Man using NAME in court hauled out in handcuffs

[Keith Alan]

Very powerful, MJ.

I hadn't considered coverture in my own journey.

[Anthony Joseph]

The issue here is if you make ANY CLAIMS, including I am not the Name, that is a claim, you will have to prove that statement. If in court and you decide not to play in their sandbox, then go in AS-King questions AND/OR make indefinite states: I believe, it seems to me, etc.

Once you make a claim, they got you.

Are you John Smith? What makes you think I am John Smith? However, I believe I know where that person nay be located. Where? Please have the bailiff come over here and take this piece of paper and this may help the court out. What is this piece of paper? Well, Harry [the judge] it appears to me to be a usufruct complaint certified certificate that may indicate the person who is the proper fiduciary who signed for that person the plaintiff seeks and who may be able to help you out to settle the matter in which the State [or whoever] is desiring to bring a claim against.

Obviously, this is not a word for word script - but you get the point.

There is no issue but whether or not one man can tell another man what to do, or not do. A uniform, badge, robe, costume, pointy hat, etc. has no authority over man unless man consents.

Do you believe i have done wrong? Do you believe you have authority over i; a man? Do you believe you can interfere with my rights? Do you believe slavery or involuntary servitude is permitted on this land?

i can make any claim i choose so long as i know i will be fully liable for said claim. That is why any claim you make should be simple and verifiable. If someone chooses to challenge your claim, let them come forward now or forever hold the peace. Only a man can come forward and speak in living voice to make a claim. Do you really believe a man will come forward and take full liability for the claim that another man has no right to catch a fish in the water?

i don't believe that has ever happened; what mostly happens is man giving life to fictions and paper and codes and statutes and ordinances which never had any jurisdiction over him. He bound himself by believing these 2nd dimension things have power over him.

We are our own oppressors.

[salsero]

It seems we agree.

[xparte]

This Man despite his patterned effort has no standing, The arrest is painfully legal If a Man is held for contempt he would have common law standing.Its the question do you understand the charges what is your NAME and his physical appearance as a living Man is what Re-venues the process and understanding has been determined when a Man has undermined himself with his salvation lost that SALVAGE REVENUE CREW is left with what the opinion a Man is state property as Fish are without authority its established without standing so is Man. licence to practice life and re-presenting the practice requires a juristic person Acting without authority practising law, fishing ,needs actors for complete scene.walk away stay away when MY AGENT hands ME MY SCRIPT refuse to act.The play has parts. Respectfully speaking finding out the hard way is never a challenge when any Man accepts his truth the introduction of Men and salvation is ongoing on the Members pages and the benevolent acceptance that this Forum requires comments that distinguish a Man from himself as Courts are one collective ego void passion truth and lawful education it takes time and effort to share ideas and to recognize genuine intent. Any room complete with strangers, Just thieves instantly recognize each other A Man has reputation not a identity.My input is no more or less a Suitors gratitude . jack

[pumpkin]

Late to the table on this one, but its a good post. There is no issue but whether or not one man can tell another man what to do, or not do. A uniform, badge, robe, costume, pointy hat, etc. has no authority over man unless man consents.
This sums up my take. Actually, it is even a bit worse for those in government. Government is a trust, and those employed by it are trustees to the people. The people are the settlor / beneficiaries. Read some trust law concerning those two words used together and you will find, it is the ultimate position within a trust. All fiduciary duty is owed to the settlor/beneficiary. Not only can they not tell use what to do, when we claim a right of the people, they will fail in the duty of loyalty by coming against it. Another one of the people can come against it with a true controversy of rights, but a servant of the people cannot. The people can claim whatever inalienable right they wish and it is against natural law for the created government to define their creator, the people. Revokable power and authority has no chance against an inalienable right. You only need to know who and what you are. One of the people, the creator of government.