rightly made up as to the matters
presented in such court records but such presumption does not establish that the
information included in such records to be true, only that the record thereof
was "rightly made up".

Ibid: "Inconclusive or disputable presumptions of law are those where a fact is
presumed to exist, either from the general experience of mankind or from policy,
or from proof of the existence of certain other facts, until something is
offered to show the contrary. Thus, the law presumes a man to be sane until the
contrary appears, and to be innocent of the commission of a crime until he is
proved to be guilty. So, the existence of a person, or of a particular state of
things being shown, the law presumes the person or state of things to continue
until something is offered to conflict with the presumption. "
"See Best Presumption, ch. ii."

The purpose of this motion is to offer evidence to show and establish the
contrary in regard to the presumption that State of Insanity has any ability to
claim political jurisdiction over me without establishing that I willingly and
knowingly abandoned the individual sovereignty I was born with, being fully
advised and informed of the consequences thereof prior thereto, in order for me
to have voluntarily surrendered myself to the jurisdiction of State of Insanity.

Moreover, the evidence I will present herein below will irrefutably establish
that State of Insanity has itself, through its failure to provide me an
alternate means of qualifying to be issued a driver license other than through
my presentation of a birth certificate, that State of Insanity has thereby
admitted it can not properly claim or exercise dominion over me.

Therefore I do not hereinafter offer any conclusory opinions not clearly
supported by the facts presented, I merely present facts and reasonable lawful
conclusions inferred therefrom   which, as is stated by the Supreme Court above,
must be responded to in writing by the judicial officer addressing this matter 
This court is required to take mandatory judicial notice of the following self
evident facts and conclusions based thereon which cannot be reasonably refuted
or denied:

1.  Is it not true and self evident that governments are artificial entities
that do not exist in nature.

The fact that over many centuries the nature of the human species has indicated
a requirement that  some form of social organization be established to address
and resolve disputes and punish criminal acts does not change the fact that
governments do not exist in nature!  It just makes it more difficult to
accomplish the proper means of addressing the manner in which issues are to be
peaceably resolved.

Creating an organization that assumes power in excess of that naturally held by
its human creators thereby enabling itself to more intently afflict the populace
with injury worse than what the organization was established to prevent and
correct cannot Reasonably be recognized as proper or acceptable.

2.  Is it not self evident that governments are the artificial creation of men
and likewise, that individual men have no natural individual authority to
command other men?

If such is true then how can it be possible for the artificial governments
created by such men to be imbued by its creators with authority not naturally
acquired or held by any one single individual man who participated in the
creation thereof?

That is, how is it that any combination of men can properly acquire or in any
way imbue themselves with authority, due merely to their numerical combination
(or otherwise), to regulate the normal and usual activities of other men in the
community, absent the willing and intentional voluntary submission of such other
men to such authority?

That is, how is it that men who create government can have any proper authority
to "vote" themselves or their government into a position of authority over those
who have not and do not willingly and intentionally, being fully informed of the
consequences thereof prior thereto, agree to be bound by such voting procedures?

3.  Based on the foregoing, when did I willingly and intentionally, being fully
informed of the consequences prior thereto, agree to submit myself to the
authority of the artificial government, State of Insanity?

Bouvier's Law Encyclopedia 3rd Rev. 8th Edition, 1914 provides the meaning of 
"Involuntary" as follows: "Involuntary, An involuntary act is that which is
performed with constraint or with repugnance, or without the will to do it. An
act is involuntary when it is done under duress?

Is it not particularly relevant that Bouvier provides that an act is involuntary
when it is done under duress?

That is, where is the irrefutable evidence in the records of State of Insanity
or any other political subdivision of the United States, that I had been fully
and properly informed that United States citizenship is a condition of servitude
and that if I voluntarily claimed such citizenship I would be submitting myself
to a lifetime condition of servitude limited only by the grace of the men who
manage what they have created for their own benefit?

4.  In order to answer these questions is it not true that this court must
consider the fact that when we humans are born we have no intellectual ability
to evaluate in any degree what-so-ever that what we are taught in government
indoctrination centers euphemistically known as "public schools" is conducive to
our own individual well-being or not?

That is, as new born infants is it not true that we have no naturally provided
frame of reference, that is, as such children are we not totally at the mercy of
those government paid adults who are charged with our upbringing?

That is, is it not true that as such children our minds are easily manipulated
into conforming to whatever degree of servitude may be desired by the government
paid adults who have unlimited access to inflict their indoctrination upon us?

5.  Is it not self evident and undeniable that the government of State of
Insanity has been and is engaged daily in it's self serving indoctrination of
every child in this state attending the government indoctrination centers
euphemistically known as "public schools"?

6.  Can it be reasonably denied that such children are in attendance in such
"schools" because the government of State of Insanity has mandated their
attendance purportedly for their own good, while the truth is that the purpose
is to indoctrinate the children into being docile taxpayers?

7.  Can it reasonably be denied that no child has ever been born into or under
or subject to the political dominion of any artificial entity, governmental?

Is it not true that as such artificial political entity has no proper authority
to claim such dominion is it not therefore also true that when the government
asserts such dominion claim that such claim is a self serving misuse and
criminal abuse of the power of government?

8.  Can it reasonably be denied that any act I may have engaged in pertaining to
my "application" for a driver license was engaged in by me as a result of the
intense intentional indoctrination I was subjected to as a child while attending
the government's indoctrination centers known as "public schools", without me
ever being told or permitted to be exposed to the truth?

Is it not true that the truth that was withheld from me by the indoctrination
officers in the government indoctrination centers was that I was born free, with
no naturally acquired obligation to apply for a "driver license" or other
government mandated identification paraphernalia?  Especially when I was
intentionally indoctrinated to believe that my ability to travel on the public
way could only be properly exercised through my  presentation of a document
known as a "birth certificate" to the government's driver license issuing office
in order for me to be issued a driver license?

9.  Can it be reasonably denied that when born a human infant has at that time
not acquired the cognitive ability to take notice of any of the facts pertaining
to its birth?

That is, is it not true that at the time of its birth a human baby has no
ability to know where it was born, when it was born, or even to understand that
it was in fact born, who its own mother was, or whether a birth certificate was
created in regard to its birth, or to even know what a birth certificate is, or
to even know its own gender or to be aware that there is such a gender
designation as boy and girl?

Is it not true that a human infant at birth has not even the ability to know
that it has two arms, two legs, ten toes, ten fingers or anything else
what-so-ever provided by Nature?

Is it not true that when born the human baby is totally at the mercy of the
adults who will teach the child all these things?

Is it not true that as children we humans in this society were and are being
continually subjected to intense unending indoctrination to imbue us with
feelings of obligations of servitude to the artificial government for the
purpose of continually convincing us that we owe fealty to and that we have a
duty to obey and conform to the dictates of the government with no natural right
or any right what-so-ever to question or in any way doubt that we have such
"obligations"?

Is it not true that we are taught as impressionable children that it is shameful
and unpatriotic to ever question any of the foregoing?

10.  Can it reasonably be denied that there is no possible way that any man,
woman, boy or girl can have even the slightest personal knowledge that a
specific birth certificate has anything what-so-ever to do with their own birth?

11.  As far as such authority might pertain to those born here on this land, can
it reasonably be denied that the authority of State of Insanity is limited to
those persons who have willingly, intentionally, knowingly, having been fully
informed of the consequences thereof  prior thereto voluntarily  agreed to
submit themselves to such authority or at least to the authority of the
government of the United States?

12.  Can it reasonably be claimed that men and women who were subjected to the
intense indoctrination set forth herein above during their childhood, who
thereupon "agree" to submit themselves to the authority of the government that
caused and instituted their indoctrination, have done so in any truly voluntary
manner?

Bouvier, "An act is involuntary when it is done under duress."

13.  Can it reasonably be denied that the authority of the State of State of
Insanity is limited to extend only to and over those men and women who have
willfully and intentionally agreed thereto, having been fully informed of the
consequences thereof prior thereto?

14.  Can it reasonably be denied that when any man or woman who has been
indoctrinated throughout their life to believe that they were born with an
obligation to submit themself to the dictates of State of Insanity acquire an
awareness that they were wrongfully and criminally intentionally seduced into
such belief by State of Insanity, that such men and women then have an absolute
natural right to be immediately freed from any purported obligation they may
have been seduced into agreeing to prior thereto?


15.  Is it not well known and widely acknowledged that State of Insanity has
established that driver licenses will only be issued to applicants who present a
birth certificate with their application in order to be issued such license?

16.  Can it reasonably be denied that the purpose of the birth certificate
requirement is to have the applicant, as an adult, "voluntarily" claim an
attachment to the artificial persona "name" created on the birth certificate?

17.  Can any of the following be reasonably denied, (i) that the ownership of
the artificial "name" entered on a birth certificate was surrendered to State of
Insanity when the birth certificate was filed with State of Insanity sixteen
years prior to a driver license applicant's presentment of the birth certificate
in order to be issued a driver license, (ii) thereby creating an acceptable
nexus enabling the artificial entity State of Insanity to inter relate through
the artificial persona "name" as being  "sovereign" over the real live flesh and
blood men and women who file such birth certificates in order to be issued a
driver license, (iii) such real live flesh and blood men and women being
designated and defined as "natural persons" in several subsections of Title 27
of the statutes of State of Insanity included therein  along with other
artificial persons in various and several of the subsections of the statutes of
State of Insanity, Title 27, when (iv) the real live flesh and blood men and
women officially "voluntarily" claim the use of the artificial persona "name"
entered on "their" birth certificate as being "theirs" when (v) the real live
flesh and blood men and women apply for a driver license?

18.  Is it not true that State of Insanity Constitution Section Twenty-seven
(27) of Article Two (2) prohibits involuntary servitude in the State of State of
Insanity?

And is it not also true that Bouvier's Law Encyclopedia 3rd Rev. 8th Edition,
1914 provides the meaning of  "Involuntary" as follows: "Involuntary, An
involuntary act is that which is performed with constraint or with repugnance,
or without the will to do it. An act is involuntary when it is done under
duress."?

19.  Can it reasonably be denied that this Constitutional prohibition of
involuntary servitude clearly imbues State of Insanity with an implied
obligation and a clear duty to provide those men and women who opt out of State
of Insanity' political dominion protection from the enforcement officers of
State of Insanity and all of its political subdivisions?


20.  In regard to the issuance of a driver license can it be reasonably denied
that as the government of State of Insanity has failed to provide an alternate
means or  procedure for those of us who refuse to make a claim to a birth
certificate of which we know it is impossible for us to have any personal
knowledge of such document's relevance to ourselves  in order for us to apply
for and be issued a driver license, that such failure on the part of State of
Insanity clearly constitutes State of Insanity' acknowledgment that State of
Insanity can make no proper claim to and has no proper ability to command or in
any way govern any real live flesh and blood man and woman who is unwilling to
commit a fraud by voluntarily "appearing" in the artificial domain of State of
Insanity?

21.  Can it reasonably be denied that State of Insanity has a Constitutional and
moral duty to provide me with some manner of passport document and other
appropriate paraphernalia to protect me from the enforcement officers of State
of Insanity and its political subdivisions?

22.  I hereby request that this Honorable court immediately order the dismissal
of all and any charges lodged against me  that have caused me to expend all of
the effort that I have to prepare this instant document and that this Honorable
court immediately order the Revenue Office of _________, State of Insanity to
immediately provide me with an identification card similar to an State of
Insanity driver license and license plates for all of the vehicles that I might
operate with notations entered in the police computers of State of Insanity that
when the police encounter me on the highways of State of Insanity that such
police be informed through their police computers that I should not be stopped
nor detained.

23.  Be hereby advised, I freely acknowledge that I am subject in every respect
to the common law and may be held accountable for under the common law for any
injury I might be responsible for in a properly established common law court.

As previously stated herein above, from Bouvier's, " An act is involuntary when
it is done under duress."


_________________________________
	 Youe name, TDC * (123) 456-7890
	 c/o P.O. Box xxx, xxxxxxxxx, State of Insanity 12345
	 August 4, 2009

Hi Group -

Instead of continually beating the opposition over the head with information
their Mind Control programming prevents them from assimilating, here below is a
presentation based on their own failure to properly provide a reasonable and
honest means whereby those of us who see through their false Matrix can be
issued a driver license.

Cheers,

I'm Eric, WhoRU??

NOTICE AND DEMAND

In the matter of the State of Insanity v. John Smith, the People of Insanity are
hereby NOTIFIED:

The Winningist Argument Of ALL

From the view point of the People of Insanity the winningist argument of all is
that I cannot be held to be at fault for not doing that which it is impossible
or unreasonable for me to honestly do!  Even if I were obligated, which, through
their inaction the People of Insanity have  acknowledge I am not, I cannot be
reasonably held to be at fault for  not complying with that which the People of
Insanity have, through their collective nonfeasance, failed and refused to
provide, such being an honest and non-deceitful means for my compliance.

If the People of the State of Insanity don't like the idea of recognizing my
claim of personal individual sovereignty, then how about turning it around as
follows:

The People of the State of Insanity have, in their total nonfeasance, created
the circumstances in which the said People must recognize my independence from
their dominion because it is the People of the State of Insanity that have
themselves established their obligation to acknowledge my independence, due to
the irrefutability of the following:

Is it not true that the People of Insanity have made a rule that all "persons"
who operate a motor vehicle must have a driver license?

Is it not true and self evident, that in making such a rule the People of
Insanity take upon themselves the responsibility for establishing criteria for
issuing such licenses that are reasonable and honest?

Is it not true that in defining the word "person" in the statutes of Insanity,
in which such definition includes and is limited to only artificial entities,
that the People of Insanity have intended the inclusion in such "definition" of
"natural person" for the purpose of establishing  an artificial persona which
can be assumed by real live flesh and blood men and women in order to provide a
means whereby real live flesh and blood men and women can "appear" in order for
them to be able to interact with and can be claimed by Insanity to have an
obligation to interact with Insanity, which is necessary because of the fact
that  Insanity itself is a totally artificial entity?

Is it not true and self evident that in making such rules the said People of
Insanity must not establish criteria that are silly and/or require applicants to
engage in dishonesty, fraud or fantasy in order to comply?

Is it not true that the People of Insanity have established that driver license
applicant "persons" must provide a birth certificate in order to be issued an
Insanity driver license?

Is it not true and self evident that it is totally impossible for any such
applicant "person" to have personal knowledge that any specific birth
certificate pertains to their own birth?

Is it not true and self evident that it is likewise totally impossible for any
individual "person" to have personal knowledge as to whether or not any birth
certificate was created in regard to their own birth?

Is it not true and self evident that there is not any way that the information
set forth on a birth certificate can in itself establish its applicability to
any individual "person" or real live flesh and blood man or woman who might have
such a document in their possession?

That is, is it not true and self evident that the State of Insanity has no means
by which it can verify, based on the information set forth on the face of a
birth certificate, that the birth certificate presented by a driver license
applicant "person" is the birth certificate created in regard to the birth of
the said driver license applicant, that is, if in fact any such birth
certificate document was created at such birth?

That is, is it not true and self evident that a birth certificate in and of
itself, c0ntributes no validity what-so-ever to the State's claim that the
driver license issued based on the said information, constitutes "Positive
I.D."?

Is it not true and self evident that the People of Insanity could quite easily
adopt criteria for the issuance of driver licenses that could include an
applicants full palm finger-prints, retina scan, facial recognition or DNA
sample any of which all driver license applicants  could honestly and easily
comply with, and than such physical information would actually constitute the
"Positive I.D." currently erroneously claimed by the State of Insanity based on
the specious reliability of a birth certificate?

Is it not true and  self evident (or not) that the People of Insanity have the
authority and the ability to correct this situation at any time?

Is it not true and self evident that the criteria established by the People of
Insanity to be required to be presented by a driver license applicant "person"
is based on dishonesty, fraud, deceit and mere fantasy?

Is it not true that we humans, being naturally born with the ability and desire
to remove ourselves from place to place upon our mere whim, using as efficient a
means as has been devised by our kind, such as are described as "motor vehicles"
in the Codes of Insanity, and that we can not reasonably be denied the use of
such ability by other humans who purport to have the authority to establish
licensing criteria based on dishonesty, fraud, deceit and mere fantasy?

Is it not true that the "violation" I am accused of by the People of Insanity
was caused by the People of Insanity themselves?

Is it not true, self evident and axiomatic, that the People of Insanity can-not
possibly have any authority what-so-ever to require me to claim a birth
certificate and or require me to claim an attachment or relationship of any
nature what-so-ever to the artificial persona created therein, which I can not
and do not know pertains to me in order for me to be issued a driver license?

Is it not true that it is totally unreasonable for the People of Insanity to
persecute, that is p-e-r-s-e-c-u-t-e me, because I refuse to participate in
their dishonest birth certificate fraud?

How is it that you people who purport to have authority to engage in such silly
nonsense can do so seriously and keep a straight face?

And Insanity State Trooper Matthew Sheeley insists that the questions I have
asked here are based on "bullshit"?

Other than where I have pointed out the silliness on the part of the People of
the State of Insanity, where, exactly, Judge Judy, is there any "bullshit" in
even one of the above questions or suppositions?

Is there any need for me to continue?

Do you need me to explain the true reason for the birth certificate requirement
scam?

Do you want me to explain why the State of Insanity, an artificial entity that
does not exist in nature wants everyone to claim a "name", a "name" being an
artificial identification designation we humans have conjured up that likewise
does not exist in nature?   That a "name" is an artificial identification
designation that is totally  unnecessary for any human activity other than that
related to our individual voluntary submission to "government" , so that the
artificial entity government can have a reasonable governmental claim over the
real live flesh and blood man or woman who voluntarily claim the use of such
artificial designation persona as their own, so called "name"?

As a name is the designation assigned to property by the owner thereof, and as I
do not have an owner, I do not have a name!  My name is not John Smith and
neither is my name JOHN SMITH.  I do not have a name, I am simply a man, born
free on the land who has determined to live in truth to the best of my ability,
who chooses to be known as John Smith!

Be once more advised, I have never failed or refused to apply for a driver
license, it is the State of Insanity who has failed and "refused"!

The State of Insanity has made a claim for which relief may not be granted
because the simple truth is Judge Judy, the State of Insanity has not
established its jurisdiction over me so as a Judicial Officer of Insanity you
cannot possibly have and you do not have standing to proceed against me and you
never did!

