| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
devekut
Regular Member
uSA
25 Posts |
 Posted - 19 Dec 2005 : 01:12:17
|
Shalom to all of you,
and greetings in the blessed Name of our Messiah Yeshua who rose from the dead that we might have life and authority to walk as His servants in the midst of the world as devoted solely to His kingdom, making known the way of life to all who would hear and desire to be called one of His sheep.
While perusing the Family Guardian website looking for ways to handle a tax lien (or more accurately, a notice of tax lien), I came upon a link to documents of a Tax Lien and Release from Tax Lien which were claimed to be proof that attorneys are foreign agents (or something along those lines).
The text beginning the Tax Lien is:
Comptroller of Public Accounts FORM 64-204
(Rev. 3-93/3)
1. PL 04 T. Code 63515
ATTORNEY OCCUPATION TAX
TEXAS STATE TAX LIEN
County Clerk of DENTON County
PO BOX 2187
DENTON TX 76202
It goes on to list the name of the victim, amount of lien, etc. and is signed by John Sharp, Comptroller of Public Accounts.
It looks to be filed under Book 73 Page 604, if that's what 073604 means.
The text beginning the Release from Tax Lien is:
Comptroller of Public Accounts FORM 64-306
(Rev. 6-94)
TEXAS STATE TAX LIEN RELEASE
ATTORNEY OCCUPATION TAX
and later states: "On the 16th day of September, 1994, the Texas State Comptroller filed a notice of lien for ATTORNEY OCCUPATION TAX
Amount of the lien filed is shown below..."
Signed by John Sharp, Comptroller of Public Accounts.
Book/Page Number 082389
----
So, these two documents evidence an "ATTORNEY OCCUPATION TAX" which I'm disinclined to believe is a tax levied on the victim for an Attorney being occupied with his case. Texas has no income tax, so presumably this is a lien for a property tax payment.
Sounds to me like the tax is being imposed as tribute on the conquered by the conqueror, the attorneys who have come from a foreign location (DC, the Middle Temple of the Inns of Court?) to occupy the land as residents in true military form.
Since I know that Yeshua is My Sovereign King who has overcome the world, I know that my tribute belongs to Him as my King.
How would an astute Lamb use the information revealed in these documents if desiring either to defend or prosecute in a tax case?
If the United States has waived sovereign immunity (26 USC 7432 & 7433), would this leave the attorneys in the position of being foreign agressors without excuse or legal defense for conducting hostilities against the people in or sojourning among the several states? Do their actions evidence peonage, fraud, or something else?
What do I present to prove that a holder of a BAR (British Accreditation Registry) Card is in fact a foreign agent who has received a foreign title of nobility?
Would I make a request to the Sec. of State to ask for the Foreign Officer registration filed for the judge, attorney, etc.?
And where can I find an Original 13th Amendment which I can get notarized and/or filed into District court?
In the midst of this I realize that the focus needs to be on who I am, and presenting the substance to make that evident to any accuser. However, while I am declaring the source of my Authority, it seems reasonable in the interest of truth to have the accusers point to the true source of their authority.
I'm glad to have found this forum and appreciate all that has been posted here. I hope to make good use of it as I make my way through the narrow gate.
Blessings and Peace to you all from the Prince of Peace, the Messiah Yeshua in whom we live move and have our being,
devekut
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 22 Dec 2005 : 21:34:36
|
quote:
And where can I find an Original 13th Amendment which I can get notarized and/or filed into District court?
Call (719) 520-6200 and request Book 6744; Page 969 (six pages).
Better yet, have it sent from my clerk into the district courthouse closest to you. Include the $39 money order to my clerk or open the case jacket yourself and have the pre-stamped envelope specify the case jacket number. It will be of the form: 05 - X - 18. |
Edited by - David Merrill on 23 Dec 2005 09:57:47 |
 |
|
|
Jay Scott
Advanced Member
uSA
181 Posts |
Posted - 23 Dec 2005 : 11:29:41
|
Greets, David,
I feel compelled to do as you suggested: have the original 13th amendment sent to the district courthouse nearest me. Do you think this is generally justified? Or would it only make sense if a person needed it recorded locally for a specific reason: such as a defense, or evidence in support of testimony? Or, on the other hand, would it make a good exercise for "learning the ropes"?
If it is generally justified, or a good exercise, then, if you would be so kind, please provide specific instructions how I would open a case jacket and have the document sent. I am also eager to learn how to record documents and "operate cases", for lack of a better description. I have no experience or knowledge how to do this, but have the impression that these skills and knowledge are important to know in order to establish and protect personal legal status.
Input from any other knowledgeable soul, on this subject, would also be appreciated.
A thought...would these instructions better serve others being placed in a thread dedicated to the topic? Or is there already a thread/topic with this type of instruction?
Forgive me, I may know not what I ask.
I hope all is well with you.
Jay
|
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 24 Dec 2005 : 19:04:59
|
Thank you Jay;
Yes all is well with me. Especially since I used the Thirteenth Amendment as an injunction (restraining order) against attorneys (including the attorney general) from approaching me.
According to decisions and opinions all over the place, the Thirteenth Amendment was never properly ratified in the United States. True enough. But the object is the District United States. And that is where everybody's minds are at.
If it was not ratified in 1819 then how in the world could it possibly show up for about seven years straight in the Laws of Colorado for the Colorado Territory? - - - In the 1860s!
Key Word; Territory. That is not the District. The district overlays do not enter by enclave until statehood.*
So are you a man on the land? File the Thirteenth Amendment into the miscellaneous file in the district court that then serve it on the attorney general or like here; the State of Colorado Supreme Court (Colorado Bar Association/Registry).
