Part IX: Everything is a Contract ...
Part IX is designed as a near-final message, and as a reaffirmation of the information you have already received. At the end of this paper is a list of sources that will keep you busy for some time if you really want to learn. The following letter and the Invisible Contracts it leads into shows exactly how we have been trapped into the United States. It is amazing, and I was as guilty as anyone else when I was younger, but if you ask an American to sign something, all you typically hear is "where?" In the rest of the world, mostly, you hear "what the h -- -for?!" I suppose we have a lot to learn about life.
THE ARMEN CONDO LETTER
George Mercier [A Letter Written In August, 1984]
In August, 1984, Armen Condo, Founder of Your Heritage Protection Agency ("YHPA") was being prosecuted by the Federal Government under numerous tax-related statutes, as well as other collateral charges such as mail fraud.
The YHPA is still (the record holds to this day), the largest organized tax protester group to ever have existed in the United States (with respectful deference to our Founding Fathers and innumerable fellow unsung "tax protester" patriots living and laying their lives on the line in the 1700s for our benefit today). In its heyday in the 1970s/1980s, the YHPA's dues-paying membership reached well into the 20,000 to 30,000 range, before it was ultimately brought into a state of non-existence through the intervention of strongly persuasive federal influences.
The YHPA published a fairly thick newspaper, and continued on in their efforts for several years, with their primary focus based upon the illegitimacy of Federal Reserve Notes, contending thereon that receipt of said Federal Reserve Notes did not constitute "income," therefore, no one receiving said notes was liable under federal income tax statutes. Although additional proprietary "tax protester" positions were routinely addressed, the YHPA's primary focus remained centered around Federal Reserve Notes.
Curiously, as a side note, individuals choosing to join the YHPA (usually in the context of a dinner/seminar setting), were guided through a "joining process" at the conclusion of the seminar, where dual ID photos were taken (the YHPA kept one photo, and you received the other, using a dual-photo camera similar to the dual-photo cameras used at your local Department of Motor Vehicles or local passport photo vendor) and slick, professional looking "ID cards" were processed on the spot and given to each new member at that time. In hindsight, the stated reasons given at these dinner/seminars with respect to the "necessity" of having/creating a photo ID card were rather specious at best, and in fact, there was some additional hindsight talk that perhaps the YHPA was a Federal "Tax Protester" Sting Operation all along,, designed to attract and then identify. [For example, in the U.S.S.R., the KGB is known to have secretly "created" (sponsored is more like it) -- various protester groups for the sole purpose of throwing out some attractive philosophy designed to attract a certain type of individual, and then having "extracted" those individuals from society, and having thus identified them -- then shutting down the organization and arresting the members. This practice is a utilization of the principle known as the "Doctrine of False Opposition."]
After all, it is rather suspicious, if not ironic, that an organization purporting to be highly critical of "government," and taking a relatively "radical" approach to same (non-filing tax protesters "sign up here ..."), and having an orientation favoring the individual over government in general, would in fact so closely emulate "Big Brother" tactics such as requiring a photo ID card for all of its new members, and for reasons that would not normally hold up to intellectual scrutiny or inspection except for the fact that within the context of the actual joining process, those people were not concerning themselves at the time with such incongruities, but were instead swept up in the excitement and impetus of the "I'm Mad As Hell and I'm Not Going To Take Anymore" sentiment generated at typical YHPA recruitment seminars.
Against this backdrop, George Mercier wrote a thoughtful advisory letter to Armen Condo in August of 1984, seeking to correctively alter the course Condo was then pursuing vis-a-vis his federal case, with the objective of the letter being oriented towards keeping Armen Condo out of a federal cage. And with respect to Armen Condo, the letter was a wash, as Armen Condo was highly unreceptive to its contents (being in an unteachable state of mind, and so he rejected it "in toto"); however, the letter did not stop there with Armen Condo. In fact, it somehow "exploded" into the general patriot pipeline/network, and was widely copied and circulated all across the country. (Although Armen Condo reacted adversely to the letter, it found a very receptive and appreciative audience amongst patriots across the nation).
One such copy of the letter found its way into the hands of Frank May, who subsequently wrote an intelligent and thoughtful letter to George Mercier, seeking an expansion of the enticing data contained in the Armen Condo Letter. Expansion he wanted -- expansion he got, because George Mercier in turn wrote a reply letter to Frank May -- a 745-page letter, which then became a privately published book entitled "Invisible Contracts - The Frank May Letter" (dated December 31, 1985).
So, without further commentary, what follows is the original letter to Armen Condo, the letter which started it all ....
