ECCLESIASTIC COMMONWEALTH COMMUNITY
ECCLESIASTIC COMMONWEALTH COMMUNITY
Home | Profile | Register | Active Topics | Members | Search | FAQ
Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?

 All Forums
 The Roman World
 Statute Law
 ARRESTED for no Driver's Licence - Advice Needed!
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly
Previous Page | Next Page
Author  Topic Next Topic
Page: of 3

Lewish
Advanced Member

uSA
496 Posts

Posted - 15 Apr 2003 :  01:26:52  Show Profile
Owenbrittont, Underhorse was talking about an appearance bond, sort of an insurance bond, against the court. I see no mention of a form 95 complaint.
Go to Top of Page

Livefree
Advanced Member

USA
270 Posts

Posted - 04 May 2003 :  21:24:43  Show Profile
Tip for the Day:

I heard on a truth radio program recently where a judge asked this guy what his name was and he said, "I am me", and the judge then asked yes, but isn't _______ your name? The guy said, "that is what they call me". The judge then turned to the baliff and said, this case is dismissed!

doer, your posts are excellent. I really enjoy them.

Go to Top of Page

Lewish
Advanced Member

uSA
496 Posts

Posted - 04 May 2003 :  22:06:53  Show Profile
I know of a case where the judge asked a guy "what is your name" and the guy replied "no, it isn't". And the judge said "What?" The man said, "You said 'What' is my name. But What is not my name". They volleyed for a few more sentences and then the judge had him removed from the courtroom and then dismissed the case.

Lewis
Go to Top of Page

Livefree
Advanced Member

USA
270 Posts

Posted - 04 May 2003 :  22:38:00  Show Profile
I took this from the book The Commerce Game Exposed. It is not copyrighted so that's why I'm posting it. It may help Caleb with any future encounters with the law (hopefully none!) although I don't know how much of this can be used for NZ courts.

A Courtroom Scenario

One of the first things that need to be disclosed is that you may end up having to spend as much as 72 hours in a jail cell. Before you venture into this process you must be prepared to spend that short period of time behind bars. If not (due to family, job etc.), we ask that you remember...."This process is NOT for everyone!"... and consider that it may NOT be for you. Take a moment and think about that.

All righty....are you still with us? If so, let's continue.

YOu must fully understand why you are doing what you doing, have faith that it's correct, and know that in the end you will prevail. You must stay the course and follow through. If you deviate, you will lose. To make matters worse, you'll still spend an equal length of time (or more) in a jail cell. Remember, no matter what a public official says to you, promises you, or guarantees you, they only say what they say for their benefit as a means to their end. If that requires lying to you, that's exactly what they will do.

You should also understand that there is no need to be rude during these encounters. You must simply view them as business.

The entire Accepted for Value process is a business procedure. This portion is also business. It it composed of four steps: three questions and one request. These four steps ALWAYS remain the same. Do NOT change the words. Do NOT try to "make it better." The request is NOT a demand.

Although this explanation will be from the perspective of a courtroom
encounter, the principles and the four steps remain the same for any
encounter initiated by a public official.

Usually, in a courtroom setting, the bailiff or the judge calls the case and you are expected to stand and walk inside the bar: to a table or a desk of some sort. Stand, but do NOT cross the bar. Instead, you should IMMEDIATELY as your first question.

If the judge asks, "Are you the defendant," or "Are you Mr/Ms so and so?" DO NOT ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS....UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES. Instead, you will perform a perfect "mirror image" right back to the judge (thereby taking over the situation) by asking your first question.

First Question: "May I have your Name"

All commerce is conducted by agreement and the first item needed in an
agreement is the name of the second party engaged in that agreement that is exactly what you are doing. You are attempting to "write" an agreement.

The judge may not give his name. If the judge (or any other public official) fails to respond and stands mute, that action relinquishes control of the agreement to you. It also signifies the waiver of his rights, in reference to the agreement that he attempted to"write" when he summoned you forward.

If the judge does not give you his name, don't belabor the point. By his silence he has essentially given you a default agreement. Move on to question two. If he does give his name say "thank you," and continue on to question two.

Question two: "Do You Have A Claim Against Me?" Since a judge cannot
prosecute anyone from the bench, he will probably say "no," or will decline to answer all together. If he does not answer, don't belabor the point. Again you have his default agreement. Move on to question three.

If the judge answers "yes" then you must demand that he be sworn in and testify under oath to the actual damage stated in the claim which he is pressing. Chances are he will not swear in. Move on to question three.

If he threatens you with contempt say, "I don't want to be in contempt, I'm just trying to determine who has a claim against me. Do you have a claim against me?" At this point he may admit he has no claim. If he doesn't answer, don't belabor the point. As mentioned above, you will have his default agreement. Move on to question three.

Question three: "Do You Know Of Anyone Who Has A Claim Against Me?"

Notice the wording, "anyONE WHO" - not anybody that" or "any person." This is very important.

If either the judge or the prosecutor says anything to the effect, "The State of <whatever> has a claim against you," say, "Is there anyone present to press the claim against me, in any alleged name other than their own?"

If the prosecutor (or anyone else) stands up to press the claim then you must demand that he be sworn in, and testify under oath as to the actual damage stated in the claim which he is pressing. Chances are nearly one-hundred percent that he will not swear in. If he doesn't, then you will say "There are no claimants who have sworn in today, under penalty of perjury, with a first hand damage claim against me." Now move on to step four: the request.

The request: "I Request The Order Of The Court Be Released To Me"

Public officials act on the premise of legislative venue. They must have their authority delegated to them, and that delegation must be in
writing....an Order.

The United States operates an "emergency" government, which basically
consists of two parts: the apparent political side (which actually operates upon the police power); and the commercial side (which is operated through the private/central national federal reserve banking system).

The office of the Secretary of the Treasury runs the commercial aspect of the "democracy". Consequently, each and every act and action of the "emergency" government has a corresponding parallel on it's commercial side. If a security is issued, i.e., a complaint, an information, a warrant, a citation, an invoice, etc., it all has commercial value attached to it,. So, the Order that you requested would have to come from the Secretary of the Treasury.

