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
 No Social Security Number??
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 3

David Merrill
Advanced Member

USA
1147 Posts

Posted - 30 Jun 2005 :  06:32:09  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Dear Readers;


Years ago I went into the Social Security office and told them to revoke or annul my SSN. Whatever they do. The first helper, a woman seemed a bit offended and started treating me like I was doing something wrong, such an unusual request. It was not long before I was speaking with the office manager. He was quite courteous and informed me that the Social Security Administration has no process for getting rid of Social Security Numbers.

He then asked me when I applied for it. I told him when I was about fourteen years old. He asked me how it is that I keep it in existence? I said I write it or say it when people ask, on job applications etc. He suggested that is the process for having a SSN as well as the process for revoking it. Just quit saying it or writing it down.

It took a few months, because I presumed polite as he was, he was giving me elusive doubletalk. But after a while it figured well. He was telling me the truth.

http://www.christianliberty.org/carmvus/June_27_2005_Carmichael_v_us.pdf

Quote:
Plaintiff also submitted a request to the Commissioner of Social Security to have his social security number rescinded...

Plaintiff also suggested that "[f]or tax reporting purposes, the number 000-00-0000 or the words religious objector may be placed in the ... block.


Speaking for myself, I was not doing this rescission for religious purposes. But would certainly grant that anyone, not being required to have a SSN anyway, could discontinue use of it, even in the military. Without a SSN, there is no Taxpayer ID Number, and subsequently, no reporting requirements.

I find one thing striking about the findings. That a man can have a SSN upon entry even into the military and simply by saying he objects and does not want to have it anymore, actually not have it anymore.


Regards,

David Merrill.

Manuel
Advanced Member

USA
762 Posts

Posted - 30 Jun 2005 :  12:27:50  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
One choking technique on military boot-camp is used on the gas-chamber whereby after tear-gas is in full bloom, the boots(re-cruits) are told to take off their gas masks and give name, rank and serial number(SSN #) prior to dawning the gas mask back on For some unfortunates, in addition, it might even go as far as to sing the military hymn of their branch At least, that the way it was?
http://www.11meu.usmc.mil/placingpill.htm
http://www.11meu.usmc.mil/suexercise.htm
http://www.11meu.usmc.mil/romanogas.htm



I am,
Manuel

Edited by - Manuel on 30 Jun 2005 12:47:38
Go to Top of Page

Lewish
Advanced Member

uSA
496 Posts

Posted - 07 Jul 2005 :  11:48:09  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Greetings,

Well, where I am going with the S.S.N. is to get them to change my status from U.S. citizen to that of "non-resident alien foreign to the United States". This removes the legal relationship that they presume exists between me a living man and the trust that they created using a barbarous name similar to name Christian appellation and family name.

The S.S.N. matters only if "they" can show a legal relationship between the man and the trust. When they took me into court, the name they kept using was the name of a trust that they presumed I had a legal responsibility to respond to. The presumption was based on the SS-5 which showed the trust and trustee to be U.S. citizens. If you sever this trustee relationship, and there are several ways to do this (take a look at IRS form 56, for one) then they have no way to proceed against you. The UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, which is a private corporate entity with a FEIN, cannot see you a living man. It was only see the trust and the fiduciary responsibility of the trustee. They hold you in captivity as an irresponsible trustee, who has failed to discharge the obligations of the trust.

Now, if the "person" named on the SS-5 is a non-resident alien foreign to the United States, where does the USDC go to get jurisdiction over the trustee? Well, first they would have to determine where the "person" was resident to, and then seek extradition of the trustee to answer. Since by becoming a citizen of the united States of America you have moved into a real nation and not a corporate nation, they cannot see you and cannot extraditite you, even if you are standing in their "court". They cannot see what is real. They can only deal with fictions. When they hold a living man in the present system, he is considered to be one and the same as the fiction trust that they have charged. If there is no trustee relationship, they cannot hold you.

Hope this info is useful,

Lewis
Go to Top of Page

David Merrill
Advanced Member

USA
1147 Posts

Posted - 07 Jul 2005 :  15:39:30  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Yes. Theoretical as yet it sounds. So let us know when things develop they way you speculate please.

I tried to use a similar approach with an employer; the W-8 filing form for non-resident aliens. I got fired. But I declared a unemployment insurance hearing in which it was determined that non-resident aliens were people from outside the United States (by their definition of course). Well you can see where theory and high ideals meet reality sometimes.

We hope and pray you may bring us a report of success Lewis. May God be with you in His timing.


Regards,

David Merrill.
Go to Top of Page

Lewish
Advanced Member

uSA
496 Posts

Posted - 08 Jul 2005 :  12:45:38  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Dear David,

You illustrated perfectly what I was saying. By trying to collect unemployment insurance, which available only to residents, and then saying you were a non-resident, you gave them a conflict that they could not resolve.

I want them to acknowledge that I am a non-resident alien foreign to the United States. I will not accept any of their proposed benefits. Then they have no means of attachment to drag me back into the U.S.

Be well brother,

Lewis
Go to Top of Page

Uncle Buck
Advanced Member

Australia
134 Posts

Posted - 08 Jul 2005 :  17:04:22  Show Profile  Visit Uncle Buck's Homepage  Reply with Quote
quote:
Originally posted by David Merrill

Yes. Theoretical as yet it sounds. So let us know when things develop they way you speculate please.

I tried to use a similar approach with an employer; the W-8 filing form for non-resident aliens. I got fired. But I declared a unemployment insurance hearing in which it was determined that non-resident aliens were people from outside the United States (by their definition of course). Well you can see where theory and high ideals meet reality sometimes.

We hope and pray you may bring us a report of success Lewis. May God be with you in His timing.


Regards,

David Merrill.



G'day David,
Why would you file any form with the IRS? Doesn't that give them proof of your consent that you are a taxpayer and leave all discretion to the Commissioner for Taxation (or equivalent in the USA)?
It seems logical that the government cannot compel you to part with you property without your consent (application) or court order (which they would have to produce the contract).
In Australia 202 of the INCOME TAX ASSESSMENT ACT 1936
Division 2--Issuing of tax file numbers

202B. Application for tax file number
202BA. Issuing of tax file numbers
202BB. Current tax file number
202BC. Deemed refusal by Commissioner
202BD. Interim notices
202BE. Cancellation of tax file numbers
202BF. Alteration of tax file numbers

INCOME TAX ASSESSMENT ACT 1936 - SECT 202B
Application for tax file number
(1)
A person may apply to the Commissioner for the issue of a tax file number.

(2)
An application shall be in a form approved by the Commissioner and shall be accompanied by documentary evidence of the applicant's identity.

(3)
An application may be handed in at, or posted to, the office of a Deputy Commissioner.

(4)
An application may be handed in at an office or facility designated by the Commissioner as a receiving centre for applications of that kind.