Dear Mr. Condo:
I just received your periodical "YHPA" for March, 1984, which I had requested from your organization for the purpose of contemplating subscribing to it.
In analyzing the contents of your magazine, I found that the United States is apparently trying to:
In trying to get a feel for your sentiments towards the United States for doing these things to you, I detected underlying feelings of anxiety and some resentment on your part. Therefore, what I have to say will only be of value to you to the extent that you are in a teachable attitude. I know that I am taking a shot in the dark by telling you things which follow, but I think it is important that someone inform you why you are on the "left side" of the issues and why and how the United States is on the "right side" of the issues -- and that the Federal Judge is merely enforcing private agreements that you continue to maintain in effect with the U.S. Secretary of the Treasury.
By the time you receive this letter in August, the Judge may already have taken some action on the government's petition for a restraining order against you -- I do not know the present status of that action, but the information you need to know will be important to you either way the Judge rules. If the restraining order has been granted, I can show you how to get it reversed next January.
Before I identify the private agreement you continue to maintain with the Secretary of the Treasury (which agreement places you into a written, equity relationship with the United States), there is a fundamental principle underlying American jurisprudence you must be aware of as background material to understand what follows. This principle is a hybrid corollary and consistent extension of the evidentiary doctrine that specificity in evidence will always overrule generalities in evidence, even when they are in direct conflict with each other. For example, the statement by one witness to a crime that ....
I saw a woman run around the corner, it wasn't a man ...." (and therefore the defendant, who is a man, isn't the criminal).
That statement would be overruled by this statement from another witness ....
"The person I saw run around the corner had long hair, a beard, and something like a tatoo on his neck ...."
Hence, conflicts in testimony are always resolved by giving the greater weight to the most specific statements. This is also the way equity grievances in contract disputes are settled -- the most specific, detailed clause governing the disputed circumstance is construed to be the statement meant to govern the disputed circumstances -- even though broader, more general statements can be found in the contract and may favor the other party.
The principle that applies to your relationship with the King (the King being the United States -- the Constitution being essentially a renamed enactment of English Common Law as it was at that time, with only additional restrainments being placed on the King) is the principle that private agreements will always overrule the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Thus, specific agreements governing individual circumstances will always overrule broad general clauses found in the Constitution. Or expressed in other words, it is irrational to allow someone to enter into a private agreement with someone, and then allow him to take a clause out of the Constitution -- off point and out of context -- and allow him to take that clause and use it to weasel, twist and squirm his way out of the agreement, all while retaining the financial gain the agreement gave him in the first place. This is irrational, and judges won't allow it.
For example, let's say that I hired you to come work for me as a computer design engineer for my computer company. When you started work for me you signed an agreement agreeing that all company information that you were exposed to while employed here, and all knowledge you acquired regarding impending new products and technologies being worked on here -- you had agreed not to disclose, release or disseminate any such confidential information to any other person for a five year period after you left my employ for any reason. So let's say that you have now left my company, and you start publishing and disseminating information you learned while here to my competitors. Your excuse for violating the agreement you signed earlier with me is that ....
"Well, the First Amendment says I got freedom of speech and press ...."
So now I take you in front of a judge and ask for a restraining order. Question: Does the First Amendment apply? The answer is no, it doesn't. Restraining order granted. Reason: Private agreements overrule the Bill of Rights. In other words, one does not get to use the Bill of Rights to weasel out of private agreements, while retaining the gain that the agreement gave him in the first place. In the back of the judge's mind is the following logic:
"Well, Mr. Condo ... you entered into an agreement with Mr. Mercier to be an engineer for him, and under which you experienced financial gain or profit. Now that you don't feel like honoring the agreement any longer, you want to take a clause out of the Bill of Rights to work your way out of your agreement with Mr. Mercier, all while keeping the money he gave you under the agreement by working for him. This is irrational. Restraining order will have to be granted."
Another example is this: Say that you are a convict sitting in a prison. The warden calls you upstairs and offers to let you go free if you sign an agreement. That agreement calls for parole checking, warrantless entry of your residence at any time, and you agree not to carry any guns. You sign the agreement and clear out of prison. A month later your car is stopped for speeding and a gun is seen half covered in the back seat. The officer charges you with possession of a concealed weapon. You argue Second Amendment rights during pretrial motions. The trial judge ignores your motions and sets a trial date. Question: Is the judge a fifth column commie pinko? No, he isn't; he is merely enforcing private agreements. Here you signed an agreement and you experienced a gain (premature freedom). Now you want to take the Second Amendment, and use that to weasel and twist your way out of an agreement, all while retaining the gain (freedom) that the agreement gave you. This is irrational, and judges will not allow it, properly so.