The Secretary of the Treasury is the man with the liability for the
bookkeeping. He is also the one who has set (appraised) the value of the security instrument. If there is no Order going back to the Secretary of Treasury, the individuals acting as public officials have no authority to collect the debt. To attempt to do so would be acting as a rogue agent.

After asking the three questions and making the request that the Order of the court be released to you, the next thing you will say is: "It appears as though this public business is finished. Since there is no further public business for me to carry on, I am leaving." You have just given equitable notice to all parties present.

If the judge says something to the effect of, "Stop that man!," stop
immediately. Turn and face the judge. Then ask, "Sir, do you have a claim against me?" And finally, request the release of the Order of the court, followed by a repetition of your final statement. "It appears as though this public business is finished. Since there's no further public business for me to carry on, I'm leaving." Then, walk out again. Repeat this as often as necessary.

If the judge says something to the effect of, "I'll find you in contempt of court if you take one more step," stop immediately. Turn and face the judge and say, "Sir, I do not want to be held in contempt of court. Tell me what I have to do in order not to be held in contempt of court and I will do it, under protest and extreme duress. Also, I take exception to your command and reserve all my rights." Do not resist them. Everything they do, that you feel the need to resist, is usually done for the sole (or at least predominant) reason of intimidation and agitation. Do not allow yourself to be baited.

When you go into court like this you are exercising your rights under Public International Law, to determine what kind of business these people are trying to do with you. Under Public International Law private rights are recognized. You are there in your "public capacity."

As soon as you engage in a co-business venture, in their private business, you are in an agreement, and you are in their court, and everything proceeds.

Remember, the U.S. Constitution states that no State shall pass any Law
impairing the Obligation of Contracts.

The judge called the case in order to transact private business, in his
private court. I'm sure many of you have heard a judge make the statement that it is his courtroom. How true that is. But, you are not there to conduct his private business. You are there for your public appearance. You are outside the venue of the judges private business. Remember that. Only focus on what you are doing.

#1 May I Have Your Name?

This means: I want to know with whom I am doing business

#2 Do You Have A Claim Against Me?

This means: Are we here on any public business?

#3 Do You Know Of Anyone Who Has A Claim Against Me?

This means: Public Business, are you a witness?

#4 I Request The Order Of The Court Be Released To Me.

This is a request to know who is behind the claim and by what authority are they attempting to collect the debt?

SOME THINGS TO REMEMBER

Never answer questions. Do not follow the directives of the court,
except as stated above. It's important that you understand what you are
doing and that you follow all the way through. Below is an example of what can happen if you are not focused, or have not done your studies.

A gentleman walked into a courtroom with a toothpick in his mouth. He knew to ask the questions and request the release of the Order. He was doing fine, having no problem getting through the court encounter. Then, as he neared the end, he began to look a little confused as to how to continue. At that point the Judge told him "Take that toothpick out of your mouth." The gentleman reached up and removed the toothpick from his mouth. The judge immediately instructed the bailiff to seize the man and jail him for ten days, for contempt of court. Do you see? When that man followed the orders of the judge he relinquished his control, abandoned his claim, and traversed into the judge's private business, which is the business of corporate state. The proper action would have been to leave the toothpick n his mouth and say, "Do you have a claim against me?"

You must learn this and understand why you are saying what you are saying (and why you are not saying what you're not). Perhaps just as important is to know who you are when you walk into a situation.

Many people say they are sovereigns, but few walk as though they are. YOU must KNOW who you are. YOU must KNOW you are sovereign.

Ask yourself, what really is the difference between you and, let's say, the King of England (if there was one)? Or, what is the difference between royalty, in general and you? What makes royalty....Royalty?

We believe the answer is simple. We believe the difference is, royalty
believes they are royalty, and they make everyone else believe it also.


Edited by - Livefree on 04 May 2003 23:03:11
Go to Top of Page

n/a
deleted

19 Posts

Posted - 05 May 2003 :  09:40:14  Show Profile
Dear "Victim"
Loving Greetings in our Masters name,
As it is similiar if not the same in Australia consider what I prepared should a need arise. There is some interesting thoughts as we are both in "British Colo
nies"
As a Bondman and Ambassador of Jesus, The Christ,
(statements that may be of assistance)

These are study notes only and are not to be taken or used in any shape or form.
The author has produced these notes as his personal study and learning only and will not be responsible in any way should anyone use this information.
The capital letter “X” has been substituted for each capital letter in the name.
The lower case “x” has been substituted for each lower case letter in the name.

Lawful
court- XXXX XXXX

Your Honour! Before I answer I need to clarify is this a court of administration or jurisdiction??

court-If he says “Administration”

Your Honour-Is this a Christian court and are you a Christian??(hold up your Bible)

Court- ??? The Magistrate usually walks out.( Perhaps their not Christian?)
Should they continue and again call your name.

yourself- “You(direct towards the prosecuting attorney) say that I am,”
Your Honour, I am here ……….(reason, as a notice was found at a door etc.) where I at times take up housekeeping, and this petition attempts to create a colourable persona under colourable law by the name X-X-X-X X period, X-X-X-X. The artifice being used here to deceive this honourable court must be abated as a public nuisance
For the record, I am a bondservant and ambassador of Lord Jesus the Christ, Advocate and Wonderful Counsellor and are using the Right of Visitation to exercise the Ministerial Powers to be heard on this matter.
It is written that thou shalt worship the Lord Jesus Christ, and only Him thou shalt serve.
My Christian name, XXXX-XXXXXXX: of the family XXXX, spelt with a capital X, lower case, xxx, capital X, lower case, xxxxxx, and my family name is spelt capital X, lower case xxx.
And also for the record, I am not a “Mr” or a “sir” for these are pagan and heathen titles of nobility.
“With respect Your Honour and for the record, you being an officer of the Crown, and sworn under Oath to be a loyal subject of Queen Elizabeth 11, our Monarch, God save the Queen, and myself, a loyal subject of our Queen, I seek to clarify, as there are Holy Bibles in this court, and with the fact that our Queen did swear an Oath at her coronation to uphold the faith.
I could not possibly be the entity the name this court and its documents are attempting to imply and for the record the issue here is not about me, but about whether or not this is a lawful court.
Is this a Christian court and are you a Christian?(hold up your Bible)
I also need to know is our learned friend a Christian?
(Should they answer “Yes”)Just to help me understand your honour, your sworn Oath (and also our learned friends Oath) confirm you both acknowledge God Almighty and as officers of the Crown you are to obey our Monarch.
God save our Queen, Queen Elizabeth 11.
All words spoken and given in evidence in this court are asked and required to be the whole truth and nothing but the truth, that we all honour both our God, His Holy Scriptures as in this court, and our Queen that we bring no disrespect, repugnance or inconsistencies to either our God or our Queen and I seek justice accordingly.