*************************
If I have to be like him who is going to be like me?
James 1:25 The Perfect Law of Liberty
Go to Top of Page

David Merrill
Advanced Member

USA
1147 Posts

Posted - 08 Jul 2005 :  20:25:28  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
This was Lynn Meredith's stuff about ten years ago. Plenty of people have been hurt by that hybridized Vultures in Eagle's Clothing. So you can imagine how much I have learned since then. Including the lesson Lewis is imparting.

I have surpassed Lewis' project on the spectrum as of a few years back. There is no way, within the scope of the system in question for them to perceive the diversity in your character Lewis. There is just no way to acquire the recognition you seek. But that is only my experience-based opinion. I wish you well with your project Lewis and also hope you will share any substantial recognition you find with us clearly so that we may have our non-resident alien to the U.S. status/character recognized as well.

Uncle Buck;

You share information that looks like a one-way valve into the system but not back out. The only way back out is to stop using benefits like the SSN. There is no process for revoking it... (well, there are rumors but why?) Why would you want to anyway? Especially like me when you have paid 40+ quarters in dividends.

I will leave the policy on hold in case I need it and it still happens to be viable when I reach 65. The policy has no assumpsit that fails to get cleared by me anyway. Even if it is the benefit of going to jail, they consistently misidentify me the legal name/trust in contractual nexus with the SSN. That is not my name until I use it and several times I have been coerced into using it to my own detriment. Ten years ago I was confused and mislead into using it by Lynn Meredith. But I am getting more and more comfortable in my identity and proportionately get more and more control over the contract obligations I get pushed into.


Regards,

David Merrill.
Go to Top of Page

Lewish
Advanced Member

uSA
496 Posts

Posted - 09 Jul 2005 :  12:57:38  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Dear Readers,

If you don't want to pay the IRS, then I strongly recommend you get Pete Hendrickson's book "Cracking the Code". It is unfornate that he chose this specific title as there are many other books out there with the same title.

Following his methodology, you file 1040X returns and get everything you paid in back. You can even go back 3 years and file amended returns. My brother EDd has already received his 2004 refund and has received a very nice letter from the IRS (we didn't know they knew how to write like that) that they are processing his previous year returns and he would be getting his refunds soon. If he had any questions, here are the phone numbers to call.

In March 2005, the IRS filed charges against Hendrickson for the 4th time in federal court. On the first day of trial, the U.S. Attorney petitioned the court for dismissal, saying it was a waste of the court's time to try this man, when the 3 previous trials had failed to get a conviction.

Part of the power of what Pete has done is to record everything he knows into the public record at the county recorder's office. That makes it "self-authenticating evidence" when introduced into court under Fed. Rules of Evid. 201. Most of his documents he had notarized as true and correct copies before recording.

There is a lot of power in the Notary Public that we are often overlooking. There is even more power in putting it into the public record. I have learned that everything I recorded about myself, in the Snohomish County Auditor's Office (we have auditors rather than recorders here) was sent to the U.S. Attorney immediately after being recorded. That is why the judge had my Declaration of Citizenship in court the first day.


Peace to you all in the name of the Lord,

Lewis
Go to Top of Page

David Merrill
Advanced Member

USA
1147 Posts

Posted - 09 Jul 2005 :  15:28:34  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Just yesterday a suitor Refused for Cause a notice of a motion. Peculiar, that in federal court a notice is required for this style of a motion. That is the essence of a Refusal for Cause. The Notice was simply a presentment requesting permission to proceed with the motion. The motion was for sanctions against the suitor for filing his judgment with the county clerk. Something really annoyed the defendant attorney about that. "Self-authenticating evidence". I knew there was a reason for doing that; filing the judgment in common law and only using the U.S. Courthouse as a conduit for notifying and informing foreign agents in admiralty.

Agreed, notaries are quite an essential part of common law publication. In Oregon where they have what I call, "common law phobia", people set up a notary instead of the county clerk. The notary starts a file drawer or cabinet and tracks by Book and Page, just like the county clerk and recorder. Apostiles can be acquired through the secretary of state too.


Regards,

David Merrill.

P.S. About Hendrickson; Some of the suitors are experimenting with his book. Only a little bit of success. Let us know if the past return amounts come in to your brother. Likely not.

I have not been very scientific about this but at the moment I conclude:

1) If the IRS is treating Hendrickson's work systematically, then it is a matter of the IRS giving just enough victories to keep people placated. Sort of like entertaining counterintelligence until they can figure out what to do about the big loophole. Or morelike because that is all they can do about the big loophole.

2) Not giving the IRS enough credit to be considered systematic about Hendrickson. Most of the time an agent sees the return and will generate the typical, "Tax schemes like these have been defeated by the courts... You are unwise to listen to these tax protester groups." But occasionally the IRS agent hands it off to an attorney. This is when you hear a success story.

If I am ever back on the grid, using a legal name and endorsing colorable money, I will definitely be buying Hendrickson's book.


Regards,

David Merrill.

Edited by - David Merrill on 09 Jul 2005 15:41:15
Go to Top of Page

Manuel
Advanced Member

USA
762 Posts

Posted - 09 Jul 2005 :  17:31:57  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Yes indeed,
They sure have copies of all past motions, petitions, writ of certiorari, habeas corpus, demand for particulars etc...

That is why they had a trial about a year ago hidden under the mask of a "juvenille court." I figure they hate to see a real flesh and blood man returning to the very place where they concoct the original crime. Next thing you know... they will attempt to "hold a trial" at the local zoos hatching incubator lab :)

On the meantime... check this out and imagine the depth of this revelation:


Fla. Official Who Killed Self Stole Money
from:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/07/AR2005070701367.html?referrer=emailarticle

By RON WORD
The Associated Press
Thursday, July 7, 2005; 3:35 PM

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. -- A "highly trusted" county official stole more than $1 million from the government before she killed herself while under investigation this spring, officials said Thursday.

Jessica Mixon, 56, admitted to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement on April 22 that she took about $200,000 a year as financial manager for the Nassau County court clerk's office. One week later, she shot herself in the chest in a motel room.

She said she had taken $875,000 since October 1999, but an audit over a longer period showed the losses totaled $1,068,000, county Clerk of Court John Crawford said Thursday.

When Mixon confessed, she told investigators none of the money was left and mentioned she enjoyed taking gambling trips. FDLE agent Dominick Pape said he didn't believe she was a gambling addict, but investigators were aware of at least one trip to Las Vegas.

Mixon was supposed to deposit the money, which came from such things as traffic fines and court fees, into a special bank account, Crawford said.

"She held the keys to the kingdom by herself," he said. "She was a highly trusted individual." She had worked for the county since 1981, officials said.

After her suicide, authorities decided to continue the investigation to confirm that no one else was involved. The county is considering civil action against her estate to try to recover the money, authorities said.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

HIDDEN LIE: "She held the keys to the kingdom by herself," he said. "She was a highly trusted individual."
Yeah right
The damn whorehouse is a laundrymat of kick-backs and hidden assets



Edited by - Manuel on 09 Jul 2005 17:38:23
Go to Top of Page

Lewish
Advanced Member

uSA
496 Posts

Posted - 09 Jul 2005 :  19:28:28  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Hello David,

Will do on updates. Me, I am ordered by the court to file 1040 tax returns. However, I am refusing to do so until the court can show me the law requiring a Citizen of the United States of America to do so.