You probably have heard it said that Federal Judges will tell defendants and counsel in Section 7203 -- Willful Failure To File criminal trials that ....
"... the Constitution does not apply here."
That statement shocks most people up a wall -- but it is an accurate and correct statement. The Judge will never tell you why, though. Of all of the different Judges that I know who have blurted out that statement, none of the criminal defendants have ever pressed the Judge for an explanation as to why the Constitution does not apply. The reason why the Constitution does not apply is because the Judge is merely enforcing private agreements the defendant signed with the Secretary of the Treasury. The Judge is not a fifth column commie pinko. The agreement the Judge has in front of him is not the defendant's 1040 or the defendant's W-2/4; those are merely declarations of facts and no profit or gain is experienced by them. The real reason is as follows:
When new Federal Judges are hired (nominated by the President and later confirmed by the Senate after hearings by the Senate Judiciary Committee -- after they go through that hiring procedure in Washington -- they are taken back to Washington and are taken into private seminars that are sponsored by the United States Department of Justice. It is in these seminars that new Federal Judges are taught and trained "how to" manage their criminal proceedings so as to avoid reversible error, i.e., absence of counsel and trial procedure, etc. They are taught and trained what the Supreme Court of the United States wants for perfecting due process. They are given Supreme Court cases to study -- and sitting next to that new Judge in these seminars is their Appeals Court Justice (who will be auditing appeals coming out of their trial court), confirming that the information being taught and presented by Justice Department lawyers is true and correct and that "Things will be done this way."
They are given a "Bench Book" to take with them, giving the new Judge guidance on handling problems as they arise on the bench. Finally, the interesting part comes: They are taught how to manage "Tax Protester" trials -- violations of Title 26. Federal Judges have been instructed that the Supreme Court ruled in 1896 in a case called Davis vs. Elmira Savings, 161 U.S. 275 that banks are instrumentality’s of the Congress. In other words, the interstate system of banks is the private property of the King. This means that any profit or gain anyone experienced by a bank/thrift and loan/employee credit union -- any regulated financial institution carries with it -- as an operation of law -- the identical same full force and effect as if the King himself created the gain. So as an operation of law, anyone who has a depository relationship, or a credit relationship, with a bank, such as checking, savings, CD's, charge cards, car loans, real estate mortgages, etc., are experiencing profit and gain created by the King -- so says the Supreme Court.
At the present time, Mr. Condo, you have bank accounts (because you accept checks as payment for books and subscriptions), and you are very much in an EQUITY RELATIONSHIP with the King.
In the words of Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter:
"Equity is brutal, but we are merely enforcing agreements."
Or in other words, Judges don't like the idea of being thought upon as being mean gestapo agents -- doing the dirty work for the King. They consider themselves as being struck between a rock and a hard spot -- being asked to enforce agreements and without being given any valid reason as to why you should be let out of it -- other than you just don't feel like being incarcerated.
So what happens during these Willful Failure to File trials is that:
"Well, Judge, the Fourth Amendment says ...."
"Judge, the Fifth Amendment says I don't gotta ...."
Are you beginning to see why the Judge is prone to experience frustration and blurt out "the Constitution does not apply here!"?
Meanwhile, the Judge is ignoring all Constitutionally related arguments and denying all motions.
If you would go back to your bank and ask the manager to show you your signature card again, in small print you will see the words:
"The undersigned hereby agrees to abide by all of the Rules of this Bank."
Have you ever asked to see a copy of the bank rules? If you have, you will read and find out that you agreed to abide by all of the administrative rulings of the Secretary of the Treasury, among many other things.
What is really happening in these Willful Failure to File prosecutions is that the Judge is operating on the penal clause to a civil contract. And since you have agreed to be bound by Title 26, what difference does it make whether or not Title 26 was ever enacted by the Congress? A contract does not have to be enacted by Congress -- in whole or in part -- in order to make it enforceable.
As for the actual taxation itself, what happens is that the King creates a "juristic personality" at the time you open your bank account. And it is that juristic personality (its income and assets) that the King's Agents are "excising" back to the King. But in any event, the taxing power of the Congress attaches by contract or use of the King's property. The Congress does not have the jurisdiction to use the police powers to raise revenue.
That is the proper way (the ideal Alice in Wonderland way actually) to collect taxes, and that is the procedure by which Federal Judges are enforcing the law -- not by ruling over gestapo Star Chambers.
