Problem: Want of truthful, complete, and accurate education is what causes opinions to become based more on hearsay and faulty conjecture. Over stimulation and mind-altering propaganda coupled with intellectual lethargy cause a want of intellectual power and acuity among "should-be" students, which subsequently leads to the contentment of being spoon-fed your own opinion by others rather than the active, fervent, and diligent search for truth that will truly set most of you free.
Solution: Force yourself, no matter how hard it seems to be, to truly think and cogitate by yourself, without the aid of others. Force yourself to form your own conclusions that are not altered or influenced by social acceptability. Remember, if you come across a nugget of irrefutable truth, and others persecute you for either discovering it, or speaking it, then you should really re-think where their motivation comes from. Darkness HATES the light.
Facts for you all to chew on:
1. It appears to be true that the phrase "sovereign citizen" has been used by individuals and groups who may or may not have "good" or "moral" intentions.
2. It also appears to be true that it is important to certain individuals and groups to ascribe and associate the words "sovereign citizen" and their meanings to individuals and/or groups who have a perceivable negative connotation about them.
3. No one here has asked why that is.
4. In 1913, the federal constitution was illegally and unconstitutionally amended by a de facto congress among highly suspicious circumstances to create the Federal Reserve Banking System. A central bank. An idea, made clear by their own writings to be abhorrent to the founding fathers and in no way by an authority granted by the People through the constitution. The word "bank" is nowhere to be found in the constitution. The writers knew of banks, knew of the word "bank," yet never included it in the constitution.
5. During the 1930s and 40s in particular, the congress, without authority, unconstitutionally granted essentially dictatorial authority and power to president in response to the dire circumstances created by the fraudulently initiated depression.
6. The depression was a direct result of the inflation/deflation caused by the very nature of the new banking system coupled with the market manipulation of the "elite" families of this country and their foreign friends.
7. In the 1930s, the president ordered the closing of banks (bank holiday). Private banks. Then he ordered the American People to surrender their gold, all of it except a very small amount (small jewelry).
8. The REAL money that the American People had used (gold & silver) since day one, was confiscated and replaced with FIAT paper money backed by debt/credit, not real valuable materials with inherent and stable value. Effectively and actually what was essentially done was Americans gave everything that gave them economic power, the private ownership of their own money, over to the PRIVATE owners of the "Federal" Reserve Bank. Which by the way is NOT OWNED OR OPERATED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES. The assets (gold, silver, real property, present and future LABOR/productivity) of the American People were pledged to international bankers in return for practically UNLIMITED CREDIT.
9. Around the same time period, the common law (the law UNDER which the constitution was written) was being extinguished and replaced by equity law. (ROMAN CIVIL LAW). Despite the information speard around about the "common law" and despite what attorneys are taught in their 3 years at law school, the common law is the system of law that allows the people of a republic to remain as free as possible. It is inherently an adversarial system that applies "real world" concepts, logic, and reason to issues for resolution or settlement. Equity law is a fictitious law system that is like playing Monopoly and making your own rules, and enforcing those rules your way. Civil law allows government to have power, sometimes more power than the citizens. Common law leaves ALL OF THE POWER in the hands of the People. That is why according to the original constitution, the founding fathers acknowledged the common law as the supreme law and made SURE it was made available through the courts to the people in all cases.
10. The fictitious "law" that equity or civil law is, is a needed tool to make things legal that ought not to be legal. Under the common law, there shall be a remedy for every wrong. Under equity/civil, the government can make murder and theft "legal." And in civil law, if there is no "law" against it, it's not a crime.
11. Under this equity law system, the government been able to make "legal" many unlawful and wrong activities perpetrated by individuals, agencies, corporations, governments, etc. Keep in mind that statutes, codes, and regulations, are called such BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT LAWS.
12. The American people existed long before the constitution or the United States. The constitution does NOT create a true nation or country. That is why there is no governor or ruler of the U.S.
13. The constitution creates a trust (corporation). That is why it has a president, vp, secretary, and treasurer, LIKE ALL CORPORATIONS.
