<![CDATA[Gold is Money - The Premier Gold and Silver Forum -- Goldismoney - Beginner's Forum]]> http://www.goldismoney2.com/ A moderated forum for new users to read and learn. en Thu, 23 May 2013 08:06:33 GMT vBulletin 60 http://www.goldismoney2.com/images/scarletrush/misc/rss.png <![CDATA[Gold is Money - The Premier Gold and Silver Forum -- Goldismoney - Beginner's Forum]]> http://www.goldismoney2.com/ How to place liens http://www.goldismoney2.com/showthread.php?46045-How-to-place-liens&goto=newpost Wed, 01 May 2013 01:36:37 GMT Peace Maker Society has met with various experts in the collection field. These are the instructions we use ourselves at this point. Do your own due dilligence to ensure this process is correct for your area. We are always happy to hear about anything you may have to add to our process. :) Enjoy... Peace Maker Society has met with various experts in the collection field. These are the instructions we use ourselves at this point. Do your own due dilligence to ensure this process is correct for your area. We are always happy to hear about anything you may have to add to our process. :) Enjoy and share freely for free always. Do not alter content.

How to place liens

1. Bill generation via fee schedule list proof of activation / affidavit

2. Send letter (release of information)

a. Police – incident number, statements given (video and audio), copies of all paperwork involved in incident such as property admittance, badge numbers. If you already have this information from any incident, skip to step three.

3. Send bills and a letter describing the offence to full details (outlining liability and legality or law, quote necessary acts and statutes if applicable and make sure fee schedule is included) or fee schedule activation. [send existing fee schedule and updated version] {Make sure to add PST and GST on the bill}

4. Wait 45 days after sending the bill (now you start filing your liens). Do the UCC filing online (you decide how long the lien is for). When you are filing the lien you will want to include any and all information on the person you are filing the lien on (their corporation information, incident numbers, organize with number so it is easily referenceable for the judge). To file the lien, you take your UCC paperwork to counter D-100 at 408 York and that enters the documents into the judge’s pocket. {Double-check all paperwork a few times as there is no room for mistakes}

5. Judges pocket is reviewed on the court’s docket, and provided you have done it properly, the lien should be filed in the day he reviews it (Lien is on legal property, this is why we do it this way through the courts as the entities we are billing are under that jurisdiction even though we are not.) [The courts will notify the defendant of the lien.]{Double-check}

6. Once the judgement is in, record payment or non-payment. If not paid, re-file at the same counter as before.

7. After re-filing, judge can grant equity in the person or their property after this step.

Note: Court pays all liens to Minister of Finance, and he pays it to you.

General instructions:

Everything that is sent (from letters, to bills, etc) needs to be sent through registered mail, keep the proof of service and also keep the online signature. That is your proof that you have done due process correctly.

All documents must state at the bottom “errors and emissions excluded”

For liens under $500,000 it is a small courts matter

There are free seminars available in many places on the UCC and how to file liens correctly. This is important because there are many types of liens. Example: contractor lien, property lien, etc.

All bills and liens are against the signatory to the organization or agency and should reference the person or agent number involved in the incident which created the ability to bill.

Liens should include all associated costs (lien filing fees, certified mail expenses, or if you consult lawyers, etc).

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Peace...10188199033334 ]]> Goldhedge http://www.goldismoney2.com/showthread.php?46045-How-to-place-liens Human Being or Legal Person? http://www.goldismoney2.com/showthread.php?46027-Human-Being-or-Legal-Person&goto=newpost Tue, 30 Apr 2013 15:30:22 GMT


Click Here for Dean Clifford's First 5 Trust Law Workshops

http://www.thecrowhouse.com/deanclifford.html ]]> Goldhedge http://www.goldismoney2.com/showthread.php?46027-Human-Being-or-Legal-Person <![CDATA[Top Things the Police Don't Want You To Know]]> http://www.goldismoney2.com/showthread.php?45949-Top-Things-the-Police-Don-t-Want-You-To-Know&goto=newpost Sun, 28 Apr 2013 19:26:12 GMT TOP THINGS THE POLICE DON'T WANT YOU TO KNOW

Did you know that if you sue for false arrest (or false imprisonment), the arrest is presumed to be false?

Did you know that all you need to prove is that the arrest occurred, and then the burden is on the officer to prove that it wasn’t false?

Did you know that for an imprisonment, all you need is to show that you were "restrained of your liberty by words and acts which you feared to disregard"?

Did you know that a car stop counts as an arrest and an imprisonment?

something.jpg


Did you know that if an officer says he has a warrant for your arrest, you can demand to see the warrant AND the supporting affidavit, and if he arrests you without producing them, it’s a false arrest?

Did you know that the police routinely ignore and violate this law?

Did you know that "sovereign immunity" only covers "discretionary" acts (where the officer has a choice about what to do) but does not cover "ministerial" acts such as executing an arrest warrant?

Do you understand that an officer is personally liable for any misdeeds during a warrant arrest?

Did you know that sovereign immunity does not cover an officer AT ALL if he breaks the law?

Did you know that many court documents are "signed" with a rubber stamp?

Did you know that many clerks and attorneys have these stamps with a judge’s signature?

How do you know the warrant wasn’t stamped by a clerk or attorney?

How can a rubber-stamp signature on a warrant POSSIBLY be legal?

Did you know that you can ask an officer for his business card and ID, and if he doesn’t comply, he’s out of uniform?

Did you know you have the right to resist a false arrest with as much force as necessary?

Did you know that if an officer misbehaves, you can complain to Risk Management?

Did you know that the Federal Pure Food, Drug and Cosmetics Act (that set up the FDA) makes it illegal for anyone but a licensed physician to operate a breathalyzer?

Did you know that if an officer asks you a question, you have the right to ignore him and keep walking?


TOP QUESTIONS TO ASK AN FBI AGENT

Are you a "Special Agent" ?

Are there any "General Agents" in the FBI?

When you tell me you are a "Special Agent," are you telling me that you have only specific, limited authority, and that I am responsible for finding out what the limits to your authority are? Am I responsible for making sure you stay within the limits of your authority, even if you are unaware of what those limits are? Please show me documentation of your authority. Is it true that the authority of an FBI agent is the same as the authority of a Park Ranger?

Did you swear an "Oath of Office" ?

Please show me a copy of it. If you violate your Oath of Office, what are the consequences to you? How are those consequences enforced? Do I have to complain to your superiors, or sue you, or what? What is the name of your superior? What is your badge number? Are you authorized to use an alias? How can I serve process on you if I don't know your real name?

When you took office, did you file a bond? Is there any liability insurance to cover damage that you cause while on duty?

Please show me a copy of the insurance policy.

Are you here on campus as an "invitee" or as a "licensee" ? How does that affect the liability of the Trustees if you are injured while here? How does that affect the liability of the Trustees if you cause damage? Which program are you here under: Applicant, Civil Rights, Counterterrorism, Financial Crime, Foreign Counterintelligence, Organized Crime/Drug, or Violent Crimes and Major Offenders?

Is it true that if you arrest me, and I sue you for false arrest (also false imprisonment, assault, battery, and kidnapping), the only thing I need to prove is that an arrest occurred, and then the burden is on you to show that it wasn't false? Would I sue you in State or Federal court? Why? Is it true that "imprisonment" includes "restraining me of my liberty by words and acts which I fear to disregard" ? Is it true that you can conduct a warrantless arrest only if you witness a felony or a breach of the peace, the same as any citizen? Please show me documentation of any other powers of arrest.