Based on the irrefutability of the foregoing, I hereby DEMAND as follows (Please
be advised, this is NOT a motion for your Judicial determination):

That the "charges" lodged against me be recognized as totally unfounded and that
all record of these "proceedings" be totally expunged from the official records
of Insanity!

Everything that Officer Idiot did to me was an unwarranted  criminal act and I
DEMAND that Officer Idiot be prosecuted and I further DEMAND that the $243.00
extorted from Mr. Fred Friendly to secure the release of the Dodge truck we were
traveling in at the time I was kidnaped by Idiot be immediately returned to him!
And, likewise DEMAND the return of the $145.00 that Mr. Friendly paid to the
bonding company to secure my release from those who kidnaped me!

/s/ John Smith

I am, a Man born free on the land!

Hi Group -  This is an excellent explanation of how the "Freedom Loving"
Founding Fathers set up the CONstitutional authority for the government to
micro-manage the lives of those who voluntarially claim the low politival status
of citizen of the United States which the Founders created in Article One of the
CONstitution, which was then fully implemented in the Fourteenth Amendment, as
intended from the beginning, IMHO.

The item below was sent to me by a WhoRU Group member.

Cheers,

I'm Eric, WhoRU??



George:

These Bills are not unconstitutional!!  Read Article I, Section 8, Clause 17. 
It reads "To exercise exclusive legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such
District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particulars
States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the
United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the
Consent of the Legislature in the State in which the Same shall be, for the
Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-yards, and other needful
Buildings."

This means they can make any law for the "ten mile square district" without any
CONstitutional restraints,  BUT, take a look at Clause 18!!

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution
the forgoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this CONstitution in the
Government of the United States, or in any Department or Office thereof."

Go to any Volume of the US Code and, just inside the cover, there is an index of
all 50 Titles.  ONLY THOSE WITH A BLACK DOT IN FRONT OF THE TITLE HAVE BEEN
LEGISLATED AS "POSITIVE LAW!"  If the laws of that title have not been
legislated as positive law THEY DO NOT APPLY OUTSIDE THE "TEN MILE SQUARE
DISTRICT!!"

Now, which of the two above has "general applicability" throughout the  Union of
States?  Only those laws legislated under Clause 18, UNLESS you are a US
citizen!

Under the 14th Amendment, if you are a US citizen you are "subject to the
jurisdiction thereof." (see attachment)

Billy-Joe of the Mauldin Family

Hi Group - This is the third time I have attempted to construct an explanation
that would convey to the average U.S. citizen where I am coming from, attempting
to figure out a way to explain these simple issues.

I think that I may now have finally figured out what it is that I have failed to
properly previously  explain. I do not think most citizens are going to like
what I am going to write but please understand that this analysis has come to me
through many years of studying these issues and those persons who created the
tyranny that we now live under, beginning with the Founding Fathers. What I am
going to write is not new to me but I have not ever before taken the time to put
it into words in detail to people "on the other side".

Those who do not understand think I am claiming that the government does not
have jurisdiction over me; that is true but my position is not from a position
of emotional rebellion, it is from Reason, Logic and fair Analysis. What has
been missing for most persons, I think, is the "WHY" - how can it or could it
possibly be true?

Lack of jurisdiction, properly understood, has to do with political status! The
unasked / unanswered question is:

WHAT EXACTLY IS POLITICAL STATUS?!?!?!?

We all "KNOW" that we do not have a political hierarchy here in this country so
therefore it is totally impossible for there to be any level or degree of
political ranking, isn't it?

Well, what if it is not true that there is no political hierarchy here in this
society. The actual facts are that there is and always has been such a political
ranking - that is precisely what a Republican form of government is all about -
that is precisely why Ben Franklin said, "If we can keep it", after he reputedly
told that woman that the Constitutional Convention had created a Republic rather
than a democracy.

A Republic is a form of government in which there are two political classes.
There are many different ways that a dual political class Republic can be
formed. The People's Republic of China is formed somewhat differently than the
Republics here in this Federation but both the USA and China are republics as
both have (1) those who make the rules and (2) those who follow the rules, or
put more succinctly, those who run up the bills and those who pay the bills.

Who the latter is, was made quite apparent in the Fourth Article of the
Fourteenth Amendment, in regard to the provision therein providing that citizens
of the United States are required to pay the public debt.  The Fourth Article
thereof provides, in regard to US citizens, that they shall not have standing to
question the validity of the public debt.  Or, to put it straight, "citizens of
the United States, shut up and pay up!"

Remember Dear Reader, that the men who wrote the Constitution were supposedly
"former" aristocrats, that is, under the republican government of King George
III, they had been of the rule making and governing without question class. Take
a close unbiased look and then consider what it was that they created in the
Constitution; how was what they created in any way significantly different than
what then existed in England and the British Empire generally. The only
discernable difference was the nomenclature, not the actual structure.  However,
the Founding Fathers had a particular dilemma in forming up their intended
aristocrat dominated republican creation due to the writings of Thomas Paine.

Prior to the war to oust King George III, Paine's extensive writings had
convinced the common people in the colonies that they were competent to govern
themselves; that they did not need a king nor did they need an aristocratic
ruling class.   Paine's book, "Common Sense", was the most widely read
publication of the time.

Due to Paine's tremendous influence, the "former" Aristocrat writers of the
Constitution had to be very careful about how they set up their two tier
ruling-class/subject class two-political-status Republic.   They dared not set
it up openly and notoriously, and they did a marvelous job of hiding it right
out there in plain sight for everyone to read.  And by leaving out any commoner
protection in the original CONstitution, the "former" aristocrats subsequent
seeming acceptance and adoption of the "former" commoner's Bill of Rights,
seemingly written and adopted to placate the "former" commoners, worked
perfectly to assure the "former" commoners that they were "protected", thereby
while at the same time enabling the "former" aristocrats to construct a
marvelous foundation for the police state republic we suffer under here in 2009.
I don't like it either but a fair evaluation will indicate that what I have
written is supported by what has politically "evolved" over the past 200 years,
most especially in the adoption of the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments.

So what has all this to do with my political status and my claim that the
government has no political jurisdiction over me? And why do those who pay taxes
resent my claim, and insist that I am no better than them; that if they have to
pay then why should I be able to claim I am exempt?

In the first place, I do not consider myself to be better than anyone, anywhere.
It is not a matter of me being better, it is a matter of my being politically
different!

If you were to go to Disneyland and be standing in a very long line to ride the
roller coaster with your children and you and they saw a man walk right up to
the front of the line with his children and get in the next car of the ride,
without waiting even one minute, and your children looked hurt and confused, and
started crying because of the apparent unfairness, and you recognized the man as
Walt Disney, you would know that as Walt Disney had created Disneyland and was
the owner thereof, and that if it were not for him none of the rides would be
there for anyone, you might not like it but you would understand and explain to
your children that the man was Walt Disney, the owner of Disneyland and of the
ride, so his children did not have to wait in any line.  Although you didn't
like it you and your children would understand that there was legitimate
justification for what took place.

So what has that to do with me?

Please read the Preamble to the Constitution: "We the people of the United
States, in order to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our
posterity, do establish and ordain this Constitution for the United States of
America, with the financial support   thereof to be provided and paid by
citizens as shall later be surreptitiously established in the Fourteenth
Amendment".

"I, Walt Disney, the creator of Disneyland, in order to secure the blessings of
head of the line privileges for me and my posterity, do establish and ordain
this amusement park to be paid for by customers living in the United States of
America".

The seeming stated purpose of the Preamble to the Constitution was to proclaim
that the purpose of the CONstitution was to secure the blessings of liberty to
all of those who enabled the creation of the Government of the United States by
having personally individually risked their very lives in their rebellion
against King George III.  This was true but it had a hook implanted therein that
most readers totally miss.

In the Preamble the Founding Fathers did what would appear to be reasonable to
the "former" commoners by using wording that would seem to specifically protect
the blessings of liberty for all of those who had actively participated in the
rebellion and which seemed to also include everyone forever, however,  in doing
this the Framers employed what in legal circles is known as a "Term of Art",
wording that creates a definition without clearly revealing that fact.

The words, "We the People", coupled with, "ourselves and our posterity" serves
to "define" the word "people" when used anywhere in the CONstitution (including
but not limited to any amendments thereto) , as a particular superior political
class, separate and apart from the political servitude class, "citizen of the
United States", as was quietly likewise set up in the CONstitution's First
Article, to establish such subservient class without an overt revelation
thereof, seeming to simply be the prerequisites for  persons to serve in the
Congress.  But the careful wording, the disparity between the age and the years
of required US citizenship - to the discerning reader this can only be
applicable to naturalized citizens, not to the native born people.  There,
between the Preamble and the First Article, you have the two necessary
ingredients to form an aristocrat dominated "republic".

As the United States had not yet been created at the time of the rebellion,
there could not be and there was not any such political statuses as people of
the United States or citizen of the United States but those of us who are not
devious don't usually consider such fine points when thinking of the beginning
of this country, but you can be assured the politicians who were scheming this
all up certainly did!

As there were then not yet any citizens of the United States none could possibly
have been involved in the rebellion.  Although it was certainly not publicly
announced, at that time the creation of the political class "citizen of the
United States" in the CONstitution's First Article  was clearly set up to apply
officially to late comers to this land, voluntarily naturalized immigrants, very
similar to the volunteering paying customers of Disneyland.

Please take note that the word "citizen" is not to be found anywhere in the
Preamble nor in the Bill of Rights, but the creation of the political status
"citizen of the United States" (later, in 1868,  declared to be "subject to the
jurisdiction thereof") is found innocently and unobtrusively set forth and
created in the First Article of the Constitution, wherein the eligibility
requirements for naturalized persons to serve in the Congress are established. 
Such servitude class therein being denominated as "citizens of the United
States".   Pretty slick!   It even got past Patrick Henry who did not in any way
like the CONstitution, as indicated by his comment when he read it, "I smell a
rat!"

So, what has all this to do with me?

All and each of the former subjects of King George III who lent their physical
power to drive out King George's Red Coats did so individually, voluntarily,
there was not and there could be no conscription for participation in rebellion
against the King,  so they were each one individually separately equally
entitled to share individually in the benefits of their successful rebellious
endeavor.

After their victory was assured and the shooting was over, no one of them or
group of them could possibly have any authority to claim political superiority
over all or any one of their former brethren in arms or of the posterity
thereof, and that is what it has to do with me!

I claim to be of the Posterity of the Rebels of July 4, 1776. The Rebels of that
date were unquestionably each one separately and individually and politically
equal to each of their brethren in arms some of whom later designated themselves
as  "The People of the United States" when they went on to create the
CONstitution for the United States of America.  Please take note that the
CONstitution was created FOR the United States, to govern the United States, to
secure the blessings of liberty for the people of the United States and their
posterity, not to govern the people of the United States.

Who is it today Dear Reader, that is governed?  Is it not clear that in all
official legal documents those governed are designated as citizens of the United
States, not designated as the people of the United States?  All of those whom
had previously joined themselves together combined their physical power to eject
King George.

None of them nor any group thereof could possibly, reasonably, claim to have
authority to command any of their former brethren in arms into a condition of
servitude, into a status of citizenship!

The political class "citizen of the United States" on the other hand, is a
status of voluntary servitude surreptitiously established in Article One of the
CONstitution and later defined as such in the Fourteenth Amendment. The
political class "citizen of the United States" is clearly a subservient second
class political status.  The second necessary ingredient of a republican form of
government.

As I claim to be of the Posterity of those who rebelled against King George III
in 1776, I cannot be held to owe any fealty obligation to the government created
by the brethren in arms of my antecedents.  I am of the Posterity of the People
whom rebelled against King George III, some of whom created the government of
the United States, and some of whom went their own way!

On the other hand those who voluntarily reduce themselves to the lower status of
citizen of the United States can make no such claim as, by their voluntary
claim, they thereby acknowledge themselves to hold the political status equal to
that  of the posterity of naturalized persons who have, perhaps unknowingly,
voluntarily agreed to pay the bills of the government in exchange for the
privilege of living here on this land that my ancestors help take away from King
George III at the risk of their lives; just as customers of Disneyland have
unknowingly voluntarily agreed to pay the bills of Disneyland while those who
are of the posterity of Walt Disney, who risked his fortune in the creation of
Disneyland, get to get into Disneyland for free, and get to go to the head of
the ride  lines. It is a naturally recognized right of inheritance.

Dear Readers, you who have chosen to be of the citizen/subject class, you could
have chosen (and still can choose) to be of the Posterity of the People but you
choose to be of the posterity of naturalized immigrants who have a voluntarily
agreed upon obligation to pay the public debt without questioning the validity
thereof (read the Fourth Article of the Fourteenth Amendment).

I now ask you, is there even one place in what I have written here where I have
called upon emotion to explain and justify my position? Is there anything that I
have written that is not reasonable and logical, anything at all that is merely
my emotionally based unsupported personal opinion?  Please write to explain
where I am in error.

I have never claimed to be above the law, but what is it that actually
constitutes "law"?  It is said, and I agree, that the law  can not be and is
never ever wrong, however law cannot be made nor changed by man.  What is
referred to as law in this society is not law at all, it is nothing more that
statutes enacted by men which statutes are changed quite frequently.  Law, on
the other hand, is established by nature, that is where the four common law
crimes are established, rape, robbery, murder and trespass, and the reasonable
derivatives thereof.

How can citizens of the United States make the argument with a straight face
that I am required to have a driver license when the "authority" that purports
to mandate that requirement has not provided me a reasonable means whereby I
could comply (even if I were politically obligated, which I am not)?  Every
thinking person knows very well that no person can have personal knowledge as to
whether the birth certificate they claim has anything to do with them or not. 
Everyone has the right to claim that it does but such a claim falls into "the
emperor isn't wearing any clothes" category.  How can the willingness of fools
who make such an unsupportable claim be translated as an obligation on my part
to likewise engage in such foolishness?  Just because I insist on telling the
truth, that I have no ability to know if any specific birth certificate pertains
to me or not, that because I insist on proceeding honestly and rationally I
should be punished?  Such nonsense would make sense only to those who are under
government induced mind control.

I have had police officers tell me that they didn't care where I got a birth
certificate so long as I got one.   As I understand it, for a person to
knowingly claim a birth certificate the person knows does not pertain to
himself, would constitute a crime under most state statutes.  And I am expected
to respect those who administer this charade?

But to get back and close this letter with a recap of what the position of most
U.S> citizens seems to be in regard to my participation in this society as a
sovereign man.

It seems that their position is that no matter that the Founding Fathers, in
adopting the North West Ordinance of 1787, therein acknowledged the natural
state of the right to unfettered travel and proclaimed therein that the water
ways and the carrying ways between them shall be forever free, most citizens
will  maintain that it is proper for the current artificial entity to conjure up
and assign to themselves authority to claim my mandatory compliance with their
conjured up rules, even though for them to "legitimately"do this, in order for
them to avoid their overt and notorious violation of the several constitutional
prohibition of involuntary servitude and the North West Ordinance, they have
resorted to deception of the populace when they are small children (beginning at
their birth), by creating this mandatory birth certificate scam, thereby
creating an artificial persona that will then lay dormant for sixteen years
until the child attains the age of reason, during which years the child will
have been subjected to intense sugar coated indoctrination constituting mind
control, programming the young person to believe and unquestioningly and
joyfully accept the lie that the person was born into freedom, while in truth,
what the "schools" teach constitutes a condition of what is actually total
servitude called "citizenship", which, the child is deceitfully taught, is a
natural born  mandatory condition that is not to be in any way doubted, and
certainly not to ever be questioned.  And when the young adult then, having been
programmed to do so in "driver education" indoctrination, presents "his" birth
certificate to the government driver license issuing office, the young adult,
having "officially" attained the age of reason, voluntarily and intentionally
(having never ever been properly and honestly informed that he has any other
option), presents "his" birth certificate to the government to "prove" "his
name", thereby the young adult unwittingly "officially" claims his use of
government owned property, such "property" being the "name" entered on the birth
certificate at the time of the applicant's birth, in regard to which the
applicant cannot possibly have any personal recollection or knowledge.

And Dear Reader, most citizens seem to contend that as this is the way that it
is that I should either "voluntarily" conform or be made to wish that I had? 
What crime have I committed to deserve such treatment here in this great land of
freedom and liberty?  Since  when has advocating the truth been properly deemed
to be a crime?

And, the young adult has also been programmed in the government indoctrination
centers to believe and accept that he has a natural born obligation to submit to
extortion euphemistically known as "taxation", which, the person has been led to
believe, is the one and only proper and necessary way for the government to be
funded in order to protect the person from - whom?  Well, certainly NOT from
those who would deceive him and set him up for a lifetime of "voluntary"
servitude?  So then Dear Reader, just exactly who is the government protecting
me from?

And most citizens seem to insist that it makes no difference as to the truth of
that which I present, that as this is the way that it is that I should be
punished when I discern the truth of it all and insist on an honest
acknowledgment of the duplicity the government is using in order to gain
"voluntary" compliance with its fraudulently obtained authority.

That because most citizens are in agreement with this deceit, that I must also
submit, and if I don't, then I should be made to shut up and agree to conform or
be killed, and Dear Reader, that is pretty much what I expect will be the
outcome of my endeavors to teach the truth.

As to financial responsibility obligating  one to "pay his fair share" (which is
a socialistic, communistic concept promulgated by those who institute the
indoctrinating enabling mind control), have  you, Dear Reader,  gone online to
watch my 70 minute video?

There is no necessity and certainly no proper justification for taxation at any
level of government in this country or, for that matter, in any other!  That
might sound very strange to someone who is under mind control but it is
none-the-less true!

As I am sure most readers are very well aware, this society is suffering from
very severe economic problems - all caused by the Federal government's misuse of
the central bank, no exception.  The economic ills are caused in some degree by
all levels of government, but  the primary miscreant is the Federal government,
the Federal Congress.
I have devised a quite simple economic Solution that would enable the total
elimination of all taxation at all levels of government and which would
eliminate the continual boom and bust economic profit taking foreclosure cycles
we have been suffering under for the past 70 plus years. The Solution I propose
would be to Federalize the privately owned Federal Reserve System and use the
interest collected on loans to private sector borrowers to fund all four levels
of government. I have written a proposed 28th Amendment to the Federal
Constitution that would correct all of the economic deficiencies in the Federal
Constitution. Everyone can watch my 70 minute presentation of this Solution by
clicking on this link:
  http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2298046812080377528

My proposed 28th Amendment can be viewed and copied here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/whoru/messages?Message.JumpSubmitCheck=1&Message.N\
umber.Input=285

As I mentioned at the outset of this letter, this is my third attempt to present
the information I have gleaned during the past 45 years, since 1964 when
Goldwater was running for president.  I contend that none of what I present is
merely my personal emotionally based opinion.  Everything I teach is founded on
Fundamental Basic Natural Principles, being that a government of a truly free
people can not properly have any more authority than that authority naturally
held by any one single individual man or woman.   As you don't have "it" and as
I don't have "it" and as no other individual person has "it", then how can you
or me or we possibly assign "it" to the artificial entity you or me or  we
create?