13. Logic: according to the constitution of each State (republic/country), the People ordained and established the governments to manage the interstate and international commerce, defense, etc. of and between the states. Does it say "we the citizens" ordain and establish....? Clearly, citizens are a different term and mean something different. The term "citizen of United States" is interestingly not specifically defined as different from the common meaning until the 14th amendment in 1868. They are specifically defined as persons being born or naturalized within the united States, AND subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. This is the first time it is seen that the Federal Government has created subjects to itself. The federal government cannot possibly have jurisdiction over the people, because the people created it and are "sovereign" in relation to it. This new "entity" called a citizen of the Unites States was created right at a time coincidentally, when African slaves were now freed by law. The government created this subject entity to be a "status" to put the newly freed slaves into, so the slaves would not have the full freedom and power that the People have enjoyed. While they were at it, it did not take long for the idea to catch on that the elite could also subjugate the People using this system. People consent to it all of the time up to the present day. "Are you a U.S. CITIZEN"......"Yes, of course."
14. The People own the government, created the government, and cannot be subject to government or any acts, or "laws" it passes or propagandizes. That is why, when a crime is committed against another or his property, the government may catch the criminal and bring him/her to the GRAND JURY for indictment and trial, not to a government employee JUDGE. Because the grand jury represents and is comprised of PEOPLE, not citizens. The State and/or Federal Government has NO AUTHORITY to , itself, prosecute one of the People. UNLESS YOU CONSENT TO IT. Next time you get a traffic ticket (victimless equity crime) and go to court to fight it, tell me what you see on the docket or caption. It will say, "STATE OF MISSOURI v. JOHN SMITH, defendant." You're listed as the defendant, why is the state not listed as plaintiff? The state will NEVER declare itself as a PLAINTIFF. BECAUSE THE STATE HAS NO STANDING. IT DOESN'T ACTUALLY EXIST FACTUALLY, AND IT'S NOT SOVEREIGN RELATIVE TO YOU.
15. That is also why "arraignment" exists. The people are all sovereign. Therefore, if the government in any way wishes to prosecute you or punish you for breaking one of it's rules, especially one that didn't involve an injured party (adversary), they need to secure your consent (whether you or your attorney know it or not) to proceed in a court NOT OF LAW, but of civil rule. By entering any plea in a court that is not a court of record, (look that term up in Black's 4th) (a court of record is your birth right in this country, and it is what protects you from government oppression and tyranny) you have consented to be prosecuted according to THEIR rules and by THEM. Usually at arraignment, you are asked by a JUDGE, "You are charged with violating section 1410.9 of the California Penal Code and Title 3 section 328 of the California General Statutes, do you plead guilty, not guilty, or nolo contendere?" What he is REALLY saying is, "Do you give up your full right to a court of record, and all of your common law rights, and all of your constitutionally secured rights, and your right to NOT be under our jurisdiction by agreeing that the statutes and codes I have cited are VALID by entering a plea of any kind? Or do you object to this star-chamber kangaroo court and wish to be brought to justice in the highest and fairest court in the land?"
16. We live in a REPUBLIC. Not a Democracy. If you plan to argue this, at least look up the legal definitions of each of these terms. My guess is you won't even find the definition of "republican form of government." In a republic (esp. the one to which you pledged your allegiance) the people are free and fully sovereign. The government exists solely as an agency to aid in the affairs of the people and has no legal authority to tread in any way on your rights FOR ANY REASON.
17. A democracy is a society in which either directly or through representation, the majority has all of the rights and power and can do whatever they want, while the minority have no rights but only privileges granted to them by the majority. Individual rights do not truly exist. If the majority thinks you're a waste of air, then you are executed and your property taken. This is half a step away from pure communism.
18. So generally, the common law is the people's only real protection against the government exceeding it's authority. So don't scoff at it. If you only knew what it really was and how to use it, you might shut your trap and begin suing officials and agents who are obviously grossly out of line. They can't get off on technicalities and b .s. in your court. The shift toward Roman Civil Law (Equity/Statutes) represents an effort by the elite to crush your opportunity to protect your rights lawfully, and to bring into existence a system in which fake money, fraud, and unlimited credit can exist "legally." Ever notice "lawful" and "legal" are used together in the same sentence in some of the statutes and codes and other instances. That's because they have different meanings. Find out what they are.