What is the Constitutional authority for the FBI to exist? Is it true that the "police power" means the power to protect the health, safety, morals, and welfare of the public? Is it true that the police powers are reserved to the States under the 10th Amendment? How can you call yourself "law enforcement" if you're not exercising the police power? Is it true that the only Federal crimes (under Article I of the Constitution) are counterfeiting, piracy and treason? If you're not exercising police powers, and you're not a standing army, then what are you?

Is it true that Congress technically ceased to exist during the Civil War, by adjourning "sine die" ("without day")? Is this the reason that Congress has not used the Constitutionally mandated procedure for admitting any States to the Union since 1859?

Is this the reason Senators and Representatives are not actually sworn in during "swearing-in" ceremonies? Is this the reason the President calls the Congress into session every two years? Why two years? Is it because the salaries of Congress fall under the two-year limit on military appropriations?

Are there geographical limits to your authority? Please show me documentation of those limits. Are you authorized to operate in one of the 10 Federal "Regions" ? What is the Constitutional authority for the Nixon-era creation of those "Regions" ? How can the Federal government create "Regions" if it is forbidden to create States? Was it done through emergency or martial-law powers? Isn't "Region" a military word?

Do you have any reason to believe that any of us are engaging in interstate commerce?

Do you know that any mention of the “interstate commerce clause” in any court, by the Prosecution or the Plaintiff, brings the Constitution into evidence and I am free to use it OR object on the grounds that the Constitution has not been entered into evidence.

Do you know Lon Horiuchi, who shot Vicki Weaver while she was holding a baby in her arms (in the infamous Ruby Ridge incident), all over a shotgun that was a quarter of an inch too short? Do you know the agent who shot 14-year-old Sammy Weaver in the back as he tried to run home?

Did you have any part in the Waco massacre (in which the FBI used CS gas and its flammable propellant, in a surprise attack with no element of surprise)? Isn't CS gas illegal to use in war? Did you help destroy evidence from Waco? Is it true that the U.S. Marshals Service falsely claimed a possible drug problem with the Weavers at Ruby Ridge in order to get military reconnaissance flights over the cabin? (and the "hot spot" from the alleged drug lab turned out to be a doghouse?) And that the bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms invented a phony drug nexus at Waco in order to obtain massive assistance from the U.S. Army, the Texas National Guard, and the Alabama National Guard? Is it true that civilian agencies routinely obtain free military support by lying about drugs, and because there is no sanction for lying, obvious falsehoods are accepted by the military as a pretext for intervention? Is it true that the infamous FBI Hostage Rescue Team has spent considerable time in recent years holding hostages and has not even attempted to rescue a hostage for several years? Why are there 56 FBI SWAT teams and what's that got to do with investigation?

Is it true that almost the entire Waco operation, not only 2/28 but the siege, had been improperly financed from money that law enforcement was supposed to use only in the war on drugs?

Have you had any military training? Are you connected in any way to military intelligence? How come you're not covered by the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878, which was passed to outlaw the use of federal troops for civilian law enforcement and which made it a felony to willfully use "any part of the Army . . . to execute the laws" ?

Is it true that during the 1930s J. Edgar Hoover, director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, falsely told the American people that an unprecedented wave of child kidnappings was in progress, and the FBI was rewarded with substantial attention and funding, and in the 1980s a very different FBI earned itself more funding by putting out phony claims about a wave of serial killers of children?

Is it really a federal crime to transport artificial teeth into a state without the approval of a local licensed dentist, with penalty of up to one year in prison? Is this the sort of thing we pay the FBI to investigate?

Is it true that the federal courts have virtually taken over such vital state functions as the operation of prisons and mental hospitals? And that by 1993, the federal courts operated 80 percent of all state prison systems in America? Is it true that federal judges determine virtually every detail of these prisons, including standards for food and clothing, grievance procedures, and cell space per convict? Is it true that these prisons are run by private corporations for profit?


TOP THINGS THE BANKS DON'T WANT YOU TO KNOW

Did you know that the FDIC doesn't really insure bank accounts?

Did you know that when a bank goes under and is taken over by the FDIC, instead of paying the $100,000, the FDIC just pays its own people to come into the bank and divvy up what's left of the bank's assets? (This comes from a woman who once worked as a temp for the FDIC. Her job was to talk on the phone to the angry depositors and explain this to them.)

Did you know that a bank cannot legally require a fingerprint as a condition of cashing a check?

According to UCC 3-501(b)(2), they can only require you to:

*Exhibit the instrument (i.e. you show them the check)
*Give reasonable identification, and evidence of your authority if you are cashing the check on behalf of someone else
*Sign the check, and make a written receipt for partial payment, or the surrender of the check upon full payment (i.e. you let them keep the check)

They write the brochures to say that they "ask" for a fingerprint (not "demand" as a condition of payment). Their excuse for the fingerprint is "reasonable identification." So if you can get them to agree that your picture ID is reasonable identification, they have NO LAWFUL EXCUSE for refusing to pay the check just because you don't give them a fingerprint! In this case they have "dishonored" the check and you can proceed exactly as you would if they blatantly, and for no reason, refused to pay. Contact us for ideas on how to use the fingerprint issue.

Did you know that if you write “Without Recourse” below your endorsement or signature that the bank can not take any action against you for any reason!

Did you know that banks do not loan their own assets, nor the assets of their depositors?

Do you realize this means they do NOT loan money, but instead, there is an exchange of credit for credit, in which interest is charged on one side, but not the other?

If the borrower walks away with cash (which has value in the form of "purchasing power"), but the bank didn't loan any of its assets, isn't it obvious that the "purchasing power" must have come from SOMEWHERE?

Did you know that when a bank makes a "loan," the money supply (M1) expands -- in other words, the volume of currency in circulation increases?

Did you know that the value of the Federal Reserve Note "dollar" depends on the size of the money supply via the law of "supply and demand" -- in other words, the more FRNs there are, the less they are worth?

Do you understand that when the bank makes a loan, the value of the FRN "dollar bills" in everybody's pocket declines -- in other words, the bank is creating FRN dollars in competition with the FRN "dollars" in your pocket, and this reduces the value of the FRN "dollars" in your pocket? Do you realize this is the cause of inflation?

Do you realize that this means the "value," or "purchasing power," loaned by the bank is essentially STOLEN from the public via the mechanism of inflation? Contact us for ideas on how to use the "Theft by Inflation" issue

1. Always Pursue Truth - unless something better comes along.
2. There is No Deception so great as-- Self-deception, see # 1.


http://stopthepirates.blogspot.com/2...N5G0s.facebook
Attached Images
]]> Goldhedge http://www.goldismoney2.com/showthread.php?45949-Top-Things-the-Police-Don-t-Want-You-To-Know How Constitution was Usurped by Corporation http://www.goldismoney2.com/showthread.php?45797-How-Constitution-was-Usurped-by-Corporation&goto=newpost Thu, 25 Apr 2013 14:55:30 GMT Here is a bit of history thanks to member 'Gold Rules' original post.