Cheers,

I'm Eric WhoRU??, a man born free on the land, born sovereign over his own
person, born owing fealty to no artificial political entity!  Born with an
obligation to live and, through Divine Guidance,  teach the truth!

Hi Group -  The appropriate entity to resolve political issues is with the
Executive branch, not the judicial branch.  This Notice, appropriately modified,
is what I will use.

The use of the government owned "name" is the key to their jurisdiction over
real live flesh and blood men and women!

K.I.S.S.!

Cheers,

I'm Eric, WhoRU??

To Judge Judy of TV Fantasy Land -

Please take note that this is NOT in any way a motion for your judicial
consideration. This is intended to be and is hereby served upon you as a NOTICE
and DEMAND, that Arkansas, and those officers thereof administering its various
departments, recognize my sovereign political status and that Arkansas rein in
its lawless enforcement officers as is the acknowledged duty of Arkansas as
indicated by the Thirteenth Amendment to your Federal Constitution and Section
27 of Article Two of the Arkansas Constitution! This is a political issue!  As
you are of the Judicial Branch, you clearly DO NOT have standing to proceed!

However, be that as it may, please be further advised, the following
presentation shall not be construed as any acknowledgment on my part of your
non-existent authority or to be construed in any manner or degree, that you do
have standing to proceed. The following is for your information and edification
only!

In regard to your oral communications to Mr. Friendly on June 1, 2009, and the
intent of my two previous letters to you in regard to my political status, there
seems to have been some sort of miscommunication on my part or misunderstanding
on your part as to the fact that, in order for you to exercise any degree of
judicial authority over me, the Executive Branch of the artificial entity you
work for (Arkansas), must present proof that I willingly, knowingly,
intentionally, being fully informed of the consequences thereof prior thereto,
voluntarily relinquished and renounced the individual personal sovereignty I was
born with and thereby willingly and intentionally submitted myself to the
political jurisdiction of Arkansas, an artificial political entity that does not
exist in nature.  The presentation of such proof is required by Arkansas for at
least two reasons; First, reason dictates such and, Second, Section Twenty Seven
of Article Two of the Arkansas Constitution and the Thirteenth Amendment to the
Federal Constitution both acknowledge such requirement.

As a judicial officer of the political entity Arkansas, an artificial entity
that does not exist in nature, before you can proceed in any way judicially in
regard to me, it must first be established by Arkansas that I am not
individually sovereign and that Arkansas has political jurisdiction in regard to
me.  That is, the Executive Branch of such artificial political entity must
present its proof that I knowingly, willingly, intentionally, being fully
informed prior thereto of the consequences thereof, of what I would have been
giving up if I were to decide to surrender my free born political independence
to Arkansas, that is, for me to surrender my free born individual personal
sovereignty over myself, to the artificial political entity, Arkansas.

As such a presentation on the part of the Executive Branch of Arkansas is
totally impossible, there is no possible way that you could have had even the
slightest judicial authority to proceed as you have and any and all of your
prior judicial determinations were and are void as opposed to merely being
voidable.

Let it be clear, the letters I sent to you were not motions for your judicial
determination filed by a "person" as "persons" are defined in the statutes of
Arkansas.  Such letters were intended to be my Courteous and Respectful Good
Faith Presentations of what were actually, (1) Notices served upon you by a Man
Born Free and sovereign on the land, and (2) Demands that you move forward as
instructed therein, presented to you in as inoffensive but firm a manner as I
could construct, as is the Custom and Practice recognized as appropriate among
and between Sovereign Political Entities.

However, moving on to the subject matter you took it upon yourself to address in
your conversations with Mr. Friendly, and the purpose of his presence in your
facility on Monday, June 1, 2009.  I had not engaged Mr. Friendly in any way to
be there on my behalf.  Mr. Friendly is a man whom I met here locally a few
weeks ago.  I had informed him casually of my having been kidnapped by Arkansas
Trooper Firstcop on April 17 of this year.  Mr. Friendly was interested in the
event and was present in your facility when I arrived there on June 1, 2009
merely as an observer.

My intention in going to your facility at that time was to either verify that
the matter had not been calendared for further proceeding in accordance with the
instructions set forth in my prior letters (Notices) to you by checking with the
court clerk, or, to resolve the matter in another appropriate manner as I might
then determine.  It seemed to me then that I had made my position quite clear in
my two prior letters (Notices) sent to you as my good faith attempt to properly
dispose of this matter.  As it likewise clearly indicated to me, your
determination to not respond to my two previous letters (Notices) constituted
your acknowledgment that my position as therein stated was valid and that the
matter was therefore otherwise disposed of.  I was therefore not surprised but
rather pleased that your clerk was unable to find Born Free WhoRU listed on her
computer nor able to find a copy of the citation issued to me (Born Free WhoRU)
by Trooper Firstcop.

As an aside, the manner of personal designation here is a critical issue.  I
have determined, as is my natural right, that I am to be known as Born Free
WhoRU, as I originally stated to Firstcop.  In your form letter to me of June 1,
2009, on the "name" line thereof you entered "Sheep Born", then on the envelope
in which you mailed said form letter to me, you entered thereon as the
addressee, "Born Free WhoRU".  Let it be clearly understood, as I do not have a
"name", my name cannot possibly be and is NOT "Sheep Born" nor is my name "SHEEP
BORN"!  To make it even more clear, I am NOT Sheep Born nor am I SHEEP BORN. 
(More on the issue of what it is that constitutes a "name" and how a person (as
the word person is defined in Arkansas statutes), acquires a name, shall be
addressed further herein below).

It is clear that when your artificial political entity Arkansas, refers to a
person, (as the word "person" is defined in Arkansas statutes), it is intended
by said political entity to refer to property owned by or at least totally under
the dominion of said artificial political entity, Arkansas.  Such property being
the ownership of the name (rather than ownership of the real live flesh and
blood individual).  The ownership of such name (Sheep Born) was conveyed to the
government by the child's parents (my parents) filing a birth certificate at the
time of the child's (my)  birth, thereby creating, in the government's files, an
artificial persona, such persona to be later "adopted" by the individual (me),
when the individual, having attained the recognized age of reason, applied for a
driver license as a young adult at the age of sixteen years, after having been
subjected to continual indoctrination of political orientation through
attendance of government indoctrination centers, euphemistically known as
"public schools", such indoctrination constituting intense mind control,
beginning from the moment of the person's (my) birth and now further 
perpetuated by the government through High Definition Television.

I am convinced that what I have set forth herein is the actual intent of agents
of Arkansas when they insist that I have "a name".  Not just any name, but the
specific name "ownership copyrighted" by the government on "my" birth
certificate, which I have been "programmed" to claim as my own even though I
cannot possibly have any personal recollection or personal knowledge of ,
thereby constituting what the government then claims to be "my positive ID" as
was intended by those who manipulate the government before I was even born and
which I unwittingly and voluntarily "claimed" when I, acting upon the intense
mind control programing I had been continually subjected to, first applied for a
driver license.  In insisting on my use of the government property (Sheep Born)
said government agents (whether they realized it or not) were maintaining me in
an artificial persona totally under the control of the government as did you
when you referred to me as Born Free WhoRU to get my attention on unofficial
papers such as the enclosing envelope but when push came to shove, in your
"official" documents, it is "Sheep Born", as entered by you in your form letter
to me of June 1, 2009.  In consideration of this one specific fact, how could I
possibly not believe that you are a knowing and willing participant in this
fraud?

I contend that the government engages in this subterfuge as a means of working
around the prohibition of involuntary servitude set forth in both the Arkansas
and Federal Constitutions in conjunction with the definition of U.S. citizenship
set forth in the Fourteenth Amendment.  That is, no artificial political entity
such as Arkansas, can reasonably be imbued by it's creators, being men who have
no such authority of their own, with any authority to declare any real live
flesh and blood man or woman to be a member of or subject to the political 
jurisdiction of such artificial entity, against their will, what else can the
words "involuntary servitude shall not exist in Arkansas" possibly mean?

Let it be made clear, several months ago, as was my natural right to do, having
learned the truth of these matters, I determined that I would no longer use the
government property, name: "Sheep Born" or "SHEEP BORN".  In the past, prior to
my becoming enlightened, while still under the mind control that I had been
subjected to since my birth, I did indeed use such government owned property,
however, as I had never, ever been properly informed by government agents posing
as school teachers, that I was born politically free and sovereign over my own
person (as was their clear duty), therefore any and all such prior use of such
government owned property by me was due entirely to fraudulent inducement on the
part of the government agents and is therefore totally void back to the day of
my birth, nunc pro tunc, as opposed to being voidable!

Your flip-flop use of "Sheep Born" and "Born Free WhoRU" does not make me to be
Sheep Born!  The only way I could ever have properly become "Sheep Born" would
have been through my intentional, willing, voluntary renunciation, being fully
informed prior thereto of the repercussions thereof, and by being previously
aware of the subsequent relinquishment thereafter of the natural personal
individual sovereign condition I was born into!  The flip-flopping of government
agents will not in any way be construed to effectively cast me into an
artificial role as a player in your artificial political charade.

I am Born Free WhoRU, as I have been referring to myself as indicated in my
prior two letters (Notices) to you and, as I had initially identified myself to
Mr. Firstcop, and as I signed the citation and all the documents I was required
to sign in order to secure my release from having been kidnaped and thrown
improperly and illegally into the [NAME OF YOUR COUNTY] County Jail, by Arkansas
"law enforcement officers" who have no respect for their own oaths to uphold and
defend the Constitutions of Arkansas and of the United States, both of which
include prohibitions of involuntary servitude!

As I had stated herein above, after determining from your clerk that Born Free
WhoRU was not scheduled on your docket to be heard that day, I was about to
depart your facility when I encountered Mr. Friendly in the hallway thereof, and
thereupon informed him as I have set forth herein.  At that time he stated that
as he was already there and interested in how such proceedings were conducted,
that he would none-the-less stay there and observe.  Other than to inform him
that I was going to Pizza Parlor for refreshments, there was no other
conversation and certainly no agreement that he was to be there in any way on my
behalf nor was there any expectation that you would address him to ask him why
he was there, and certainly no expectation that you would then cast him
unwillingly, into being my representative.  Mr. Friendly made this quite clear
to you in response to your question as to "whether he had written authorization
to represent me".  Mr Friendly's response being a very clear "No".  However, you
ignored Mr. Friendly's clear denial and proceeded as though he had responded in
the affirmative.  You then, purporting to have judicial standing and authority,
proceeded to enter a not guilty plea "on my behalf", and to set the matter for
trial(?).  Among my friends, we refer to such conduct as "Clear and Intentional
Bad Faith!"

As I wrote herein above, as you had not acted in good faith by properly
responding to either of my prior letters (Notices) to inform me of any
disagreement you might have with complying with my instructions, prior to your
clerk's inability to find me listed among the cases to be heard that day, I had
previously had cause to be concerned regarding your respect of my Political
Sovereignty due to comments made to me in regard to you by Officer Firstcop at
the time he kidnaped me.  Although, as you have no judicial standing in regard
to me, and although you cannot therefore possibly have the slightest flavor of
proper jurisdiction over me, I freely recognize that you do have virtually
unlimited physical power at your disposal, to physically attempt to force me
into compliance with whatever you determine would be necessary to bring me into
compliance with the tyrannical practices of most artificial political entities,
such as is, apparently, Arkansas.  I had therefore gone to your facility, as
stated above, to be assured that the matter had been properly resolved as per my
first letter (Notice) to you, and if not, to otherwise properly address the
issues.

As you had not responded in good faith to inform me of your disagreement(s), if
any, I expected that you intended to proceed regardless of your lack of judicial
standing (due to Arkansas' lack of political jurisdiction), totally in excess of
any properly acquired jurisdictional authority.  Therefore, I had gone to your
facility to further protect my interests and those of the bonding company.  I
was indeed pleasantly surprised to find that I, Born Free WhoRU, was not listed
among the matters to be addressed that day, however my pleasant feelings were
short lived when Mr. Friendly thereafter related to me the information you had
related to him and that he had also overheard while talking to you as you also
talked to your clerk and Mr. County Prosecutor, the deputy state prosecutor, on
the telephone.

A great deal of my cause for concern as to the proper resolution of this matter
was derived from the severely derogatory and threatening comments made to me by
Mr. Firstcop during the time he was proceeding with his kidnapping of me,
wherein Mr. Firstcop stated that there was a new sheriff in [NAME OF YOUR
COUNTY] County and that this new sheriff and the judge (Firstcop using the
pronoun "she",meaning you) were no longer going to put up with the "bullshit" of
Eric Williams and those that are suckered into what he (Eric Williams) teaches
on his talk shows.  Firstcop told me that he most probably would not have
arrested (kidnapped) me were it not for the fact that Eric Williams was riding
in the Dodge pickup that I was operating at that time, which, I once more state,
Firstcop had lost any possible probable cause to proceed against when Firstcop
observed the rider in the box of the Dodge was a fully mature woman of 43 years
of age!

Mr. Friendly further informed me that you had expressed your concern regarding
Firstcop's failure to provide the address of the court on the citation as part
of your reasoning to not declare my absence on June 1, 2009 as a "failure to
appear".  Need I state herein once more that you have no judicial standing
allowing you to proceed with further persecution of me!

Let it be clearly understood, no matter that I might very well be physically
present I will never, ever "appear" in you court.  The word "appear" means to
suddenly materialize, out of nowhere, as in an imaginary state of existence,
such as is the case of an actor "appearing" in a movie or a stage play, playing
a fictitious artificial character, and as is the case of those persons who have
agreed to play the artificial role of citizen of the United States by
"appearing" in the court of this artificial political entity, Arkansas*, as such
artificial role-playing is defined in the Fourteenth Amendment to the Federal
Constitution as citizen of the United States.  (Such fictitious "appearance" is
required to be an entirely voluntary act, due to the demands of both Reason and
the prohibition of involuntary servitude as set forth in the Thirteenth
Amendment to the Federal Constitution and in Section 27 of Article Two of the
Arkansas Constitution).

*(Please note that I am not claiming that Arkansas is in any way fictitious just
because Arkansas' existence is artificial).

Be hereby further advised, I am not such an artificial person playing such an
artificial role, therefore I cannot "appear" anywhere.  When I am wherever I am,
I am always there in my real live flesh and blood entity, known as Born Free
WhoRU.  And, as previously stated herein above, "Born Free WhoRU" is NOT my
"name"!  A name is the designation assigned to property by the owner thereof. 
As I do not have an owner I do not have a name! Born Free WhoRU is NOT my name,
Born Free WhoRU is who I am!

As previously mentioned herein above, it is my further clear understanding that
under the authority of artificial political entities in the United States,
"official names" are always derived from birth certificates, and all birth
certificates are conveyances to the government of the ownership of the names
entered thereon by the parents of newborn children, thereby creating artificial
personae to be later adopted when those children, having been subjected to
lifelong indoctrination in government indoctrination centers known as public
schools, attain adulthood, thereby overcoming the dictates of Reason hidden from
children during childhood, and providing the "work-around" needed by the
government in order for the government to be in compliance with the prohibition
of involuntary servitude as set forth in the Thirteenth Amendment and Section 27
of Article Two of the Arkansas Constitution.  Among my knowledgeable friends
such intentional indoctrination of children is known as Fraud in the Inducement!

Mr. Friendly also informed me that you had acknowledged to him that it was
impossible for me to know where to go because Trooper Firstcop had left the
address of the court off the citation, but that you also stated that it seemed
strange that I could not find the physical location while at the same time I was
able to notify you by mail.

Let it be clearly understood, my ability to find the location is not the issue,
the issue is first, that you do not have judicial standing to proceed, and
second, in recognition of these as adversarial proceeding, I had no good faith
obligation to do anything other than what I had agreed when I signed the
citation.  It is axiomatic that an impossible agreement is void upon its
inception.

Mr. Friendly further informed me that from what he heard from your conversations
was, it seemed, that someone from you office had previously contacted Trooper
Firstcop and that Firstcop had informed such person that the address of the
court was on a label on the back of the citation, which, of course, was not the
case.  However, be that as it may, the address on the label or not, the fact
that I could have easily located the court building is not the issue.  The point
is, due to both your (Arkansas') lack of Judicial Standing and the statement on
the citation above my signature, as I have not ever "properly" submitted myself
to the political jurisdiction or authority of Arkansas, I had incurred no good
faith obligation to read anything beneath my signature, nor on the reverse of
the citation.  The statement on the citation above my signature clearly
established that I was the one to determine whether or not I would take notice
of anything below my signature or on the reverse, and, due to my political
sovereign status, I simply declined.

That is, the wording above my signature clearly establishes that any obligation
for me to present myself, as set forth therein, was specifically and strictly
limited to whatever was set forth therein above and nothing else!  An impossible
contract is void at the time of its inception, this is true no matter if the
parties are aware of the impossibility at the time of the agreement or not!
Therefore, both Reason and contract law dictate that I had not entered into an
enforceable contract to present myself in your facility for any purpose
what-so-ever, or at any time, even according to the rules of your artificial
political entity, Arkansas!  Which rules I have no obligation to comply with,
due to my political sovereignty over myself!

I freely acknowledge that such interpretation may not be appropriately claimed
by persons as defined in Arkansas statutes, as such persons have indeed incurred
a "membership obligation" to "cooperate", BUT, such "cooperation" does not
attach or in any way apply to those of us who have claimed or reclaimed our
personal individual sovereignty that everyone is born with!  It is, therefore,
the clear obligation of the Executive Branch of Arkansas to present its proof
that I have voluntarily incurred such "membership obligation"!  And, need I
point out that it is your obligation as an impartial judicial officer to
maintain that burden of the Executive Branch on the Executive Branch and to NOT
assume it to yourself!  For you to proceed otherwise would constitute a
violation of the Constitutionally established Separation of Powers Doctrine,
would it not?

