Jaro
07-08-11, 03:11 AM
Here's something for those who think that when you got Lawful Money, the gov't still has authority over you. It's an article by Jean Keating. Demonstrates how when a government gets involved in commerce, it ceases to be a government and becomes a mere corporation, which obviously ONLY has authority through contract.
But mere corporate US citizens can't take on the gov't as a corporation, because they're its creation, and are insolvent and part of the US bankruptcy. Only when you got REAL/lawful money, you got some sovereignty and can demand to see the contract that allegedly binds you to obey statutes of the US corporation or of one of its State subdivisions.
"In fact and law there is NO United States. It is now merely a private corporate UNITED STATES
(including all states, counties and cities) administrating the pledged credit for its creditors which is YOU. (See
Clearfield Trust Co. v. U.S. (1943) 318 US 363.) This has the effect of making each United States Citizen a
Resident Alien in a foreign (corporation of Federal jurisdiction) country. (Clearfield, supra, is the leading case on
the subject.) The following should explain:
"Governments descend to the level of a mere private corporation and take on the character of a mere
private citizen [where private corporate commercial paper (securities) are concerned]" Bank of US v.
Planters Bank, 9 Wheaton (22 US) 904, 6LEd 24
and
"When governments enter the world of commerce, it is subject to the same burdens as any private firm."
U.S. v. Burr, 309 US 242, 60 Sct. 488, 84 LEd 244.
and
"For purposes of suit, such corporations and individuals are regarded as an entity ENTIRELY separate from government." Planters, infra.
and
"The plaintiffs are NOT suing the USA, but the corporation, and if its act was UNLAWFUL, even if they might have sued the USA, they are NOT cut off from a remedy against the AGENT that did the wrongful
act. In general the USA cannot be sued for a tort but its immunity does NOT extend to those who acted in its name." Sloan Shipyards v. US EFC 67 Cal. LR No. 6 (1979).
Do you know of any government AGENT in the U.S. who is not dealing in commercial paper? With this understanding you should be able to sue the pants off them bur-a-rats in their private (non governmental) individual capacity (state and federal). I could list 50 more cases that say the same thing as above but you can search them out if needed.
It is a shame the people do not know about the law merchant and it makes this writer want to cry out to those who are protesting such things as abortion, taxes, seat belts, and other government coercion, etc.; then when they go into court have their constitutional arguments ignored BECAUSE THEY ARE UNDER
CONTRACT in law merchant due to use of negotiable instruments and the court just overrules their constitutional arguments or approves a Motion in Limine, e.g. keep the constitution OUT, without telling them why. You should have a good grasp of the situation after reading this report.
There is nothing but international law merchant courts in existence today and they once in a while give lip service to the constitution for confusion IF THE CASE IS PROPERLY PLEADED. Babylonian = confusion = Law Merchant.
"Actually, this entire procedure should be adjudicated at the
Administrative level and never reach the referee of need. See Title 5, sections 554 (a) (c) (1) ; 555 (B) ,
556 & 557."
@CHAPTER ONE
WHAT HAPPENED?
BONA FIDES EXIGIT UT QUOD CONVENT FIAT
"GOOD FAITH DEMANDS THAT WHAT IS AGREED UPON
SHALL BE DONE."
The Constitution of the United States was overwhelmed by a body of law called the
Negotiable Instruments Act [Law] (herein-after "NIL"). The NIL was established by Treaty (International Law) by most of the free Nations of the world in 1930 at the Geneva conference.
The NIL has many names and several forms. Some of the names are Roman Civil Law, Civil Law, Hague Law, Geneva Law, Merchants Law, Negotiable Instruments Law, Superior
Law, Babylonian Law, International Law of Credit, Public Law, Law of Nations, Uniform Commercial Code, and others. These multiple names cause confusion.
The Law Merchant (ie. NIL) came early to America from English Law. The NIL has been "codified" in most states as a commercial code. All "codes" arise out of and are subject to the NIL, [see UCC Article 10]. In some states the NIL (or Law Merchant) is called the Business and Commerce Code. The NIL was repealed (Article 10, Sec. 40) and Codified in most states about 1967 as the Uniform Commercial Code (hereinafter "UCC").
Until 1933 entry into this law was voluntary (explained infra). Without a knowledge of this private law, "Code", you cannot know what is happening in America and the world today.
This (so called superior law) works upon notes, bills of exchange, checks, drafts, and all commercial paper [presentments].
The use of paper denoting debt by contract compels the user into the Law of Merchants or Mercantile Law, (UCC).
The use of credit was forced upon the people in America in 1933 by HJR 192 forcing the acceptance of FRNs (hereinafter "FRNs") as legal tender in lieu of payment of debt. The use of
FRNs compels the user into interstate commerce under an admiralty/maritime jurisdiction involving international law.
"A bill, draft, check, or note is a contract, and the fundamental rules governing contract law are applicable to the determination of the legal questions which arise over such instruments.