Very interesting read.....................




http://battlehymn.com/

STRAIGHT TALK

ALL WARS ARE DEBT-FINANCED

May 10, 2013
by: Dane Phillips

Why was the American Civil War fought? For most of us, the answer would clearly be over slavery – right? The truth is, the issue of slavery was a front, a way to mask and deflect attention away from the real reason the war was fought – monetary policy.

John Adams clearly understood the lack of knowledge regarding basic monetary policy. Knowledge comes first – understanding follows. The rank in file citizen wasn’t even paying attention. Adams knew it – the nation was asleep in the light of liberty:

“All the perplexities confusion and distress in America arise not from defects of the Constitution, not from want of honor or virtue, so much as from downright ignorance of the nature of coin, credit and circulation.” —John Adams

HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF

Was it not Benjamin Franklin, who stated that the primary reason for the Revolutionary war was the inability of the Colonists to get the necessary power to issue their own money permanently out of the hands of George III and the international bankers?

satan (never capitalize his name), a master of deceit, has given us amusements in order to create distraction, so as to divert our attention from the fact that he exists to destroy all of mankind – including you – get it?

Wars are fought because a chosen select cadre of elite families who carry the embedded luciferic bloodline force governments to borrow vast sums of money at interest, thus creating an unimaginable amount of debt. Again, governments do not go to a designated savings account and withdraw the required capital to finance their conflicts – they borrow the money from the reptilian bloodline. All wars are debt-financed.

If ever there was a plot to enslave us all, this is their core monetary plan:

To change the world’s financial system by way of privately owned and controlled centralized banking.

The following excerpt, with added quotes, from the book, Battle Hymn: Revelations of the Sinister Plan for a New World Order gives you an insight into the money and monetary policy that led up to and set the stage for the American Civil War.

THE AMERICAN CIVIL WAR

“The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes.”—Benjamin Disraeli (1st Prime Minister of England), in a novel he published in 1844 entitled, Coningsby or The New Generation

“The few who understand the system, will either be so interested from its profits or so dependent on its favors, that there will be no opposition from that class. While on the other hand, the great body of people, mentally incapable of comprehending the tremendous advantages…will bear its burden without complaint, and perhaps without suspecting that the system is inimical to their best interests.”—Rothschild Brothers of London communiqué to associates in New York, June 25, 1863

The fierce division between North and South in the mid 19th Century clearly was heading toward conflict. Knowing this, a meeting in London of the International Banking Syndicate concocted a strategy of divide and conquer.

A war would force the federal government to spend vast sums of money, therefore borrowing at interest and creating debt. The plan further had provisions for a possible Southern victory and independence, in which case, individual Southern states would receive their own European-controlled banks. These states in turn could be instigated into wars with one another, creating more loans and debt.

It was nothing short of a roadmap for fracturing, fragmenting and destroying the United States through the chaos of war. From his perch in the Prussian chancellorship, Otto von Bismarck saw the plot clearly: “The division of the United States into federations of equal force was decided long before the Civil War by the high financial powers of Europe. These bankers were afraid that the United States, if they remained in one block and as one nation, would attain economic and financial independence, which would upset their financial domination of the world. The voice of the Rothschilds prevailed.”

American businesses, North and South, had been penetrated by the Rothschilds well before the Civil War. Nathan Rothschild purchased major cotton exports from the South for his English textile business. At the same time, he made loans to several states in the North and for a time was an official banker of the US government.

The complete story of Rothschild complicity in the start and prosecution of the Civil War never will be known, because the private family correspondence between 1854 and 1860, especially those letters emanating from London, is missing. According to Rothschild biographer Niall Ferguson, the letters deliberately were destroyed by subsequent senior partners in the family firm in London.

In any case, it is clear that the foreign bankers took advantage of the economic friction between the North and South. The Southern businessmen rankled at the stiff tariffs on European imports that were imposed by Congress at the behest of Northern manufacturers. European businesses retaliated by ceasing to import cotton from the South, which heightened the economic hardships there. When the Southern states seceded, a federal naval blockade strangled all Confederate imports and exports.

Seven years before the opening guns fired on Fort Sumter, a surgeon and writer named Dr. George Bickley founded the first chapter of the Knights of the Golden Circle (KGC) in Cincinnati, Ohio. Comprising mostly local Freemasons, the society patterned itself on Masonic lodges in its organization and its rituals. Initiates were sworn to secrecy.

Bickley’s dream was to found a circular empire encompassing the southern US, Cuba, Mexico, Central America and the West Indies. His “Golden Circle” would be a bastion of slave labor to create a monopoly on cotton, tobacco, sugar, coffee and rice production.

Financial support for the KGC came from the American Colonization and Steamship Company in Veracruz, Mexico, which was capitalized for $5 million despite the fact that Bickley had no visible personal fortune. Who were Bickley’s benefactors?

Bickley’s ties to England are undeniable. He claimed to be a University of London graduate and after the Civil War he lectured in England. But by 1860, he had made remarkable progress in building the KGC society to a membership of more than 65,000 “Knights.”

The KGC by this time was headquartered in San Antonio, Texas, where Bickley hoped soon to march his Knights into Mexico. But, he said, if Abraham Lincoln were to win the 1860 presidential election, he would order a march on Washington instead.

Bickley’s Knights actually made two abortive invasions of Mexico that spring. Each failed miserably when Bickley didn’t send reinforcements and supplies. The following year, with the beginning of the Civil War, Bickley’s Knights passed into the Confederate Army as an organizing command force.

He also had plans to create a Northern Confederacy by utilizing his Knights in Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, Minnesota and Illinois (which boasted an amazing 20,000 KGC members) to seize federal arsenals and take control. The state governments took the threat seriously enough to indict 60 KGC members in Indiana for treason. Although they were eventually released, the federal government was thereafter attentive to KGC plots.

President Abraham Lincoln during the Civil War enacted all the emergency powers available to his office in the US Constitution, including the suspension of habeas corpus. In the course of the war, more than 13,000 citizens — businessmen, local politicians, newspaper editors — went to prison without trial on charges of treason or simple “disloyalty.” Lincoln’s political opponents accused him of using the KGC threat as an excuse to create a dictatorship.

The emergency legal statutes finally ensnared Bickley in 1863, when he was arrested on charges of spying in Indiana. He was released only after the war’s end in 1865 and died two years later. But the KGC lived on after the war, going underground as the Ku Klux Klan.

When the Civil War began, France and England were quick to see opportunities for renewing their power in North America. Britain sent an additional 11,000 troops to Canada, positioning them along America’s northern border, and Canada became a hotbed of Confederate agents. The British fleet went on alert, in case it would have to quickly intervene.

Napoleon III of France, after receiving a loan of 210 million francs from the central bankers of Europe, sent a French army to Mexico, and installed a puppet, Archduke Maximilian of Austria, as emperor. Maximilian promptly arranged for transportation of vital supplies to the Confederacy through Texas, circumventing the federal blockade.

French and British troops stationed on the northern and southern borders of the US were ready to move when the warring sides exhausted themselves. The central bankers of Europe hoped that a weakened America would allow them to circumvent the Monroe Doctrine and reopen the Central and South American territories to be looted by them.

Lincoln parried this threat in a piece of political genius, issuing the Emancipation Proclamation on January 1, 1863. The document, which declared all slaves in the Confederacy to be free men, cut the legs from beneath the British and French interests by making slavery the central issue of the war. The populations of both countries were fiercely opposed to slavery, that institution having been abolished in France and England nearly three decades earlier.