Your Honour, it is clear to see that as my given Christian name Xxxx-Xxxxxxx: of the family Xxxx, spelt with a capital X, lower case, xxx, capital X, lower case, xxxxxx, and my family name is spelt capital X, lower case xxx, and being a man, indigenous and a sojourner, born , I am told in Victor Harbour, in the state of South Australia, being part of the mainland continent of Australia, and being a bondservant of Jesus the Christ, I could not possibly be the colourable entity the name this court and its colourable documents are attempting to imply. I am a flesh and blood Christian Man created by God and God alone and have my substance through Him.
A fictional persona is a “person” of created fiction with no substance or true foundation and can even be a corporation This is a clear case of misnomer.
My Law is My Family Bible, I am who I say I am, not who the …Attorney says I am.
It is written that thou shalt worship the Lord Jesus Christ, and only Him thou shalt serve.
Further I sayeth not and I stand mute

These are study notes only and are not to be taken or used in any shape or form.
The author has produced these notes as his personal study and learning only and will not be responsible in any way should anyone use this information.

The capital letter “X” has been substituted for each capital letter in the name.
The lower case “x” has been substituted for each lower case letter in the name.
Hope this is of assistance.
It's great "Down Under" but we have to work at it too.
Regards
Getreal
Go to Top of Page

Timothy Patton
Junior Member

USA
20 Posts

Posted - 26 Jul 2003 :  21:04:03  Show Profile
Dear Victim:

Many have been and are in your shoes--don't get discouraged. To travel the road that we servants of Yahweh have chosen, you've got to be willing to take a few knocks and receive some bruises; but more importantly, you like myself need the experience--how many times have you been told that? Gain experience and confidence. If we don't have the confidence, then it must be fear. Drive out fear with learning and experience and faith!

My advice is for your future. Ask yourself the question, "am I willing or able to go to jail?" A Habeas should get you out of jail, then learn how to defend yourself. You should have a Habeas already on file and ready to execute.

If you are willing to go to jail, then I offer you a little tip to avoid giving an I.D. when being pulled over by a fascist cop. I don't know about NZ, but in the States we have the right to keep quiet and the right for legal counsel. When a cop pulls you over and comes to your window, immediately take control. I'll roll down the window and ask the cop one simple question, "what is your reason for pulling me over? is it civil or criminal"? He has to say criminal, and when he does mirandize yourself. Say "if this is criminal, I have the right to keep silent and I have a right for legal counsel". At this point maintain your silence. Tell it to the jailers too.

I've been in jail over night two times for no drivers license and no registration and all that crap, but I've learned this move after the fact. In my case I am willing to go to jail, and the Habeas will get me out. But I am not willing to I.D. And if they are going to be mean with you, as in alot of cases I suspect, you want them to trample on your first amendment rights, and warn them before they do. Document and bear witness to as much misbehavior as you can.

One other move for the record, in Texas where I am from, a charge of a Misdemeanor C is a nonjailable offense, and as such their own code says they can't take your fingerprints. Of course they do put us in jail and take fingerprints, but the point is you need to incorporate all these "unlawful" offenses into your case and find cases where people like us are winning. We need to turn their own code against the evildoers.

Finally, in any court case the bench will always establish from the start two things, as you probably know. First, identity. Second, is there a contract. As far as identity, there are Does and Don'ts, right? Don't give your name, as I am suggesting, and the the Do is tell the bench who you are. You've got to have an identity or they will sure as shooting throw you back to jail. I tell them via a lenghty Affidavit that I am an American Citizen and I enter it into the record by giving the court Judicial Notice. If you don't know about Judicial Notice, you need to learn--very important. You must force the court to listen to your Affidavits. Second of all, do you have a contract with the State--yes or no? If not case closed the court has no jurisdiction. If and when I go in to court next, I will enter specify motions on jurisdictional grounds and I will do my best to defend them, unless the facts in my case will impress a jury or a judge--probably not. Besides what judge is willing to respect an alleged defendant who is in his own person--In propria persona.

Clearly I prefer not going to jail--I've got a family to provide for, but I do have my convictions. My choice presently with my two cars, until we find sufficient remedy in the law, is to register both autos in a offshore trust or Neveda Corporation Sole, and no drivers license, and I try not to offend the coppers. Unless you are willing to live like the Amish who have learned how to avoid making contracts with the English and Jews, and live at relative peace within their unincorporated society. Our fathers mistakenly have sold us into bondage as we choose to live in a corporated society. Solution--start forming your own unincorporated jural society.

May Yahweh bless and deliver you from these sons of Belial. Thanks for listening.

Live Free or Die,

Tim from Texas


Go to Top of Page

Lewish
Advanced Member

uSA
496 Posts

Posted - 28 Jul 2003 :  12:02:39  Show Profile
Hi Tim,

I am formerly from Texas, so I can appreciate the attitude of some the "peace" officers there. Some aren't so "peaceful".

I have learned that the best thing to do is stop the problem from in the car. Only roll you window down part way. When the officer asks for your Driver's License, tell him "I do not consent to contract with you." When he presses the matter, especially when he threatens to drag you out of the car and off to jail, reply "Since you are forcing me to contract with you, then you are hereby bound by my contract as well." Hand him your copyright notice with the self-executing contract which makes him personally liable for some amount of dollars (named in the contract) if he proceeds and violates your copyright notice. Then hand him your Driver's License and your Copyright Notice in such a way that he can't take the DL without taking the Copyright Notice.