(I have some reservations on the modus operandi of Federal Judges to the extent that the Supreme Court mentions over and over again that:
"Justice must satisfy the appearance of justice." [Offutt vs. U.S., 348 U.S. 11] and that when a man is thoroughly convinced that he is on the right side of an issue -- a man like Irwin Schiff -- that justice has not satisfied the appearance of justice unless the criminal defendant is aware that he did wrong. And on these tax protester trials, that requires a sentencing hearing lecture by the judge to the defendant on why and where the defendant did err. So I disagree with the modus operandi of Federal Judges to this extent).
I am not going to spend any more time on this subject just right now -- other than you should be cognizant by this point in the letter that you are on the left side of the issue -- and that the King's Agents are not working a great evil by going around the countryside asking people to stop defiling themselves by dishonoring their own agreements with the King.
So, in conclusion on this issue, if the 16th Amendment were somehow repealed tomorrow morning at 9:00am -- it would not change a single thing (other than the IRS would have to start giving people a correct presentation of the law to justify the taxes). The IRS and the excise tax on juristic persons would continue on as usual.
As it pertains to the proposed restraining order the King's Agents are trying to get against you and your alter ego, please get a copy of the Complaint filed by U.S. Attorney Charles Magnuson dated January 31, 1984 -- and turn to page 9. Examine the last five words in paragraph "b":
"... under the Court's equity powers."
This petition by the United States for a restraining order against you is legitimate to the extent that you are in written contractual equity with the King.
When you trace back the genealogy of your signature on your bank card, you will find that you agreed to be bound by Title 26, and under Section 7202 you agreed not to disseminate any fraudulent tax advice. And the concept that Federal Reserve Notes are not taxable instruments of commerce -- for any reason -- when the person has a written agreement with the King saying that FRN's are taxable -- this concept is in fact fraudulent.
I would encourage you, Mr. Condo, to prove me wrong. You can prove me wrong by asking the Judge:
"Please identify the instrument I signed, Judge, which creates an attachment of equity jurisdiction between the United States and me."
The Federal Judge probably is not going to want to disclose what document it is that you executed which created the attachment of equity jurisdiction. They have been asked not to let the cat out of the bag. The IRS handles this "bank account = equity relationship" on a military style "need-to-know" only type basis. You can file a Mandamus in the Circuit Court of Appeals or petition for a Subpoena Duces Tecum returnable against the U.S. Attorney to compel discovery of what it is that you signed that created the attachment of equity jurisdiction the King's Agents are now acting under in trying to get a restraining order against you. This type of equity jurisdiction always attaches by written consent.
If this restraining order has already been granted by now -- then get rid of your bank accounts and file a petition for reversal next January -- your arguments being then that you are not in an equity relationship with the King anymore. Then the First Amendment would apply then, but it does not apply to you now since you are in an equity relationship with the King -- and private agreements overrule the Bill of Rights.
END OF LETTER
Everything you sign is a Contract. But more importantly, everything is a contract, including your relationship with your wife, your children, your neighbors, and, most important of all, with your Creator -- The One True God. The following files contain numerous sources/case law for verification and expansion of the above letter.
To better understand contracts, the rest of George Mercier’s "Invisible Contracts" can be found at: http://www.discoverynet.com/initiative/march98%20article.htm
The Contents of Invisible Contracts:
Help file 14,849 Bytes
0. Letter to Armen Condo 22,732 Bytes
1. Introduction [p. 1-88] 291,960 Bytes
2. Third Party Interference with a Contract [p. 89-130] 134,115 Bytes
3. Bank Accounts [p. 131-193] 195,644 Bytes
4. The Story of Banking [p. 194-228] 93,609 Bytes
5. The Employment Contract [p. 229-299] 189,497 Bytes
6. Admiralty Jurisdiction [p. 300-385] 240,238 Bytes
7. The Citizenship Contract [p. 386-434] 165,822 Bytes
8. Federal Reserve Notes [p. 435-477] 103,170 Bytes
9. Insurance Programs [p. 478-479] 3,199 Bytes
10. Federal Licensing Programs [p. 480-481] 5,067 Bytes
11. State Created Juristic Benefits [p. 482-531] 146,603 Bytes
12. Government Enforcement of Commercial Interests [p. 532-553] 51,119 Bytes
13. The Residency Contract [p. 553-565] 36,241 Bytes
14. An Endless List [p. 566-661] (TEXT UNAVAILABLE)
15. Epilogue [p. 662-745] (TEXT UNAVAILABLE)
This next section is in the way of a "reminder" of what it means to expect that "someone else" is going to "fix" America ... for you.