But the danger still existed that the governments of France and England might diplomatically recognize the Confederate government and attempt to ship supplies through the Union blockade. It was one of several schemes the two countries had plotted against other nations, and one of the plots — instigating a war that would allow them to divide up the Russian empire — came to the ears of Czar Alexander II.

Already a supporter of the Union cause in the Civil War, Alexander sent two Russian fleets to the United States in late1863 — one anchored off Virginia and the other moored in San Francisco harbor — to threaten any French or British naval intervention. Britain and France remained neutral.

In the meantime, prosecution of the war created the necessity to impose the first income tax in American history. By 1862, there was a five percent tax on all income of more than $10,000. But this would prove insufficient to meet the spectacular costs of the war, so in 1862 Lincoln instructed the US Treasury to print paper money. The Treasury did this without charging interest, Lincoln stating that government “need not and should not borrow capital at interest.”

An estimate made much later in 1910 put the total cost of the American Civil War at an incredible $12 billion, a figure that would amount to many trillions in modern terms. The federal government at first sought to borrow from the European bankers, who, sensing their opportunity to ruin America, charged outrageous interest fees of between 24 and 36 percent. Lincoln refused to borrow under such extreme conditions, and instead tabbed Colonel Dick Taylor of Chicago to take charge of financing the war.

Taylor advised Lincoln to induce Congress to pass a bill authorizing the treasury to print its own legal tender in notes that would pay the military. Lincoln’s concern over whether Americans would accept the new money was quelled by Taylor, who told him, “The people or anyone else will not have any choice in the matter, if you make them full legal tender. They will have the full sanction of the government and be just as good as any money, as Congress is given that express right by the Constitution.”

In 1862 and 1863, the US Treasury printed $450 million worth of the new money, and to distinguish it from other bills, green ink was used on the back side, causing them to be called “greenbacks.” These bills went into circulation without any need for the government to pay interest.

Lincoln explained his reasoning to Congress, saying, “The government should create, issue and circulate all the currency and credit needed to satisfy the spending power of the government and the buying power of consumers. The privilege of creating and issuing money is not only the supreme prerogative of government, but it is the government’s greatest creative opportunity. By the adoption of these principals…the taxpayers will be saved immense sums of interest. Money will cease to be master and become the servant of humanity.”

The London Times quickly spouted the central bankers’ viewpoint in an editorial: “If this mischievous financial policy, which has its origin in North America, shall become endurated down to a fixture, then that government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off debts and be without debt. It will have all the money necessary to carry on its commerce. It will become prosperous without precedent in the history of the world. The brains and wealth of all countries will go to North America. That country must be destroyed, or it will destroy every monarchy on the globe.”

Several authors have claimed that Lincoln may have been assassinated because of his bold monetary policy. The man who murdered him, John Wilkes Booth, was a famous actor who was known to have joined the foreign-funded KGC.

Theorists also point to a possible connection between Booth and Confederate Secretary of State Judah P. Benjamin, who had established relations with the House of Rothschild to finance the Southern states. The Rothschilds and other European bankers certainly saw Lincoln’s policy of creating interest-free capital as a catastrophe.

“Greenbacks,” however, were not sufficient to fully finance the tremendous cost of the Civil War. In 1863, with the war reaching its turning point, Lincoln allowed the bankers to establish the National Banking Act, in which banks could operate free of taxation while creating the new “greenbacks” bank notes.

After this, the entire US money supply was created from debt by bankers who bought US Government Bonds to issue them as reserves for bank notes. Treasury Secretary Salmon P. Chase later bemoaned his role in creating this situation: “My agency in promoting the passage of the National Banking Act was the greatest financial mistake in my life. It has built up a monopoly which affects every interest in the country.”

Rothschild agent August Belmont took advantage of the situation by financing both the North and South. He convinced European bankers to buy federal bonds while he bought Southern bank bonds at knockdown prices, gambling that the South would have to honor them at higher prices following the war. In 1863, the Chicago Tribune attacked Belmont, the Rothschilds, “and the whole tribe of Jews,” for buying Confederate bonds.

Salomon Rothschild actually came to America at the beginning of the war. Clearly pro-Confederate, he criticized Lincoln for being “uncompromising.” Rothschild almost certainly referred to Lincoln’s refusal to borrow at interest rather than his uncompromising policy of maintaining the Union.

But maintain the Union he did, and for that Lincoln was murdered immediately after the war ended. Otto von Bismarck in Germany understood the implications, and wrote, “The death of Lincoln was a disaster for Christendom….I fear that foreign bankers, with their craftiness and tortuous tricks will entirely control the exuberant riches of America, and use it systematically to corrupt modern civilization. They will not hesitate to plunge the whole of Christendom into wars and chaos in order that the earth should become their inheritance.”

The subsequent investigation of the Lincoln assassination revealed a complicated plot that included smuggling and kidnapping by agents of the KGC with overseas financing. The trail led to KGC and British agents in Canada.

Booth could not enlighten the investigators, because he’d been shot and killed by federal troops. Four additional conspirators from Baltimore — one of them having wounded Secretary of State William Seward and another having lost his nerve to assassinate Vice President Andrew Johnson — were hanged. The plot clearly intended to behead the entire US executive branch.

Allegations that international bankers were behind the Lincoln assassination emerged 70 years later in Canada when in 1934, Vancouver attorney Gerald Grattan McGeer presented evidence to the House of Commons Committee on Banking and Commerce. McGeer studied the unexpurgated testimony of secret service agents during the posthumous Booth trial, which had been deleted from the public record, and concluded, “The evidence discloses that, instead of being a patriot, John Wilkes Booth…was a mercenary.”

McGeer offered evidence that the plot to murder Lincoln originated in Montreal and Toronto, where, “a group of men representing the Confederacy were operating in Canada with headquarters in those cities. During the winter of 1864 and 1865, they were approached by an unknown group with a proposition to assassinate Lincoln. They [the unknown group] were not from the South nor connected with the Southern government, because representatives of the South in Canada hesitated to consider the proposal until it had been submitted to the South for approval. Booth was engaged to organize the assassination.”

Although the instigators of the murder were unknown, McGeer revealed that “they were described as a group which could undertake anything without regard to cost.” One of Booth’s co-conspirators did indeed return from Canada with “plenty of gold.” This and other evidence convinced McGeer that the plotters were “the men opposed to [Lincoln’s] national currency program, and who had fought him throughout the whole Civil War on his policy of greenback currency. They were the men interested in the establishment of the gold standard system and the right of bankers to manage the currency and credit of every nation in the world. With Lincoln out of the way, they were able to proceed with that plan, and did proceed with it in the United States. Within eight years of Lincoln’s assassination, silver was demonetized and the gold standard money system set up in the United States.”

The international bankers at this time controlled much of the world’s gold, while silver was plentiful in the US.

It is one of history’s great curiosities that so many aspects of Lincoln’s assassination are identical to the assassination of John Kennedy. Both men had made many powerful enemies who certainly had the means to murder them by subtle methods like poisoning. This, after all, was a time-tested and safe way to achieve regime change.