However, as you do not seem to be proceeding in good faith, I expect that you
will not be impressed much by the truth and irrefutability of theses points, and
are only interested in how much money you can justify extracting from me while
making it look like you are being reasonable, therefore, here below is what
actually occurred on April 17, 2009.

			 *** 	 *** 	 ***

We were proceeding eastbound along the bypass in a 1986 Dodge pickup with three
persons riding in the cab and one person riding in the box behind, sitting well
up against the back of the cab.  Trooper Firstcop later stated that when he
first saw us he thought the person in the back sitting in the box was a small
child so he presumed he had cause to pull us over due to the State's concern for
child safety (Mother Government, an artificial entity that does not exist in
nature, must act as parent due to the presumed incompetence of natural
parents?).

After we had both stopped, Firstcop walked to the Dodge approaching from the
rear; as he did he then saw that the rider in the back was an adult woman to
whom Firstcop then spoke, asking her age.  The woman informed Firstcop that she
was 43 years old.  It seems quite clear that at that point, Firstcop's probable
cause vanished and Firstcop should have then apologized for his wrong
presumption and bid us on our way.

However, Firstcop then stepped cautiously toward the left door of the Dodge
gesturing with his right hand (not with an apology to go on ahead, but) towards
the woman sitting in the bed stating through his amused grin how he had mistaken
her as being an underage child, but she obviously isn't.  Firstcop then, rather
than apologizing and sending us on our way, looked into the cab and saw Eric
Williams sitting there.  Thereupon Firstcop's whole demeanor morphed into that
of an "Official" with an obviously long-subdued vendetta he now unexpectedly had
an opportunity to act upon, Firstcop's attitude immediately morphed into that of
a vicious hungry wolf espying desired easy prey.

Instead of doing the right thing, Firstcop then asked me for my driver license. 
I responded that I did mot have one because I did not have a birth certificate. 
Thereupon Firstcop began ranting, scolding me about "the Eric Williams no birth
certificate crap" and how is he (Firstcop) to know whether I'm a "mass murderer"
or not if he didn't have a clue to `who I was.  Whereupon the question came from
Firstcop – "Who Are You?" whereupon I replied "Born Free Whoru".  Out comes the
pocket notebook – "How do you spell it?" he asked,  "W-h-o-r-u" I replied. 
"Social Security number?" was Firstcop's next and last "official" question to me
whereupon my attempt to describe the fact that I no longer use such government
property was abruptly interrupted when Firstcop (obviously disgusted with my
reply) then stated how he'd be right back.

Upon Firstcop's return he ordered me from the Dodge and also ordered me to stand
at a specific location near the right rear bumper of said Dodge and frisked me
for weapons; thereupon Firstcop gestured with a nod of his head towards the
people sitting in the cab asking for the name of that person.  I had thought
Firstcop was asking about the woman in the cab and with some hesitation (but
wanting to cooperate and knowing that my response would most likely annoy him
which it did because he mumbled under his breath "Figures", when I told him,
"She calls herself Candy Kane".

Firstcop then stated that he was referring to the man in the cab, not the woman.
Again with hesitation for the same reason herein above, I stated "Eric ...". 
Firstcop then interrupted, saying "Eric Williams", with a sense of confidence
and obvious glee that he had little doubt about his previous assumption. 
Whereupon I couldn't hide my surprise as to how Firstcop knew that it was indeed
Eric Williams right there in the passenger seat of that Dodge pickup.  By this
time, Firstcop's backup officer (Clint Backupcop I later learned,  because I,
for some reason, missed Firstcop's courteous introduction) was approaching us,
Firstcop stated to Backupcop in a low voice, while gesturing with a nod of his
head towards Mr. Williams still sitting in the cab of the Dodge – "Guess what we
have here – That's Eric Williams".  Backupcop, not taking his eyes off me, as if
to be sizing me up, and with very little facial expression, just nodded his head
with a barely noticeable nod.   As a matter of fact, it just now occurred to me
that I do not recall officer Backupcop saying a single solitary word to me
during the entire encounter.

Firstcop then arrested me (as in "kidnapped") and put me in the front seat of
his police car.  After Firstcop had placed me in his police car he went to talk
to the people sitting in the Dodge, apparently to determine whether any of the
three had a driver license to drive the Dodge, or whether Firstcop was going to
be able to call a tow company to have the Dodge towed.

I was later informed of the long discussion (for a good ten minutes) that took
place between the people in the cab of the Dodge and Firstcop after my 
kidnaping, while Officer Backupcop stood between Firstcop's police car and the
Dodge.  I know this because I observed the six or seven times that Backupcop
looked back at me at about every minute or so while sitting uncomfortably cold
and strapped into the front seat of Firstcop's police car, while the engine was
running.  Firstcop's first interest with those people in the Dodge was whether
or not there were any arrest warrants out for Mr. Williams.  When Mr. Williams
responded that to the best of his knowledge there were none, Firstcop then
stated that Firstcop thought that there probably were, as there had been several
such warrants in place the last time Firstcop had contact with Mr. Williams. (If
that were true then why did Firstcop not arrest Mr. Williams during that
previous encounter?)

At that time Firstcop then proceeded to severely berate Mr. Williams for leading
people astray with his "Birth Certificate - Bullshit".  Firstcop informed Mr.
Williams that there was a new sheriff in [NAME OF YOUR COUNTY] County now, and
that said sheriff and judge, that she especially would no longer allow Mr.
Williams to get away with his crap, and, using his authoritative commanding
police officer tone, Firstcop conveyed to Mr. Williams that if he (Eric
Williams) uttered a word in that regard that Firstcop was going to arrest Mr.
Williams for interfering with government operations.  Firstcop seemed to be
doing everything he possibly could to develop an incident that he could use to
justify an arrest of Eric Williams.

Instead of falling into Firstcop's trap, Mr. Williams remained silent.  Firstcop
then returned to his police car where I observed and heard Firstcop use his
police radio, telephone and police car computer for at least twenty minutes in
Firstcop's efforts to conjure up an arrest warrant for Eric Williams so that
Firstcop could also arrest Mr. Williams.  After spending at least twenty minutes
in that fruitless endeavor, during which time Firstcop also spoke to me telling
me how totally stupid I was for having listened to Mr. Williams' "bullshit",
Firstcop stated that the FBI had investigated Mr. Williams and knew everything
there was to know about Mr. Williams and Mr. Williams' "bullshit", that Firstcop
(and or the FBI), had listened to Mr. Williams' bullshit on his radio shows. 
When Firstcop was unable to conjure up an arrest warrant for Mr. Williams,
Firstcop, in obvious disappointment, returned to the cab of the Dodge to further
talk to the people sitting there.

I was later informed also of how Firstcop then asked the occupants of the Dodge
if any of them had a driver license.  All three responded that they did not. 
Mr. Williams, anticipating then that Firstcop was going to have the Dodge towed,
Mr. Williams stated to Firstcop that if Firstcop was going to have the Dodge
towed that Mr. Williams wanted Firstcop to call Friendly Towing Service to do
the tow.  Firstcop's immediate response, stated in a clearly vindictive tone,
was, "You don't GET a choice!!  I am going to call the next tow company
according to the rotation list", which constituted Firstcop's intentional
violation of Arkansas statutes requiring Firstcop to respect the tow request of
the owner or other competent occupant present.

As Firstcop had stated that he was not going to call Friendly, using a cell
phone, Mr. Williams then immediately called Friendly Towing and informed Jim
Friendly of the situation and asked Jim Friendly to come and do the tow.  Jim
Friendly agreed.

We were later informed by Jim Friendly that no sooner had Friendly's
conversation with Mr. Williams ended that Mr. Friendly received a call from
Firstcop wherein Firstcop informed Mr. Friendly that Mr. Friendly could come to
the scene and pick up the three people riding in the Dodge to take them away,
but that Mr. Friendly would not be allowed to do the tow.  Mr. Friendly also
informed us that at that time, Mr. Friendly asked Firstcop if Firstcop was not
going to honor Mr. Williams' request, that Firstcop was instead going to call
the next tow company according to the police rotation list and that Firstcop
then responded to Mr. Friendly that Firstcop was not going to honor Mr. Williams
request.  Thereupon Mr. Friendly departed his facility to come to the scene in
Mr. Friendly's personal vehicle to give a ride to the three people riding in the
Dodge.

Firstcop then arranged for UNFriendly Tow Co to do the towing of the Dodge
pickup.  Firstcop then left the scene to take me to jail leaving Trooper Clint
Backupcop in charge at the scene of the kidnapping of me and the theft of the
Dodge pickup.

I was later informed further that when the tow driver from UNFriendly Tow Co
arrived, that Mr. Williams immediately asked the driver, John UNFriendly, to
relinquish the tow to Friendly Towing.  Backup officer, Arkansas state Trooper
Clint Backupcop, interceded before UNFriendly could respond, Backupcop stating
emphatically and authoritatively, that UNFriendly was going to do the tow in
accordance with the state police tow rotation list.  I was likewise informed
that when Jim Friendly arrived, Jim Friendly approached UNFriendly and asked
UNFriendly to tow the Dodge to Mr. Friendly's impound lot, UNFriendly declined. 
When UNFriendly declined, UNFriendly thereby reiterated his previously
established intentional complicity as an accessory to the conspiratorial felony
to violate the Arkansas towing statute, which requires the request of the owner
or competent occupant present be respected unless there were other exigent
circumstances, which there were not.

The three former occupants of the Dodge then climbed into Mr. Friendly's vehicle
and were transported by Mr. Friendly back to Yellville.

Meanwhile, while I was being processed (booked) into the [NAME OF YOUR COUNTY]
County Jail, Firstcop continued his constant badgering of me, as Firstcop had
been doing continuously during the travel to the [NAME OF YOUR COUNTY] County
Jail, about how my relationship with Mr. Williams would only lead to more and
most likely bigger legal issues for myself if I chose to continue following Eric
Williams' "bullshit" (teachings).

Firstcop also read to me from a clipboard information about how  "the FBI knew
everything there was to know about Mr. Williams and that Mr. Williams was wanted
by the authorities of Arizona".  Firstcop said that he had contacted the Arizona
authorities to try to get them to agree to extradite Mr. Williams from Arkansas
but that the Arizona authorities declined, which seemed to greatly disappoint
Firstcop.

My reasonable inquiries as to my arresting offense(s) and an approximate time
frame as to when and how to anticipate my release came with all sorts of
berating comments from Firstcop.  The reasons which Firstcop concocted to
justify his arrest of me were,  according to Firstcop, (1) - "I lied to Firstcop
about my name"!,  (2) the chances of my seeing a judge anytime soon were
extremely doubtful and that there was a good chance that even if I were able to
see the judge within a week or so,  "SHE" (meaning you, Judge Judy) would most
likely throw me into jail for up to at least a year for contempt if I said
anything what-so-ever in regard to what Eric Williams teaches!

Firstcop told me to just "Sit Down and Shut-up" (in a tone as though he were
berating a child), when I was asking about a particular document I was ordered
to sign, which certainly did not pertain to me.

Firstcop continued to say many things in his Terroristic Threatening of me
during his attempts to intimidate and terrify me.  All because of my being in
the presence of Eric Williams, or, perhaps, for merely having a friendly
relationship with Mr. Williams based on my believing in the Truth.

For Arkansas State Police Trooper Corporals (as proudly and arrogantly pointed
out to us by Firstcop, stating that Williams and the rest of us were not dealing
with rookie troopers who did not know how to deal with Eric William's crap),
Matthew Firstcop and Clint Backupcop to refuse to honor Mr. Williams' reasonable
request that the Dodge be towed by Friendly towing was a blatant and
intentionally vicious  violation of Arkansas statutes by the Arkansas State
Police for the clear purpose of causing Mr. Williams as much financial expense
as possible, and you people want to prosecute me for not having a driver
license, when you have no proof what-so-ever that you have judicial or political
jurisdiction over me, and the Legislature thereof had failed and refused to
provide a means whereby those of us who honestly recognize that we do not have
any ability to have personal knowledge regarding the applicability of a birth
certificate regarding our own birth, to be issued a driver license, and Firstcop
characterizes Mr. Williams' sound and irrefutable teachings as "bullshit"?

Let it be made clear:  What it is that actually and truly constitutes BULLSHIT,
is for Arkansas "authorities" to rely on birth certificates to establish
"positive ID" and to intentionally and deceitfully subjugate the population of
Arkansas into a condition of "voluntary" servitude by inundating them with an
overwhelming intense indoctrination of misinformation  constituting virtual
total mind control, for the purpose of inducing them to "voluntarily" surrender
their freedom and their wealth to finance a totally artificial police state
entity that can make no honorable proper claim of such authority, when a
non-coercive means of funding government is readily available through a simple
reorganization of the Central Bank of the United States  as suggested by Eric
Williams.

While I am on the subject of driver license, Arkansas statutes require all
persons who operate a motor vehicle to possess a valid driver license.  The word
"person" as defined in Arkansas statutes is written to apply to only artificial
entities, including (but not limited to) such artificial persons as corporation
and partnerships.  the inclusion in such statute of "natural persons", a term
which to the uninitiated would seem to be more than somewhat redundant, but
which serves to establish that the "natural persons" referred to therein are
actually artificial personae, not real live flesh and blood men and women.  The
term "natural persons" is clearly intended to apply to the artificial personae
assumed by real live flesh and blood men and women when they agree to assume the
artificial "name" entered on "their" birth certificates.

It is fairly well understood that corporations, partnerships and other clearly
artificial "person" entities are the means by which one or two or more real live
flesh and blood men and women can create commercial or other needed entities
that can remain viable when the single real live flesh and blood creator or one
or more of the several real live flesh and blood creators (as the case may be),
die, or are no long associated therewith.  Those who create corporations operate
such corporations as though the corporations were themselves; quite often it is
difficult to determine where the real live person and the artificial person
diverge.  As the corporations have no intelligence or will of their own, all of
the activities of the corporations are quite clearly nothing other than the
activities desired by their human creators.

Devious men creating governments have determined that they can use this
artificial mantle, or persona, to voluntarily entice real live flesh and blood
men and women to "voluntarily" submit themselves to the authority of such
artificial political entities, called government.  Then, by imbuing the
artificial personae with citizenship obligations taught to the population during
their formative years during their childhood in government indoctrination
centers, euphemistically designated as "public schools", the government has been
able to surreptitiously bring the entire population unwittingly into a condition
of what constitutes a falsly induced condition of "voluntary" servitude; all of
which scheming may very well comply with the strict letter of but certainly not
the spirit of the Constitutional prohibitions of involuntary servitude.

However, "Honor" requires that the creators of such artificial entities provide
a means whereby those few who discern the scheme will be able to opt out.  That
is why the various Constitutions include the prohibition of involuntary
servitude; and ignorant enforcers such as Firstcop want to characterize this
truth as "bullshit"?

The term "natural persons" in such statutory "definitions" is clearly intended
to be limited to only those real live flesh and blood men and women who have
been conned into volunteering into use of the artificial personae entered on
their birth certificate (thus the reason for the word "natural" to modify
"person" rather than simply using the words "men" or "women")?  Why would the
word "person" need to be modified by the word "natural" in the statutory
definition if it were not for the purpose of establishing that the real live
flesh and blood "natural" persons intended to be included therein were in some
way, NOT natural?

When entered on a birth certificate and filed with the government a "name"
becomes government owned property.  When real live flesh and blood men and women
claim the use of an artificial persona "name" as entered on "their" birth
certificate, the claiming and use of such government owned property by driver
license applicants is construed by Arkansas as the applicant's voluntary act of
renunciation of the person's natural born sovereignty and of the applicant's
voluntary submission to the political jurisdiction of the artificial entity
Arkansas.  Thereby Arkansas authorities maintain compliance with Arkansas
Constitution Section 27 of Article Two.  Isn't that why you addressed your
letter to me using Born Free WhoRU on the envelope while the "legal" document
inside, the citation, has government owned property, being the "name", "Sheep
Born", entered therein?  Is this not "the smoking gun"?

As it is totally impossible for any real live flesh and blood person to have
personal knowledge pertaining to their own birth and certainly no person has any
ability to attest to the authenticity of a birth certificate as pertaining to
their own birth, so why then, when the Legislature of Arkansas (an unnatural
artificial political entity the product of the intellectual activity of men long
dead), assumed the authority to require all persons operating a motor vehicle to
have a driver license.  Why did such Legislature use such a questionable basis
for the establishment of the identity of the applicants?  And why then do
Arkansas enforcement officers declare that such questionable  establishment
constitutes "Positive ID"?

Why has the Legislature of Arkansas not made a way for those of us who insist on
adhering to the truth, to be issued a driver license using fingerprints, retina
scan or DNA as the basis, any of which would actually establish "Positive ID"? 
Or, at least it would from the time and date of the issuance thereof?  Could it
possibly be because the Legislature is not actually interested in creating
"Positive ID" but rather, because the Legislature is endeavoring to comply with
Arkansas Constitution Section 27 of Article Two thereof?  And, that "Honor"
would dictate that the use of any other means than a birth certificate would
require some sort of embarrassing disclosures?

That is, isn't it true that until a real live flesh and blood man or woman
formally and officially claims the use of government property as a person having
attained the age of Reason, such property being the "name" of the artificial
persona as was purportedly entered on "their" birth certificate, that the
Legislature of this artificial political entity has no political jurisdiction
over such real live flesh and blood "persons"?  And, Judge Judy, you will not
allow political jurisdiction attained through fraudulent inducement to fly in
your court, will you?  Or would you?  That IS the question we will see resolved,
isn't it?!

As the Legislature of Arkansas has no legislative jurisdiction over me and as
neither does the Executive Branch have enforcement jurisdiction then it
reasonably follows does it not, that neither then do you, Judge Judy, have
judicial jurisdiction over me and therefore Trooper Firstcop did not have any
authority to arrest me either, did he, and is that not the entire issue here?!

But I digress.

Arkansas statutes, as I am confident that you are aware, require Firstcop to
respect the tow request of a competent occupant of a disabled vehicle.  When
Trooper Backupcop agreed with Firstcop and tow driver UNFriendly likewise
refused, their concerted agreement constituted a felonious criminal conspiracy
to violate Arkansas statutes by two Arkansas state Troopers and one tow driver. 
It is my understanding that such a willful act constitutes an intentional
conspiracy to willingly and knowingly violate the law, which, as I understand
it, is a felony, or did I already mention that little fact?