Congress' Red Army Caucus -- part 2
The Internet has been buzzing for the last week or two with discussions and frantic e-mails of concern about Congress' so-called "Progressive Caucus."
I'm a little surprised, since I first wrote about this group of socialist subversives back in July -- warning that its approximately 60 members, including Maxine Waters, Barney Frank and John Conyers, represent a large, unyielding voting and lobbying bloc pushing the government inevitably toward the goals of its Democratic Socialists of America sponsors. I referred to the group then and again now as Congress' Red Army Caucus. No other shorthand description could possibly do them justice.
Think about it. There are at least five Bolsheviks on the House Judiciary Committee. Do you think anything -- any evidence -- could ever persuade them to break with their party line against impeachment of William Jefferson Clinton. Imagine the outcry if there were five members belonging to some other extremist hate group -- American Nazi Party, Ku Klux Klan, etc.
Yet, there's no moral difference. The Democratic Socialists' goal is clear from their own literature. The goal is Communism. Never mind that the history of that system is littered with more death, oppression and destruction than any other "ism." Never mind that it has been discredited everywhere it has been tried. The DSA believes the right people just haven't been in charge. They want to try it here -- in the United States of America.
The Progressive Caucus and congressional members are a big part of their game plan. The Democratic Socialists actively seek out "celebrities" for out reach purposes. They use them to recruit -- to achieve mainstream credibility.
"While it's certainly true that one can't build a mass socialist movement simply by recruiting celebrities, they are very important in legitimizing both the organization and the concept of socialism," explains an organizational document geared toward its youth program. "When you tell someone that Ron Dellums, Barbara Eisenreich, Gloria Steinem, Wimpy Winpisinger and Ed Asner are members," it helps take the horns off of socialism.
Furthermore, the Democratic Socialists' chief organizing goal is to work within the Democratic Party.
"Stress our Democratic Party strategy and electoral work," the same document explains. "The Democratic Party is something the public understands, and association with it takes the edge off. Stressing our Democratic Party work will establish some distance from the radical subculture and help integrate you to the milieu of the young liberals."
Yet, that radical subculture is alive and well within the Democratic Socialists of America and its affiliate group, the Progressive Caucus of Congress.
Take the song list at the DSA Website. It features, first and foremost, "The Internationale," the worldwide anthem of Communism and socialism. Another classic is "Red Revolution" sung to the tune of "Red Robin." Here are the lyrics for that little ditty: "When the Red Revolution brings its solution along, along, there'll be no more lootin' when we start shootin' that Wall Street throng." Then there's that memorable old ballad, "Are You Sleeping, Bourgeoisie?" Never heard that one? You haven't been in the congressional Progressive Caucus, lately, I guess: "Are you sleeping? Are you sleeping? Bourgeoisie, Bourgeoisie. And when the revolution comes, We'll kill you all with knives and guns, Bourgeoisie, Bourgeoisie."
Gee, imagine what the totalitarians in the Progressive Caucus would do if they found that kind of extremist "hate speech" on the Website of a right-wing congressional caucus.
Make no mistake. These folks are revolutionaries. They may dress in suit and tie. They may not carry guns and bandoleers. But the Red Army Caucus in Congress is at the vanguard of a Communist movement that has no respect for the U.S. Constitution, individual rights and the freedoms America takes for granted today.
Their rhetoric is a little more sophisticated at times than Stalin's, but the goals are the same -- a dictatorship of the proletariat, that oh, so elusive worker's paradise, re-education camps, you get the picture.
In one article on the DSA site, a "fundamental restructuring of our socio-economic order" is demanded.
"While the freedoms of democratic capitalism are gains of popular struggle to be cherished, democratic socialists argue that the values of liberal democracy can only be fulfilled when the economy as well as the state is democratically controlled."
Gee, I can hardly wait. (Author's Note: As can I, but to understand this, you must first understand "democracy". I doubt the writer of this piece does. – David)
And, from another source:
"The Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) is the largest socialist organization in the United States, and the principal U.S. affiliate of the Socialist International (also in Francais and Espanol). DSA's members are building progressive movements for social change while establishing an openly socialist presence in American communities and politics." Please note the phrase "openly socialist presence in American communities AND politics." They go on to write: "We invite you to support the campaign by adding your name to the list of signers of the Pledge for Economic Justice.
In conjunction with the Campaign DSA is working with the Congressional Progressive Caucus, a network of more than 50 progressive members of the U.S. House of Representatives ....