But Lincoln and Kennedy were publicly executed while in office, as if to send a message. The fact that both men are the only presidents to have ordered the US Treasury to create money at no interest may be a clue as to where the message originated.

As an interesting footnote to the above mentioned assassinations, on July 4, 1835, President Andrew Jackson received a letter threatening his life. It was addressed as “You damned old scoundrel,” and demanded that Jackson pardon two prisoners named DeRuiz and DeSoto, who had received death sentences for piracy.

The letter threatened, “I will cut your throat whilst you are sleeping.” It was signed by Junius Brutus Booth, a famous Shakespearean actor, and for 175 years historians presumed the letter to be a fake. But in 2009, researchers working for the History Detectives television show proved that Booth actually had written the letter, based on his known whereabouts (which matched the envelope’s return address), Booth’s handwriting, and later apologies by Booth to his theater director for writing letters he shouldn’t have to “authorities of the country.”

Again, it should not be overlooked that Junius Brutus Booth was born in England. More interestingly, he sired three sons who also entered the theater. One of them was John Wilkes Booth, who would murder President Abraham Lincoln.

The result of the Civil War was a failure for the European bankers’ ambitions, however. More than 600,000 Americans had died, but the nation was undivided and suddenly a world power. No foreign-controlled central bank had been established. The country was not deeply indebted to foreign bankers.

But the foreign bankers would continue to try. Almost exactly one year after Lincoln’s murder, Congress passed the Contraction Act, authorizing the Treasury Department to begin removing greenbacks from circulation, thereby contracting the money supply. While no direct connection between the passage of this act and the influence of international bankers has come to light, it is clear that it benefited them tremendously.

By 1876, two-thirds of America’s money supply had been called in by the bankers. The tightening of money produced hardship in the South and a series of money panics in the North. This pressured Congress eventually to put the US banking system under centralized control. —excerpted from, Battle Hymn: Revelations of the Sinister Plan for a New World Order— Authors, John
Scura & Dane Phillips

“The money powers prey upon the nation in times of peace and conspire against it in times of adversity. It is more despotic than a monarchy, more insolent than autocracy and more selfish than bureaucracy. It denounces as public enemies’ all to who question its methods or throw light upon its crimes. I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me and the bankers in the rear. Of the two, the one at my rear is my greatest foe.”—President Abraham Lincoln (16th President of the United States)

“The United States Federal Reserve Banks are privately owned and controlled agents of the foreign central banks; a very select group of chosen investors and arms merchants – directly responsible for instigating wars, creating fraudulent debt and lending money to both sides (including enemies of the United States) in their sinister drive to create a luciferic New World Order.

The shareholders, living and deceased, should be charged with treason; with all personal, professional and corporate assets seized and returned to the United States Department of the Treasury.” —Dane Phillips



================================================== ====
You have to wonder "who" was behind the change... it didn't just 'happen'.


How the Constitution was Usurped by the Corporation

History
The United States exists in two forms:

1. The original United States that was in operation until 1860; a collection of sovereign Republics in the union. Under the original Constitution the States controlled the Federal Government; the Federal Government did not control the States and had very little authority.

2. The original United States has been usurped by a separate and different UNITED STATES formed in 1871, which only controls the District of Columbia and it’s territories, and which is actually a corporation (the UNITED STATES CORPORATION) that acts as our current government. The United States Corporation operates under Corporate/Commercial/Public Law rather than Common/Private Law.

The original Constitution was never removed; it has simply been dormant since 1871. It is still intact to this day. This fact was made clear by Supreme Court Justice Marshall Harlan (Downes v. Bidwell, 182, U.S. 244 1901) by giving the following dissenting opinion: “Two national governments exist; one to be maintained under the Constitution, with all its restrictions; the other to be maintained by Congress outside and Independently of that Instrument.”

The Restore America Plan reclaimed the De Jure institutions of government of the 50 State Republics in order to restore Common Law that represents the voice of the people and ends Corporate Law that ignores the voice of the people while operating under Maritime/Admiralty/International Law. This occurred when warrants were delivered to all 50 Governors on March 30, 2010.

The rewritten Constitution of the UNITED STATES CORPORATION bypasses the original Constitution for the United States of America, which explains why our Congressmen and Senators don’t abide by it, and the President can write Executive Orders to do whatever he/she wants. They are following corporate laws that completely strip sovereigns of their God given unalienable rights. Corporate/Commercial/Public Law is not sovereign (private), as it is an agreement between two or more parties under contract. Common Law (which sovereigns operate under) is not Commercial Law; it is personal and private.

To understand this document, you need to understand some basic terms. Visit www.usavsus.info for complete understanding. The basic terms are:

De Jure – Existing by right or according to law; original, lawful. Common Law operates under De Jure terms.

De Facto - In practice but not necessarily ordained by law; in fact, in reality. Corporate Law operates under De Facto terms.

Sovereign – A real person. Sovereigns can own property while Citizens/Subjects cannot. According to the original Constitution, all government comes from the Sovereign Individual. Without the Sovereign Individual, there is no government.

U.S. Citizen/Subject – A corporate fictitious entity that merely represents the real person. It acts as a “strawman.” [To call oneself a “sovereign citizen” or “sovereign subject” is an oxymoron, since “sovereign” and “citizen/subject” are mutually exclusive of each other.] When asked if you are a “U.S. Citizen” on corporate legal documents, if you check “yes,” you agree to the terms of Corporate Law and unknowingly relinquish your sovereign status and transfer all of your rights to the UNITED STATES CORPORATION since you are now under contract.

Corporation – A non-human, fictitious entity. Corporate fictitious entities are denoted in all caps. This includes the names of Citizens/Subjects. Your fictitious “strawman” entity is addressed in all caps, i.e. JOHN SMITH, rather than John Smith.

Common Law – God’s law. Common Law and the system of De Jure Juries apply to sovereigns in disputes. In Common Law, contracts must be entered into knowingly, voluntarily, and intentionally.

Admiralty/Maritime Law/International Law – The King’s law. Deals with criminal acts that only apply to international contracts. Under this law, the people are no longer sovereign. The Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) that the United States practices is based on Admiralty Law. Under the UCC, contracts do not have to be entered into knowingly. Simple agreements can be binding, and as long as you exercise the benefits of that "agreement," you must meet the obligations associated with those benefits. If you accept the benefit offered by the government, then you MUST follow, to the letter,
each and every statute involved with that benefit. That “benefit” is the Federal Reserve Notes (U.S. dollars). By paying for things with U.S. dollars you are unknowingly giving up all of your Constitutional rights and are legally obligated to follow all of the UCC statues. But you were NEVER told this.

Lawful – A term used in Common Law.

Legal – A term used in the UCC which applies to Corporate Law.