I demand that these two "police officers" be properly charged and brought to
trial, along with their fellow conspirator, tow truck driver John UNFriendly,
and that the $243.00 extracted from Mr. Williams to recover the Dodge Truck from
UNFriendly Tow Co be returned to him, and that the $145.00 paid to the bonding
company to secure my release from jail be likewise restored to Mr. Williams, and
that the bonding company be released from any other further obligation in regard
to this matter!

Likewise, as afore-stated, as it is totally impossible for Arkansas to present
proof of it's dominion over me, I demand that this matter be expunged from the
records of Arkansas and that I no longer be harassed by Firstcop or the Arkansas
State police, et al.  In as much as there is no possible way that Arkansas can
present proof that I knowingly, willingly, intentionally, being fully aware of
the consequences prior thereto, gave up the personal individual sovereignty I
was born with in order to place myself under the political dominion of the
artificial political entity, Arkansas, my demands are more than reasonable.

Sincerely, and with all due respect,


Born Free WhoRU

Signing as witnesses who will attest appropriately to the information presented
in this document:


Eric Williams


Candy Kane


Mr. Friendly

Hi Group -

I know this is late notice but there is just too much to do and so little time
to do it all!!

Due to TalkShoe access problems on all days other than Mondays, we have decided
to reduce my show to be on Mondays only for awhile, so I encourage all of you to
be on tonight at 8:00 PM Central time:

TalkShoe.com, chow access number 27767

or call in at (724) 444 - 7444, access code 27767#

It is best to both log in and call in at the same time!

Cheers,

I'm Eric, WhoRU??

Hi Group -

Here is something for you all to think about:

The Decriminalization of Freedom

Although generally overlooked it cannot reasonably be denied that prior to the
adoption of the Thirteenth Amendment in 1866, the exercise of freedom by certain
people in the United States, was viewed as a criminal act.

Although this view certainly seems strange, a careful examination thereof will
convince any reasonable person that prior to 1868, it was indeed criminal for
those persons bound into slavery to seek or claim freedom for themselves. Any
black (or white), slave who was to escape and flee to a state where slavery was
not practiced would be hunted down and, when caught, severely punished for such
transgression, and then returned to the former condition of slavery; therefore,
the claim or exercise of freedom by such persons, was indeed a criminal act,
therefore, it reasonably follows that the Thirteenth Amendment did undeniably
constitute the decriminalization of freedom.

It is important to understand that although the Thirteenth Amendment clearly
prohibits slavery and involuntary servitude, the Thirteenth Amendment does not
in any way regulate voluntary servitude.

That is why the Fourteenth Amendment was promulgated, as the "work around",
wherein the political status "citizen of the United States", first mentioned in
Article One of the Constitution, is presented and defined in such a way as to
constitute the recognition of a person's freeborn right to voluntarily enter
himself into a condition of voluntary servitude.

The content of the Fourteenth Amendment wherein it is set forth and  established
that citizens of the United States are subject to the jurisdiction thereof, that
this mandatory provision makes it abundantly clear that the Thirteenth Amendment
establishes that a person cannot possibly be born automatically, into the
political status of citizen of the United States!

All humans everywhere on this planet are born with ten fingers, ten toes, two
eyes, two legs, etc.  These are all conditions determined and assigned by Nature
not by political governments.  "Citizenship" is certainly not assigned by
Nature.  As "citizenship" is not a Natural condition assigned by Nature how then
can "citizenship" possibly be acquired merely due to the location of a person's
birth?
Mandatory citizenship assigned as a condition of birth is a political status
determined by political  tyrants for the purpose of extracting tribute and
obedience from those unwittingly duped into volunteering into citizenship
through mind control imposed in government indoctrination centers
euphemistically known as public schools!

The Thirteenth Amendment constitutes the decriminalization of freedom!  Being
free to apply for permission does not in any way constitute freedom!
As Freedom is no longer a crime, isn't it time that we begin to practice it by
refusing to be duped into "voluntarily" claiming
citizenship?

Cheers,

I'm Eric, WhoRU??

Hi Group -this is the final draft of the letter I sent to the AG of my state. 
If you choose to send it to anyone please be advised that I am not an attorney
and I do not give legal advice so anything you do in on your own responsibility.

Cheers,

I'm Eric, WhoRU??

Dear AG(Name of Your State Attorney General without parens) ,
As I am sure you are aware, the (Your State without parens) State legislature is
considering a resolution castigating the Government of the United States for
serious encroachment on the Sovereign rights of (Your State without parens)
State (or State of (Your State without parens), as the case may be; hereinafter
"(Your State without parens)"), under the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of
the United States of America or to the Constitution of the United States, as the
case may be (hereinafter "United States" or "Federal"). I strenuously support
this action on the part of the (Your State without parens) Legislature.
I am writing to you on a similar issue under the aegis of both the Ninth
Amendment, the Thirteenth Amendment to the Federal Constitution, and Article 27
of Section 2 of the (Your State without parens) Constitution, as such pertain to
the prohibition of involuntary servitude.
I am a man of about 75 years of age living in the area known as (Your County
without parens) County (or County of (Your County without parens), as the case
may be; hereinafter "(Your County without parens) County"), in (Your State
without parens). I have been living here since about the year 2000.
Due to information I was exposed to in 1964 during the presidential campaigns
and election, I became aware that much of what I had been taught in government
schools were lies or at least total misrepresentations of the truth, such as
that all persons born on the land area known as the United States are
automatically born into United States citizenship and/or state citizenship. I
gradually became aware that it is totally impossible for a real live flesh and
blood human being to be born into any obligation of servitude or fealty to any 
totally artificially created political entity such as is the United States and
as are each and all of the Fifty States comprising the Federation known as The
United States of America.
I gradually came to a realization that not only do I not know when nor where I
was born, nor who my own parents were, or whether a "birth certificate" was
issued regarding my birth or not but I likewise came to realize that neither
does any other man or woman have any ability to have personal knowledge of any
of these "facts".
These points are not merely my unsupported personal beliefs, they are
irrefutable facts that cannot be reasonably denied. These are facts of which any
and every court of law is obligated to take mandatory judicial notice.
As it is clear than no individual person has any ability to have personal
knowledge of any of these facts it reasonably follows that no person who has
become or been made aware of such impossibility can honestly present a birth
certificate to "prove" their date of birth, place of birth nor who the person's
natural parents were; therefore, it is impossible for such a person to honestly
present any such documentation to an agency of any government for the purpose of
securing some purported benefit provided by the government.
The Legislature of (Your State without parens) has taken it upon itself to enact
statutes requiring all persons (as the word "person" is defined in (Your State
without parens) statutes),  to secure a driver license prior to operating a
motor vehicle in (Your State without parens). In its enactments in this regard
the said Legislature has determined that applicants for a driver license shall
present a birth certificate to the appropriate issuing office before a driver
license may be issued. The said Legislature has not provided any alternate means
whereby persons otherwise qualified, who are aware that they have no ability to
have personal knowledge as to the authenticity of any birth certificate which
might pertain to their own birth, to be issued a driver license or (Your State
without parens) identification card.
I am clearly such a person (however, I deny that I am a "person" as the word
"person" is defined in (Your State without parens) statutes) . Upon my arrival
in (Your State without parens) in the year 2000, I presented myself to the local
(Your State without parens) Revenue Office located in (Your City without
parens), (Your Countywithout parens) County, for the purpose of securing a
driver license and was duly refused the issuance thereof because I could not
present a birth certificate regarding my own birth.   If (Your State without
parens) actually has political jurisdiction over me it would be the
responsibility of (Your State without parens) to provide a means whereby I could
be issued such license or similar documents.
The question repeatedly presenting itself to me over the years has been: "What
is the significance of a birth certificate and why does the government make such
an issue over the requirement that a person present such a seemingly fallacious
document in order to be issued such an innocent appearing document as a driver
license?"
Parents enter the "name" of their child on the birth certificate and then the
parents file the  birth certificate with the government and by this procedure
the "name" of the child is thereby filed and registered with the government by
the child's parents  - why? What legitimate interest does the government have in
the birth of children?
As the government is an artificial entity it can only interact with and control
other artificial entities, therefore, through my reasoning abilities I have
concluded that what this "name" registration process does is to create an
artificial personage (as the word "person" is defined in (Your State without
parens) statutes), the ownership of which is unknowingly and unintentionally
assigned to the government by the parents, so the "name" can be "adopted" later
by the child after the child has been subjected to many years of servitude
indoctrinating mind control  during the child's mandatory attendance in
government mind control centers euphemistically known as "public schools".
As parents do not own their children parents cannot overtly transfer ownership
of their children to the government (and as the government is an artificial
entity it cannot "own" real live flesh and blood persons), and most parents 
would most probably balk if the parents were to be made aware of what was being
set up upon their filing of the birth certificate with the government,
effectively transferring ownership of their child's "name" to the government, so
that when the child "voluntarily" and "officially" began using the government's
property (the "name"), as an adult, the "ownership" of the "artificial" person
(as the word "person" is defined in (Your State without parens) statutes), and
control of the real live human by the government, would be fully accomplished
without anyone being the wiser.
That is, through this acquisition of the ownership and control of the artificial
person's "name " through the ploy of the birth certificate the artificial
government effectively gains control and ownership of the real live flesh and
blood person when the person "voluntarily" presents the birth certificate during
the person's application for a driver license.   This ploy is the "work around"
that  circumvents the constitutional prohibitions of involuntary servitude.
This scam is properly known as, "Fraud in the inducement"!
A "name" is the designation assigned to property by the owner thereof; as I do
not have an owner I do not have a "name". Eric Williams is not my "name", Eric
Williams is who I am!
I have often heard the reference to what is known as "positive ID", and that a
driver license is considered to constitute this "positive ID" which is desired
by the government.  It seems that what the government is actually accomplishing
through the requirement of the presentation of a birth certificate in order for
a person to be issued a driver license is to surreptitiously lead the applicant
into volunteering into a condition of servitude in order for the government to
avoid an overt violation of Article 27 of Section Two of the (Your State without
parens) Constitution and the Thirteenth Amendment to the Federal Constitution. 
I contend that this is done in order for the person to be "legitimately"
subjected to taxation and other government control and micro-management of the
"person's" entire life!  If the government's true purpose was merely to
establish "positive ID" rather than a condition of servitude, then why does the
government not simply require all driver license applicants to submit to full
palm finger printing, retina scans or to provide a DNA sample?  Where is there
any legitimate need for the government to establish the birth origin of the
applicant in order to issue a driver license or to create "positive ID"?  Any
fair and unbiased analysis of the birth certificate creation procedure will
conclude that there is no possibility that such documents can in any way
establish "positive ID".
In regard to my opening reference herein above, to certain constitutional
provisions, I contend that what we have here is an intentional failure on the
part of the artificial government to recognize or to in any way acknowledge the
natural actual free born political status of all human beings, naturally
acquired by each of them upon their birth.  That is, each and every single
individual human being is born politically free, politically independent and
politically Sovereign over their own individual self, totally free of all or any
artificial political or other servitude obligation to any and/or every
artificial political or other artificial  entity created by other humans prior
to the birth of such individuals or even if created after such birth.
How can it reasonably be asserted that persons born before me can have had any
properly acquired authority to make politically oriented rules that I am
required to obey, when such purported political rules were made years before my
birth and in regard to issues about which I had no opportunity what-so-ever to
voice my agreement or objection thereto?  Based on this reasoning how could any
person ever be born automatically into citizenship in any artificial political
entity?
Let me make it clear, I am most certainly not a scofflaw nor an anarchist! Nor
am I anti government! I contend that if we do not create a government of our own
choosing some foreign tyrant will invade our land and impose a government upon
us which we would not like. However, I also contend that there is no difference
in the long run whether the tyranny imposed upon us is of foreign origin or
domestic; and on this same point, I contend that the tyranny I am being
subjected to here in this county and state is of no lesser objection than the
tyranny encountered by the people of the People's Republic of China or the
people of the Democratic People's Republic of [north] Korea.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX\
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX\
XXXXXXXXXX


I contend, that just as the Sovereign authority of the several states is
Constitutionally protected by the Tenth Amendment, so is the Sovereign Authority
of the People of the United States (as opposed to "citizens of the United
States"), likewise protected by the Ninth Amendment. That is, the political
status "People of the United States" and the political status "citizen of the
United States" are NOT in any way the same as proclaimed by Chief Justice Tanny
in the Dred Scott case in 1857.
I contend that although Dred Scott may very well have been the rule prior to
1866/1868, that with the invocation of the Thirteenth and Fourteenth amendments,
any application of the Supreme Court's rulings in Dred Scott became moot. That
upon the invocation of the Fourteenth Amendment that it was therein very clearly
establishes that US citizenship is a condition of total servitude, and that
therefore, because of the prohibition of involuntary servitude in the Thirteenth
Amendment, that US citizenship cannot possibly be obtained by the mere birth of
a person within the boundaries claimed by the artificial political entity United
States or any similar claim of either or any of the Fifty Several artificial
political States; and that the Thirteenth Amendment's prohibition  clearly
protects the political class known as People of the United States, as the term
People of the United States is defined and established through the employment of
the term, "We the people of the United States...", as a "term of art" in the
Preamble to the Federal Constitution.
As the Thirteenth Amendment prohibits involuntary servitude  Fourteenth
Amendment U.S. citizenship can only be acquired through the voluntary and
intentional determination of an individual person after such person, born here
on this land, reaches the age of reason, (generally accepted in this country as
being sixteen years of age), when first exercised, "officially", when the young
person unwittingly (having been subjected to many years of mind control
indoctrination in government indoctrination centers euphemistically known as
"public schools),  presents "his" or "her" birth certificate during an
application to be issued a driver license.
I further contend that as such driver license applicants, having been subjected
to thirteen years of intense mind control indoctrination in government
indoctrination centers euphemistically known as "public schools", that such
applicants had intentionally never ever been properly informed of the Sovereign
political status they were born with.
I further contend that as such applicants are not and have never been informed
of the fact that they were in fact born totally free and individually Sovereign
over their own person, that as such applicants, having never ever been told or
in any way informed by their government indoctrination officers ("school
teachers"), that U.S. citizenship is a voluntary condition of subservience,
constituting a total surrender of their natural born and naturally acquired
individual personal Sovereignty, that such applicants, having never been
properly informed that their application for a driver license constituted a
total and complete surrender of their natural born political Sovereign status,
that (Your State without parens),  upon the promulgation and acceptance of the
application for a driver license from these indoctrinated applicants, that such
promulgation and acceptance by (Your State without parens) constitutes and is a
total fraud perpetrated by the government of (Your State without parens) and
every one of the other several states of this Federation, upon the unwitting
children improperly commanded to attend such indoctrination centers!
Therefore, I further contend that as it is not possible for any such
indoctrinated person to have been properly, willingly, knowingly and
intentionally fully informed prior thereto of what they were giving up and
surrendering themselves into when they submit themselves to the political
jurisdiction of the United States, or to the political jurisdiction of (Your
State without parens), to have thereby actually placed themselves or in any way
to have come under the political dominion of the United States or (Your State
without parens).
I contend that it is not reasonably possible for the artificial political
entity, (Your State without parens), to properly use its vast enforcement power
to impose its non existing political authority over those few of us who have
reasoned our way through and out of the mind control we were and are subjected
to continually by the various governments that have done and are doing
everything they can to destroy every vestige of true freedom yet remaining in
this country. I content that a condition of true freedom has never ever actually
existed in the United States nor in any political subdivision thereof!!
I contend that (Your State without parens) Constitution Article Two, Section 27,
prohibiting involuntary servitude, makes it Constitutionally impossible for any
person to be born under the political dominion of (Your State without parens).
Although (Your State without parens) Constitution Article Two, Section One
provides that all political power is inherent in the People [of (Your State
without parens)], is it not totally unreasonable for such a Constitutional
provision to be construed to imbue the People of (Your State without parens), as
a group, with powers which none of such people individually inherently possess?
Is it not recognized as being axiomatic, that the creature cannot be greater
than its creator?
Would anyone suggest that the People of (Your State without parens) have the
political power to declare that a cow could fly? So where then is the clear
extent of the limit of the inherent political power of the People of (Your State
without parens)? Does not Reason dictate that the group comprising the People of
(Your State without parens) can not possibly inherently have power in excess of
the inherent power of any one single individual member of such group? Would
anyone agree that the People of (Your State without parens) have the political
power to make lawful the armed robbery of WalMart? So where then is the
reasonable limit of the "inherent political power" of the People of (Your State
without parens)?
Would someone perhaps argue that causing a cow to fly is not a political issue,
such an endeavor would be a physical issue and physical issues are not included
in the Constitutional political powers reserved to the People of (Your State
without parens) - OK - so when is an issue physical rather than political? Is
not the taking of money from someone at gunpoint a physical issue? Can it
reasonably be argued that taxation is not the taking of money at gunpoint?
As I have no natural individual authority to lay a tax on you and as you have no
natural individual authority to lay a tax on me and as no other single
individual has any natural authority to lay a tax on any other individual
person, then how can the People acting as the government of (Your State without
parens) possibly have any proper authority to lay a tax on anyone and everyone?
Does a wrong and criminal means ever become justified merely because of the
perceived good result derived therefrom? Who gets to decide this for me or for
anyone? Is this not clearly an issue protected under the prohibition of
involuntary servitude as set forth in (Your State without parens) Constitution
Article 2, Section 27? And, of course, the same prohibition is set forth in the
Thirteenth Amendment to the Federal Constitution! And, the same is certainly
among the unspecified rights referenced in the Ninth Amendment to the federal
Constitution, which, as set forth in the Preamble thereto, very specifically
pertains to the People of the United States, not to citizens of the United
States, which is also clearly the case in the First, Second, Fourth, Ninth and
Tenth amendments, where the designation of protected class is specifically the
People of the United States, wherein there is not even one single reference to
any such protections applying to citizens of the United States.
Please write something back to convince me that I am wrong on even one point
that I have addressed!
Is it not clear that these constitutional prohibitions are there to prohibit and
restrain the relevant government from declaring any person to be citizens of the
United States or to be a citizen of (Your State without parens)? Is it not clear
that the only persons that may be required to submit themselves to the authority
of the artificial political entity, (Your State without parens), are those
persons who have freely knowingly willingly and intentionally volunteered
themselves into the political statue of citizen of the United States and/or
citizen of (Your State without parens)? How and where did I ever volunteer into
such status? Is not the burden of proof clearly upon the artificial political
entity, (Your State without parens)? When was I ever properly informed by the
government while I was being required to attend government indoctrination
facilities as a small child, that I was born free and Sovereign and that I had
the natural born right to choose for myself whether or not I would volunteer to
participate in the artificial political entity, (Your State without parens) or
the artificial political entity United States?
Additionally, I contend that it is a fair and reasonable interpretation of these
constitutional involuntary servitude prohibitions, that the Executive Authority
of (Your State without parens) (and of the United States), are thereby mandated
and obligated to protect me and similarly situated persons, from harassment by
the various enforcement officers of (Your State without parens) and all of the
political subdivisions of (Your State without parens). That is, I contend that
the wording of these constitutional provisions clearly acknowledge that there
may well be persons born politically free and Sovereign here on this land, who
will NOT choose to voluntarily submit themselves to the political dominion of
any artificial political entity, and who are therefore, not subject to any of
the rules, regulations or statutes promulgated by any of the various
legislatures of the relevant artificial political entities.
I further contend that persons politically situated such as I, have the natural
right to engage in all and every manner of activities common to members of our
species, that is, I have the naturally acquired right to engage in every
conceivable manner of activity common to humans, to engage in commerce with any
and every person who is willing to engage in commerce with me, no matter what
their political status may be . That I have the naturally acquired right to
travel to and fro on the common highways and byways of the communities in which
I from time to time may find myself and to likewise utilize commercial flight
options. To purchase and own every manner of property, to seek employment among
other humans who may desire my services or me theirs; that I have the natural
right to seek food, clothing, shelter and every other manner of property common
to the human species as long as I do so in the manner commonly accepted by those
individuals I engage in such intercourse with (this does NOT include any
obligation on my part to conform to any political rules, statutes, regulations,
laws or other description of mandatory conformity).
I freely acknowledge that I do not have any right to abuse anyone because of my
Sovereign Political status. I freely acknowledge that I am Sovereign over no
person other than myself; that I have a natural obligation to conduct myself in
a reasonable, courteous and honorable manner; that if I were to cause an injury
or loss to any person that I would have an obligation to make such person whole,
that for me to do otherwise could be considered an act of war; that if I failed
to properly address such issues in a reasonably timely manner that I could be
held accountable in a court of the common law of my peers, (but not in any
statutory court nor subject to any statutory rules of any artificial political
entity).
As I have stated herein above, that I acknowledge the need for a government, and
that such would of necessity be militarily powerful, and therefore very
expensive.  How would I suggest that such a defensive force be funded without
taxation, in addition to the other services provided by such government, such as
postal services and road construction, which includes (but is not limited to),
the construction of expensive bridges and water control infrastructure?
I would suggest that the central bank currently known as the Federal Reserve
System, should be federalized, that its ownership should be assigned to the
general population of the United States acting through the offices of the
legislatures of the several states (NOT the federal Congress), that the interest
collected on central bank loans, limited to private sector borrowers, be
credited to the four levels of government thereby providing a means whereby the
interest paid could be recycled back into circulation, thereby replenishing the
circulating money supply diminished by the paying of interest on loans and
enabling the total elimination of every vestige of taxation in the entire
Federation.
I have created a proposed amendment to the Constitution of the United States a
copy of which amendment I am annexing to this instant letter and making a part
hereof by reference, in its entirety.
Please be herein advised: I am sending this letter to you via the U.S. Postal
Service, registered mail, Return Receipt Requested, so that I will have evidence
that this letter was received by your office. I suggest that your response (if
any), be likewise sent to me so that you will likewise be assured that I did
receive your response.  In the event that you do not respond to contest what I
have asserted herein, a certified copy hereof, when presented together with the
aforementioned signed Return Receipt Signature card, shall be acknowledged by
every enforcement officer of (Your State without parens), and of every political
subdivision thereof, that you have not contested my claim of political
Sovereignty, including (but not limited to), my natural born right to travel on
the highboys and byways of (Your State without parens) without any requirement
that I have (Your State without parens) license plates, registration papers,
proof of financial responsibility or that I am mandated to conform to any other
(Your State without parens) statute, rule or regulation.
Please be further advised; I contend that as I claim to be of the Posterity of
the People of July 4, 1776, and that as my antecedents lent their physical
strength to repel the army of King George III from the shores of this continent
that my antecedents thereby contributed significantly to the success of that
endeavor, that therefore the United States and (Your State without parens) both
singly, individually and together, have a moral, lawful and Constitutional
responsibility to provide me and other persons similarly situated, with
officially issued documentation similar to the Diplomatic Passports issued to
Foreign Diplomats, which letter and card I may then present to (Your State
without parens) enforcement officers whereupon such officers shall be thereby
instructed to recognize my individual Sovereign status and allow me to proceed
on my way unobstructed and un-detained by their otherwise proper enforcement
activities. That a certified copy of this letter, when presented together with
the signed Postal Signature Receipt Card, indicating that the original hereof
was received by your office in Little Rock, (Your State without parens), that
such presentation to any and every (Your State without parens) enforcement
officer, Sheriff or deputy sheriff, shall constitute and be recognized as being
such Diplomatic Recognition.
Additionally, I fully acknowledge your right to respond and to refute or contest
all and any point that I have addressed in this instant writing, I would welcome
your comments or suggestions as to how we may work out these issues in a
friendly and non-confrontational manner.  If you intend to respond I will expect
that your response will be dated and posted to me within ten (10) days of the
date hereof, as indicated on page one hereof.  I would suggest that your reply,
if any, also be sent to me Return Receipt Requested.
Please find enclosed our letter to the (Your State without parens) Towing and
Recovery Board and Frank Lee's letter to the court of (Your Countywithout
parens) County, along with my proposed 28th Amendment5 to the federal
Constitution.