Some officer's will refuse to take it and walk away. Others will take it back to their car and read it. Perhaps call an attorney for advice.

But, so far, I have yet to hear of a case where the officer continued the matter and wrote a ticket. Except for one case where the officer wrote a "warning" ticket. But, that is un-recorded and is not a violation of the Copyright Notice.

I know of one person, who about a month ago, go pulled over on I-90 for doing 90 (well the sign did say 90, didn't it) and his car plates and his DL were both expired. No Ticket. The officer spent a good 15 minutes trying to decide what to do. He came back and threw the papers into the car and said "Please drive carefully!" That was all.

Peace,

Lewis
Go to Top of Page

doer
Advanced Member

uSA
198 Posts

Posted - 30 Jul 2003 :  03:55:48  Show Profile
Here is a thread from another "legal" Forum that seems helpful and interesting. Enjoy.
--Doer

From: Frog Farmer <[email protected]..>
Date: Sun Jul 27, 2003 3:48 pm
Subject: Re: [tips_and_tricks] More on Tickets Hearing

Hobot wrote -- > I argree with your views and references Don and travel privately on pulbic roads w/o lic for over a decade now, not w/o facing challenges by uniformed armed people staging a fake emergency with flashing lights acting like real sheriffis 'serving' process, acting as a bailiff too demanding a bond and appearence etc etc and on and on.

Frog Farmer responds – It sounds to me like you're pulling over to talk (without forcing the issue to see if they'll stop you - they've never "stopped" me, as I know there is no such thing as a psychological tractor beam weapon). Twice, when I didn't respond to the fake emergency, it was called off without me stopping. Of course I did smile. Maybe it was the smiley face that did it.

If they were to actually STOP ME, I'd wait for them to impersonate an officer and arrest them for the felony committed in my presence. Otherwise, wouldn't I become an accomplice to a felony? It must not be happening that way in other parts of this wide country. Of course, if they never tried to impersonate an officer, I'd have other claims against mere neighbors misbehaving.

H > Interesting aside, I don't own any vehicles in my name [trusts] as they were last registered in TX 5 yr ago but not in AR, which gets noticed at times but has never ever been a ticket or court issue in the 'legal' attacks.

FF - They don't feel that they have to do a good job because they figure you're an average American.

H > Don't know status in your or other's STATES but in AR I found this in the regs on driver lic. case notes and is a thorn in the pants confusion to me yet, especially with language in the AR Const. states Natural Persons are Residents along with the rest of the aritifical persons.

FF - Yes, TX and AR are both artificial too. Why not decide to live in Texas or Arkansas instead?

H > Of course when you dig deep into origin of various statures there's always a stated emergency at the base of the 'authority'.

FF - At a base closer to the ground there are qualifications whereby mere neighbors become able to act as officers. Any person may waive the qualifications in their own particular cases (kind of like self-commitment).

H > In General - Arrest - Driving without license. The state has the police power to promulgate regulations calculated to promote saftety in the use of highways.

FF - Granted, of course!

H > Driving a motor vehicle on a priviilege, and not an unrestrained, natural right,

FF - Correct again. Do you think we could get the average American to confess to the term of art, which never existed in the law until the definitions of "operator" and "chauffeur" were blended into "driver"?? What I don't get is, the day before they blended the two regulated classes of operator and chauffeur, there were MANY Americans who knew they didn't need a license to go downtown in their own cars. Travelling in your own car was widely shared experience. The state had no equitable interest in their cars, but there were still people going into the DMV who wanted to give them one. And now today those people make up the vast majority.

Back then (I remember the 1950's) the two classes of license were blended into one, to eliminate redundancy, and suddenly, a whole bunch of people who weren't regulated under either of the former classes now somehow came to the conclusion that they were now regulated. Of course many did not, and many still exist today without the new "street smarts" that "everybody knows". It would almost be funny if it wasn't so tragic that even those who want to be free imprison themselves by their inability to read, and the resulting admissions and confessions they can be cajoled into making out of ignorance. Of course, peer group pressure is more powerful than is widely admitted.

H > and the state may require a license of those who exercise the privilege. Satterlee v. State, 289 Ark. 450, 711 S.W.2d 827 (1986)

FF - That's right! "May". Reminds me of the time I got a notice saying that unless I turned myself in, "a warrant may be issued for your arrest." After I read that, I decided to find out if "may" also means "may not". It did. You may understand this. And you may not.

H > The "licensing" of Americans in the constitutional use of their pubic right-of-ways, can only secure and support the right of travel, which has existed as a right since before the creation of this nation.

FF - It is not happening. It appears to be happening, for the gullible, and those who cannot read or write adequately.

H > If it is not now a right, when did that right cease to exist?

FF - It ceases to exist as soon as you define a right with a word that obviously means a privilege, which you might know if you were lucky enough to actually read the laws in order of their authority (Constitutions first, statutes second, regulations third, public opinion a.k.a. "street smarts" last if at all).

H > Show me the constitutional amendment that has specifically revoked this right!

FF - There isn't one, but your own use of words makes it so for you. If you could only use the correct terms, and not admit to driving (despite the marketing efforts of Chevrolet) you wouldn't be admitting to being regulated.

H > If constitutional users of the public right-of-ways are not "licensed", what direct and immediate, provable threat to public safety would this create?

FF - None. Ask them. Ask me or the others that do it. We're probably actually safer than somebody with limited liability insured for collision. How many people on this list understand the implications of limited liability and what it does to one's "free" status? Raise your hands please.

H > Show me the facts of the need of "licensing" the non-commercial users of the public right-of-ways!

FF - Show me where it's done. I look at the statutes and see the opposite. Do you think that a vegetarian member of PETA would be dissuaded by a bureaucrat from buying a deer-hunting license? Why would anyone stop you from getting a license for something you'd never do? They need the revenue! And if you want go and apply and pay for something you don't need and would never use, who will stop you? Nobody.

H > If these facts do not exist, then the need for licensing does not exist.