HOW THE CONSTITUTION WAS USURPED BY THE CORPORATION

(note by Panama Legal: These are the basic premises adhered to by the people in the movement and the people in the Sovereign movement. The Government is a Corporation actually functioning as the Federal Government. Thus it does not have to follow the constitution. Also it does not matter if Obama is not a natural born citizen since it is a corporation he is the head of. The corporation gets the permission of the people to reign over them by deceit. This is done by wording in the Birth Certificates, Social Security Cards, driving Licenses, IRS forms, Marriage Licenses and other documents. They always refer to the “person” in all capital letters. This means the name represents a corporate entity. This is how the corporation courts get jurisdiction over you. Their courts do not fly the “reaL” American flag. They use the military or admiralty flag. For a discourse on this try this website: http://www.usavsus.info/

What the theory is goes like this. When you enter a US Courtroom there is a military or admiralty flag flying. The US Military does not have the protection of the constitution, neither does this apply to admiralty laws with ships at sea. When you enter a court room and cross through that little wooden gate they have and go to the area where the plaintiff (prosecutor) and defendant sit along with judge, court reporter, you are entering a “ship” or a foreign country as evidenced by the admiralty or military flag flying thus the constitution has no applicability and you are under equity law not common law. The flaw with their scheme is that there is no full disclosure to the people about any of this. This is brief over simplified synopsis of the scam run by the federal corporation. End of our comment.)

In 1788 (January 1), The United States was officially bankrupt.

In 1790 (August 4), Article One of the U.S. Statues at Large, pages 138-178, abolished the States of the Republic and created Federal Districts. 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...the new State Constitutions fraudulently made the people “Citizens” of the new Corporate States. A Citizen is also defined as a “corporate fiction."

In 1845, Congress passed legislation that would ultimately allow Common Law to be usurped by Admiralty Law. www.barefootsworld.net/admiralty.html explains this change. The yellow fringe placed at the bottom of court flags shows this is still true. Before 1845, Americans were considered sovereign individuals who governed themselves under Common Law.

In 1860 – Congress was adjourned Sine Die – Lincoln could not legally reconvene Congress.

In 1861, President Lincoln declared a National Emergency and Martial Law, which gave the President unprecedented powers and removed it from the other branches. This has NEVER been reversed.

In 1863, the Lieber Code was established taking away your property and your rights.

From 1864-1867, Several Reconstruction Acts were passed forcing the states to ratify the 14th Amendment, which made everyone slaves.

In 1865, the capital was moved to Washington, D.C., a separate country – not a part of the United States of America.

In 1871, The United States became a Corporation with a new constitution and a new corporate government, and the original constitutional government was vacated to become dormant, but it was never terminated. The new constitution had to be ratified by the people according to the original constitution, but it never was. The whole process occurred behind closed doors. The people are the source of financing for this new government.

In 1917, the Trading with the Enemy Act (TWEA) was passed. This insightful video from [link to movielocker.com/4084)] states the following: “This act was implemented to deal with the countries we were at war with during World War I. It gave the President and the Alien Property Custodian the right to seize the assets of the people included in this act and if they wanted to do business in this country they could apply for a license to do so. By 1921, the Federal Reserve Bank (the trustee for the Alien Property Custodian) held over $700,000,000 in trust.” Understand that this trust was based on our assets, not theirs.

In 1933, 48 Stat 1, of the TWEA was amended to include the United States Person because they wanted to take our gold away. Executive Order 6102 was created to make it illegal for a U.S. Citizen to own gold. In order for the Government to take our gold away and violate our Constitutional rights, we were reclassified as ENEMY COMBATANTS.”

In 1933, there was a second United States bankruptcy. In the first bankruptcy the United States collateralized all public lands. In the 1933 bankruptcy, the U.S. government collateralized the private lands of the people (a lien) – they borrowed money against our private lands. They were then mortgaged. That is why we pay property taxes.

From a speech in Congress in The Bankruptcy of the United States Congressional Record, March 17, 1993, Vol. 33, page H-1303, Speaker Representative James Trafficant Jr. (Ohio) addressing the House states:

“...It is an established fact that the United States Federal Government has been dissolved by the Emergency Banking Act, March 9, 1933, 48 Stat. 1, Public Law 89-719; declared by President Roosevelt, being bankrupt and insolvent. H.J.R. 192, 73rd Congress m session June 5, 1933 - Joint Resolution To Suspend The Gold Standard and Abrogate The Gold Clause dissolved the Sovereign Authority of the United States and the official capacities of all United States Governmental Offices, Officers, and Departments and is further evidence that the United States Federal Government exists today in name only.

The receivers of the United States Bankruptcy are the International Bankers, via the United Nations, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. All United States Offices, Officials, and Departments are now operating within a de facto status in name only under Emergency War Powers. With the Constitutional Republican form of Government now dissolved, the receivers of the Bankruptcy have adopted a new form of government for the United States. This new form of government is known as a Democracy, being an established Socialist/Communist order under a new governor for America. This act was instituted and established by transferring and/or placing the Office of the Secretary of Treasury to that of the Governor of the International Monetary Fund. Public Law 94-564, page 8, Section H.R. 13955 reads in part: “The U.S. Secretary of Treasury receives no compensation for representing the United States...

Prior to 1913, most Americans owned clear, allodial title to property, free and clear of any liens of mortgages until the Federal Reserve Act (1913) “Hypothecated” all property within the Federal United States to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve, in which the Trustees (stockholders) held legal title. The U.S. Citizen (tenant, franchisee) was registered as a “beneficiary” of the trust via his/her birth certificate. In 1933, the Federal United States hypothecated all of the present and future properties, assets, and labor of their “subjects,” the 14th Amendment U.S. Citizen to the Federal Reserve System. In return, the Federal Reserve System agreed to extend the federal United States Corporation all of the credit “money substitute” it needed.

Like any debtor, the Federal United States government had to assign collateral and security to their creditors as a condition of the loan. Since the Federal United States didn’t have any assets, they assigned the private property of their “economic slaves,” the U.S. Citizens, as collateral against the federal debt. They also pledged the unincorporated federal territories, national parks, forests, birth certificates, and nonprofit organizations as collateral against the federal debt. All has already been transferred as payment to the international bankers.

Unwittingly, America has returned to its pre-American Revolution feudal roots whereby all land is held by a sovereign and the common people had no rights to hold allodial title to property. Once again, We the People are the tenants and sharecroppers renting our own property from a Sovereign in the guise of the Federal Reserve Bank. We the People have exchanged one master for another.”

In 1944, Washington D.C. was deeded to the International Monetary Fund (IMF) by the Breton Woods Agreement. The IMF is made up of wealthy people that own most of the banking industries of the world. It is an organized group of bankers that have taken control of most governments of the world so the bankers run the world. Congress, the IRS, and the President work for the IMF. The IRS is not a U.S. government agency. It is an agency of the IMF. (Diversified Metal Products v. IRS et al. CV-93-405E-EJE U.S.D.C.D.I., Public Law 94-564, Senate Report 94-1148 pg. 5967, Reorganization Plan No. 26, Public Law 102-391.)

HOW CAN WE REPAIR OUR COUNTRY RIGHT NOW?

“The Supreme Court has said the De Jure Government offices still exist but the people have failed to occupy them.

Remember Downs v. Bidwell and the dissenting opinion of Justice Marshall Harlan? He said that two national governments exist; one to be maintained under the Constitution, with all its restrictions. This is one that We the people need to force our elected public officials to occupy – De Jure rule.

We need to change that by organizing Grand Juries and putting our officials back under De jure rule and out of the Corporate (or Military) Rule that they are currently operating under.

Our elected officials will then have to operate under the limits of their Oath of office to uphold the U.S. and State Constitutions, circa 1860. When they violate the Oath it’s a capital crime.

The reason we go back to 1860 is because that is the last time we had lawful laws in this country.

Where do the people get their power to convene a Grand Jury? The Magna Carta, 1215.