Very Truly Yours,

How Money Works - Why Money Works.
By Eric, WhoRU??

Let's say we have a moderately sized community of about 200,000 persons. The
community is fairly self sufficient with the exception of providing its own food
- it has been purchasing its food from foreign suppliers for long enough for
most of the gold money used by the community to have been paid out of their
community to the foreign supplier - this lack of money in the community is
causing the economy of the community to suffer from serious unemployment and
everyone is on the verge of starvation.

Then one day a stranger comes into the community with what seems like an
inexhaustible supply of money - gold money - this stranger goes from store to
store purchasing thousands and thousands of dollars worth of every variety of
merchandise which he loads into a huge van which he then drives out of the
community leaving all this gold money circulating there where the people can
then once more flourish due to the seemingly magical effect all of this gold
money has on restoring the economy of the community.

Additionally, the people of the community realized that the economic dilemma
they had been suffering from had been caused by their foreign procurement of all
their food - so some of them started growing a food supply sufficient for all of
the people of the community. The new farmers sell their food to everyone, the
farmers are paid with the new gold money that had been spent into the community
by the stranger. The farmers then spend their gold money to purchase clothing,
tools, fuel, entertainment, landscaping services, beautician services, vehicle
repairs, new farming equipment, and the farmers also hired many workers to help
with the growing and processing of the food, thereby, all of the money paid to
the farmers is continually re-circulater back into the community and everyone
who receives any of this money likewise re-spends the money they receive back
into circulation and the community then continued to flourish with no more
economic problems caused by the lack of money.

So what do we have in this example? We seem to have an example of how real gold
money can enable a community to flourish, but is this actually the case or does
it only seem to be?

What if it were to be discovered many years after the stranger who had spent all
this gold money into circulation had left town, that what everyone in the
community believed was real gold money was actually nothing but some kind of
heavy base metal coated with some kind of shiny yellow coating that looked like
real gold but was actually nothing but some kind of paint, and thereupon the
community, believing the money to now be worthless, once more came to a grinding
halt with many people unemployed and everyone once more on the verge of
starvation - WHY? Was the failure of the economy due to the fact that the money
was not actually gold or was the failure due to the awareness or the people that
the money was not actually gold? Did the phony money ever have the actual value
of gold? Certainly not - so then, as the money never ever did have any actual
gold value then what was it that enabled the economy to flourish during the time
the people erroneously believed the money was real gold, prior to the
realization of the people that the money was nothing other than fraudulent junk?
So what then was the actual cause of the previous economic success and why now
the economic failure?

In the example as given herein above, prior to the discovery of the fraud, can
it be reasonably denied that everyone in the community benefited and flourished
because of the deception? So, then, as it seems clear that no one was injured by
the deception where was there any harm in the introduction of this "worthless"
money into this community? Was there anyone in the example who derived an
unearned benefit from the fraud? What about the stranger who spent all the
fraudulent money to purchase all of the valuable goods he loaded into his huge
truck? The retailers had all believed they had been well paid - the gold
appearing money had been accepted by everyone in the community for many years
resulting in substantial economic prosperity during all that time. What if the
stranger's single purpose was merely to introduce the money into circulation in
order to save the community from starvation? What if the stranger actually had
no use for any of the merchandise he had purchased and what if he still had all
of that merchandise loaded in his truck? What if he came back into town and
returned all the merchandise to the stores from whence he had fraudulently
purchased it and got all of his worthless money back from the community? Would
everyone have been better off if the stranger had never ever come to town? On
the other hand, what if the people, upon discovering the money was not actually
gold, chose to ignore that fact and continued using the money as before,
enabling the economy to continue flourishing? Which would be the most sensible
choice? The important question here is: "Did the economy flourish because of any
actual value of the money or because of the mere belief of the people that the
fraudulent money was actually gold?"

What if there were no stranger coming to the rescue at the time of the initial
economic problem but instead the people of the community had come to a
realization that what they actually needed to do was two things (1) grow all
their own food locally so their money would stay in their community, and (2),
devise a money system which would not require the use of gold, because, reason
teaches that it is the perception of value rather than any actual value, that
lends usefulness to whatever is used as money.

The problem with this solution is in how to get a medium that has no intrinsic
value to be accepted as money by the people of the community, how can such money
be successfully entered into circulation? In the example presented above a
stranger came into town and spent his worthless money into circulation. The only
reason he was able to do that was because his money appeared to be real gold -
if it had been realized at the outset that the stranger's money was worthless
base metal with a gold colored coating, the stranger would not have been able to
save the economy - but if the entire truth is acknowledged - that it is the
perception of value rather than any actual value that enables money to work, to
be accepted by the people of the community then the community could flourish
without any need for actual gold money.

All communities have a need for infrastructure to be created and maintained,
streets, bridges, sewer systems and similar projects. The common way for this to
be accomplished is for a government to be formed and a tax thereby laid on the
people. At the same time a medium of exchange is also needed, and as we are all
too well aware, the way this has all too often been accomplished is through a
privately owned central bank where money is created out of thin air and lent to
borrowers with a substantial interest surcharge attached. In such a system the
lending banks do not actually lend anything, they create the money they purport
to loan by entering a few numbers into a computer data file, yet they reap
substantial profits and operate a system which always seems to have recession
cycles where many borrowers are foreclosed on with the lending banks taking over
ownership of the mortgaged homes, adding substantially to the unearned interest
profits of the lenders.

What if the ownership of the central bank were held by the people of the
community which bank would then loan money into circulation to private sector
borrowers, at interest, and where the interest collected would be credited to
the treasury of the community to be used instead of taxation, to pay for the
building and maintenance of the infrastructure of the community? Under such a
system, all taxation could be totally eliminated and the exact quantity of money
needed by the people would be determined by themselves, through their voluntary
loan applications.

Cheers,

I'm Eric, WhoRU??

Secrets Behind Santa Cruz Corruption ... Foreign Manipulation (UN)

© 2009 Tom DeWeese - All Rights Reserved

Ladies and gentlemen, I've come a long way to get here and I have such a short
time to be with you. So, let's just get everything out on the table right now,
shall we?

I believe the American people, and their every action, are being ruled,
regulated, restricted, licensed, registered, directed, checked, inspected,
measured, numbered, counted, rated, stamped, censured, authorized, admonished,
refused, prevented, drilled, indoctrinated, monopolized, extorted, robbed,
hoaxed, fined, harassed, disarmed, dishonored, fleeced, exploited, assessed, and
taxed to the point of suffocation and desperation.

America is drowning in a sea of rules and regulations, particularly under the
guise of "saving the environment."

We all know something is very wrong and we are trying to fix it.

Many in America attempt to fight against one issue or another as they try to
understand what is happening to their country. But most fail to see the whole
picture and are being crushed under a well organized "divide and conquer" tactic
that keeps them reeling from crisis to crisis.

Tonight, I'm going to try to give you at least a peek at the all-encompassing,
gut wrenching national transformation that we face -- and, hopefully, help to
lift the veil of confusion.

To put things in perspective, here are some questions every American should ask
their elected officials – especially those supporting "climate change"
legislation.

If it is proven that climate change is not man-made, but natural, will you be
relieved and excited to know that man is off the hook?

We've been terrorized into accepting that human society was on the brink of
extinction because of man-made global warming. We've been warned that, unless we
take drastic action to reverse it – then islands will disappear, whole cities
will be destroyed and polar bears will drown.

So, if it's not true, will you now help to remove all of the draconian
regulations passed during the global warming hysteria? Will you help to restore
our Republic with common sense and sound economics?

Their answers to these questions should be very illuminating as to the true
agenda they seek to impose.

If they are supporting climate change legislation because of a genuine concern
for the environment, then they should now be greatly relieved to know that true
science is showing more and more evidence that there is no man-made global
warming, and in fact, a natural cooling period has begun.

I have just returned from one of the most important Climate Change conferences
ever held. Sponsored by the Heartland Institute, more than 700 scientists from
all over the world came together to testify that man-made Global Warming does
not exist.

Harvard scholar and climate scientist Willie Soon said it best in a recent
article he titled, "It's the Sun, stupid."

Dr. Mark Campbell, professor of chemistry at the U.S. Navel Academy in Annapolis
recently wrote, "The sky is not burning, and to claim that it is amounts to
journalistic malpractice."

Said U.S. Government atmospheric scientist Stanley B, Goldenberg, "It is a
blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of
scientists who don't buy into anthropogenic global warming."

In the past year, more than 650 scientists from around the world have expressed
their doubts. That's 12 times the number of UN IPCC global warming alarmists.

Top that with the fact that more than 31,000 American scientists have signed a
petition saying there is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of
carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing disruption of the
Earth's climate.

Of course most of the hysteria has been fueled by Al Gore's Oscar-winning, Nobel
prize-winning film "An Inconvenient Truth," which almost every American school
student has been forced to watch endless times in their classroom.

Well, guess what, the government of Great Britain just ruled that the film
cannot be shown in English classrooms unless it carries a disclaimer that says
the film is full of mistakes and propaganda.

An overwhelming majority of scientist are now telling us that investigative
research shows any warming actually stopped in 1999. And, in fact, they say the
brief warming period we experienced in the past decade was completely natural,
caused in part by storms on the sun, not CO2 emissions from SUVs.

The Sun storms have ended and now a cooling period has begun.

That's it. Done. Crisis over. Man is not to blame. Hurray! The nation should be
rejoicing.

No need for expensive green cars, mercury-filled light bulbs, special home
building materials, expensive alternative energy, no bird-killing windmills, no
special energy taxes, no extra government oversight committees, no more global
climate change conferences – and no need for a Climate Czar. Carol Browner can
go back into mothballs.

We can finally clean out the ten feet of fuel on the bottom of the forests and
prevent the massive forest fires. We can reestablish the timber industry and all
the jobs that were killed.

We can drill American oil and end our dependency on foreigners who hate us. In
fact, that stable source of energy will help restore the Detroit auto industry
and all of those jobs. And it will help us to stop funding terrorists. What's
not to like about drilling American oil?

We didn't need a stimulus package after all – the economy will rebound on its
own. We are free. The environment is not in crisis. Rejoice! Rejoice!

That silence you hear is the news media, which refuses to report what any
skeptic has to say.

That silence you hear is the lack of effort on Capitol Hill to start to pull
back from the climate change hysteria.

That silence you hear is from the White House where President of Change, Barack
Obama now has an EPA director, a Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) director
and a full blown Climate Change Czar, all working to impose huge cut backs in
energy use, with more taxes, and more rules and regulations that will bring an
already damaged economy to its knees – all in the name of man-made Global
Warming – which doesn't exist.

…And that silence you hear is from global corporations which have bought into Al
Gore's lie and invested heavily in the promised green economy. In fact, their
dollars are the only thing green about any of it. Their commercials are
promoting the lies and changing our way of life. "Going Green" is the mantra of
the day. None of them are about to change any of these policies, simply to
accommodate a few inconvenient scientific facts.

In spite of all the evidence to the contrary, in spite of literally thousands of
real scientists joining the ranks of the skeptics, Gore just told Congress that
the Global Warming crisis is even worse than predicted. Obama, our newly crowned
king said, "The science is settled."

Why do they continue to promote a lie? Because global warming never was about
protecting the environment. It's nothing more than the excuse to enforce global
governance on the planet by creating a new global economy based on the
environment rather than on goods and services.

In fact, the most important debate in the history of the United States is about
to begin – it's the battle over a completely new economic system based on
Climate Change called Cap and Trade.

It should be called Tax and Trade as it will force up the price of every item
created or run by energy from gasoline to toothpaste to natural gas to hotel
rooms, as we sit in our cold, dark homes.

Cap and Trade will throw out the old system of a free market based on goods and
services and operate on the idea that CO2 is a pollutant. Instead of money,
wealth will be determined by how many government-issued emission permits you own
to allow you to operate your business.

In short, it's all about wealth redistribution. Your wealth into a green rat
hole.

During the Cold War, communists tried to get us to surrender our liberties and
way of life for the wisdom of Karl Marx. Americans didn't buy it.

But now, they have taken the same clap trap and wrapped it all in a nice green
blanket, scaring us with horror stories about the human destruction of the
environment – and so we are now throwing our liberties on the bon fire like a
good old fashioned book burning -- all in the name of protecting the planet.

It sounds so friendly. So meaningful. So urgent. But, the devastation to our
liberty and way of life is the same as if Lenin ordered it.

You know, we have a new language invading our government at all levels. Old
words with new meanings fill government policy papers. The typical city council
meeting discusses "community development," "historic preservation," and
"partnerships" between the city and global corporations.

Civic leaders organize community meetings run by "facilitators," as they outline
a "vision" for the town, enforced by "consensus." No need for debate when you
have consensus!

People of great importance testify before congressional committees of the dire
need for "social justice."

Free trade, social justice, consensus, global truth, partnerships, preservation,
stakeholders, land use, environmental protection, development, diversity,
visioning, open space, heritage, comprehensive planning, critical thinking, and
community service are all part of our new language.