Right now I have the court between a rock and a hard spot with a Writ of Error Corram Vobis. In the Writ I listed 14 separate and distict times they denied me due process of law during the 10 months I was incarcerated. Any one is sufficient grounds to expunge the case. I will give them 21 days to answer and then I will record a Judgment in Estoppel against the court in the County records with notary seal and service. I am also considering having it witnessed by a British Consular. That should put a real kick into it if I can get the Consul Officer to witness it.

Oh the fun we can have when we finally start to see all of the possibilities available to use. I see so many ways to wrinkle their game that it is almost embarrassing.

Peace to you all,

Lewis
Go to Top of Page

devekut
Regular Member

uSA
25 Posts

Posted - 20 Dec 2005 :  19:26:14  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Shalom to all through Him who has truly set us free.

As one who was issued an SSN probably before I could speak, I am seeking to disentangle myself from the worldly contractual state created by having one. Compared with the Light of His Glorious Presence, Babylon just doesn't appeal to me.

One approach to detach the SSN from the name on the SS Card is the SSA-521 http://www.ssa.gov/online/ssa-521.pdf

I'm given to understand this is the "recognized" method. However, wouldn't there be implications for using their forms, reasserting a NUMBER by filling in the SSN? Does use of their forms create some kind of presumption of attachment, or would it be proper for a bondservant of Yeshua to use such form to settle a prior commitment?

If I were to fill out this form, the "NAME OF WAGE EARNER, SELF-EMPLOYED INDIVIDUAL, OR ELIGIBLE INDIVIDUAL" would be the CAPITAL LETTER PERSON, and YOUR NAME would be my true appellation.

My father submitted the application, so I would put unknown under the date of application.

Reason for withdrawal: Original request was not executed under full disclosure. I'm not eligible as I am not engaged in commerce, nor am I a federal officer, agent, or employee, nor am I a resident of a Federal district. (?)

Why is a Notice of Recission of SSN for fraud ab initio not recognized? Hmmm... I think I know.

Or is it more effective to Resign as the Fiduciary of the Soc. Sec. Trust? What wording would one use to effect such resignation?

devekut
Go to Top of Page

Lewish
Advanced Member

uSA
496 Posts

Posted - 20 Dec 2005 :  22:33:13  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Hello devekut,

You can't revoke the SSN contract until you have revoked the liabilities of being the fiduciary for their creation, a trust in a name of all capitals letters which is similar to yours. As long as you are still fiduciary, then you are still under the original contract. Look at 26 CFR 300 and following.

Regards,

Lewis-Vincent
Go to Top of Page

David Merrill
Advanced Member

USA
1147 Posts

Posted - 21 Dec 2005 :  03:58:26  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Dear Lewis-Vincent;


That is not true according to the Social Security Administration. Also it is difficult to revoke liabilities - short of a death certificate anyway.

The proof is in the requirement that you give the SSN. The evidence is in the hyphen you have inserted into your true name; novation. I am in control of what I have and do not have. That is according to the SSA.

quote:
As long as you are still fiduciary, then you are still under the original contract.


If I have no SSN how could I still be considered fiduciary for a trust? Anybody trying to enforce that premise would be requiring me to have a SSN. And according to the SSA all I have to do is quit saying and writing it - then it is no longer extant.

I certainly appreciate the debate. I have explored this extensively and believe the SSA office manager. There is probably truth to your statement but from a certain perspective - that is to say - from the man creating the fiction. So the posture is likely useful for many Readers.



Regards,

David Merrill.

P.S. I stood in front of an audience after a lecture and tore up the Social Security Card over a decade ago. That may have an effect upon my perspective about this. I will probably examine the citation however. Thank you Lewis Vincent.

http://www.washingtonwatchdog.org/documents/cfr/title26/part300.html

Edited by - David Merrill on 21 Dec 2005 04:08:57
Go to Top of Page

Oneisraelite
Advanced Member

uSA
833 Posts

Posted - 21 Dec 2005 :  06:54:34  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Greetings and salutations, devekut:

Peace be unto the house.

Also it is difficult to revoke liabilities - short of a death certificate anyway.” [Emphasis added]

Fascinating response, “…short of a death certificate....”, i.e. proof of death!!

If one was certain of what he was about to do, and the attending repercussions*, perhaps one could run an official notice in a widely-enough-circulated-newspaper for three consecutive weeks announcing the civil death of ALL-CAP NAME and SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER, accompanied with some sort of notification to any and all persons which can show cause why this is not LEGALLY allowable, of a time and place where they may present their evidence. Be sure to keep the original newspaper notices and receipts for the same.

civil death. Law. The change of status of a person equivalent in its legal consequences to natural death. – Webster’s 1960 New Collegiate Dictionary, page 151

Civil death, being the equivalent in its LEGAL consequences to natural death, would LEGALLY revoke all liabilities, we believe.

Wherefore if ye be dead with the Anointed [One] from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances, after the commandments and doctrines of men?

Extra legem positus est civiliter mortuus. One out of the pale of the law, (an outlaw,) is civilly dead.

PALE, n. 3. An inclosure; properly,that which incloses, like fence, limit; hence, the space inclosed. - Webster's 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language

Perhaps someone here, more learned than we, could tell you how to take these notices and receipts to one of their JUDGES, or maybe to a NOTARY PUBLIC, and somehow make it recognizable to the STATE. Perhaps one could even post copies of the three notices, with attending dates and whatnot, in their COURTHOUSE and several other conspicuous places together with some form of AFFIDAVIT, for any person who says you cannot LEGALLY do this, to fill out and when no thing has given a Lawful rebuttal, file a default.

Or, just maybe, we make this more difficult than it needs to be. What if, when one is stopped by one of kosmokrator's AGENTS who demands, "Your papers, please", we presest IT with a Manifest Proclamation of Status with the above evidence attached. "Notice to the agent is notice to the principal; notice to the principal is notice to the agent."

Behold, here I am: witness against me before Yahuwah, and before his anointed: whose ox have I taken? or whose ass have I taken? or whom have I defrauded? whom have I oppressed? or of whose hand have I received any bribe to blind mine eyes therewith? and I will restore it you.

But we believe that anyone who does this must remember Paul’s very explicit warning once this process has been completed…

(Touch not; taste not; handle not [[their] ordinances, after the commandments and doctrines of men]; which all are to perish with the using)

…which we believe is based on Leviticus 18:1-5…

And Yahuwah spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the subjects of Yisra’el, and say unto them, I am Yahuwah your ‘Elohiym. After the doings of the land of bondage, wherein ye dwelt, shall ye not do: and after the doings of the land of traffickers, whither I bring you, shall ye not do: neither shall ye walk in their ordinances. Ye shall do my judgments, and keep mine ordinances, to walk therein: I am Yahuwah your ‘Elohiym. Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgments: which if a man do, he shall live in them: I am Yahuwah.