FF - Maybe now it's becoming more clear...

H > YOU MAY have your private form of locomotion "registered" for usage for commercial purposes, but that doesn't mean that every time you are using your locomotion, that you are under "traffic" regulations for commercial vehicles.

FF - Yes, it does, because you yourself made the number of equitable interests plural instead of singular. The Certificate of Title you ACCEPTED is the proof of it.

H > It is beyond comprehension, that ALL users of the pubic right-of-ways would be subject to commercial regulations,

FF - But apparently it is not beyond the comprehension of the over 60% functionally illiterate Americans.

H > and that all constitutional uses of the public right-of-ways, have been revoked and nullified.

FF - I know. What IS it that makes the majority of Americans BELIEVE these lies and misinterpretations?! I believe it is due to a program widely referred to as "dumbing down".

H > Do not argue the statute, argue that your rights have been infringed.

FF - If you want to argue. If you don't want to argue (and thus traverse), DISQUALIFY as many "contenders" as you can! Don't skip any for expedience or convenience!

H > If you argue the "statute", you give it authority over you. If you argue constitutional rights, you give these authority over you.

FF - But you advised it above....??

H > "The motor vehicle statute does not apply to me, for I was not performing any commercial operations. I was only exercising a constitutional right. The right of free travel.

FF - And the kindly old officer explained to the recently graduated youngster, "but sir! The placing of state placards upon your vehicle is an admission and confession YOU chose to make. Sorry!"

H > Do not the public right-of-ways exist for the free travel of all Americans?

FF - It exists for all who don't waive the right in return for privileges of limited liability, dealing in debt, and applying to be regulated.

H > If not, when was this right revoked by a constitutional amendment? "

FF - The whole constitution was revoked March 27, 1861, when the quorum to conduct business under it was lost. Congress abandoned the House and Senate without setting a date to reconvene. Under parliamentary law of Congress, the session was closed, and because there was no provision for reconvening the assembly again, the adjournment dissolved the assembly. Congress ceased to exist as a lawful deliberative body. I dare say nobody can tell me when the constitution was restored to supremacy, or how.

A new substitute congress was convened under the military conquering power which put up a sham for the populace to follow. It too exists to this day under the military authority of the Commander-in-Chief operating under executive orders (the King's decree) and public policy, not the constitution and law.

The point is, Congress knew the rules of parliamentary law and knew that it could have adjourned lawfully, but instead chose a method that would destroy the law-making power of Congress.

H > Challenge the law enforcers, to prove they have jurisdiction over you as within constitutional principles.

FF - Nothing says you can't prove it for them by your own words and actions, and that's how it is mostly proven on the record, by the words and actions of the accused, often in answers to clever questions designed to elicit admissions and confessions on the record.

H > Just some thoughts ----------------------------- Don

FF - Just some facts ----------------- FF


Edited by - doer on 30 Jul 2003 03:57:37
Go to Top of Page

doer
Advanced Member

uSA
198 Posts

Posted - 30 Jul 2003 :  04:37:58  Show Profile
More good stuff from "Frog Farmer," et al --

From: Frog Farmer <[email protected]>
From: "tthor.geo" <[email protected]>
Subject: [tips_and_tricks] Re: IN RE: Dessie"s Post
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2003 02:01:41 -0000

"The great masses of the people... will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one." --Adolph Hitler, Mein Kampf, 1933.

California Statutes dating from around 1913 (read 40th session around pages 640-641) through 1959 and maybe later define who is to be regulated and licensed (these sections were preserved by reference in later years.). The secret is in the definitions of "operator" and "owner" and "person". I used them for my own cases in the 1980's.

"Operators" and "chauffeurs" are the "persons" licensed. Most people will be able to tell you if they are a chauffeur or not. However, many will incorrectly label themselves as operators or drivers. "Person" is defined in the corporate sense. Every definition other than "individual" meant more than one person. The exemption from operator licensing was made for a person transporting "his" (also included "her") "own property".

It's hard to find a concise citation explaining it all, probably as hard as it is to find a Supreme Court Case saying that humans have the right to breathe the Earth's atmosphere and drink water. Some things are assumed to be understood, and when they are not, hopefully the law defines them.

What part of "his own property" don't people understand? I guess they don't understand it at all. People seem to think that, while property may be divided amongst shared equitable interests, any one of those can say it is their own.

Bankers know that is not true. Insurance companies know that is not true. State Vehicle departments also know it is not true. How do you remedy the situation where high school and college graduates cannot distinguish a shared equitable interest from sole ("his own") ownership?

I see that most people actually are ignorant of the meaning of a shared equitable interest existing in the vehicles they "own" even AFTER they go and apply for certificates of title, and registration, where they fill their names in on forms as the "operator".

Maybe people should read the definitions of "own" and "owner" and investigate the effects of "granting an equitable interest" on "sole ownership". Maybe people should study up on how title to property rightfully changes hands, and how rights to property are surrendered in return for privileges (such as dealing in debt).

A guy named Bruce McCarthy collated a series of communications between himself and the State of Missouri, which showed the reality of the situation. He travelled the state towing one of those old shiny travel trailers, and he absolutely owned both the car and the trailer. Nobody else held an equitable interest, and that was the main lynch-pin to his winning position. Bruce titled his book "Manufacturer's Statement of Origin: The Keys to Ownership".

In it he showed that the MSO is the true title to a vehicle, and that a state "certificate" of title granted only "qualified ownership". Such property is not "one's own" due to the shared equitable interests involved.

If anyone takes the time to research the driver's license issue starting from the beginning it should be made clear by a reading of all the statutes together.

