hello dm

Hello david merrill and everyone else,

long time no type, or read, lol

its walter from the old canadian forum,
you know the one...the one that went to shit from a couple members that think they are god and know everything,

yeah that one, hahaha,

same people over there on the new one namely that hellberta boy that calls himself bmxninja357 is impossible to deal with,

it seems like some people will rather argue just to think they are right then try to seek redemption,

sick and tired of reading whining and bs,

i guess eating to much gmo would do that to ones brain,

anyway just was strolling though my book markers and came across this forum that i forgot i had marked and figured its time to see what you guys over here are doing,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by walter

Hello david merrill and everyone else,

long time no type, or read, lol

its walter from the old canadian forum,
you know the one...the one that went to shit from a couple members that think they are god and know everything,

yeah that one, hahaha,

same people over there on the new one namely that hellberta boy that calls himself bmxninja357 is impossible to deal with,

it seems like some people will rather argue just to think they are right then try to seek redemption,

sick and tired of reading whining and bs,

i guess eating to much gmo would do that to ones brain,

anyway just was strolling though my book markers and came across this forum that i forgot i had marked and figured its time to see what you guys over here are doing,

---

Welcome!

You come on a bit crude for my liking but we have yet to set up forum rules. Maybe you are looking for some?

Anyway - that was a forum attached to the World Freeman Society forums. I recall calling Robert Arthur MENARD on a "reality check" due to his claim in a video that the Birth Certificate is a $18M stock certificate in the Canada Corporation. (View the 4:00 Minute and 1:00 Hour Marks. Oh! That's right - he has made his videos private so that only certain people can see?) He got so bent that he quit "his own forum" after issuing an ultimatum that either he would be banished, or I would. That was kind of childish I recall. He went over to another popular conspiracy forum and badmouthed me and even put up advertisement with me as a government plant on Craig's List in Toronto and Vancouver both! Then he got really stoned and admitted that I am not after all a government plant.

I believe it was all the promotion of smoking pot that brought about such a turbulent forum. Freemen Pete was writing from New Zealand where pot is legal and that really messed people up thinking that being a freeman is about getting stoned in public. Since getting stoned affects your thinking there was an inherent glitch to the entire business!

It amazed me that even after correcting his assertions about the BC being a stock certificate he threw away the budding World Freeman Society business over his temper tantrum towards me. I suspect that he just had no future with it in Canada anyway because of the Bar Association up there anyway - and he just used my "reality check" to try blaming me:

Quote:

---

Robert Arthur Menard of North Vancouver has been prohibited by the Supreme Court from appearing as counsel, preparing documents for use in proceedings, and identifying himself in any way that suggests he is a lawyer. He was also ordered to pay costs.

---

I can tell Rob is a smart guy, when he is straight anyway so that makes a lot more sense to me. He was headed for trouble charging people for the legal advice packages and chose to try making me look like the problem?


It is nice of you to drop by Walter.

Yes i might sound a little crude because of the frustration dealing with people that have to be right even when they make no sense, sorry for that,

i know the rules and i will stick to them,

rob is back on the forum and has settled down a bit, i have no beef with him and wish him the best, he gets a little excited and puts out videos before he has a chance to make sure that it is correct, 96 is your fix is a good example of that,

all i seek is remedy and to help out others when i can, i don't know all the answers but i know some good ones,

that forum seems to be a stepping stone,
it is mostly for beginners that want templates and most get frustrated when you tell them where their answer lies and for them to read the act again,

some people don't understand that sometimes it takes reading the same thing over again several times before the answer appears, these people want you to do all the work and give them the answers and we all know how dangerous that can be,
and when you hold back for these reasons they get mad,

i wasted to much time helping people out only for them to quit right when they need to be the strongest, and then walk away from everything and continue to do the same thing they were before,

don't get me wrong, not all people, but you need the passion, and passion comes with the pit bull attitude that i will fight to the very end,
those people don't need templates, those are the ones i like to work with,

i know you are one, same a rob, just different sides of the coin,

speaking of rob have you seen meads vs meads yet?

http://www.albertacourts.ab.ca/jdb/2...bqb0571ed1.pdf

the courts are getting frustrated, about time,

currently i am trying out a few offset techniques that i figured out for myself and one was for property tax and land transfer tax that was sent out 6.5 months ago and have not heard anything back yet so fingers still are crossed,
every month i here nothing is a good sign,

just sent out a couple more experiments using almost the same method yesterday,
should find out if those work in the next month,
i hope they do, it would change everything,

its good to be here david,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by walter

it seems like some people will rather argue just to think they are right then try to seek redemption, ....

---

What do you mean by 'seeking redemption' ?

Yes about Mead v. Mead. I have a thread around here. I get into the cases on PACER here. I think it may be with SUSSMAN's Idiot Patriot Arguments.

While writing about Rob this morning my mind concluded that was actually what was going on. Rob was realizing for himself at that time that he cannot sell his books and CDs with a membership style club and is limited altogether by the UPL judgment by the Law Society. I recall now that conclusion by the timing. He ventilated about a lot of folks who criticized his work and now it makes sense. He is not the irrational hothead I had thought. He was a hothead because he had a budding business that simply could not get off the ground - not to mention terrible problems in the foundations he proposed.