19. As far as this whole "strawman" idea. I can't speak to that very much because I have not tried it or used it. But, the concept is fairly simple, it's just so obvious yet antithetical to everything we all have been led to believe, that it is a hard sell. But again, in terms of fact and logic, an accessible "trust" system must exist in order to facilitate the unlimited credit that the people bought back in 1933/35, and their must be a strawman or other corporate entity attached to you because the simple fact is, that in the equity and fiat money systems, everything is fictitious, and only fictions can interact with fictions. Think of it like playing a board game. You must have a token that represents you and your position in the game. It's all a game.
20. Also, check out the Internal Revenue Code, Title 26 U.S.C. Section 7806. Read it carefully and look up definitions if you have to. Related, did you ever wonder why it's called a tax "return" when all you seem to be doing is "paying" taxes out?
21. In ending here, I just want to be clear that my only wish is for people to seek the truth and stop arguing and asserting views like schoolchildren. Search for FACTS and use your brain to reach logical conclusions on your own. Then compare those facts with what you believe, and be better off for it. Because KNOWLEDGE IS POWER. And "he who slumbers on his rights, has none." (paraphrased)
Some will rob you with a six gun and some with a fountain pen - Woodie Guthrie
Like mushrooms popping up in a damp basement, a slew of court settlements have been registered recently involving the big banks and their role in the financial crisis. An informal review of settlements over the last two years reveals about 16 multi-million dollar payouts from the big banks amounting to some $1.6 billion in fines and restitution and $13 billion in buybacks of auction-rate securities that were represented to be as safe as cash.
Sounds impressive, doesn't it? But when fines are stacked up against an elite white-collar crime spree worth trillions, it is a little less impressive.
Broad Array of Crimes Revealed
A review of the settlements shows an array of fraudulent and illegal actions.
* Predatory, deceptive and abusive lending related to mortgages
* Securities fraud, including creating investment vehicles designed to fail
* Accounting fraud
* Brokerage fraud
* Bribery of government officials
* Undisclosed conflict of interest in financial analysis and advice
* Lying to shareholders and investors
* Robbing consumers with abusive overdraft fees
* Robbing homeowners by overcharging them by hundreds or thousands of dollars, when they were already in bankruptcy and foreclosure
A pattern is emerging: no admission of wrongdoing, earnest promises to do a better job and a fine representing a fraction of the infraction. Because the fine is paid by shareholders, no one is held accountable and the whole incident is swept under the rug.
Last week, a federal judge reviewing a proposed settlement between the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Citigroup sounded off. "Why isn't the government getting tough with the banks?" Judge Ellen Segal Huvelle demanded of government lawyers. The SEC wanted to fine Citigroup $75 million for failing to disclose to shareholders some $50 billion in subprime mortgage investments that were deteriorating during the financial crisis and ultimately crippled the bank. This is the third time that a federal judge has weighed in with regulators to demand stiffer penalties against the banks.
Incompetence and Indifference Allows Elites to Avoid Accountability
In these cases there is no jury. The judge acts as a stand-in for the public interest. While we can hope that judges are getting tougher on these settlements, the whole process lets the people who committed the crimes avoid the public rage and personal accountability that helps to deter future crimes.
Recently, Judge Emmet G. Sullivan sharply questioned one settlement with Barclays Bank telling government lawyers that the public might see the settlement as a "free ride" and noted that "requiring banking officials to stand before federal judges and enter pleas of guilty might be a powerful deterrent to this type of conduct."
But now, two years after Wall Street's fraudulent and reckless behavior collapsed the economy, costing average Americans trillions in lost wages, savings and housing wealth and throwing eight million people out of work and some six million families out of their homes, not one Wall Street banker or predatory lender is behind bars.