For a complete history of California Drivers Licensing, Go to --
http://www.geocities.com/tthor.geo/vehiclereg.html

--Doer

Edited by - doer on 30 Jul 2003 05:10:19
Go to Top of Page

Robert-James
Advanced Member

uSA
353 Posts

Posted - 14 Sep 2003 :  10:53:40  Show Profile
Greetings all,
"Caleb", is again in jail in Christchurch, New Zeland. another charge, after being pulled over traveling to a fellowship-sabbath meeting, without government permission...not giving finger prints when asked. They are holding him for observation and checking his sanity. He will appear in court...in chains, September 18th.
The govt. seems to want to make an example of his Standing on the Law of the land. He is also writing a book explaining the movie, "The Matrix" and how it tells the story of jurisdiction.
Caleb is standing as an American, not as a U.S. citizen, and now has no U.S. passport.
Remember those in bonds, as if you were in bonds with them.
Go to Top of Page

Bondservant
Forum Administrator

381 Posts

Posted - 14 Sep 2003 :  11:08:09  Show Profile  Visit Bondservant's Homepage
Is there any way to contact Brother Caleb directly or through another Brother or the ekklesia there? At the least, he should be aware that around the world others are standing in Spirit with him.
Go to Top of Page

Robert-James
Advanced Member

uSA
353 Posts

Posted - 14 Sep 2003 :  14:27:15  Show Profile
Hello; [email protected] but his wife has not been allowed to contact him. Caleb was degreed states side as an engineer. He knows quite a bit on jurisdiction, and whose Kingdom he represents. Yahuweh is truely our Judge-King-Lawgiver. Of all the typical christians he has met...one, just one, served a habaus corpus, from the ecclesia. The cops have ignored it.
Go to Top of Page

Manuel
Advanced Member

USA
762 Posts

Posted - 16 Sep 2003 :  11:58:49  Show Profile
Brother Caleb is a Lawful Christian Man. He has responded as a True Bondman of the Messiah, and holds His Truth around his neck. A True Bondman In Christ.

Manuel
Go to Top of Page

Caleb
Advanced Member

Philippines
209 Posts

Posted - 18 Sep 2003 :  06:25:51  Show Profile
Dear Brothers in Messiah,

Thank you all for your prayers on my behalf. The Father even sent me a guardian angel while in prison's "high risk" unit in the form of a man who knew I was sane and wouldn't let the system treat me otherwise. He also arranged calls to my wife twice.

There is much to tell and the story is not over. Today was merely a "pre-trial hearing," which was just an excuse to put me back in jail for another five days, since they can only play this game in increments of no more than seven days at a time. The trial will be on the 23rd, and I signed a bail bond agreeing to appear. The Father showed me two days ago that this was how to handle the situation, since the duress they had me under negated any legitimacy of the contract. So if they try to use this paper against me, I will have great fun as the judge explains in open court why I was not allowed to change the ALL CAPS name at the top to my name spelled properly with the exact same letters. When I tell people about the ALL CAPS straw man, they think I'm crazy, so I'll just let the judge tell them instead!

When you see this world through the Father's eyes, the results are: heads you win, tails they lose. Seven days behind bars does wonders for improving your vision, even if it is quite hard on the family.

I will share the whole saga on a new post in the next day or two, Yahweh willing.
Go to Top of Page

Manuel
Advanced Member

USA
762 Posts

Posted - 18 Sep 2003 :  10:25:23  Show Profile
Greetings In Him, Yahshua, the Messiah.

We are told of this truth, that there is nothing new under the sun. Therefore, with His fore telling of what was, is, and what is to come, I, Manuel, will be a testator to the ekklesia, that my time in their prisons is shortly arriving. I and others, In Him, have witnessed the
false accusations they have burdened us with through and by the ignorance of His Law.
As a child on this world, communist admirers adviced my earthly father, on the island called Cuba, that if I where to stay ( I was there until the age of 8 years old), I would eventually be imprisoned, persecuted and murdered.
Lord Behold! Seems that that "nature" I had during those tender years, was His potters work. For now, striving to enter In to His kingdom, His truth has hit me as a lightning bolt with His Light entering to the very depths of my soul, In Him. A light I will not depart from, for He is The Truth which has forgiven me of my transgressions as I ride within Him foresaking all that is dark and rotten to its core.

As time passes, God Willing, I will leave notice and God Willing, relay the events, of the "current" situation, by others (If they are not stiffed-necked)to pass on to you.

Brother Caleb, His Grace be upon you, and the fear of God guide you through His straight and narrow path. For yet... a while longer, we must endure and watch with patience.

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished." - Matthew 5:17,18

Manuel



Go to Top of Page

Robert-James
Advanced Member

uSA
353 Posts

Posted - 18 Sep 2003 :  22:08:57  Show Profile
Yoseph, the dreamer, was sold into slavery by his own brother's. Ten hard years as a captured slave, then a couple more years in Egypt's dungeon. All of this, his heavenly Father's plan...to save the household of Israel, and make sure Yahuweh's covenants to His people. Yoseph learned Divine forgiveness for his enemies, who were of his own household. Am certain Yahushua {aka Jesus} was strengthened for the task that lay before Him by reading and reflecting on this beautiful redemption story. Both Judah {fourth son} and Yahushua, the Lion of the tribe of Judah stand, or stood...surety till the son, or sons, of the Right hand appear! It is for Yahuweh to conceal a matter, and kings to search it out. Where is this nation of kings and priests? In the makings. Husbands and wives can make children easy. For Yahuweh to produce His children, is a process. The final words of Yahushua and Stephen, were, well, about forgiveness. To err is 'human', to forgive...Divine. A tried and True statement. The age of the 'dispensation' of grace is about over. Time to live in the now.
Go to Top of Page

PopeSquasher
Senior Member

USA
54 Posts

Posted - 26 Oct 2003 :  23:33:10  Show Profile
Greetings, All.

Copyrighting your name? Capital letters?....C'mon guys....this stuff doesn't work in the real world- the world of the black-robed priests of Baal who sit behind a bench with a gavel.

Yes, yes....I've been hearing this all for years- "it would've worked, except for....." (insert your own piddling, miniscule reason- you forgot to cross your "i"...."you should've said this, not that" ad infinitum)

C'mon! We live in Babylon- if we transgress the laws of the god of Babylon, he executes his wrath on us, through his priests- the cops and judges- who seem to take more pleasure in locking us up, than in putting rapists and murderers away.