"The Progressive Caucus of the U.S. House of Representatives is made up of 58 members of the House. The Caucus works to advance economic and social justice through sponsoring legislation that reflects its purpose. The Caucus also works with a coalition of organizations, called the Progressive Challenge, to bring new life to the progressive voice in U.S. politics."... and it is assumed, to undermine, abrogate and destroy the Constitution of the United States to which those 58 congressional members have sworn a sacred oath.
"Who are these socialist co-conspirators? You'll recognize many of them as the "usual suspects" as purveyors of petulance. Bernard Sanders from Vermont is the chairman, and Maxine Waters of California is on the Executive Committee. I'll include the full list at the end, but this should be a wake up call for all Americans, and all who still cherish freedom and liberty.
Socialism comes in a wide variety of flavors ... all bad. Communism has jokingly been called "socialism in a hurry." Mussolini tried out fascism, a variation on the same theme. The Nationalist Socialist Workers Party was the Nazism effort. Now John Conyers, Barney Frank, Maxine Waters and their co-conspirators rabid to defend the indefensible are working to introduce and legitimize an American abomination. The Democratic Socialists of America.
Here is the list (provided by The Democratic Socialists of America) of Socialists in Congress. You are strongly encouraged to call, fax, email, and raise hell. While you are still allowed to do so.
Rep Eni Faleomavaega, AL
Rep Earl Hilliard, AL
Rep Ed Pastor, AZ
Rep Xavier Becerra, CA
Rep George Brown, CA
Rep Julian Dixon, CA
Rep Bob Filner, CA
Rep George Miller, CA
Rep Nancy Pelosi, CA
Rep Pete Stark, CA
Rep Esteban Torres, CA
Rep Maxine Waters, CA
Rep Henry Waxman, CA
Rep Lynn Woolsey, CA
Rep Diane DeGette, CO
Rep Eleanor Norton, DC
Rep Corrien Brown, FL
Rep Alcee Hastings, FL
Rep Carrie Meek, FL
Rep John Lewis, GA
Rep Cynthia McKinney, GA
Rep Neil Abercrombie, HI
Rep Patsy Mink, HI
Rep Danny Davis, IL
Rep Lane Evans, IL
Rep Luis Guiterrez, IL
Rep Jesse Jackson, IL
Rep Julia Carson, IN
Rep Barney Frank, MA
Rep Jim McGovern, MA
Rep John Olver, MA
Rep John Tierney, MA
Rep David Bonior, MI
Rep John Conyers, MI
Rep Lynn Rivers, MI
Rep Bernie Thompson, MS
Rep Melvin Watts, NC
Rep Donald Payne, NJ
Rep Maurice Hinchey, NY
Rep John LaFalace, NY
Rep Jerold Nadler, NY
Rep Major Owens, NY
Rep Charles Rangel, NY
Rep Jose Serrano, NY
Rep Nydia Velazquez, NY
Rep Sherrod Brown, OH
Rep Marcy Kaptur, OH
Rep Louis Stokes, OH
Rep Peter DeFazio, OR
Rep Elizabeth Furse, OR
Rep William Coyne, PA
Rep Chaka Fattah, PA
Rep Carlos Romero-Barcelo, PR
Rep Robert Scott, VA
Rep Berard Sanders, VT
Rep James McDermott, WA
The secret to understanding the above is the fact that none of those members listed faced a "re-election" or "election" in which their membership in this organization was an issue. All of those listed are so-called democrats, but neither their so-called republican nor any other candidate made a campaign issue out of this. Why?
The only way that this many candidates can survive such an issue is because the decision has been made that the republican party will not make an issue of this -- by the head of the republican party. Or are we to assume that WE know about this, but the republican leadership does not? Oh, and the republican leadership in America means, among other things, George Bush, so if you really think that the next president of the United States, Mr. George Bush, Jr., will make a difference, you might want to think again.
Any competent campaign that used the fact of this membership against any of the above listed members of Congress would lead to their defeat in America. Probably by a very wide margin, with the possible exception being in New York City. That they were not defeated, simply means that those in power in the republican party did not want them defeated. Think about this the next time you are tempted to enter back into the old mindset that Washington, DC, is somehow "fixable" or that "Constitutional rule" is best for America. Or that your voting "can make a ‘difference.’"