Our Founding Fathers looked back to history for precedent when they decided they wanted to change their government. What they found was the Magna Carta Liberatum, the Great Charter of Freedoms. It set a precedent that changed the face of England forever, by establishing that the King was not above the law.

King John of England signed the Magna Carta after immense pressure from the Church and his barons (the people). The King often lived above the law, violating both Feudal and Common Law, and was heavily criticized for his foreign policy and actions in England. The Barons, with the support of the Church, pressured King John to spell out a list of their rights and guarantee that those rights would be enforced. The Barons provided a draft, and after some negotiation, King John put his seal to the Magna Carta in Runnymede, in June of 1215.

Section 61 set rules for establishing the Grand Jury. It states: Since we have granted all these things for God, for the better ordering of our kingdom, and to allay the discord that has arisen between us and our barons (people), and since we desire that they shall be enjoyed in their entirety, with lasting strength, forever, we give and grant to the barons the following security: The barons shall elect twenty-five of their number to keep, and cause to be observed with all their might, the peace and liberties granted and confirmed to them by this charter. If we, our chief justice, our officials, or any of our servants offend in any respect against any man, or transgress any of the articles of the peace or of this security, and the offense is made known to four of the said twenty-five barons, they shall come to us.”



http://www.republicforarizona.org/history.html

Another for the Republic of Colorado
http://www.coloradorepublic.org/we_the_people.html ]]> Goldhedge http://www.goldismoney2.com/showthread.php?45797-How-Constitution-was-Usurped-by-Corporation The Right to Travel http://www.goldismoney2.com/showthread.php?45665-The-Right-to-Travel&goto=newpost Tue, 23 Apr 2013 14:12:31 GMT *The Right to Travel* Your motor vehicle license registration and title are not what you believe they are. Your title is not even title, it is CERTIFICATE of title. This certificate is a receipt for the rights and property you have traded to civil government that can be redeemed by canceling the... The Right to Travel

Your motor vehicle license registration and title are not what you believe they are. Your title is not even title, it is CERTIFICATE of title. This certificate is a receipt for the rights and property you have traded to civil government that can be redeemed by canceling the registration agreement. EVERY SINGLE TIME it is that an American waives rights or transfers rights, property, or other security interests to the hands of government, it is ALAYS done by signed hand written authorized consent submitted via application for registration.

Rights are not inALIENable, you can certainyl alienate them by your signed consent in a contract. Rights are unALEINable, meaning they cannot be taken from you WITHOUT your consent. So the automobile. The moment you purchase a car and pay for it your receipt is your actual title, evidence, proof of purchase/absolute ownership, allodial title if you will. There is NO SUCH THING as an obligation of LAW to register this. Just like a bicycle you have all the authority you require to make lawful use of that property in the enjoyment of freedom and the pursuit of happiness, WITHOUT permission. As a matter of fact your automobile ONLY becomes DIFFERENT from your BICYCLE.....WHEN it is REGISTERED.

REGISTER, is a very old word holding it's origins in maritime admiralty law. Registration as a verb, means "to sign over for safe keeping", to leave to the discretion of another". This s evidenced because it is exactly what you are doing when you register your car. You are signing absolute ownership "allodial title" over to the State in return for partial, for a taxable privilege of limited liability protection. At this moment you are no longer claiming and exercising rights, but privileges . Registration is an act of abandonment, and your property is seized under maritime admiralty salvage. You further beg in your application to continue to use the property you are signing over under a protected privilege. The State having accepted ownership happily now permits you to use State property, the car you just signed over. A driver's license is NOT permission to own property, you are born with that right, it is not permission to use the nation common ways, again that is a natural right unanimously upheld by the supreme court in an impressive array of cases I will be happy to cite at the end of this post. Your license from the State is only permission to use State property, the car you just abandoned and they seized. And because you have voluntarily consented, the State now holds that allodial title as surety against you for your compliance to the terms and conditions of that voluntary registration contract which are encoded in the Motor Vehicle Code. That code IS NOT LAW. It is merely the terms and conditions of an agreement. LAW i the lawful defense of individual rights, this ACT is NOT LAW because it is a contract and all contracts are voluntary. There is no such thing as an obligation of law to agree. Agreement by it's very nature is consentual. In this registration agreement you waive ALL rights related to the property and activity as well. This is why a cop can arbitrarily seize or impound your car in violation of the due process clause of the 5th amendment. You waived your right to not be deprived of proprety absent conviction of a crime by a jury. ALSO the cop is not seizing YOUR car, they are seizing the STATE'S car, due to a material breech of the registration agreement. These cops are not enforcing law. They are enforcing the terms and conditions of the contracts of the corporate fiction defrauding the people. Refusing the privileged limited liability agreement and exercising the right is a big responsibi lity, but the only duty you must accept to exercise a right is to cause harm to no one through that claim and exercise of rights. You do not sacrifice the right by refusing the contract you actually only sacrifice the rights by accepting it.

Every time you subject yourself to the terms and conditions of a civil contract like this you receive a certificate in return for the rights and property you are signing over to the State. Certificate of Title, Certificate of Birth, Certificate of Marriage, firearms permits, building permits, hunting permits, fishing permits, pet ownership permits, ALL of these activities are lawful. All of the activities the licensing body is licensing MUST be lawful outside of the limited liability pivileged licensing framework, otherwise the licensing body is licensing crime, and last I checked I could not get an armed robbery permit.

This is also the same authority which gives CPS it's power to come into your home without a warrant and seize your children. Again you waive ALL rights in these contracts including birth registration agreements. You waive the right to be secure in your person papers and affects. And again CPS is NOT seizing YOUR child, they are seizing the STATE'S child, whom was signed over to them for safe keeping in the birth registration contract. This is why the STATE can compell YOU to send THEIR child to their indoctrina tion camps, why they can compell parents to vaccinate THEIR child. Without a birth registration contract this authority does not exist over the parent. The parent is the highest authority over the child. The State has ZERO jurisdiction over anything which was not signed over to it voluntarily in a registration agreement. If they spelled it right and called it a BERTH registration it would be easier to see, they just change the spelling to confuse people. A birth certificate is a certificate of manifest. They have people in maritime admiralty law by getting them to act like boats engaged in foreign commerce of their own signed consent protected under a government contract of limited liability privileges. ECH of tehse contracts has their own terms and conditions throughout the United States Code and Code of Federal Regulations. You can identify them quite easily they say ACT right in the title. Social security registration relates to the income tax, automobile registration relates to the Motor Vehicle Act, marriage registration has its own which I have admittedly not looked too much into, but ti is all the same, and all voluntary.

Statutes are these terms and conditions of these contracts. Statutory rules CAN be laws but every time that is true an lement of harm to another exists. They are not law because some lawyer wrote them and included them in a rule book, but because they derive from the supreme law of the land, the individual rights of the people. When these statutory rules infringe laws (rights are laws), they are void. ALL statutory rules are children of and restrained by the highest law, which is not the Constitution, or Declaration of Independence, those are simply documents that protect rights and establish our form of government. A nation wide common law jurisdiction and a self governign constitutional republic. The highest law is literally the individual rights of the people, ALL rights, enumerated and not enumerated, ALL Americans may claim and exercise ANY right which causes no harm. Law is grounded in self evident truth. For example. It is self evident that there is no such thing as an obligation of law to sign your rights and property over to the state in order to make lawful use and enjoyment of them. It is self evident that no one needs permission to exercise a right, and that such permission when accepted converts a right into a privilege. It is self evident that ALL Americans are free equal, and KING, but their rule applies only to them self in a self governing Cosntituti onal Republic. It is self evident that the conversion in technology and the conveyance of the day, did not grant new powers to government, so unless one can show me the registration and license/ license plate on George Washington's Horse's ass there is no more lawful authority to regulate your method of travel today than there was in 1776.