We're not going to escape the injustices of Babylon while living in her midst. We must come out of Babylon- and live in such a place where we need not deal with these things. (Unfortunately, I don't know where such a place is, currently)- and while we are here- the only way we're going to avoid being thrown into their filthy prisons, is to either avoid certain activities (such as driving) or to follow the perverted laws.

It is my opinion that you guys who are setting forth all these legal theories, are playing with peoples lives, and giving them false hope, and causing them to jeopardize their freedom, property and livliehoods. Excuses are always offered as to why these things dont work- but none-the-less, these absurd theories do not work- and the advice you offer after the fact, doesnt do much good, when the person is sitting in the slammer, or having his property and wealth confiscated.

The system works for them- not us. That's why a murderer can stand up in front of a judge, and the judge will go out of his way to uphold the murderers rights and see that he is given every courtesy, while they treat decent people with contempt, and dont even follow the rules of procedure with us. We- the servants of God and keepers of His law are their enemies- for we are citizens of the Kingdom which they are in war against.

I did not yet read all the messages in this thread- so I dont yet know how Bondservant fared- but if need be, I will pray for him- as that will be of far more value than all this specious legal nonsense.

Go to Top of Page

StandingComplete
Regular Member

USA
26 Posts

Posted - 01 Nov 2003 :  02:14:38  Show Profile
Kenneth Copeland Ministies just completed a two-week broadcast on the history of our nation leading up to current events in preparation for Nov 4 elections. The featured guest is Pastor David Barton. I learned many things I did not know about our nations spiritual and political history. Each segment is about 1/2 hr long, there are 10. Go to kcm.org to the archived broadcasts beginning with the week of 10/20/03 and ending 10/31/03. Lays a great foundation for how the body of Christ is to partake in the affairs of government.

PopeSquasher has a point. (You go PopeSquasher!) I have collected more information, spent more time than I want to admit about preserving my God-given rights until my head could just about explode. There are so many different approaches, solutions, etc., who can know which is right and will work? Even if a solution has worked in the past, it does not have to work the next time. The enemy (Satan) makes and breaks his own rules at will. He uses depraved individuals to accomplish his wickedness. All these folks know is they have a job to do, whatever it is!

I have to confess with the passing of the patriot act and the continued efforts to establish an office of 'Homeland Security' I thought the only thing left to do was to engage in fervent spiritual warfare which those of us who know Elelyon (the Most High God) are to do anyway. I recently went to a bank where my employer's payroll check was drawn because I did not want to deposit it in my account and wait two days for it to clear. The teller copied the info from my DL onto the check and then opens that little ink pad asking for my fingerprint. When I politely told her I wasn't going to do that, she said it was required because the bank does not have a 'relationship' with me. Please get a manager. The manager says each banking institution has the latitude to interpret the patriot act as they see fit. I laughed. "So this about the patriot act?" I explained the check was my (God's) property and I presented the proper identification required by this state's Revised Statutes for banking and the bank was preventing me from obtaining it. Please get a President or VP. After the manager has some discussion with the VP, he comes out of his office-burrow. I introduce myself, firmly shake his hand and repeat what I said to the manager. The lame response I received was that if they do it for me they have to do it for everyone else. I said "I'm" the one asking you, not anyone else. I discerned this confrontation in the bank lobby had the VP a little nervous because I know, he knew, he was wrong. At this point I wanted to step it up a notch by asking if the patriot act supercedes the law of this state, but opted not to because I was getting nowhere and it was more important to honor my Lord (boss) and Savior with sober behavior than to let the flesh reign. I graciously bid him a good day and left.

Fortunately, my bank kindly took the check without all the rigormarole and did not place a hold on the funds. No doubt, if I asked him to sign an affadavit stating he didn't care about my rights, he wouldn't do it. What was the patriot act supposed to do, again? These kinds of events along with suitcase searches at airports(without your knowledge, permission or witness) can induce unbridled anger and hopelessness to regaining even some of the liberty we HAD. The current idea of freedom in most peoples minds is an illusion. If I were a gambler, I'd wager that the average person when asked their definition of freedom, would answer that freedom comes from LAWS enacted to protect them in every area of their lives. Yikes! What a deception! True freedom is that which Yahweh provides. Any of man's laws not based on Yahweh's laws are corrupt.

We can huff and puff all we want about being closed in on, but what will turn all this around? Our Creator's perfect laws are what we are to love and live by the power of the Holy Spirit that Yeshua (Jesus) left us! He lives in us! Pouring over so many man-made regulations has not been and never will be the answer, I've found. It's a frustrating and lengthy process that takes us away from our God-mandated priorities. Even the currency examiners at the Bureau of Engraving and Printing are trained to continually examine the authentic article, so when the counterfeit comes along, it is easily recognizable. I have learned and continue to believe the truth of God's word and that His power is above all powers! We can't depend on persons in leadership positions to grant us freedoms and save us when there is trouble. Many laws enacted to so-called 'protect' us are unjust to the benefit or exclusion of an elite few.

Our Father has strong warning for leadership whether it be a country, a state, a county, a city, a corporation, a household, a small business, any entity and ESPECIALLY the church body:

Proverbs 20:10-11 "Divers weights, and divers measures, both of them are alike abomination to the Lord. Even a child is known by his doings, whether his work be pure, and whether it be right."

Micah 6:11-12 "Shall I count them pure with the wicked balances, and with the bag of deceitful weights? For the rich men thereof are full of violence, and the inhabitants thereof have spoken lies, and their tongue is deceitful in their mouth." (There are many upright rich people. This speaks of the ones whose wealth is their god.)

Deuteronomy 25:15 “But thou shalt have a perfect and just weight, a perfect and just measure shalt thou have: that thy days may be lengthened in the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.”

God's Command to us:
I Timothy2:1-6 “I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; For kings, and for all that are in authority (Godly); that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty (emphasis mine). For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.”

Many of us would like to believe that people entering public office do so to serve their public. Given some of the benefits of being a public officer, I doubt if every public official ran for office because in was in their heart to serve others. I'm confident we would all agree that leaders (any leader) should be held to the very same demands and standards as the public they serve and more. When much is given, much is required by God's standard. Sadly many of them seek the enjoyment of unequal weights and measures. They get perks, know secrets that we should know and lead double lives without rendering an account, even when it’s rightfully demanded. Leaders must know they have a godly mandate to be an sober example for the people they serve.
Yet, today it is all backwards.