…and is reiterated here in the following New Testament/Covenant verses…

Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith Yahuwah, and touch not the unclean [thing]; and I will receive you, and will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith Yahuwah Almighty.

If we are way off base here, we are sure someone will come forward with the reasons, in words that are understandable even to a small child, why this is not so.

* Caveat: If one wishes to partake of the "rulers' dainties" (government benefits/privileges) one should not die civilly. Your status will be changed "in the twinkling of an eye", and you will, from that day forward, have to put all your faith in Yahuwah [Jehovah], the Living One, Creator and Sole and Unconditional Owner of the heavens, the earth, the seas and all that in them is.

When thou sittest to eat with a ruler, consider diligently what is before thee: And put a knife to thy throat, if thou be a man given to appetite. Be not desirous of his dainties (government benefits/privileges): for they are deceitful meat.

Que sentit commodum, sentire debet et onus. He who derives a benefit from a thing, ought to feel the disadvantages attending it. 2 Bouv. Inst. n. 1433.


brother Robert: fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisra'el,
NOT the man-made, fictional USA.
Ephesians 2:12 & 19
Actus me invito factus, non est meus actus. An act done by me against my will, is not my act.

Edited by - Oneisraelite on 23 Dec 2005 07:06:35
Go to Top of Page

kreoleluv
Junior Member

uSA
19 Posts

Posted - 21 Dec 2005 :  14:41:14  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Peace to all in the room...

I am confused... I have seen both ways to which everyone is reffereing with mild success. I have seen someone become the head of the trust thereby controlling it, and have seen someone refuse to use the number and return the card to the SSA, refusing their creation. Which is the more correct or higher road to take. I am of the opinon that if you control it then tehy can't..remeber it is impossible to serve to masters, something has to give...

Appreciate some feedback...
the new guy.. Kreoleluv

Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere assimilated ignorance and organized conscientious stupidity. - Kreoleluv
Go to Top of Page

Lewish
Advanced Member

uSA
496 Posts

Posted - 21 Dec 2005 :  15:43:09  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Greetings oneisraelite,

I strongly advise against your suggestion of civil death for the trust. It is not yours, and you have no authority to kill it. I can point you to several people serving time in federal prison right now for murdering the trust. It ain't yours. Leave it alone.

To David: The fiduciary liability does not arrise under the SSN only. It arouse the moment the trust was created. In my case, that was 9 days after I starting breathing air outside my mother's womb.

The SSN is only an account number that is associated with the trust. It is not the "legal relationship" to the trust.

Regards,

Lewis-Vincent: Hughes
Go to Top of Page

David Merrill
Advanced Member

USA
1147 Posts

Posted - 21 Dec 2005 :  16:31:04  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Your involvement with the trust creates it Lewis Vincent.

That is what I am saying about perspective.

Edited by - David Merrill on 21 Dec 2005 16:31:31
Go to Top of Page

Lewish
Advanced Member

uSA
496 Posts

Posted - 21 Dec 2005 :  19:09:35  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Hello David,

Not sure I understand your response. I could interpret it two different ways.

Please elucidate.


Regards,

Lewis

Go to Top of Page

RevokeTheTrust
Senior Member

USA
57 Posts

Posted - 21 Dec 2005 :  20:39:22  Show Profile  Visit RevokeTheTrust's Homepage  Reply with Quote
Greetings and salutations!

Peace be unto His house.

quote:
Originally posted by David Merrill

Dear Lewis-Vincent;


That is not true according to the Social Security Administration. Also it is difficult to revoke liabilities - short of a death certificate anyway.

The proof is in the requirement that you give the SSN. The evidence is in the hyphen you have inserted into your true name; novation. I am in control of what I have and do not have. That is according to the SSA.


Objection, brother David. The prematurely conjured "Lewis Vincent", by Negotiable Instruments Law, is an incomplete instrument because it bears space; it is mute in terms of logic, and is expressed as favor to limited liability to its use; as a compurgatorial writ, as I have emitted, respective example to attach Lewis-Vincent to the Holy of the Dark-side (unHoly in tHis realm) matter in a vacuum would implode this world and transfer into another, whereby I restrictively appear in such transparentage in Christ and obey in the LORD with condition and constant exception as to such special appearance among their general-public. However, to let such instrument attach to Lewis-Vincent would be in likeness of covering the living with dead as to effect a separation tempted into foreign venue. It is improper to ignore the substance to that fiat mon/human, but invoke the standing timber contracts to reprove that it is factually a feigned form that needs to be rebuked and chastised. Let a counter to the fiat echo the true form, and ignore their True name tendered to what they think is SURNAME You. "Lewis Vincent" is not a true name; it is an appointed True Name, quiet title cured upon a stamp of a sleeping babe. I suggest looking into an goodly video for biophobic foreign judiciary, titled "Battle Of The Leaves" and let lawful life move without the chicanery. To exgest the ambience of the fiat true name, True Name would exhibit an act of negligence. To quote from an "Owl Book"

...BEGIN THIRD-PARTY INTERFERENCE:
quote:
PRACTICAL LAW
LEARN TO DO BY DOING
SPENCERIAN COMMERCIAL SCHOOL
LOUISVILLE, KY
...
PRACTICAL LAW
A treatise on Business Law especially compiled for schools that teach Accounting, Business Practise, Office Methods and kindred subjects : : : :
By BURRITT HAMILTON
REVISED AND ENLARGED
ELLIS PUBLISHING COMPANY
Battle Creek, Michigan
1914

9. What is Due Care.--Due care is such caution as a prudent person would use under like circumstances. It is "care according to need." It is care in proportion to danger. The greater the known danger, the greater the degree of care required.
10. Negligence.--The want of due care is called "negligence." It may consist in an act or in an ommission. It is neither more nore less than failure to perform a legal duty. Any failure to act as a prudent person might be be reasonably expected to act under like circumstances is negligence.