What are they really talking about? What mental pictures come to mind when those
words are used? George Orwell realized that those who control language and
manipulate key phrases can control policy.

The language is being changed and manipulated to quietly implement a very
destructive policy. One outlined in a UN soft-law document called Agenda 21,
first revealed at the UN's Earth Summit in 1992. The working name is Sustainable
Development.

Rather than good management of resources, Sustainable Development has come to
mean denied use and resources locked away from human hands. In short, it has
become a code word for an entire economic and social agenda.

I have spent most of the past 12 years studying every facet of this new
political agenda which is fast becoming a revolution -- touching every aspect of
our businesses, our public education system, our private property, our families
and our individual lives.

Interestingly, it is not a Republican or Democrat issue. It's not liberal or
conservative. It is being implemented on a purely bipartisan basis.

It is now the official policy of the United States, put in force by literally
every department of the government.

It is the official policy of every state government, and nearly every city, town
and county in the nation.

But, I warn you, accepting the perception that Sustainable Development is simply
good environmental stewardship is a serious and dangerous mistake.

So what is Sustainable Development? The Sustainablists insist that society be
transformed into feudal-like governance by making nature the central organizing
principle for our economy and society.

To achieve this, Sustainablist policy focuses on three components; global land
use, global education, and global population control.

Keep in mind that America is the only country in the world based on the ideals
of private property. But, private property is incompatible with the collectivist
premise of Sustainable Development.

If you doubt that, then consider this quote from the report of the 1976 UN's
Habitat I conference which said: "Land …cannot be treated as an ordinary asset,
controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the
market. Private land ownership is also a principle instrument of accumulation
and concentration of wealth, therefore, contributes to social injustice."

It is a social injustice for some to have prosperity if others do not. It is a
social injustice to keep our borders closed. It is a social injustice for some
to be bosses and others to be merely workers.

Social justice is a major premise of Sustainable Development. Another word for
social justice, by the way, is Socialism. Karl Marx was the first to coin the
phrase "social justice."

Some officials try to pretend that Sustainable Development is just a local
effort to protect the environment -- just your local leaders putting together a
local vision for the community. Have you heard that one?

Then ask your local officials how it is possible that the exact language and
tactics for implementation of Sustainable Development are being used in nearly
every city around the globe from Lewiston, Maine to Singapore. Local indeed.

Sustainable Development is the process by which America is being reorganized
around a central principle of state collectivism using the environment as bait.

The best way to understand what Sustainable Development actually is can be found
by discovering what is NOT sustainable.

According to the UN's Biodiversity Assessment Report, items for our everyday
lives that are NOT sustainable include: Ski runs, grazing of livestock, plowing
of soil, building fences, industry, single family homes, paved and tarred roads,
logging activities, dams and reservoirs, power line construction, and economic
systems that fail to set proper value on the environment (capitalism, free
markets).

Maurice Strong, Secretary General of the UN's Rio Earth Summit in 1992 said,
"…Current lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle class –
involving high meat intake, use of fossil fuels, appliances, home and work
air-conditioning, and suburban housing are not sustainable."

Are you starting to see the pattern behind Cap and Trade, the Clean Air Act, the
Clean Water Act, and all of those commercials you're forced to watch about the
righteousness of Going Green?

And one of the most destructive tools they use to force it on us is something
called the "precautionary principle." That means that any activities that might
threaten human health or the environment should be stopped -- even if no clear
cause and effect relationship has been established – and even if the potential
threat is largely theoretical.

That makes it easy for any activist group to issue warnings by news release or
questionable report and have those warnings quickly turned into public policy –
just in case.

So how is this wrenching transformation being put into place?
There are four very specific routes being used.
In the rural areas it's called the Wildlands Project.
In the cities it's called smart growth.
In business it's called Public/Private Partnerships.

And in government it's called stakeholder councils and non-elected boards and
regional government.
The Wildlands Project was the brainchild of Earth First's Dave Foreman and it
literally calls for the "re-wilding" of 50% of all the land in every state –
back to the way it was before Christopher Columbus set foot on this land. It is
a diabolical plan to herd humans off the rural lands and into human settlements.
Crazy you say! Yes. Impossible? Not so fast.

From the demented mind of Foreman, the plan became the blueprint for the UN's
Biodiversity Treaty. So now the scheme is international in scope.

But how do you remove people from the land? One step at a time. Let's begin with
a biosphere reserve. A national park will do. A huge place where there is no
human activity. How about Yellowstone National Park? Then you establish a buffer
zone around the reserve. Inside the buffer only limited human activity is
allowed. Slowly, you squeeze until you squash that human activity.

Once accomplished, you extend the area of the biosphere to the limits of the
former buffer area – and then you create a new buffer zone around the now larger
biosphere and start the process over again. In that way, the Biosphere Reserve
acts like a cancer cell, ever expanding, until all human activity is stopped.

And there are many tools in place to stop human activity and grow the reserve.

Push back livestock's access to river banks on ranches. 300 feet ought to do it.
When the cattle can't reach the stream, the rancher can't water them -- he goes
out of business.

Lock away natural resources by creating national parks. It shuts down the mines
-- and they go out of business.

Invent a Spotted Owl shortage and pretend it can't live in a forest where timber
is cut. Shut off the forest. Then, when no trees are cut, there's nothing to
feed the mills and then there are no jobs, and -- they go out of business.

Locking away land cuts the tax base. Eventually the town dies. Keep it up and
there is nothing to keep the people on the land – so they head to the cities.
The wilderness grows – just like Dave Foreman planned.

It comes in many names and many programs. Heritage areas, land management, wolf
and bear reintroduction, rails to trails, conservation easements, open space,
and many more.

Each of these programs is designed to make it just a little harder to live on
the land – a little more expensive – a little more hopeless. Now tell me how
they can deny that the process is herding people into human habitat areas?

Today, here in your area, one of the latest Wildlands scheme is called Yukon to
Yellowstone or Y2Y -- a 2000 mile no-man's land corridor from the Arctic to
Yellowstone.

The second path is called Smart Growth. After they herd you into the city, they
have more plans for you in regimented and dense urban communities. They put a
line around the city and tell you no growth can take place outside that line.
Urban sprawl, they say disdainfully.

They refuse to build more roads as a ploy to get you out of your car into public
transportation, restricting mobility. Those able to build apartment houses may
find it impossible to provide parking – we don't want any stinking cars!

Because there is a restriction on space inside the controlled city limits there
is a shortage of houses, so prices go up. That means populations will have to be
controlled, because now there is a shortage of land.

Third, inside the human habitat areas, government is controlled by an elite
ruling class called stake holder councils.

These are mostly Non-governmental organizations, or NGOs, who, like thieves in
the night, just show up to stake their claim to enforce their own private
agendas.

The function of legitimate government within the system will be simply to
enforce the dictates of the councils.

The councils are unelected, but all powerful. They are controlled by a small
minority in the community. They will make you ask permission for anything
necessary to live in the community. They can dictate the kind of building
materials you may use in your home – or whether you can build on your property
at all.

Then, if they do grant a permit for building, they might not decide to let you
acquire water and electricity for your new home – and they may or may not give
you a reason for being turned down.

They can even dictate that you get the proper exercise – as determined by the
government. San Francisco has built a new federal building – the greenest ever
built. But the elevators will only stop on every third floor so riders are
forced to use stairs – for their own health, of course.

These councils fit almost perfectly the definition of a State Soviet: a system
of councils that report to an apex council and then implement a predetermined
outcome. Soviets are the operating mechanism of a government-controlled economy.

The fourth path is Public/Private Partnerships. Today, many freedom
organizations are presenting PPPs as free enterprise and a private answer for
keeping taxes down by using business to make a better society.

In truth, many PPPs are nothing more than government-sanctioned monopolies in
which a few businesses are granted special favors like tax breaks, the power of
eminent domain, non-compete clauses and specific guarantees for return on their
investments.

That means they can charge what they want and they can use the power of
government to put competition out of business. That is not free enterprise. And
it is these global corporations that are pushing the green agenda.

For example, using government to ban its own product, General Electric is
forcing the mercury-laden green light bulb on you, costing 5 times the price of
incandescent bulbs. Such is the reality of green industry.

PPPs are building the Trans Texas Corridor, using eminent domain to take more
than 580,000 acres of private land - sanctioned by the partnership with the
Texas government.

And PPPs are taking over highways and local water treatment plants in
communities across the nation. It is not free enterprise, but a Mussolini-type
fascism that will only lead to tyranny. And it's all driven by the Agenda 21
blueprint of Sustainable Development.

Truly, Sustainable Development is designed to change our way of life. Local
communities are now being targeted by international forces. Here's how.

In June 2005, I reported on the UN's efforts to recruit the nation's mayors to
directly impose Sustainable Development policy into our local communities. The
mayors were invited to attend the UN's World Environment Day conference in San
Francisco.

The mayors weren't there to simply discuss policy, they actually committed to an
agenda with specific goals. As part of their participation, the mayors were
pressed to commit to specific legislation and policy goals by signing a slate of
UN accords. Two documents were presented for the mayors' signature.

The first document was called the Green Cities Declaration, produced by the
United Nations Environment Programme. This document was essentially a statement
of principles which set the agenda for the mayors' assigned tasks.

The Declaration is amazingly bold in that it details exactly how the UN intends
to implement a very specific agenda in every town and city in the nation. The
final line of the Declaration explained the UN's goal very explicitly: Each year
cities shall pick three actions to adopt as policies or laws."

The second document signed by the mayors was called the "Urban Environment
Accords." The document includes exactly 21 specific actions (as in Agenda 21),
for the mayors to take -- controlled by a time table for implementation.

For example, under the topic of energy, action item number 1 called for the
mayors to implement a policy to increase the use of "renewable" energy by 10%
within seven years. Energy action item numbers 2 and 3 dealt with reducing
energy consumption.

These action items are classic examples of the UN trying to go around the U.S.
Congress and federal energy policy and force a backdoor implementation of the
UN's Kyoto Accord, which the U.S. has never ratified.

Perhaps the most egregious action item offered in the Urban Environmental
Accords dealt with the topic of water. Action item number 19 called for adoption
and implementation of a policy to reduce individual water consumption.

The UN document begins by stating: "Cities with potable water consumption
greater than 100 liters per capita per day will adopt and implement policies to
reduce consumption by 10% by 2015." There is no scientific basis for the 100
liter figure other than to employ a very clever use of numbers to lower the bar
and control the debate over water consumption.


You must be aware that 100 liters is equal to about 26 GALLONS per person, per
day. According to the UN, each person should have less than 26 gallons each day
to drink, bathe, flush toilets, wash clothes, water lawns, wash dishes, cook,
take care of pets, and more.

© 2009 Tom DeWeese - All Rights Reserved

Those who see the danger ... need to run for local offices using these issues.

To All Group Members and others, please be advised that this is an incomplete
rough draft.  I am posting it here for comments and input from all who would
choose to provide same.  After the final version is completed I will post it
here for the use of any who choose to do so - this is not to be considered legal
advice.

Cheers,

I'm Eric, WhoRU??



Dear AG -

As I am sure you are aware, the Arkansas State legislature is considering a
resolution castigating the Government of the United States for serious
encroachment on the Sovereign rights of the Arkansas State (or State of
Arkansas, as the case may be; hereinafter "Arkansas"), under the Tenth Amendment
to the Constitution of the United States of America (hereinafter "United
States"). I strenuously support this action on the part of the Arkansas
Legislature.

I am writing to you on a similar issue under the aegis of both the Ninth
Amendment and the Thirteenth Amendment to the Federal Constitution, and Article
27 of Section Two of the Arkansas Constitution.

I am a man of about 75 years of age living in the area known as Marion County
(or County of Marion, as the case may be; hereinafter "Marion County"), in
Arkansas. I have been living here since about the year 2000.

Due to information I was exposed to in 1964 during the Lyndon Johnson - Berry
Goldwater Presidential election (I am not a registered voter nor do I identify
with either or any political party), I became aware that much of what I had been
taught in government schools were lies or at least total misrepresentations of
the truth, such as that all persons born on the land area known as the United
States are automatically born into United States citizenship and/or state
citizenship. I gradually became aware that it is totally impossible for a real
live flesh and blood human being to be born into a totally artificially created
political entity such as is the United States and as are each and all of the
Fifty States comprising the Federation known as The United States of America.
I gradually came to a realization that not only do I not know when nor where I
was born, nor who my own parents were, nor whether a "birth certificate" was
issued regarding my birth or not but I came to realize that neither does any
other man or woman have any ability to have personal knowledge of any of these
things. These points are not merely my unsupported personal beliefs, they are
irrefutable facts that cannot be reasonably denied. These are facts of which any
and every court of law is obligated to take mandatory judicial notice.

As it is clear than no individual person has any ability to have personal
knowledge of any of these facts it reasonably follows that no person who has
become or been made aware thereof can possibly honestly present a birth
certificate to "prove" their date of birth, place of birth nor who the person's
natural mother and father were; therefore, it is impossible for such a person to
honestly present any such documentation to an agency of any government for the
purpose of securing some purported benefit provided by the government.
The Legislature of Arkansas has taken it upon itself to enact statutes requiring
all persons to secure a driver license prior to operating a motor vehicle in
Arkansas. In its enactments in this regard the said Legislature has determined
that applicants for a driver license shall present a birth certificate to the
appropriate issuing office before a driver license may be issued. The said
Legislature has not provided any alternate means whereby persons otherwise
qualified, who are aware that they have no ability to have personal knowledge as
to the authenticity of any birth certificate which might pertain to their own
birth, to be issued a driver license or Arkansas identification card.

I am such a person. Upon my arrival in Arkansas in the year 2000, I presented
myself to the local Arkansas Revenue Office located in Yellville, Marion County,
for the purpose of securing a driver license and was duly refused the issuance
thereof because I could not present a birth certificate regarding my own birth.

The question repeatedly presenting itself to me over the years has been: "What
is the significance of a birth certificate and why does the government make such
an issue over the requirement that a person present such a seemingly fallacious
document in order to be issued such an innocent appearing document as a driver
license?"

The parents enter the "name" of their child on the birth certificate and the
birth certificate is then filed and registered with the government by the
child's parents  - why?

Through my reasoning process I have concluded that what this "name" registration
process does is to create an artificial personage the ownership of which is
unknowingly and unintentionally assigned to the government by the parents, to be
"adopted" later by the child after the child has been subjected to many years of
servitude indoctrinating mind control  during the child's mandatory attendance
in government mind control centers euphemistically known as "public schools".

As parents do not own their children parents cannot overtly transfer ownership
of their children to the government and most parents  would most probably balk
if the parents were to be made aware of what was being set up upon their filing
of the birth certificate with the government, effectively transferring ownership
of their child's "name" to the government, so that when the child "voluntarily"
and "officially" began using the government's property (the "name"), as an
adult, the "ownership" of the person by the government would be fully
accomplished without anyone being the wiser.

This scam is known as, "Fraud in the inducement"!
A "name" is the designation assigned to property by the owner thereof; as I do
not have an owner I do not have a "name". Eric Williams is not my "name", Eric
Williams is who I am!

I have often heard the reference to what is known as "positive ID" and that a
driver license is considered to constitute the "positive ID" desired by the
government.  It seems that what the government is actually accomplishing 
through the requirement of the presentation of a birth certificate in order for
a person to be issued a driver license is to surreptitiously lead the applicant
into volunteering into a condition of servitude in order for the government to
avoid an overt violation of Article 27 of Section Two of the Arkansas
Constitution and the Thirteenth Amendment to the Federal Constitution.  I
contend that this is done in order for the person to be "legitimately" subjected
to taxation and other government control and micro-management of the person's
life!  If the government's true purpose was merely to establish "positive ID"
rather than a condition of servitude, then why does the government not simply
require all driver license applicants to submit to full palm finger printing,
retina scans or to provide a DNA sample?  Why does the government need to
establish the birth origin of the applicant in order to merely create "positive
ID"?

In regard to my opening reference herein above, to certain constitutional
provisions, I contend that what we have here is an intentional failure on the
part of the government to recognize or to in any way acknowledge the natural
free born political status of all human beings naturally acquired upon their
birth, that is, each and every individual human being is born politically free,
politically independent and politically Sovereign over their own individual
self, totally free of all or any political or other servitude obligation to any
and/or every political or other artificial  entity created by other humans prior
to the birth of such individuals.

How can it reasonably be asserted that persons born before me can have had any
properly acquired authority to make politically oriented rules that I am
required to obey, when such purported political rules were made years before my
birth and in regard to which I had no opportunity what-so-ever to voice my
agreement or objection thereto?  Based on this reasoning how could any person
ever be born into citizenship?

Let me make it clear, I am most certainly not a scofflaw nor an anarchist! Nor
am I anti-government! I contend that if we do not create a government of our own
choosing some foreign tyrant will invade our land and impose a government upon
us which we would not like. However, I further contend that there is no
difference in the long run whether the tyranny imposed upon us is of foreign
origin or domestic; and on this same point, I contend that the tyranny I am
being subjected to here in this county is of no lesser objection than that
encountered by the people of the People's Republic of China nor the people of
the Democratic People's Republic of [north] Korea.
I contend, that just as the Sovereign authority of the several states is
Constitutionally protected by the Tenth Amendment, so is the Sovereign Authority
of the People of the United States likewise protected by the Ninth Amendment.
That is, the political status "People of the United States" and the political
status "citizen of the United States" are NOT in any way the same as proclaimed
by Chief Justice Tanny in the Dred Scott case in 1857, I contend that although
Dred Scott may very well have been the rule prior to 1866/1868, with the
invocation of the Thirteenth and Fourteenth amendments, any application of the
Supreme Court's rulings in Dred Scott became moot upon the invocation of these
two amendments; that the Fourteenth Amendment very clearly establishes that US
citizenship is a condition of total servitude, and that therefore, US
citizenship cannot possibly be obtained by the mere birth of a person within the
boundaries claimed by the United States or any of the Fifty Several States; and
that the Thirteenth Amendment clearly protects the political class known as
People of the United States as the term People of the United States is
established through the employment of such as a "term of art" in the Preamble to
the Federal Constitution.

As the Thirteenth Amendment prohibits involuntary servitude Fourteenth Amendment
U.S. citizenship can only be acquired through the voluntary determination of an
individual person after such person, born here on this land, reaches the age of
reason, generally accepted in this country as being sixteen years of age, and
first exercised, "officially", when the young person presents "his" or "her"
birth certificate during an application to be issued a driver license.