I do not know how much you are willing to sink into this but use a private process server who will provide a comprehensive affidavit of service with blue-ink stamped evidence, certified copies etc. Then file that at your local county clerk and recorder (public record in common law around you). Then mail that filing (certified copies and original to the US district court case jacket) to the parties (attorneys).
Regards,
David Merrill.
* There is however strong evidence of shenanigans. The Territory did not become a State until 1876. However the Thirteenth Amendment on file was followed by the Slavery Amendment in about 1865 and then replaced by that Amendment and followed by the Civil Rights Amendment in the Fourteenth Amendment slot by about 1868. Whereas technically, the Thirteenth Amendment should have stayed put until 1876.
Evidence of the above theory is found in Title 28 USC Sec. 91 about Hawaii. Hawaii was a territory at that time and so they had to express that the district court in Hawaii was established under the authority of Article III of the Constitution. It is the only State in Title 28 with that verbiage. However I doubt that it ever formed. [http://www.edrivera.com/ - The Magic Bullet link seems disconnected now. I wrote Ed and inquired about his claim the only Article III courts are in Hawaii and Washington DC just the other day. Maybe he is reconsidering things. I think I have his letter though, somewhere on my disk. I however do not agree with Ed basically because he is looking through attorney lenses.] The only Article III court in America according to my research is the Court of International Trade on Manhattan Island - associated with the Patroonship of the Dutch East Indies Trading Company from 1633.
http://www.cit.uscourts.gov
quote:
Sec. 251. Appointment and number of judges; offices
(a) The President shall appoint, by and with the advice and
consent of the Senate, nine judges who shall constitute a court of
record to be known as the United States Court of International
Trade. Not more than five of such judges shall be from the same
political party. The court is a court established under article
III of the Constitution of the United States.
(b) The offices of the Court of International Trade shall be
located in New York, New York.
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_METROchapter1.pdf
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_METROchapter2.pdf
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_METROchapter3.pdf
|
Edited by - David Merrill on 24 Dec 2005 19:29:30 |
|
|
|
Manuel
Advanced Member
USA
762 Posts |
Posted - 24 Dec 2005 : 20:33:58
|
Hey David Merrill,
ATTORNEY OCCUPATION TAX < attorney accupuncture axe
See the difference?
Then also one can deny the BAR ATTORNEYS jurisdiction based on their unlawful faction and same-hands control of all three branches based on Separation of Powers established on the FEDERALIST PAPERS, and extending to State Contitutions also on the branches of government article/sections.
"No man can be the 'judge' of his own case" & "Justice cannot be rationed"
I am,
Manuel
In fact, I recall a STRAWMAN once attacked using that Law and the BLACK-ROBED SPECIALED INTEREST "BAR-JUDGE" ad-viced a same-hands BAR-ATTORNEY not to answer questions regarding that truth. I thought the sign hanging above them (Here We Labor To Seek Truth ) was going to fall on them.
Soon afterwards, I heard the same BLACK ROBED BAR "JUDGE" was caught running around NAKED through a hotel hallway during a BAR CON-VENTION or something of that sort. |
Edited by - Manuel on 24 Dec 2005 21:07:12 |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 25 Dec 2005 : 06:13:07
|
quote:
Manuel cited maxims in brief
"No man can be the 'judge' of his own case" & "Justice cannot be rationed"
I am,
Manuel
The above seems to enforce that out of necessity (there being only one judiciary in Manhattan) you have adjudicated for yourself a judgment and decree that you exist. I like that about you Manuel.
Regards,
David Merrill. |
Edited by - David Merrill on 25 Dec 2005 06:13:58 |
|
|
|
Oneisraelite
Advanced Member
uSA
833 Posts |
Posted - 25 Dec 2005 : 08:21:45
|
If that is indeed what you were saying brother Manuel, you are in good company!
yod he waw he;
I exist,
that is to say,
I live.
Yahuwah at Exodus 3:15
he waw he ...to breathe; to be (in the sense of existence)
ego eimi
I exist,
that is to say,
I live.
Yahushua at Yahu'hanan [John] 18:6
G1510 eimi ...I exist (used only when emphatic)
EXIST', v.i. egzist' 2. To live; to have life...
fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisra'el,
NOT the man-made, fictional USA.
Ephesians 2:12 & 19
An act done by me against my will is not my act. |
Edited by - Oneisraelite on 25 Dec 2005 09:16:22 |
|
|
|
David Merrill
Advanced Member
USA
1147 Posts |
Posted - 25 Dec 2005 : 14:21:44
|
| My point exactly; a nod of approval for the image of God within Manuel. That he finds the authority to adjudicate from God's image. |
|
|
|
Manuel
Advanced Member
USA
762 Posts |
Posted - 25 Dec 2005 : 19:18:34
|
Greetings,
It was but a stepping stone. Adjudicate according to Blacks Law, sixth edition, defines adjudicate as: "To settle in the exercise of judicial authority. To determine finally. Synonymous with adjudge in its strictest sense. United States v. Irwin,127 U.S. 125, 8 S.Ct 32 L.Ed. 99."
Further, since Lex loci delictus does not make the actor (see Blacks Law sixth edition definition, "actor" included) liable, then think of the many shows committed on the dark. Lex manifesta... and just who turns their plow "shares" to s-words?
As a continuum, the stepping stones lead further to the Truth which opened my eyes to the following:
"Good government obeys the Laws of Father,
Bad government doesn't obey the Laws of Father,
and Ugly government neither obeys the Laws of Father nor their own."
I am,
Manuel
|
Edited by - Manuel on 25 Dec 2005 19:42:47 |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
Attorney Occupation Tax