11. The Penalty of Negligence.--If my negligence damages another, who is himself without fault, I must answer for it; I must compensate him for his loss or injury.
12. Care in One's Own Acts.--The law holds that everyone intends the natural and direct results of his own acts. The person who sets a cause of injury into motion must answer for the consequences. Thus, if a person start a stone to rolling down a steep hill, and the stone so started dislodges others, which, in their course downward, inflict an injury, the starter of the first stone must answer for the damages.
13. Contributory Negligence.--The law is intended to aid those only who are using due care. If A is negligent and B is injured thereby, B must show that he was himself without fault. When a person's ownwant of care contributes to his injury, he cannot hold another responsible for any portion of the injury, for to permit him to do so would be to permit him to profit by his own neglect.
14. Proximate and Remote Cause.--To make a person liable for damages, it must be shown that he is responsible for the thing which caused the injury complained of. If there are several possible causes, the law will say that the injury arose from the proximate, or nearest, cause.
15. Negligence in Executing Written Instruments.--When a negotiable instrument, such as a check or draft, is executed by filling up blanks left for that purpose in a printed form, it is negligence to leave blanks unfilled. Heavy lines should be drawn through all the spaces not filled by printed or written words or figures. If the person making the instrument neglects to do this, and some later holder changes the instrument by writing in larger amounts or different terms without defacing the paper, the negligent maker will be bound by the changes terms to one who, without knowledge of the alteration, afterwards acquires the instrument in due course.
38. Revocation.--An offer may be withdran (or revoked) at any time before acceptance. After acceptance it is irrevocable. When an offer fixes a time within which his offer may be accepted, he may, until acceptance, revoke at will before the time has expired, unless he has received a consideration for holding the offer open.
40. Offer, Acceptance and Revocation by Mail and Telegraph.--When an offer is made by mail, the offer continues open until the letter is received, and for a reasonable time thereafter, unless sooner revoked. Thus an offer made by mail might be revoked by a telegram, or even by a subsequet letter, provided the revocation reached the offeree before acceptance of the offer. If the revocation failed to reach the oferee until after he had accepted the offer, it would be too late. Revocation by mail becomes operative when the letter of revocation is received by the oferee, and not before. Acceptance by mail becomes binding when the letter of acceptance is mailed. If A, in Chicago, were to make B, in Detroit, and offer on January 1st, and if B were to mail his acceptance of the offer on the morninf of January 4th, a letter of revocation mailed by A on January 3d and received by B on the afternoon of January 4th would be wholly ineffectual. Were A to communicate his revocation to B on January 3d by telephone or telegram, it is evident that he might forestall the acceptance. Revocation should always be made by the quickest means. A letter of acceptance, properly mailed, is binding upon the oferer, although he may never receive it. The minds of the parties are held to have met at the moment the letter of acceptance is mailed and an agreement has therefore been made, although the letter may be afterwards lost. But a letter of revocation is wholly inoperative until it has reached the offeree. Similar rules are applied to telegrams of acceptance and revocation.
43. Contracts Imrpoperly Expressed.--If a contract is oral when the law requires it be in writing, it will be either voidable or void. All contracts may lawfully be made orally, unless some statute provides otherwise. The difficulty is that all states have statutes requiring certain important contracts to be in writing. The purpose of these statutes is to require the preservation of accurate proof of what was actually agreed upon. Human memory is fallible. It is often biased by selfish interests. Several centuries ago it was observed that verbal contracts were a source of many frauds and perjuries. So, land entitled "An Act for the Prevention of Frauds and Perjuries." This statute made several classes of contracts void unless preserved in writing. Nearly every state in the Union has adopted a Statute of Frauds modeled, to some extent, upon this ancient act. Under Statute of Frauds in most states the following classes of contracts are required to be in writing: (a) Contracts which cannot be performed within one year. (b) Contracts to pay the debt of another. (c) Contracts made in consideration of marriage, except mutual promises to marry. (d) Contracts for the sale of any interest in land. (e) Contracts for the sale of personal property at a price exceeding $50. Such contracts, unless in writing, are usually unenforcable.
48. Standing Timber.--Standing timber is an interest in land, hence a contract for the purchase of standing timber will be void, unless made in writing.

55. Signing by Agent.--The required memorandum may be signed by the parties in person, or by agent. In the case of Heffron v. Armsby (see sec. 53) we saw a signature by an agent sustained by the court. The signing in that case was in crude form. It should have read: J.K. ARMSBY, by J.H. RUDELL, Agent
Yet, because the intent of the parties was clear, the isgning was treated as sufficient. In most states, written authority is required to enable an agent to execute a contract relating to land. Verbal authority is generally sufficient in all other cases.
56. Incompetent Parties.--Contracts made by the following classes of persons are generally either void or voidable: (a) Infants, (b) Lunatics and drunken persons, (c) Persons under duress, (d) Married women.
69. The Meaning of Consideration.--The thing given by each party to the other as the inducement for the contract is called Consideration...
70. Absense of Consideration.--Contracts to give somthing for nothing are void. Consideration is the foundation of the contract; without it the contract must fall. Thus, if A were to give B, gratuitously, an option for the purchase of land belonging to A, B could not enforce the option contract. Bus if B had paid A something of value for the option, even a small sum, as for example $1, the option contract would be enforcible.
71. Good Consideration.--The following things are held to be good consideration: (a) Money and things of value. (b) Mutual promises. (c) Acts and forbearances. (d) Natural love and affection.
76. Valuable Consideration.--A consideration is said to be "valuable" when it consists of money or of something convertible into money. Marriage is also a valuable consideration. As between the parties to the transaction, a good consideration is sufficient, but to support the transaction as against the adverse interests of creditors, the consideration must be both good and valuable.
78. Illegal Contracts.--The following classes of contract are void: (a) Contracts in violation of law. (b) Contracts contrary to public policy.
85. (d) Gambling Contracts.--A wager is an agreement to pay upon the happening of an uncertain event. Wagers are in violation of sound morals. Wagering (or gambling) contracts are therefore held void by the courts of nearly eery state in the Union. Election bets, bets upon horse races and upon games are almost universally void. When money have been deposited with a stake holder for the purpose of an unlawful wager, the depositor may recover his money from the stake holder by demanding it at any time before it has been paid to the winner, and this either before or after the bet has been decided. If the stake holder refuses to give back the money on demand, he becomes personally liable for it to the depositor.
86. (e) Marriage Brokerage.--A contract to procure a wife or another is contrary to public policy and sound morality. Such contracts are void.
87. (f) Usurious Contracts.--The maximum rate of interest that may be charged is fixed by statute in most of the states of the Union. When a contract, directly or indirectly, requires payment of a return to the lender, or his agent, exceeding the maximum rate allowed by law, it is said to be usurious. Usury ordinarily works a forfeiture of a part or of all f the interest, and in a few states avoids the contract.
89. Words.--When the parties have put their contract into words, the question arises, What do the words used mean? The act of ascertaining the intent of the parties from the expression they have used is called Construction. In construing a contract, common words are to be given their plain, obvious and ordinary meaning. Technical words and trade terms are to be given their special significance, unless a different intent is evident from the instrument itself. Words are construed most strongly against the party using them, as it is presumed that he has used language as favorable as possible to himself. A contract is to be so interpreted to give effect to every word used. When ellipses occur for the sake of brevity, the court may construe the contract as though the ommitted expressions had been used.
91. Double Construction.--When a contract is capable of two constructions, the one which will make it operative will be chosen in preference to the one which will make it inoperative.
92. Satisfaction.--When it is contracted that a certain thing shall be to the satisfaction of another, as, for example, that certain machinery shall work to the satisfaction of the purchaser, the person whose opinion is to be thus consulted is the sole judge of whether or not he is satisfied. If dissatisfied he may cancel the contract.
93. Negative Contracts.--When a contract provides that one of the parties to it shall not do a certain thing, breach of the contract may be enjoined by the courts.
94. Reasonable Time.--When an act is promised to be done, and not time of performance is set, the law will say that the act was to be done within a reasonable time.
95. Contracts Partly Written and Partly Printed.--When a part of a contract is printed form, and a part is written words, and the written words are in conflict with the printed portion of the contract, the written words control.