Resources for those serious about learning:
This is Richard McDonald’s "State Citizen" information center. there are many files in this database that are vital for full understanding of the World Bankster’s plans. There is a directory of files by George Mercier as well. Visit this site and fill your memory with information. The documents on "British Colony" works by Lysander Spooner and many other subjects are available at this site
The file called "Is America Still a British Colony" contains the Treaty of Paris, the Treaty of Ghent, Cornwallis Capitulation at Yorktown, the Virginia Colony Charter and an in-depth analysis of how these treaties have been interpreted under Article VI, Paragraph II of the Constitution. There is also a listing of ratification dates for the original Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution. The Titles of Nobility Amendment revoked the American Citizenship of all attorneys and judges who took the foreign titles of "Esquire" and "Your Honour". Please remember, when the Constitution held all contracts to be valid, the charters which were issued by the King of England in the establishment of the colonies are contracts, wherein the King receives certain benefits (returns on "investment) for having granted a charter (to lands he did not own, but who is quibbling) to one or more of his subjects. Were we ever taught in school that these charters are still valid? We did not need to be, because the language of the Constitution is plain on the face of it, once you begin to read it instead of listening to others "explain" what it means.
There is a wealth of information in this web site. I suggest you use it.
Mr. Forest Glen Durand has an electronically reproduced copy of a Certified copy of the Thirteenth Amendment, as published by the State of Maine in 1825. There is more information on the Thirteenth Amendment on this website than on any other that I have visited.
Hundreds of files for the Sovereign. There are court cases and much more. Many of the files on Sovereignty are useful to the readers of Strategic Withdrawal, once you understand the basics. Without the understanding of your relationship with the government through bankruptcy, many of these files would only bring more grief.
Dave is a 100% normal American that began his website as an expression of disgust at some of the things that the government was doing. He felt that it was his right and obligation as an American to correct the wrongs. Dave had thought that the government was just a little off base but the problems were still fixable. The more that Dave learned, the angrier he got, until he read Strategic Withdrawal. Now, Dave knows that there is a remedy, a personal, peaceful remedy, even though the problems with the government are so deep seated that they are not fixable.
This is a book by Eustace Mullins, and it is a good book. I suggest everyone read it, and most every other book Eustace Mullins has written, including Murder By Injection.
If you are a Christian, you need this site, if not for you and your children, supposing you may have none, then for your friends and relatives.
Copies of the alleged Warrant that was not served on the Branch Davidians. Virtually complete trial conscripts, etc. Of course, there is a lot more to this story than we were ever told.
Excellent music for those who understand what is going on.
A specialist website. Title 26 U.S. Code is also available in other places.
Planning on taking a trip? Leaving a paper trial? Getting lost?
These maps show where the European Aristocracy wants us to live. The European Aristocracy has determined that the population of the earth must be reduced and moved into these pre-defined areas. In order to understand the jargon of people like "Lord" Albert Gore, this information is essential. All of the environmental terrorism of Greenpeace, the Sierra Club, and like environmental activists serves the agenda of the global elitists (or they would not be "funded"). I know some people who are involved in what I call the "save the whales" activities. Most of these people are sincerely concerned about the world in which we live, but they have focused upon the result of the greed of the European Aristocracy and not upon the guiding force of that same aristocracy, Baron Rothschild. To Rothschild and his minions we are but boisterous and hungry playthings that eat too much food and take up too much energy. In other words, there are too many of us to be easily controlled. Most of us are dispensable and must be eliminated. This Website shows part of their plan for accomplishing their goal.
This is the area near America's southern border that has been deeded over to the United Nations. If you doubt that Congress knows exactly what they are doing, read these files. Who does he really represent, be he republican or democratic? And what is a representative? Is there a reason why this name was used for those in Congress? Could it have anything to do with establishing your standing, or lack thereof, because these men are not your "agents?" You might want to think about this, and we will discuss it more later.
I also hope you are at least beginning to accept that the above, and everything in these reports which is evil, is a result of the Constitution -- and not in spite of it. We, the People, keep forgetting the over-riding principal of the Constitution; it is the law of the land, correct? But in what regard?
Only in the regard that it is a restriction on the actions of the King. The Constitution is a modern day Magna Carta -- nothing else. It has nothing to do with the people of America! It was for the collection of the tax that many in the colonies believed the King had a right to, and for keeping some connection with him, that people could have voluntarily. Remember that famous line from the IRS -- the one about voluntary compliance? And it does not even matter if you accept the evidence of the connection to the King of England, because if some entity makes your law, it is your King! And perhaps that explains Christ and His Law a little, and why He is Named King. And why the so-called churches work so hard to convince you that His Law no longer applies, so they can extract a benefit from you through acting as an agent for the state, which makes their "law." Just as the state issues their "marriage licenses."