That exacerbating facet explains my surprise that he should have been secure enough to simply explain rather than react by attacking me. I was writing because I liked Rob. I was enjoying his videos like Bursting Bubbles. I thought that he was going to rebut, not attack when I posted a "Reality Check".

About that time, when I brought up the Judgment against him he was saying that he was going to tear the Law Society a new one with some secret and powerful process. Yet the webpage is still up and running.

I suppose a partial retraction is in order - Rob is selling Security of the Person for $25/pop on World Freeman Society. Apparently he is not being molested by the Canadian Bar - the Law Society.

Quote:

---

Did you know you owned stock and could hold that stock and collect dividends?

---

Anyone trying the theory will soon find otherwise:

http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/7...certnobond.jpg

This explains why Rob has hidden the free YouTube rendition from viewing too. It is available in 10 segments apparently. Here is the 5:00 Minute Mark clip. [After some while Rob did add the "STOCK CERTIFICATE SAMPLE" notice.] Approaching the 1:05 account of a woman who got rich we have this snippet at the end of Part 6. Sadly for making my point though - Part 7 is Part 6 repeated so I cannot show you.

I have plenty more about that but have always avoided bashing Rob except for this one particular point - and especially around here. It got ugly.

Thanks for dropping in and I hope you enjoy learning about redeeming lawful money - we have a Canadian rendition from the end of the Canadian Bank Act if that is more to your liking.



Regards,

David Merrill.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shikamaru

What do you mean by 'seeking redemption' ?

---

i want to redeem my birth right,

notice the differences from re to de,

de-mocracy
re-public

de-posit
re-posit

re-
"back to the original place, again," also with a sense of "undoing,"

de-
"down, off, away, from among, down from,"

the public functions in the de world, defacto, "deed, act"

for me its time to drop the de and go back to re,

Back when I was saving castles the little pamphlet said Government Repository. I wish dearly that I had saved one of them! I made comment and even got into an argument so they changed it to Government Documents.

I give tours there for new suitors etc. One day I was setting with a new suitor inquiring about a Certificate of Search and the deputy clerk in Denver was shouting irrationally about me not giving her his "Last Name". She was so loud that he could hear every word in the quiet repository - and became convinced right then and there or the same truth. The magic of law is how you cast the spell - it is in the spelling.

The same US clerk tried to dispell James Roland's identity. Look at the dates! I sent $350 to Congress and served a summons on James MANSPEAKER to answer for falsification of documents:

http://friends-n-family-research.inf..._falsified.jpg


http://friends-n-family-research.inf..._corrected.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by walter

i want to redeem my birth right,

notice the differences from re to de,

de-mocracy
re-public

de-posit
re-posit

re-
"back to the original place, again," also with a sense of "undoing,"

de-
"down, off, away, from among, down from,"

the public functions in the de world, defacto, "deed, act"

for me its time to drop the de and go back to re,

---

And what is your birthright? There seems to be implications of inheritance. Inheritance from whom?

Redemption also has implications of absolution from sin or debt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shikamaru

And what is your birthright? There seems to be implications of inheritance. Inheritance from whom?

Redemption also has implications of absolution from sin or debt.

---

"that the earth belongs in usufruct to the living;" that the dead have neither powers nor rights over it.

taken from a letter from Thomas Jefferson To James Madison Paris, Sep. 6, 1789

http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/presidents...son/jefl81.php

my birth right is to be free from the last generations debt,
the living inherit the earth debt free,
because we us the "deed papers" (de facto) to identify yourself with (bc, pass port, etc) we become part of the dead and loss the inherit right and hold on to the obligation of repaying the dead's debt,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by walter

"that the earth belongs in usufruct to the living;" that the dead have neither powers nor rights over it.

taken from a letter from Thomas Jefferson To James Madison Paris, Sep. 6, 1789

http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/presidents...son/jefl81.php

my birth right is to be free from the last generations debt,
the living inherit the earth debt free,
because we us the "deed papers" (de facto) to identify yourself with (bc, pass port, etc) we become part of the dead and loss the inherit right and hold on to the obligation of repaying the dead's debt,

---

Ever hear of the term, assumpsit?

Thanks for that quotation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shikamaru

Ever hear of the term, assumpsit?

---

we have no legal action until we start to reverse the pledge,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by walter

we have no legal action until we start to reverse the pledge,

---

Have you agreed to undertake or assume (assumpsit) of your parents' debt?

From your last post, it seems you have.
Also, what exactly was pledged or promised? What was given in return?

Ever notice how many religious or legal terms have commercial contexts?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shikamaru

Have you agreed to undertake or assume (assumpsit) of your parents' debt?

From your last post, it seems you have.
Also, what exactly was pledged or promised? What was given in return?

Ever notice how many religious or legal terms have commercial contexts?