96. Writing not Varied by Parol.--When a contract has been reduced to writing and executed by the parties, all preliminary understandings and agreements are merged in the written agreement. To all intents and purposes the preliminary, verbal agreements cease to exist.
97. The Law of Place.--As a eneral rule, a contract valid where made is valid everywhere, and a contract invalid where made is invalid everywhere. When a contract is made in one state or country to be performed in another state or country, the law of the place of performance governs the contract, unless the parties have agreed otherwise. When a contract is both made and to be performed in one and the same state, the law of the place where the contract is made governs.
114. Defenses.--When one is called upon to perform a contract, he may lawfully refuse compliance for any one or more of the following reasons, which we have already discussed, namely: Want of agreement, Want of proper form, Want of competent parties, Want of consideration, Want of certainty, Want of legal object. Or he may refuse on the ground that the contract has been terminated by performance, impossibility of performance, substitution, mutual cancellation or rescission. There are still other defenses. Among them we shall note (a) Merger, (b) Alteration, (c) Forgery, (d) Bankruptcy, (e) The Statute of Limitations.
120. The Relation.--An agent is one who acts in the stead of another with authority so to do. The Principal is the one by whose authority the agent acts. Authority is the power delegated to the agent by his principal.
123. Special Agents.--A special agent binds his principal only when he acts within the scope of his actual authority. Persons who deal with a special agent must ascertain his authority at their own peril.

124. Conferment of Authority.--Authority may be conferred upon the agent by words, or it may arise through acts, or even through a failure to act. When one knows that another is assuming to act as his agent, yet makes no objection, he can not deny the authority of the agent, when such denial will injure those who have been mislead by the supposed principal's silence. Thus, if A states to B in C's presence that he, A, is C's agent, B will be protected in relying upon such statement if C, hearing it, fails to contradict it. Authority may be conferred verbally or in writing. Verbal authority is sufficient to authorize the agent to execute a written contract. But authority to execute a deed must be given in writing. Authority to execute an instrument required by law to be under seal must intself be under seal.
276. Variance Between Words and Figures.--If the amount of the instrument written in figures differs from the amount written in words, the words, and not the figures, control. But if there is no amount written in words, the figures control.
282. Filling Up Blanks.--The Negotiable Instruments Law provides that: "Where the instrument is wanting in any material particular, the person in possession thereof has a prima facie authority to complete it by filling up the blanks. When a maker or drawer signs a bill or note in blank in order that the paper may be converted into a negotiable instrument, his act operates as a prima facie authority to the person to whom he delivers the paper to fill up the paper for any amount. In order that an instrument, delivered in incomplete form, may be enforced after completion against any person who becomes a party to it before its completion, it must be filled up strictly in accordance with the authority given, and within a reasonable time; but if any such intstrument, after completion, is negotiated to a purchaser in due course the instrument will be enforcible in his hands regardless of the fact that it may have been filled up for a greater amount than was intended by the maker. Thus if A signed a blank negotiable note and delivered it to B, with instruction to fill up the instrument for a sum not exceeding $500; and if B afterwards wrongfully wrote his own name in the note as payee thereof. and inserted $5,000 as the amount of the obligation, and then negotiated it in due course to C, A would be bound to pay C $5,000. WHen a maker of an instrument carelessly leaves space in a printed form whereby an alternation may be made without defacing the instrument or exciting the suspicion of a careful person, the maker will be liable upon the instrument to a holder in due course when the opportunity for alteration has been exercised.



:END THIRD-PARTY INTERFERENCE...


quote:
If I have no SSN how could I still be considered fiduciary for a trust? Anybody trying to enforce that premise would be requiring me to have a SSN. And according to the SSA all I have to do is quit saying and writing it - then it is no longer extant.


Their strawman is authority expected to be put upon the principle by alienation to entreat the principle as a non-resident alien and convert to an agent -- by contract. The contract, and all presumptions, will not hold see-water when the source of the ink is criticized, the color of the ink/RGB spectrum is criticized, the verry substance of hu/watt owns the parchment assembled and the source of the paper whence derived from the standing lumber; ie, everything. I'm not a religious man, but just go along my Father's business.

quote:
I certainly appreciate the debate. I have explored this extensively and believe the SSA office manager. There is probably truth to your statement but from a certain perspective - that is to say - from the man creating the fiction. So the posture is likely useful for many Readers.


You put faith where none is given. Brother David, you are dealing with people that are intentionally ignorant. I recently came near an agent of the Crown: the governor of California is in Stockton California and his name isn't ARNOLD SCHWARZENIGGER. Further Objections; rebuke without fascinating content in a vaporous World within the world, presumptions; a wicked substance to wear a thread. Have you spoken to the Rock, hymn that rolls in front to you, or do you strike the Rock? To reprove the manner of instrument; Lewis-Vincent is not a man; Hymn/him be process of time, a little lord/minstrel, a flush and resonant stone/sirnamed cherubim seated to the arms of the Lord, renoun to exhibit a record that Spirits among the living dead/mute and the undead/animated by crafty serpentine hands good and evil; acroleutic entrails levitated and once-while skip across the water. Lewis-Vincent trolls space, brings about time of when a fruit has reached maturity to pluck from the vine, and to sow the seed that bears ten-times a harvest.

"Lewis Vincent" is the first strike to a imperfected man held above the water-line, derainged and manipulated as to artifice borne at birth of a SURNAME Vessel at bay, established at limited liability of stoning by hymn that counters the object that cured such quiet title. It is good to honor judiciary/Lewis-Vincent entering this forum, but not respect hymn for [un]worthy seamanship; for His countenance has fallen onto us intelligently as living water, a tice to admonish wherever we stumble, and lower the bar/raise the shelf of the deep to a walkable susbstrate for every stone wrapped around a man's neck and cast away. Welcome to Jesus' island, a high-place, man. "Lewis-Vincent" is the living will, while "Lewis Vincent" was the pass-Word of a sailor humanated and expunged by a Noachide/woman at sea. Check for the red-thread attached to the shank composed by Vincent to Lewis, perceive the green thread/gHost with roots that are quickly burned by the salt of the sea, and neither forget the blue tassel/annointed Spirit that merges the known venues into the world to bring about the oft-misplaced white light fought for in the firmament. Thereto exhibit the master's record in Ezekiel (King James Version, 1611, Authorized Version)
quote:

[17:1-8] (King James Version, 1611, Authorized Version) "[1]And the word of the LORD came unto me, saying,[2]Son of man, put forth a riddle, and speak a parable unto the house of Israel;[3]And say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; A great eagle with great wings, longwinged, full of feathers, which had divers colours, came unto Lebanon, and took the highest branch of thecedar:[4]He cropped off the top of his young twigs, and carried it into a land of traffick; he set it in a city of merchants.[5]He took also of the seed of the land, and planted it in a fruitful field; he placed it by great waters, and set it as a willow tree.[6]And it grew, and became a spreading vine of low stature, whose branches turned toward him, and the roots thereof were under him: so it became a vine, and brought forth branches, and shot forth sprigs.[7]There was also another great eagle with great wings and many feathers: and, behold, this vine did bend her roots toward him, and shot forth her branches toward him, that he might water it by the furrows of her plantation.It was planted in a good soil by great waters, that it might bring forth branches, and that it might bear fruit, that it might be a goodly vine." [solicitor, Gregory|Thomas]


Utmost blessings to Lewis Vincent for his fiat submittance of the world, thou Lewis-Vincent is manifest to counter the fiat and thereby cursed above all cattle to rule over them in Genesis (King James Version, 1611, Authorized Version)
quote:

[4:20-24] "[20]And Adah bare Jabal: he was the father of such as dwell in tents, and of such as have cattle.[21]And his brother's name was Jubal: he was the father of all such as handle the harp and organ.[22]And Zillah, she also bare Tubalcain, an instructer of every artificer in brass and iron: and the sister of Tubalcain was Naamah.[23]And Lamech said unto his wives, Adah and Zillah, Hear my voice; ye wives of Lamech, hearken unto my speech: for I have slain a man to my wounding, and a young man to my hurt.[24]If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold, truly Lamech seventy and sevenfold.

[3:7,14,15,19-24] "[7]And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were
naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons.[14]
And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou
art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy
belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:[15]
And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and
her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel. [19]In
the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the
ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust
shalt thou return.[20]And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was
the mother of all living.[21]Unto Adam also and to his wife did the LORD
God make coats of skins, and clothed them.[22]And the LORD God said, Behold,
the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil: and now, lest he
put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live
for ever:[23]Therefore the LORD God sent him forth from the garden of Eden,
to till the ground from whence he was taken.[24]So he drove out the man;
and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming
sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life"
[solicitor, Gregory|Thomas]

[4:3-6] "[3]And in process of time it came to pass, that Cain brought of the fruit of the ground an offering unto the LORD.[4]And Abel, he also brought of the firstlings of his flock and of the fat thereof. And the LORD had respect unto Abel and to his offering:[5]But unto Cain and to his offering he had not respect. And Cain was very wroth, and his countenance fell.[6]And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen?"
[solicitor, Gregory|Thomas]


Confirmed in Luke (King James Version, 1611, Authorized Version)
quote:

[12:10]
"[10]And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven."
[17:3-4]
[3]Take heed to yourselves: If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him.[4]And if he trespass against thee seven times in a day, and seven times in a day turn again to thee, saying, I repent; thou shalt forgive him."




quote:
Regards,

David Merrill.

P.S. I stood in front of an audience after a lecture and tore up the Social Security Card over a decade ago. That may have an effect upon my perspective about this. I will probably examine the citation however. Thank you Lewis Vincent.

http://www.washingtonwatchdog.org/documents/cfr/title26/part300.html



That is outstanding/standing-out. I offered my strange-fire to their strange-fire and it was consumed, to my liberty. I thought it accurate to commend that a Krishnan friend of mine, holding a corpus for his carpentry business, would sign all documents with a figuritively-drawn penis or a duck("quack"); not to hold in one's hand, but discharge a discolored ink -- no realy, he signed pornography on things he had no likeness of. I punned him a quest for what color the pen, and he said the "pen-is black." To that perdition, it is an honor to greet a man at the door that casted-out idolls with idolatry and remained spotless from the world, not as a carrier but an extra-terrestrial Holder in due course. It is folly to say someone is self-employed; it admitts too much idolatry into the world, and returns a visit from the libelants that seized the broken ship INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE. Thereto a male/woman, wearing an apron, either in a smithery or a masonic lodge and crafting a thing of man can be outcast by another forge; but to do so, would be done in Christ to prove one's sacrifice worthy to the will of God. Does anyone hear?

quote:

Greetings and salutations, devekut:

Peace be unto the house.

“Also it is difficult to revoke liabilities - short of a death certificate anyway.” [Emphasis added]

Fascinating response, “…short of a death certificate....”, i.e. proof of death!!

If one was certain of what he was about to do, and the attending repercussions*, perhaps one could run an official notice in a widely-enough-circulated-newspaper for three consecutive weeks announcing the civil death of ALL-CAP NAME and SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER, accompanied with some sort of notification to any and all persons which can show cause why this is not LEGALLY allowable, of a time and place where they may present their evidence. Be sure to keep the original newspaper notices and receipts for the same.

What is dead to the english tongue can only be resurrected as undead; salvaged for a rape. Outstanding debt is resident, so I suggest not dwell on any profession for more than four-years, or do as I do and let all the illegal aliens make use of that pirate vessel. I love the face on an ignorant homeless man that needs help traversing on the high-seas of asphault with a registered junker that he was coerced to use someone-elses' Social Security Number without vehicle insurance. "Thanks amigo gringo" or whatever they say to me for a wicked human/slave to coercively govern their vessel.

quote:
civil death. Law. The change of status of a person equivalent in its legal consequences to natural death. – Webster’s 1960 New Collegiate Dictionary, page 151

Civil death, being the equivalent in its LEGAL consequences to natural death, would LEGALLY revoke all liabilities, we believe.

Wherefore if ye be dead with the Anointed [One] from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances, after the commandments and doctrines of men?

Extra legem positus est civiliter mortuus. One out of the pale of the law, (an outlaw,) is civilly dead.

PALE, n. 3. An inclosure; properly,that which incloses, like fence, limit; hence, the space inclosed. - Webster's 1828 American Dictionary of the English Language


Why is everyone confident that a civilian can be put to rest by paper? Just jump a helmsman into the captain's chair, issue direction to your search engine/horse, properly anoint the hull with cider to the Principle and Agent doctrine, and shove off already to sea how far it can move without having to put paper on the barbecue. As I always say, the property is the civilian; it neither attacks or defends, but until I change its state to unleash some canonical law. I've an aquatic trike, by the Way for recreation via Genesis 1:2.

quote:
Perhaps someone here, more learned than we, could tell you how to take these notices and receipts to one of their JUDGES, or maybe to a NOTARY PUBLIC, and somehow make it recognizable to the STATE. Perhaps one could even post copies of the three notices, with attending dates and whatnot, in their COURTHOUSE and several other conspicuous places together with some form of AFFIDAVIT, for any person who says you cannot LEGALLY do this, to fill out and when no thing has given a Lawful rebuttal, file a default.


That depends on wether you define notice as "know this" or "no tice"; don't vacate your post; seal the door, put the post repository security/safety box in the cargo bay of the car facing the angle whence an agent approaches, and let them bring their offering/exhibit/tender their negligence.

quote:
Or, just maybe, we make this more difficult than it needs to be. What if, when one is stopped by one of kosmokrator's AGENTS who demands, "Your papers, please", we presest IT with the a Manifest Proclamation of Status with the above evidence attached. "Notice to the agent is notice to the principal; notice to the principal is notice to the agent."