"The failure of the Bush and Obama administrations to imprison a single CEO of the nonprime mortgage lending specialists that led what the FBI aptly named an 'epidemic' of mortgage fraud in 2006 -- four years ago -- demonstrates a level of incompetence and indifference to the crimes of the elites that is staggering," says University of Missouri law Professor Bill Black, a former federal regulator during the Savings and Loan crisis of the 1980s.
Even Drug Money Laundering Tolerated
America's largest banks apparently can engage in the most flagrantly criminal activity and emerge unscathed. While average Americans would be given a stiff jail term for laundering even small amounts of drug money, this summer Bloomberg News broke the story that Wells Fargo/Wachovia had been caught laundering billions in Mexican drug cartel money, but got away with a slap on the wrist.
The Justice Department charge sheet against the bank indicates that between 2003 and 2008, Wachovia handled $378.4 billion for Mexican currency exchanges, "the largest violation of the Bank Secrecy Act, an anti-money-laundering law, in U.S. history." According to Bloomberg, the sum is equal to one-third of Mexico's current gross domestic product. Yet the bank's penalty for laundering over $380 billion in drug money is going to be a promise not to ever do it again and a $160 million fine. Given that the firm's top officers were alerted to this activity, which fuels Mexico's murderous drug war, shouldn't someone have to stand trial?
Unequal Justice
The perception of unequal justice -- one set of rules for the average Joe, and another for the elites on Wall Street -- erodes the public's faith in the criminal justice system and our political system as a whole.
"Our prisons have tens of thousands of blue collar thieves. If one added up the cumulative financial damage they caused it would not represent one-hundredth of one percent of the losses caused by a single fraudulent large nonprime specialty lender," says Black, who hopes that someday a leader will emerge with the courage (and common sense) to prosecute the elite criminals that cause our recurrent, intensifying financial crises.
Bank of America ex-CEO Kenneth Lewis and ex-CFO Joe Price, are facing fraud charges connected to their personal involvement in the of a $3.6 billion dollar bonus package to[Merrill Lynch executives shortly before the bank took over the investment firm in 2008. This time, it's not federal agencies pressing charges but the New York Attorney General's office.
Baring a dismissal, these two bankers may yet find themselves before a judge this fall. But it is highly unlikely that this one prosecution will satisfy the nation's hunger for justice.
TAKE ACTION: Click here to send a note to the FBI and the Department of Justice and tell them to pick up the pace. These firm may be too big to fail, but their executives are not too big for jail.
LEARN MORE: See our informal tally of recent settlements below.
***************************************************************
BIG BANKS SETTLEMENTS
The Firm: Goldman Sachs
1. The Company/Subsidiary: Goldman Sachs/Litton Loan Servicing LP
The Settlement Amount: $60 million
The Settlement date: May 10, 2009
The Court or Federal Agency: The Massachusetts attorney general's office
The Complaint: Goldman paid the fine to end the Massachusetts AG's investigation into allegations that it engaged in predatory lending practices in the state. The settlement will be used to reduce the mortgage payments of 714 Massachusetts residents who had secured subprime mortgages funded by Goldman Sachs.
Source: Wayne Leslie, "Goldman Pays to End State Inquiry Into Loans," The New York Times, May 11, 2009.
2. The Company/Subsidiary: Goldman Sachs
The Settlement Amount: $550 million ($300 million to the U.S. government and $250 million to investors
The Settlement date: July 15, 2010
The Court or Federal Agency: The Securities and Exchange Commission
The Complaint: In April 2010, the bank was accused of securities fraud in a civil suit by the SEC that claimed the bank had created and sold mortgage investments that were secretly devised to fail. Though Goldman did not formally admit to the SEC's allegations, it agreed to a judicial order barring it from committing intentional fraud in the future under federal securities laws.
Source: Gretchen Morgensen,
eric seiger
Gentlemen: While I often find myself at odds with the opinions of your news network, I applaud your decision not to cover the Koran burning insanity. You are starving the attention-craving beast, precisely as necessary. Congratulations! ...
Scans set standard for how connectivity evolves during maturation.
It was a cast-iron certainty that at least one MP would go off at a diversion during the News of the World phone-hacking debate.