---

there is an obligation to via the pledge,
dissolve the pledge = void the obligation,
re-deem the birth right,
redemption

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by walter

there is an obligation to via the pledge,
dissolve the pledge = void the obligation,
re-deem the birth right,
redemption

---

What is the pledge exactly?
What is the obligation specifically?
What is being redeemed specifically?

What is the birth right?

I'm gaining some sense of similarity to a specific action in equity. Can you name that action?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shikamaru

What is the pledge exactly?
What is the obligation specifically?
What is being redeemed specifically?

What is the birth right?

I'm gaining some sense of similarity to a specific action in equity. Can you name that action?

---

perhaps if you read my last post in
"The Name thing. " on page 8
you will see what i am getting at and you should find the answers to your questions there,

ps,
did you in the usa at the beginning of every school day pledge an allegiance?
get them when their young, sad but true,
we had "oh canada" in the morning and "god save the queen" last thing,
i think today they have dropped "god save the queen"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shikamaru

What is the pledge exactly? What is the obligation specifically? What is being redeemed specifically? What is the birth right? I'm gaining some sense of similarity to a specific action in equity. Can you name that action?

---

Because the purpose of the Fourteenth Amendments first section was to end the denial of those fundamental rights that belong to all citizens by virtue of their citizenship under Article IV, Sec. II of the U.S. Constitution was imperative to first define citizenship of the United States. Otherwise, a State could refuse to recognize newly emancipated slaves as citizens by withholding the right to sue, make contracts, due process, purchase property, etc. Therefore, the Fourteenth Amendment acts to recognize all persons as citizens who do not owe allegiance to some other government when naturalized or born.

Madison made it clear rules of who is a citizen or alien properly belonged with each State when addressing a contested South Carolina Election of Rep. William Smith in the House of Representatives in 1794. Madison said the question of whether Rep. Smith had been a citizen of the United States for seven years at the time of the declaration of independence rested entirely with the Constitution of South Carolina:

Under Sec. 1992 of U.S. Revised Statutes the same Congress who had adopted the Fourteenth Amendment, confirmed this principle: ?All persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are declared to be citizens of the United States.?

Who are the subjects of a foreign power? Thomas Jefferson said ?Aliens are the subjects of a foreign power.? Thus, the statute can be read as ?All persons born in the United States who are not aliens, excluding Under Sec. 1992 of U.S. Revised Statutes the same Congress who had adopted the Fourteenth Amendment, confirmed this principle: ?All persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are declared to be citizens of the United States.?

Who are the subjects of a foreign power? Thomas Jefferson said ?Aliens are the subjects of a foreign power.? Thus, the statute can be read as ?All persons born in the United States who are not aliens, excluding Indians not taxed, are declared to be citizens of the United States.?

(a) Definitions
In this section:

(1)The term ?Indian lands? means lands the title to which is held by the United States in trust for an Indian tribe or lands the title to which is held by an Indian tribe subject to a restriction by the United States against alienation.

Alienation may refer to: Alienation (property law), the legal transfer of title of ownership to another party;

More

What's in your restriction? (b)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by walter

perhaps if you read my last post in
"The Name thing. " on page 8
you will see what i am getting at and you should find the answers to your questions there,

---

I've read your posts thus far. They are vague without any specifics.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chex

Because the purpose of the Fourteenth Amendments first section was to end the denial of those fundamental rights that belong to all citizens by virtue of their citizenship under Article IV, Sec. II of the U.S. Constitution was imperative to first define citizenship of the United States. Otherwise, a State could refuse to recognize newly emancipated slaves as citizens by withholding the right to sue, make contracts, due process, purchase property, etc. Therefore, the Fourteenth Amendment acts to recognize all persons as citizens who do not owe allegiance to some other government when naturalized or born.

---

I look at it this way. Those "slaves" (merely a title) were denied their fundamental rights ab initio by being forcibly dragged into the legal fiction of people as things for commercial gain and profit.

When I think of States' rights and freedom of association, I ask myself, "Who respected the freedoms and liberties of those men, women, and children made into articles of commerce and exploitation in these United States"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by shikamaru

I've read your posts thus far. They are vague without any specifics.

---

yes they are,

like i mentioned earlier in one of my posts on "the name thing" thread,
i would have to write a chapter if i wanted to fully detail all my finds,
maybe even a small book,

i just want to hit the points of interest to try to explain the whole picture with out getting into to much detail,

i have run out of time,
i am off hunting for a week,
be back around monday or so,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by walter

perhaps if you read my last post in
"The Name thing. " on page 8
you will see what i am getting at and you should find the answers to your questions there,

ps,
did you in the usa at the beginning of every school day pledge an allegiance?
get them when their young, sad but true,
we had "oh canada" in the morning and "god save the queen" last thing,
i think today they have dropped "god save the queen"

---

This all speaks of mental conditioning. Shikamaru is requesting details of the express (writings). There is none apparently. The pledge is executed by repeatedly holding your hand over your heart and chanting together in unity. This certainly forms a constructive system of pledging. However it is easy to get out from under this assumpsit as unwrapping your mind from the conditioning.

I hope you come back to this discussion with a freezer-full!