I further contend that as such driver license applicants, having been subjected
to thirteen years of intense mind control indoctrination in government
indoctrination centers euphemistically known as "public schools", such
applicants have never ever been properly informed of the Sovereign political
status they were born with, and such applicants are never informed of the fact
that they were in fact born totally free and individually Sovereign over their
own person, and were never ever told or in any way informed by their
indoctrination officers that U.S. citizenship is a voluntary condition of
subservience constituting a total surrender of their natural born and naturally
acquired individual personal Sovereignty, that such applicants never mentioned
purported surrender of their natural born political Sovereign status upon
application for a driver license constitutes and is a total fraud perpetrated by
the government of Arkansas and every one of the other several states of this
Federation, upon the unwitting children improperly commanded to attend such
indoctrination centers! Therefore, that it is not possible for any such
indoctrinated person to have properly, willingly, intentionally, being fully
informed of what they were giving up and surrendering themselves into when they
submit themselves to the political jurisdiction of the United States, or to the
political dominion of Arkansas.

I contend that it is not reasonably possible for Arkansas to properly use its
vast enforcement power to impose its non existing authority over those few of us
who have reasoned our way through and out of the mind control we were and are
subjected to continually, by the various governments that have done and are
doing everything they can to destroy every vestige of true freedom yet remaining
in this country. A condition of true freedom has never ever actually existed in
the United States or in any political subdivision thereof!!

I contend that Arkansas Constitution Article Two, Section 27, prohibiting
involuntary servitude, makes it Constitutionally impossible for any person to be
born under the political dominion of Arkansas. Although Arkansas Constitution
Article two, Section One provides that all political power is inherent in the
People [of Arkansas]. Is it not totally unreasonable for such a Constitutional
provision to imbue the People of Arkansas, as a group, with powers none of such
people individually possess?

Would anyone suggest that the People of Arkansas have the political power to
declare that a cow could fly? So where then is the clear extent of the limit of
the inherent political power of the People of Arkansas? Does not Reason dictate
that the group comprising the People of Arkansas can not possibly have power in
excess of any one single individual member of such group? Would anyone agree
that the People of Arkansas have the political power to make lawful the armed
robbery of WalMart? So where then is the reasonable limit of the "inherent
political power" of the People of Arkansas?

Would someone perhaps argue that causing a cow to fly is not a political issue,
such an endeavor would be a physical issue and physical issues are not included
in the Constitutional political powers of the People of Arkansas - OK - so when
is an issue physical rather than political? Is not the taking of money from
someone at gunpoint a physical issue? Can it reasonably be argued that taxation
is not the taking of money at gunpoint?

As I have no natural individual authority to lay a tax on you and as you have no
natural individual authority to lay a tax on me and as no other single
individual has any natural authority to lay a tax on any other individual
person, then how can the People of the government of Arkansas possibly have any
proper authority to lay a tax on anyone and everyone? Does a wrong and criminal
means ever become justified merely because of the perceived good result derived
therefrom? Who gets to decide this for me? Is this not clearly an issue
protected under the prohibition of involuntary servitude as set forth in
Arkansas Constitution Article 2, Section 27? And, of course, the same
prohibition is set forth in the Thirteenth Amendment to the Federal
Constitution! And, in the unspecified rights referenced in the Ninth Amendment
to the federal Constitution, which very specifically pertains to the People of
the United States, not to citizens of the United States, which is also clearly
also the case in the First, Second, Fourth, Ninth and tenth amendments, where
the designation of protected class is specifically the People of the United
States, wherein there is not even one single reference to any such protections
applying to citizens of the United States.

Please write something back to convince me that I am wrong on even one point
that I have addressed!

Is it not clear that these constitutional prohibitions are there to prohibit and
restrain the relevant government from declaring any person to be citizens of the
United States or to be a citizen of Arkansas? Is it not clear that the only
persons that may be required to submit themselves to the authority of the
political entity, Arkansas, are those persons who have freely knowingly
volunteered themselves into the political statue of citizen of the United States
and/or citizen of Arkansas? How and where did I ever volunteer into such status?
Is not the burden of proof clearly upon the artificial political entity,
Arkansas? When was I ever properly informed by the government while I was being
required to attend government indoctrination facilities as a small child, that I
was born free and Sovereign and that I had the natural born right to choose for
myself whether or not I would volunteer to participate in the artificial
political entity, Arkansas or the artificial political entity United States?

Additionally, I contend that it is a fair and reasonable interpretation of these
constitutional involuntary servitude prohibitions, that the Executive Authority
of Arkansas (and of the United States), are obligated to protect me and
similarly situated persons, from the various enforcement officers of Arkansas
and all of the political subdivisions of Arkansas. That is, I contend that the
wording of these provisions clearly acknowledge that there may well be persons
born politically free and Sovereign here on this land, who will NOT choose to
voluntarily submit themselves to the political dominion of any artificial
political entity, and who are therefore, not subject to any of the rules,
regulations or statutes promulgated by any of the various legislatures of the
relevant artificial political entities.

I further contend that persons politically situated such as I, have the natural
right to engage in all manner of activities common to members of our specie,
that is, I have the naturally acquired right to engage in every conceivable
manner of activity common to humans, to engage in commerce with any and every
person who is willing to engage in commerce with me, no matter what their
political status may be . That I have the right to travel to and fro on the
common highways and byways of the communities in which I from time to time find
myself. To purchase and own every manner of property, to seek employment among
other humans who may desire my services or me theirs. That I have the natural
right to seek food, clothing, shelter and every other manner of property common
to the human species as long as I do so in the manner commonly accepted by those
I engage in such intercourse with.

I freely acknowledge that I do not have any right to abuse anyone because of my
Sovereign Political status. I freely acknowledge that I am Sovereign over no
person other than myself. That I have a natural obligation to conduct myself in
a reasonable, courteous and honorable manner. That if I were to cause an injury
or loss to any person that I would have an obligation to make such person whole,
that for me to do otherwise could be considered an act of war. That if I failed
to properly address such issues in a reasonably timely manner that I could be
held accountable in a court of the common law of my peers, (but not in any
statutory court nor subject to any statutory rules of any artificial political
entity).

As I have stated herein above, that I acknowledge the need for a government, and
that such would of necessity be militarily powerful, and therefore very
expensive, how would I suggest that such a defensive force be funded without
taxation, in addition to the other services provided by such government, such as
postal services and road construction, which includes (but is not limited to),
the construction of expensive bridges and water control infrastructure.

I would suggest that the central bank currently known as the Federal Reserve
should be federalized, that its ownership should be assigned to the general
population of the United States, that the interest collected on central bank
loans to private sector borrowers be credited to the four levels of government,
thereby providing a means whereby the interest paid could be recycled into
circulation, thereby replenishing the circulating money supply diminished by the
paying of interest on loans.

I have created a proposed amendment to the Constitution of the United States a
copy of which amendment I am annexing to this instant letter and making a part
hereof by reference, in its entirety.

Be herein advised: I am sending this letter to you via the U.S. Postal Service,
registered mail, Return Receipt required. A certified copy hereof, when
presented together with the aforementioned signed Receipt signature card, shall
be acknowledged by every enforcement officer of Arkansas, and of every political
sub division thereof, that you have not contested my claim of political
Sovereignty, including (but not limited to), my natural born right to travel on
the highboys and byways of Arkansas without any requirement that I have Arkansas
license plates, registration papers, proof of financial responsibility or that I
conform to any other Arkansas statute, rule or regulation.

Please be further advised; I contend that as I claim to be of the Posterity of
the People of July 4, 1776, and that as my antecedents lent their physical
strength to repel the army of King George from the shores of this continent that
my antecedents thereby contributing significantly to the success of that
endeavor, that therefore the United States and Arkansas both singly,
individually and together, have a moral, lawful and Constitutional
responsibility to provide me and other persons similarly situated, with
officially issued documentation similar to the Diplomatic Passports issued to
Foreign Diplomats, which letter and card I may then present to Arkansas
enforcement officers whereupon such officers shall be thereby instructed to
recognize my individual Sovereign status and allow me to proceed on my way
unobstructed by their otherwise proper enforcement activities. That a certified
copy of this letter, when presented together with the signed Postal Signature
receipt card indicating that the original hereof was received by your office in
Little Rock, Arkansas, that such presentation to any and every Arkansas
enforcement officer, Sheriff or deputy sheriff, shall constitute and be
recognized as being such Diplomatic Recognition.

Dear Editor, More on Loss of Gun Rights

In my previous letter I mentioned the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments in
regard to gun laws and gun rights, explaining why citizens of the United States
have no gun rights protection under the Second Amendment.

At the time of the Articles of Confederation, prior to the Constitution, all
those present were politically equal holding the political status of " the
People of the United States" and, as there were then not yet any naturalized
citizens, there were no citizens of the United States, that is, no citizens
under the immediate dominion of the federal government.

This posed a dilemma for the "Former Aristocrats" as they formed up the new
government under the Constitution, how were these "Former Aristocrats" to retain
political control over the general population without arousing the resistance
and ire of the "Former Commoners"? They decided to design a republic under a
CONstitution and write it in such a way as to obfuscate any clear distinction of
political class. A more overt distinction of a political hierarchy would come
years later, after they had created and established the basic foundation; that
is why there were no specified rights in the original CONstitution and that is
why Patrick Henry said, in regard to the original CONstitution, "I smell a rat".

In 1854 a suit was filed by Dred Scott, a Negro slave, against his master, suing
for his freedom. The case rose to the Supreme Court where in 1857 Chief Justice
Tanny wrote:

"The words `people of the United States' and `citizens' are synonymous terms,
and mean the same thing. They both describe the political body who ... form the
sovereignty, and who hold the power and conduct the Government through their
representatives....".

The overall writing of the Dred Scott case clearly indicates that "citizens of
the United States" were then considered to be and held all of the prerogatives
of "the people of the United States". I contend that a fair and unbiased
analysis of how it is that we came to be where we are now, as citizens under the
direct dominion of the federal government of the United States, indicates that
the holding of the Supreme Court in Dred Scott was an intentional setup for both
the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments.

The Thirteenth Amendment unequivocally prohibits involuntary servitude, the
Fourteenth Amendment just as unequivocally enables voluntary servitude. The
Fourteenth Amendment clearly establishes and defines the political class
"citizen of the United States" to be a subservient political status.

Prior to the Thirteenth Amendment, under Dred Scott, every white person born
within the claimed boundaries of the United States was politically equal to
every other such person - there were no persons who were under the direct
dominion of the federal government. The Thirteenth Amendment guaranteed this
superior political position to all persons who took the time to pay attention to
the words actually written in the amendment instead of the sales pitch words
uttered by the politicians who wrote these amendments.

A careful reading of the Fourteenth Amendment will reveal that it does NOT
provide that all persons born in the United States are automatically thereby
citizens thereof, but only those persons who have, in some manner, volunteered
themselves into such subservient status are considered to be such citizens;
moreover, no where has anyone ever contended that the Fourteenth Amendment
negated the prohibition of involuntary servitude as set forth in the Thirteenth
Amendment! This is part of why there are no gun right protections in the Second
Amendment for citizens of the United States!

Eric Williams

Dear Editor,
Gun Rights vs. Gun Laws. There are millions of gun rights advocates who are
upset about the gun laws proposed by this new government in Washington. The gun
rights advocates complain that the Second Amendment protects citizens gun rights
and that the government and the courts are in violation of the Constitution and
the Second Amendment.

I am not so sure; what if it were to be considered that the government and the
courts are actually following the Constitution, what then would constitute a
reasonable explanation of what seems to be a clear violation?

It all has to do with words - the use and meaning of words, especially when used
by politicians, comparing what they say with whet they write. If people have
rights, what are those rights, but what most people miss is any consideration as
to who it is that constitutes the people. If people have rights do those rights
also apply to citizens? What is the difference between a citizen of the United
States and the People of the United States? If this seems like a silly question
to you, then you really need to think again!

A careful study of the wording of the Preamble to the Constitution, the wording
of the First Article of the Constitution, the wording of the Constitution as a
whole, the wording of the thirty some rough draft amendments proposed by the
general population of the Thirteen States back in 1787-1791, the wording of the
Bill of Rights, and the wording of the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments in
1866 and 1868, will reveal some mighty curious contradictions.

The political status, "citizen of the United States" is no where clearly defined
in the Constitution but seems to refer to naturalized persons in Article One of
the Constitution, in the disparity between the age of a candidate for the House
of Representatives and the number of years required to be a citizen of the
United States (25 vs 7). However in 1868 the Fourteenth Amendment clearly
defines a citizen of the United States to be a person subject to the
jurisdiction of the United States. In 1787 there was no suggestion that anyone
then present was under the political dominion of the Federal Government, to have
even suggested such a dominion at that time would have caused another rebellion
similar to the one of 1776.

The wording of the Thirty proposed amendments in reference to gun rights clearly
indicates that the intention of the common persons who wrote them that such
rights were intended to be protected to everyone with no consideration of
political status or citizenship.

Why were there any amendments needed so immediately after the Constitution was
presented? It was because the general population rejected the Constitution and
demanded that protection be added in order for it to be accepted. Why did the
Original writers of the Constitution not include any of such basic protection in
the body of the Constitution?

Read the words of the Preamble, it is "We the People of the United States" who
are securing the blessings of liberty "to themselves and their posterity". Then,
the very same men who wrote the CONstitution rewrote the thirty amendments
proposed by the common persons of the Thirteen States, wherein the "Former
Aristocrats", used the word "People" in the five most critical of the Firs Ten
Amendments. No where in the Bill of Rights" will we find any mention of the
rights of mere citizens!

"Citizen of the United States" is a second class political status with no rights
other than what the CONgress feels inclined to grant, People of the United
States is a superior political status, this is precisely what it is that
constitutes a republican form of government!

When these matters are considered in this manner, everything that is happening
to our freedom makes sense. .Until we come to an understanding of political
statue we are going to continue to be treated as second class persons Please
convince me that I am wrong!

Eric Williams

Yellville

Dear Editor:  Tell Us More.

    I read with great interest the letter to the editor from a Mr. Eric Williams
in the March 12, 2009 edition of the Mountaineer Echo.

    Finally, an author with a clear vision of the money system we suffer,
unfettered by the brain-washing to which we all have been subjected.

    I want to hear more from Mr. Williams as to how we can put into effect his
proposals for change for true freedom. So long as coercive taxation exists, we
shall never be truly free.

    Is it not the purpose of a newspaper editorial page to promulgate an editor's
opinion or the opinions of others which can stimulate the readership to
constructive thought and action?

    Should not important material such as the letter from Mr. Williams be at the
top of the page instead of entertaining fluff pieces using valuable column space
taking top billing?

    Really now, a dead deer-head article on the editorial page?????


    Also, where is the editor's possible commentary on Mr. Williams ideas?

Geoffrey Swanson

Pyatt, Arkansas

Dear Editor,

Eliminate The Stupidity of Taxation

Albert Einstein said that stupidity is when we try to solve the same old problem
over and over using the same failed means as previously. When are we going to
stop the stupidity of giving our government authority it always misuses?

As wonderful as our Federal Constitution is, it has two major flaws (1),
assigning the Congress the authority to borrow money on the credit of the
taxpayers, and (2), assigning the government the power to tax.

How can we claim to be a free people and how can we teach our children that they
too are free, when the very government that we created to protect our freedom
funds itself by pointing its guns at us?

At this time we are in a very serious monetary disaster due to these two issues.
Our central bank, the Federal Reserve, is a private profit taking corporation
that creates all of our money as loan principle, based on the signatures of
borrowers, and then the Fed improperly takes the interest as its totally
unearned profit. Is it not clear that as the Fed has not lent any of its own
money that the Fed has no just claim on these trillions of unearned profits?

It seems clear to me that when the people of the community accept and use the
borrowed paper money, spent into circulation in their community by private
sector borrowers, to purchase all the items the money was created to purchase,
that it is the people of the community who are actually providing the backing
for all those millions of loans and it is the people of the community that have
earned and who should be getting the benefit of all that interest money!

As the Fed merely created the money as a book-keeping entry the Fed has nothing
to lose if the borrower defaults, when the borrower defaults it is the community
that actually takes the loss, not the Fed.

Why don't we federalize the Federal Reserve, take all oversight, control and
access away from the Federal Congress, assign all oversight thereof to the
legislatures of all the fifty states, change the Constitution to eliminate the
two problems listed above, and then credit the interest collected on all
mortgage, business and other loans to private sector borrowers to the
legislatures of the four levels of government, thereby enabling us to eliminate
all taxation at every level of government?

This is very similar to what Benjamin Franklin implemented in the colonies prior
to the revolution.

Eric Williams,

Yellville

Hi Group -  This is "An Assignment", like homework.  I received the
below from one of my regular listeners who has been a follower of my
shows for quite a long while.  When he received this he sent it to me
asking me to respond to this person's negative comments about the
federal Reserve.   It is apparent that my supporter had made a
comment to this person that the Fed is not all bad.

My assignment to you, should you care to accept the challenge,  is to
write your response to each of the 5 statements below.  As a slight
hint, none of the statements below are true representations of the
Federal Reserve.  All of them are common misunderstandings and or,
blame the Fed for problems actually caused by the Congress, not the
Fed.

Please write your responses and sent them to me with the
subject, "Fed Homework Assignment".

This is a test to determine how well I have presented my thoughts on
these issues and also a test on how well you have paid attention.

Cheers,

I'm Eric, WhoRU??

The opening paragraph below is from my group member:

One of my friends sent me this email about the federal reserve, I
just wanted to ask if you can send me a reply with what is good about
the Federal Reserve and about what was sent to me below. Thanks.

Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2009 12:12 PM

Subject: Brice Benefiel also commented on Gene Karl's link...

"I must be one of many who fail to realize the "good things" about
the Federal Reserve.

Are these the "good things" you are talking about?

#1 The Fed which is a private organization (not a Federal entity),
that was formed against the rules of the constitution, allows our
government to print useless paper which devalues our currency by
flooding our monetary system.

# 2 Very little oversight

#3 Poor monetary policy which created unsustainable bubbles to over-
inflate the real estate market and provide predatory and immoral
loans that were inevitably going to default.

#4 Keeping interest rates at historic lows so that consumers and
businesses don't save money which builds capital investment.

#5 Allows for a fractional reserve banking system with no gold
backing so that we can sell and resell debt without having a clue as
to what the value of these toxic securities/derivatives are."