Here is some good case law now to support everything I have said. The spirit of law is excellent, btu it is always good to have the letter that supports the sprit.

The Right to Travel

"The use of the highways for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common and fundamental Right of which the public and the individual cannot be rightfully deprived." [emphasis added] Chicago Motor Coach vs. Chicago, 169 NE 22; Ligare vs. Chicago, 28 NE 934; Boon vs. Clark, 214 SSW 607; 25 Am.Jur. (1st) Highways Sect.163.

"The Right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by horse drawn carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city can prohibit or permit at will, but a common Right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." [emphasis added] Thompson vs. Smith, 154 SE 579.

"For while a Citizen has the Right to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, that Right does not extend to the use of the highways, either in whole or in part, as a place for private gain. For the latter purpose no person has a vested right to use the highways of the state, but is a privilege or a license which the legislature may grant or withhold at its discretion." State vs. Johnson, 243 P. 1073; Hadfield, supra; Cummins vs. Homes, 155 P. 171; Packard vs. Banton, 44 S.Ct. 256;

"Heretofore the court has held, and we think correctly, that while a Citizen has the Right to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, that Right does not extend to the use of the highways, either in whole or in part, as a place of business for private gain." Barney vs. Board of Railroad Commissioners, 17 P.2d 82; Willis vs. Buck, 263 P.l 982. What is this Right of the Citizen which differs so "radically and obviously" from one who uses the highway as a place of business? Who better to enlighten us than Justice Tolman of the Supreme Court of Washington State? In State vs. City of Spokane, supra, the Court also noted a very "radical and obvious" difference, but went on to explain just what the difference is: "The former is the usual and ordinary right of the Citizen, a common right to all, while the latter is special, unusual, and extraordinary.” “This distinction, elementary and fundamental in character, is recognized by all the authorities." State vs. City of Spokane, supra.

"the right of the Citizen to travel upon the highway and to transport his property thereon in the ordinary course of life and business, differs radically and obviously from that of one who makes the highway his place of business and uses it for private gain in the running of a stagecoach or omnibus. The former is the usual and ordinary right of the Citizen, a right common to all, while the latter is special, unusual, and extraordinary." Ex Parte Dickey, (Dickey vs. Davis), 85 SE 781.

The right of the Citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, in the ordinary course of life and business, is a common right which he has under the right to enjoy life and liberty, to acquire and possess property, and to pursue happiness and safety. It includes the right, in so doing, to use the ordinary and usual conveyances of the day, and under the existing modes of travel, includes the right to drive a horse drawn carriage or wagon thereon or to operate an automobile thereon, for the usual and ordinary purpose of life and business."

STANDING

"To adjudicate upon, and protect the rights and interests of individual citizens, and to that end to construe and apply the laws, is the peculiar province of the judicial department. The judicial power "is the power to hear and determine those matters which affect the life, liberty, or property of the citizens of the state." City of Sapulpa v. Land, 101 Okl. 22, 223 P. 640, 644, 35 A.L.R. 872, 878. Nash v. Brooks, 297 N.Y.S. 853, 855-856.

Without standing there is no actual or justiciable controversy and courts will not entertain such cases. Clifford v Superior Court 45 Cal Rptr 2nd 333, 335

Freedom and Rights

"“The Individual may stand upon his Constitutional rights as a citizen. He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way. His power to contract is unlimited. He owes no duty to the State or to his neighbors to divulge his business, or to open his doors to an investigation, so far as it may tend to incriminate him. He owes no duty to the State, since he receives nothing there from, beyond the protection of his life and property.”

“His rights are such as existed by the Law of the Land (Common Law) long antecedent to the organization of the State, and can

only be taken from him by due process of law, and in accordance with the Constitution.”

“Among his rights are a refusal to incriminate himself, and the immunity of himself and his property from arrest or seizure

except under warrant of the law.” “He owes nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights.” Hale Vs.

Henkel., 201 U.S. 43 at 74 (1906). "

“A state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the federal constitution. Thus, it may not exact a

license tax for the privilege of carrying on interstate commerce” Murdock vs. Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105.

“Law of the Land” means “The Common Law.”Taylor vs. Porter, 4 Hill. 140, 146 (1843) Justice Bronson. Webster’s definition of

“Law of the Land” at Dartmouth, 4 Wheat. 518, 581.The CONSITUION,as the law of the land, has to honor the COMMON LAW and then

the Federal or State laws have to abide under that...per iod. When it or they do not, they are LAWBREAKERS.

"Personal liberty -- or the right to enjoyment of life and liberty -- is one of the fundamental or natural rights, which has been protected by its inclusion as a guarantee in the various constitutions, which is not derived from nor dependent on the U.S. Constitution... It is one of the most sacred and valuable rights [remember the words of Justice Tolman, supra.] as sacred as the right to private property...and is regarded as inalienable." 16 C.J.S. Const. Law, Sect.202, p.987. Teche Lines vs. Danforth, Miss., 12 S.2d 784; Thompson vs. Smith, supra.

"An unconstitutional act is not law; it confers no right; it imposes no duties; affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed." Norton vs Shelby County118 US 425 p.442.

"The general rule is that an unconstitutional statute, though having the form and the name of law, is in reality no law, but is wholly void, and ineffective for any purpose; since unconstitutiona lity dates from the time of its enactment, and not merely from the date of the decision so branding it. No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it."16th American Jurisprudence 2d, Section 177, late 2nd, Section 256

"All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void." Finding that the statute conflicted with the Federal Constitution, Marshall considered it “the essence of judicial duty” to follow the Constitution.He concluded that “the particular phraseology of the Constitution of the United States confirms and strengthens the principle, supposed to be essential to all written constitutions, that a law repugnant to the constitution is void; and that courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument” It is a proposition too plain to be contested, that the constitution controls any legislative act repugnant to it; or, that the legislature may alter the constitution by an ordinary act. Between these alternatives there is no middle ground. The constituti on is either a superior, paramount law, unchangeable by ordinary means, or it is on a level with ordinary legislative acts, and like other acts, is alterable when the legislature shall please to alter it… . If the former part of the alternative be true, then a legislative act contrary to the constitution is not law: if the latter part be true, then written constitutions are absurd attempts, on the part of the people, to limit a power in its own nature illimitable. Marbury vs Madison, 5 US (2 Cranch) 137, 174, 176, (1803)

“Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." Miranda vs. Arizona, 384 US 436, 491.

"The claim and exercise ...of a constitutional Right cannot be converted into... a crime." Miller vs. U.S., 230 F. 486, 489. "There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of this exercise of constitutional Rights." Snerer vs. Cullen, 481 F. 946 ]]> Goldhedge http://www.goldismoney2.com/showthread.php?45665-The-Right-to-Travel