1st American Jurisprudence, vol.7, pg.788 (emphases added)
Contracts are private law not controlled by the Constitution. []
"The admiralty court later widened its jurisdiction to embrace mercantile causes, and
thereafter the common-law judges encroached upon the field of admiralty jurisdiction over commercial transactions." 1st Am Jur, 7, pg. 797 supra.
Neither Congress, the schools, "churches", nor the mass "news" media have informed the people about the involvement of the UCC in every aspect of their lives.
Liability [in theory] arises through the use and circulation of non-redeemable FRNs
(credit) placing the user in debt bondage under the UCC. This happened without notice and
opportunity to be heard [without due process?] while fraudulently pretending the constitution
is controlling.
The coup de grace was accomplished by President Roosevelt in 1933 when HJR 192
demonetized gold, forcing the States and people therein to accept Notes in discharge of debt
instead of payment in gold/silver.
HJR 192 (1933) made all State and Federal governments law merchants, thereby
destroying their sovereignty as a state, and placing them under the private side of international
law, see UCC 1-201 (28) and the Clearfield Trust Co. v. U.S. (1943) 318 US 363 and related
cases (infra).
HOW does one get involved? By becoming a law merchant! When dealing in negotiable
instruments such as checks, notes, bills of exchange etc. [offers, presentments, refusals,
acceptances, contracts] issues are judicated in a court exercising a quasi-admiralty jurisdiction in
accord with the UCC, Am.Jur.7, Vol 1. pg. 796, '797, para 14, see UCC 2-104 (law merchant
code).
There is no other choice, by edict of congressional statutes, since HJR 192 in 1933.
Dealing in FRNs, checks, bills, etc. makes one a full fledged law merchant. Bills, notes, checks,
bills of lading, warehouse receipts etc. are contracts, see Am.Jur.1, vol.7 & 8 for a full discussion
on these contracts. Using FRNs is also dealing under contract in interstate commerce.
Interstate commerce comes under the exclusive jurisdiction of the statutory laws of congress.
A license is required for involvement in transactions using FRNs because these paper
notes are traded in inter state commerce, and international transactions. This involvement makes
one a(n) (international) law merchant.
Until you plead and prove otherwise, the presumption (in the courts) is that you are under
the UCC, your silence waives the defense. [As a general rule failure to plead a defense waives
the defense.]
http://www.fourwinds10.com/siterun_data/government/corporate_u_s/news.php?q=1266689118...
It is presumed, everyone voluntarily entered the law Merchant by their silence, (ie. no
strong objection to a violation of the law, see ratification below). Silence [failure to reject or
performance on a contract] confirms a contract. When you know someone is violating the law
(Art 1, ยง 10) and you participate without objection, you become as guilty as the other party by
your silence. You have ratified the contract (by your silence) hence the courts take the position
that you volunteered into it,
But mere corporate US citizens can't take on the gov't as a corporation, because they're its creation, and are insolvent and part of the US bankruptcy. Only when you got REAL/lawful money, you got some sovereignty and can demand to see the contract that allegedly binds you to obey statutes of the US corporation or of one of its State subdivisions.
"In fact and law there is NO United States. It is now merely a private corporate UNITED STATES
(including all states, counties and cities) administrating the pledged credit for its creditors which is YOU. (See
Clearfield Trust Co. v. U.S. (1943) 318 US 363.) This has the effect of making each United States Citizen a
Resident Alien in a foreign (corporation of Federal jurisdiction) country. (Clearfield, supra, is the leading case on
the subject.) The following should explain:
"Governments descend to the level of a mere private corporation and take on the character of a mere
private citizen [where private corporate commercial paper (securities) are concerned]" Bank of US v.
Planters Bank, 9 Wheaton (22 US) 904, 6LEd 24
and
"When governments enter the world of commerce, it is subject to the same burdens as any private firm."
U.S. v. Burr, 309 US 242, 60 Sct. 488, 84 LEd 244.
and
"For purposes of suit, such corporations and individuals are regarded as an entity ENTIRELY separate from government." Planters, infra.
and
"The plaintiffs are NOT suing the USA, but the corporation, and if its act was UNLAWFUL, even if they might have sued the USA, they are NOT cut off from a remedy against the AGENT that did the wrongful
act. In general the USA cannot be sued for a tort but its immunity does NOT extend to those who acted in its name." Sloan Shipyards v. US EFC 67 Cal. LR No. 6 (1979).
Do you know of any government AGENT in the U.S. who is not dealing in commercial paper? With this understanding you should be able to sue the pants off them bur-a-rats in their private (non governmental) individual capacity (state and federal). I could list 50 more cases that say the same thing as above but you can search them out if needed.
It is a shame the people do not know about the law merchant and it makes this writer want to cry out to those who are protesting such things as abortion, taxes, seat belts, and other government coercion, etc.; then when they go into court have their constitutional arguments ignored BECAUSE THEY ARE UNDER
CONTRACT in law merchant due to use of negotiable instruments and the court just overrules their constitutional arguments or approves a Motion in Limine, e.g. keep the constitution OUT, without telling them why. You should have a good grasp of the situation after reading this report.