You're there, brother! Just don't speak of the safe-heaven/uncodified country, but keep it clothed and ready to move the chess-peices that are given to SURNAME/You (not the original I).

quote:
Behold, here I am: witness against me before Yahuwah, and before his anointed: whose ox have I taken? or whose ass have I taken? or whom have I defrauded? whom have I oppressed? or of whose hand have I received any bribe to blind mine eyes therewith? and I will restore it you.

But we believe that anyone who does this must remember Paul’s very explicit warning once this process has been completed…

(Touch not; taste not; handle not [[their] ordinances, after the commandments and doctrines of men]; which all are to perish with the using)


The agent covets every ass because it's a slave to carry the king, and there is money to be made when they do it with their You. That judiciary branch covets every engine, to derive a tax with every act of negligence/certification. Surely, I can't touch their ordinances because I am not signing anything; that thing, You, are signing it as though my agent; residue in the air captured and directed to their control for a tresspass that occurred at the harbor. The air at the sea sure is salty. Brother Geoff adapted a great parable to lock the salt in the most arid soil; http://permaculture.org.au or specifically "http://207.21.197.146/per/Permaculture.swf" and the technique was not necessarily to burn the unrooted tares but pile the tares upon the living as to buffer or prevent window evaporation from leaking below to a scortching sun.

quote:

…which we believe is based on Leviticus 18:1-5…

And Yahuwah spake unto Moses, saying, Speak unto the subjects of Yisra’el, and say unto them, I am Yahuwah your ‘Elohiym. After the doings of the land of bondage, wherein ye dwelt, shall ye not do: and after the doings of the land of traffickers, whither I bring you, shall ye not do: neither shall ye walk in their ordinances. Ye shall do my judgments, and keep mine ordinances, to walk therein: I am Yahuwah your ‘Elohiym. Ye shall therefore keep my statutes, and my judgments: which if a man do, he shall live in them: I am Yahuwah.

…and is reiterated here in the following New Testament/Covenant verses…

Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith Yahuwah, and touch not the unclean [thing]; and I will receive you, and will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith Yahuwah Almighty.

Are you talking to the helmsman, the king, or the horse-drawn undead carriage/chamber aptly named "MUNDT" and thereby disemboweled with the occupants blood shed as in Ezekiel 23 memorandum at
quote:
[45]And the righteous men, they shall judge them after the manner of adulteresses, and after the manner of women that shed blood; because they are adulteresses, and blood is in their hands."


A pilot that allows any passenger into their carriage, without respect to their origin, admits the car is rather whorish. Kick them out; come out of her, without malice unlike that whore or even Onan that spilled the seed/living-stone.

quote:
* Caveat: If one wishes to partake of the "rulers' dainties" (government benefits/privileges) one should not die civilly. Your status will be changed "in the twinkling of an eye", and you will, from that day forward, have to put all your faith in Yahuwah [Jehovah], the Living One, Creator and Sole and Unconditional Owner of the heavens, the earth, the seas and all that in them is.

When thou sittest to eat with a ruler, consider diligently what is before thee: And put a knife to thy throat, if thou be a man given to appetite. Be not desirous of his dainties (government benefits/privileges): for they are deceitful meat.


That is true; A corporation that builds its motivation, such and such tonnes of broken-reeds birthen, would be a monster to any eyes to see that its verry horse/engine has a mind of its own; that it would seize on consuming the wrong fuels: such is unlawful consideration to contracts, although strange things happen at the Grace of God, such as in Christ to protect and gestate upon those perverse children to rehabilitate them to a perfection and reprove them a sacrifice for God. The LORD's mercy is great! Hallelujah!
Oh Jah...
Gregory-Thomas

Edited by - RevokeTheTrust on 21 Dec 2005 21:02:17
Go to Top of Page

Oneisraelite
Advanced Member

uSA
833 Posts

Posted - 22 Dec 2005 :  07:24:16  Show Profile  Reply with Quote
Greetings and salutations:

Peace be unto the house.

In the event that some may have missed the facetiousness (sportive humor) in Lewis’s answer to us, we point it out.

We wrote: “If we are way off base here, we are sure someone will come forward with the reasons, in words that are understandable even to a small child, why this is not so.” [Emphasis added]

So Lewis responded, as a “PARENT” might respond; “It ain't yours. Leave it alone.”

We respond: But, [uncle] Lewis, if we notice them properly, according to their own so-called law, one day each week, for three consecutive weeks, in front of enough witnesses, is it not the fiduciary duty of the TRUSTEE, or one of ITS AGENTS, to come forward and tell us "It ain't yours. Leave it alone"? [You're not an AGENT for the world ruler(s), are you?] And if IT, or one of ITS AGENTS, does not come forward, within the prescribed amount of time, and say, "It ain't yours; Leave it alone", then by default that means it’s allowable, right, [uncle] Lewis?

It’s kind of like if you were babysitting me (parens patriæ), [uncle] Lewis, and in accordance with your own rules, I asked you three consecutive times, in front of lots and lots of witnesses, "[Uncle] Lewis, can I go back to my real Guardian now, and if you fail to respond to my question within an allotted and reasonable amount of time, [uncle] Lewis, I’m gonna go, okay?" If you had become my babysitter (parens patriæ) via artifice (fraudulent means), as it is written (2Peter 2:3), you might not want all the neighbors to know, hence you might refuse to respond, and as a consequence, I may LEGALLY and Lawfully go. You could not LEGALLY imprison me for returning to my de jure Guardian, now could you, [uncle] Lewis? All those witnesses would say, “But Lewis, he did give you notice several times, in accordance with your own rules, and you defaulted by not answering him within the allotted time”.

When [[uncle] Lewis] saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude…

[Uncle] Lewis, how did the so-called prodigal son return to his original estate after he had died and joined himself to a citizen of that country?

The word “went”, as in “went and joined himself to a citizen”, Luke 15:15, is the Greek word poreuomai, and can mean according to Joseph Thayer, “1b) to depart from life” and as per James Strong, “[figuratively die]”, which perhaps explains why his Father made this strange statement, “For this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found.” In what way was he dead to his Father, [uncle] Lewis? Was he civilly dead? Or did he die a natural death?

Is this why after the subjects (children) of Yisr'ael had opted for a man as their god/ruler that Yahuwah said...

1Shama'el 8:18 (LITV) And you will cry out in that day because of your king whom you have chosen for yourselves. And Jehovah will not answer you in that day.

Could it be [uncle] Lewis that He could not answer them, because they were now civilly dead to Him, dead to His Jurisdiction?

So many questions, so little time.


brother Robert: 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 22 Dec 2005 08:58:33
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 3 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Next Page
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly
Jump To:
ECCLESIASTIC COMMONWEALTH COMMUNITY © 2003-2020 Ecclesiastic Commonwealth Community Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.19 seconds. Snitz Forums 2000