The original intent of the foundation of this government was that its servants (public officials) would fear the served (us), but now it's the total opposite. I was taught in Junior High Civics that the 1st Amendment of the Bill of Rights grants free speech and press to us as long as we tell the truth and do not incite riot or violence. (Is this taught in public school anymore?) Today, if we speak out (vocally or printed page), we're considered a troublemaker or threat, though it is perfectly in our right to do so by the supreme law of the land, the Constitution of these united states of America. Do we need ‘Homeland Security’ or the security or God’s promises to a nation who acknowledges His power? Who supports us until there is a massive outcry? Many elected to take the stand for ‘the people’ don’t do it. Why then, should they be lauded with special favor? For some of them, their seat isn’t ‘hot’ until it’s threatened to not be reelected.

Many people have been incrementally and systematically trained to be fearful, silent obedient slaves who don’t challenge, who are lethargic and complacent because they see no hope.

When God created us, He made us sovereign like He is! John 8:36 “If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed.” John 10:10 “The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.”

Yes, as Americans we have the right, through various protocols, to question inequities (unequal weights and measures) existing in governmental bodies. Unfortunately, especially lately, writing letters and phone calls to Congresspeople or other elected officials about their accountability in anything seems futile. Many citizens wear themselves out going through the protocols and protesting, then can't get access to the very people who they elected help. A citizen might strike a nerve, and at minimum get blown off with a form letter from a Congressional staff person. There’s serious doubt that ALL congressional representatives, local elected officials, judges, etc. are this aloof, but it sure doesn't help the public's view of our nation's leadership. So many people distrust the current governmental system, it’s leaders and administrators, so they’ve given up trying to affect it. The horrifying result is that the unrighteous leadership of this society will continue to heap burdens on us designed to break us. Then we’ll REALLY know who are the slaves.

A loss of hope never makes things better, always worse. Hope motivates people to positive action. No wonder so many people are frustrated to negative extremes to get attention! Some propose a revolution, an overthrow is necessary to turn things around. We know what that involves – bloodshed! No doubt, many are at that point now. The solution lies in the Highest power.

It’s proven that REAL change comes from within, not without. Surface changes don’t last and eventually the situation becomes worse than before. God says HE changes people (leaders): Proverbs 21:1 “The king's heart is in the hand of the LORD, as the rivers of water: he turneth it whithersoever he will.” Also, 2Chronicles 7:14 “If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their land.” (Whoa, that’s an awesome promise, IF we do our part! The body of Christ and this nation is surely primed for HEALING!)

This is not saying to discontinue attempting contact with representatives, but understand this is a spiritual battle. Our leaders certainly need to know and should know our concerns, grievances, etc. Let’s not forget to encourage them with praise when they do something right! Ephesians 6:12 “For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world against spiritual wickedness in high places...” read through to verse 18 to get the instructions!

IMPORTANT NOTES: (Remember, WE’RE the NATION!)

Ephesians 5:11 “And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.” (We give our tacit approval when we don’t keep leaders accountable for wrong decisions, we become partakers!)

The answers for true ‘Homeland Security’:
Proverbs 14:34 “Righteousness exalteth a nation: but sin (the condition of not letting God be the boss!) is a reproach to any people.”

Psalms 33:12 “Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD; and the people whom he hath chosen for his own inheritance.”

Proverbs 29:2 “When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice: but when the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn.” (Are we rejoicing or mourning today?)

If you are satisfied with the performance and response of your elected and non-elected officials, great for you. If you’re dissatisfied, start praying and asking God about your role in helping to cause a turn to our benefit as Americans created by Almighty God, maker and ruler of heaven and earth!. One letter may not make a difference, but many letters, many phone calls with overwhelming corporate action, gets attention. Continue the 'good fight of faith' by praying for our leaders to serve, rather than be self-serving figure heads, that they would do right by the people they represent!

I leave you with this: Proverbs 16:7 “When a man's ways please the LORD, he maketh even his enemies to be at peace with him.” (This includes nations, too!)

Please know I continue to pray for all of you standing for righteousness. You are the apple of your Father's eye. Galatians 6:9 "And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not." Yahweh's blessing to all!

In praise and adoration of our Savior and Lord, King of kings and Lord of lords, Yeshua (Jesus)!

Go to Top of Page

n/a
deleted

19 Posts

Posted - 02 Nov 2003 :  21:39:49  Show Profile
Good to see there are other beleivers here in NZ standing for The Lord God. Don't forget, Licence = permission to sin.
Go to Top of Page

Manuel
Advanced Member

USA
762 Posts

Posted - 03 Nov 2003 :  20:04:22  Show Profile
Greetings In His name Yahshua,

Psalm42, yes, the power to license and regulate is the power to destroy I heard, and believe is truth under the conditions of scoundrels. And what there is are SCOUNDRELS.

As far as making a change towards Lawful Authority, yes, that will also come, as is happening at this time, but it will not happen from the deceitful ones which speak by the hour, because for generations they have written books and have held hearings/discussions to no avail. They always seem to use the excuse of holding yearly and even years of study only to cancel the "studies" or "appointing new members to new "studies." It has mostly been the attitude of thinking that "time heals old wounds" not realizing that wounds which are rotten with infections will eventually give way and destroy the rest of the body. The ones passing on the ills to the "new generation" of "lawmakers" think that the ultimate Lawgiver is not watching.
That apathy is part of the decaying limbs holding what is left on its threads. When it snaps, their game is over by de-fault. When it breaks free, those which fear God, will need no rules, codes, regulations. The question is, what will happen to all those which thrive of the left-overs?

Manuel

Edited by - Manuel on 03 Nov 2003 20:28:19
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 3  Topic Next Topic  
Previous Page | Next Page
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
ECCLESIASTIC COMMONWEALTH COMMUNITY © MMXVII Ecclesiastic Commonwealth Community Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.62 seconds. Snitz Forums 2000