There is nothing but international law merchant courts in existence today and they once in a while give lip service to the constitution for confusion IF THE CASE IS PROPERLY PLEADED. Babylonian = confusion = Law Merchant.
"Actually, this entire procedure should be adjudicated at the
Administrative level and never reach the referee of need. See Title 5, sections 554 (a) (c) (1) ; 555 (B) ,
556 & 557."
@CHAPTER ONE
WHAT HAPPENED?
BONA FIDES EXIGIT UT QUOD CONVENT FIAT
"GOOD FAITH DEMANDS THAT WHAT IS AGREED UPON
SHALL BE DONE."
The Constitution of the United States was overwhelmed by a body of law called the
Negotiable Instruments Act [Law] (herein-after "NIL"). The NIL was established by Treaty (International Law) by most of the free Nations of the world in 1930 at the Geneva conference.
The NIL has many names and several forms. Some of the names are Roman Civil Law, Civil Law, Hague Law, Geneva Law, Merchants Law, Negotiable Instruments Law, Superior
Law, Babylonian Law, International Law of Credit, Public Law, Law of Nations, Uniform Commercial Code, and others. These multiple names cause confusion.
The Law Merchant (ie. NIL) came early to America from English Law. The NIL has been "codified" in most states as a commercial code. All "codes" arise out of and are subject to the NIL, [see UCC Article 10]. In some states the NIL (or Law Merchant) is called the Business and Commerce Code. The NIL was repealed (Article 10, Sec. 40) and Codified in most states about 1967 as the Uniform Commercial Code (hereinafter "UCC").
Until 1933 entry into this law was voluntary (explained infra). Without a knowledge of this private law, "Code", you cannot know what is happening in America and the world today.
This (so called superior law) works upon notes, bills of exchange, checks, drafts, and all commercial paper [presentments].
The use of paper denoting debt by contract compels the user into the Law of Merchants or Mercantile Law, (UCC).
The use of credit was forced upon the people in America in 1933 by HJR 192 forcing the acceptance of FRNs (hereinafter "FRNs") as legal tender in lieu of payment of debt. The use of
FRNs compels the user into interstate commerce under an admiralty/maritime jurisdiction involving international law.
"A bill, draft, check, or note is a contract, and the fundamental rules governing contract law are applicable to the determination of the legal questions which arise over such instruments.
1st American Jurisprudence, vol.7, pg.788 (emphases added)
Contracts are private law not controlled by the Constitution. []
"The admiralty court later widened its jurisdiction to embrace mercantile causes, and
thereafter the common-law judges encroached upon the field of admiralty jurisdiction over commercial transactions." 1st Am Jur, 7, pg. 797 supra.
Neither Congress, the schools, "churches", nor the mass "news" media have informed the people about the involvement of the UCC in every aspect of their lives.
Liability [in theory] arises through the use and circulation of non-redeemable FRNs
(credit) placing the user in debt bondage under the UCC. This happened without notice and
opportunity to be heard [without due process?] while fraudulently pretending the constitution
is controlling.
The coup de grace was accomplished by President Roosevelt in 1933 when HJR 192
demonetized gold, forcing the States and people therein to accept Notes in discharge of debt
instead of payment in gold/silver.
HJR 192 (1933) made all State and Federal governments law merchants, thereby
destroying their sovereignty as a state, and placing them under the private side of international
law, see UCC 1-201 (28) and the Clearfield Trust Co. v. U.S. (1943) 318 US 363 and related
cases (infra).
HOW does one get involved? By becoming a law merchant! When dealing in negotiable
instruments such as checks, notes, bills of exchange etc. [offers, presentments, refusals,
acceptances, contracts] issues are judicated in a court exercising a quasi-admiralty jurisdiction in
accord with the UCC, Am.Jur.7, Vol 1. pg. 796, '797, para 14, see UCC 2-104 (law merchant
code).
There is no other choice, by edict of congressional statutes, since HJR 192 in 1933.
Dealing in FRNs, checks, bills, etc. makes one a full fledged law merchant. Bills, notes, checks,
bills of lading, warehouse receipts etc. are contracts, see Am.Jur.1, vol.7 & 8 for a full discussion
on these contracts. Using FRNs is also dealing under contract in interstate commerce.
Interstate commerce comes under the exclusive jurisdiction of the statutory laws of congress.
A license is required for involvement in transactions using FRNs because these paper
notes are traded in inter state commerce, and international transactions. This involvement makes
one a(n) (international) law merchant.
Until you plead and prove otherwise, the presumption (in the courts) is that you are under
the UCC, your silence waives the defense. [As a general rule failure to plead a defense waives
the defense.]
http://www.fourwinds10.com/siterun_data/government/corporate_u_s/news.php?q=1266689118...
It is presumed, everyone voluntarily entered the law Merchant by their silence, (ie. no
strong objection to a violation of the law, see ratification below). Silence [failure to reject or
performance on a contract] confirms a contract. When you know someone is violating the law
(Art 1, ยง 10) and you participate without objection, you become as guilty as the other party by
your silence. You have ratified the contract (by your silence) hence the courts take the position
that you volunteered into it,