Our problems begin when we go to "them" and accept something from these minions of the King. It does not matter if that "something" we accept was designed to entice us into the "request", because the instant we sign anything bearing the King’s name, we agree to accept his law -- in it’s entirety. That’s the purpose of the signature required on every form, and why there are such vague terms on all of the forms about acceptance and terms, always leading back to "other" legislation which leads to "other" legislation which leads to "other" legislation .... Think about that the next time you sign the "registration" for your children in the "public" school, or register to vote, or .... Well, the list is rather endless, isn't it.
A great source for most Executive Orders, from 1945 forward, and more to come. Other information in addition.
Some of the most comprehensive information on tax issues:
The future you ...
The person you are to become, is always watching the person you are right now. The image you have of yourself tomorrow, depends on the actions you watch yourself take today. The confidence with which you live next month, will be based on the integrity of your actions this week.
You can hide and conceal things from just about anyone, but the person you are to become is always watching. And that person's opinion of you will play a major role in your life.
Will you be proud tomorrow of what you did today? Will your future self find strength in your present actions and attitudes? Will you learn from your mistakes and from your successes? The you of tomorrow is watching, waiting, hoping and depending upon the you of today.
Live each moment like someone is watching Because someone is watching, someone who can make you or break you. Live so that the person you become in the future can look back with gratitude and admiration at the person you are right now. -- Ralph Marston
Now that you have finished Part IX (not that Part IX can ever be finished with the sources listed!), please proceed to Part X. Part X is the final paper of the first section, and it is a gateway. You will see what I mean.
"We have staked the whole future of American civilization, not upon the power of government, far from it. We have staked the future ... upon the capacity of each and all of us to govern ourselves, to sustain, according to the ten commandments of God.
-James Madison, 1778
In Part II, I mentioned that there was a solution. It is necessary for everyone to understand Invisible Contracts for the solution to become visible -- for the solution is neither a group nor a national solution; it is for individuals only. And this is how we will change America: one man and one woman at a time.
Earlier, I mentioned that I work with Gamaliel Ministries, and with their book, Strategic Withdrawal, the Peaceful Solutions Manual. The title of this book tells you what it is about, as it contains the forms, case law sites and statutory authority for canceling all contracts with the "state" and withdrawing with all of your assets intact.
What this accomplishes is to make you invisible to the bureaucrats, and it works. There are many people all across America who have used this book and similar works to obtain the freedom from fear that so many seek. Is this book the only, or the best, solution? No, to both questions. But, it is the best that I know of by a wide margin, and I looked for a very long time before I found the answers I was seeking in this book. And I mean I looked in case law and in many patriot sites trying to find the information available -- to the best of my knowledge -- nowhere else in a comparable or in as easily understood and used package.
Do I recommend the book -- yes. And not just to use the forms; it is an excellent source for more learning, and you will find, as you read it, that much of the fear you have now will melt away. I had no fear to begin with, as I had solved that problem long ago, but I certainly can recognize that value in this work. And this information is different from mine; the book works well with my information, but is not a duplication.
If you wish to know more about this book, please request Strategic Withdrawal in a Nutshell, and I will send it right out to you. If you do decide to purchase it, I would appreciate it if you would purchase it through me. The cost is $303.20, and the cost includes personal consultation time with the author. This is necessary for the correction of forms and research into the application of law in the various states.
As I briefly went over in Part IV, I work with a number of other groups who offer offshore banking, offshore trusts and foreign corporations as well as pure trusts and Corporation Soles (Oversoul) for asset protection in America. I think you are now beginning to see why this is necessary. This is what such things provide:
Become lien proof, levy proof, and judgement proof.
Protect your assets through the use of offshore financial tools.
Keep all of the $$$$$$$$ you earn.
Dramatically reduce or eliminate tax liabilities (and this includes the property tax on your home).
Totally eliminate probate expenses. Mostly, however, these tools provide you with what is necessary to become a sovereign in America, and stop acting as a disobedient slave to "the state."
There are other benefits as well, not the least of which is peace of mind and a re-connection with the Law of our forefathers. If you want more information, please E-mail me and I would be happy to help you in anyway possible.
One other note: ; the last hurricane which hit Mexico eliminated the village where I bought my organic coffee. Literally, it no longer exists. As of April of 1999, I no longer sell coffee wholesale, as I simply do not have a large, reliable source. This means I now depend, in large part since most of my coffee business was wholesale, on sales of Strategic Withdrawal, donations, and the work I do for Gamaliel Ministries on their Seminars and the Symposiums in Mexico. I want you to understand that in these instances, I now have a financial stake, and being human, this will change how I approach these things. Not much, I hope, but such is reality.
God Bless, David
Return to Table of Contents for