Tweet
I am approaching two facets about identity in this article. One is that our true name is truthful, and when we understand the distinction between what our parents named us and full or legal name we can begin to use the truth as a lie detector. The second facet is an article about National ID that will reveal some things I hope, about the first facet.
I have not read this article past:
The video comes up paused on an imposing LEO at a courthouse weapons search gate with metal detectors etc... I wont play that unless I have to. That sort of stuff is actually bad for my health, at least so it feels - suppression. It is against natural law.
Which brings up the 'saving to suitors' clause (again). This makes for the diversity between different types of character. For the purposes of this article, the difference between people and government employees.
The author of the article about the imposing National ID is kind enough to tell me where to find source material by citing Public Law 109-13 and so there is no need to subject myself to the alarmist clutter. Much like the article, I do not need to read past the first sentence!
...a federal agency may not accept, for any official purpose, a driver license...
True - the law will go into effect three years after the Act was passed. But it only applies to people identifying themselves to federal agencies. And even so, only for official purposes; which probably does not include for security purposes. [Technically it does not apply to people - it affects people. The new law applies to federal agencies.] Here is what I am telling you about the 'saving to suitors' clause of 1789; it inherently prohibits Congress from getting out of its federal box. It can only make that stipulation for its own.
And it will have difficulty enforcing that too. For one example at the federal courthouses. Look at the Rules. I must have a government-issued ID card to get in. The five guards on duty were quite rude when I told them I did not have one and in addition would not let me pass through inside. I was after this document, synchronistically about People - Ensminger 1, Ensminger 2, Ensminger 3. You see behind the Rules is the clerk's office so I pulled out my cell phone, in front of the steaming guards and watched the clerk pick up. I showed her my $10 bill through the window and she brought my document to me and was quite pleased to tender the transaction right in front of the oppressive guards. Mainly because they were trying to ruin our jovial mood - which made it all the more fun! [Pulling out my camera to photograph the sign in front of them was so fun, I almost pushed it to photograph their sourpuss faces.]
Another example is in the process of settling my $20M lien against the State, I petitioned for enforcement of my waiver of tort from chief judge DANIEL in Denver. The clerk wanted to fabricate the illusion the lien was bogus and opened a civil suit and notified me that all documents filed into my $39 evidence repository would now be directed to his suit. [I say his because they never billed me $350 or even asked me if I was indigent (in forma pauperis)] I refused for cause. Next the judge appointed to his case ordered the magistrate to schedule the clerk's case for jury trial and I accepted this conditionally, instructing that I felt it error to open the civil suit instead of issueing the Writ of Enforcement upon the principles of waiver of tort, and more to my point - I sent a photo of my ID card with my signature and thumbprint so that I could get into the courthouse. If they were willing to convene a jury, I was willing to go explain to the panel about my lien and get my Writ that way - but I had to get into the courthouse to do that. [When I really need to get into the courthouse I just call the clerk to the front door and he clears me. I find it more effective to pay $35 for Certificate of Mailing through a process server, as you see by looking closely.] Now I also request of you to notice that last entry - about lawful money - note the last page on the bill itself, was filed once again in my original evidence repository while the Notice of Lien itself, was filed in originally in the clerk's civil suit.
In fact, true name and lawful money are of similar character just as legal name and elastic currency of the Fed are. The lien arose from the chief judge overriding an abatement for misnomer - four and a half years after the alleged crime! This of course violated my speedy trial rights and was obviously done on the presumption that I would plead guilty and accept a week of Community Service instead of 18 months in prison. Bad gamble. I will upload over 100 pages I saved from SuiJurisClub about that drama soon so you can refresh yourselves if you like. My point here is a bit more succinct.
When I wanted a transcript of the billing notice in open court I paid in lawful money. The chief judge, standing there as I photographed the order, corrected my name; a major confession to violating the original abatement for misnomer. Looking over that definition for misnomer notice that I was never arraigned in his court - because the clerk never would correct the name on the case to my name. Thinking it over the judge even established the name of the trust, DAVID MERRILL to deposit the $20M in lawful money, as demanded on the published lien, upon settlement.
If the bill were really to effect me I would find the notice in the federal register and refuse it for cause.
The articles that rely on sensationalism like that are so common I really can ignore them anymore. Like I said, I only read the first paragraph. The sickening feeling of suppression stopped me from reading past the citation. My theory is by knowing your identity you have a tuning fork based in truth by which our solar plexus (Chinese call it abdominal brain) either creates resonance or dissonance. In the attached diagram that part of our system is even called sympathetic.
Regards,
David Merrill.
I have not read this article past:
Even though no one on Capitol Hill is talking about it, unless it is stopped, the provisions of The Real ID Act of 2005 (Public Law 109-13, 119 Stat 392), through the Department of Homeland Security, will require the federalization of State-issued driver's licenses by May 11, 2011.
This is the type of card the Nazi's and the communists in the Soviet Union made people carry.
This is the type of card the Nazi's and the communists in the Soviet Union made people carry.
Which brings up the 'saving to suitors' clause (again). This makes for the diversity between different types of character. For the purposes of this article, the difference between people and government employees.
The author of the article about the imposing National ID is kind enough to tell me where to find source material by citing Public Law 109-13 and so there is no need to subject myself to the alarmist clutter. Much like the article, I do not need to read past the first sentence!
...a federal agency may not accept, for any official purpose, a driver license...
True - the law will go into effect three years after the Act was passed. But it only applies to people identifying themselves to federal agencies. And even so, only for official purposes; which probably does not include for security purposes. [Technically it does not apply to people - it affects people. The new law applies to federal agencies.] Here is what I am telling you about the 'saving to suitors' clause of 1789; it inherently prohibits Congress from getting out of its federal box. It can only make that stipulation for its own.
And it will have difficulty enforcing that too. For one example at the federal courthouses. Look at the Rules. I must have a government-issued ID card to get in. The five guards on duty were quite rude when I told them I did not have one and in addition would not let me pass through inside. I was after this document, synchronistically about People - Ensminger 1, Ensminger 2, Ensminger 3. You see behind the Rules is the clerk's office so I pulled out my cell phone, in front of the steaming guards and watched the clerk pick up. I showed her my $10 bill through the window and she brought my document to me and was quite pleased to tender the transaction right in front of the oppressive guards. Mainly because they were trying to ruin our jovial mood - which made it all the more fun! [Pulling out my camera to photograph the sign in front of them was so fun, I almost pushed it to photograph their sourpuss faces.]
Another example is in the process of settling my $20M lien against the State, I petitioned for enforcement of my waiver of tort from chief judge DANIEL in Denver. The clerk wanted to fabricate the illusion the lien was bogus and opened a civil suit and notified me that all documents filed into my $39 evidence repository would now be directed to his suit. [I say his because they never billed me $350 or even asked me if I was indigent (in forma pauperis)] I refused for cause. Next the judge appointed to his case ordered the magistrate to schedule the clerk's case for jury trial and I accepted this conditionally, instructing that I felt it error to open the civil suit instead of issueing the Writ of Enforcement upon the principles of waiver of tort, and more to my point - I sent a photo of my ID card with my signature and thumbprint so that I could get into the courthouse. If they were willing to convene a jury, I was willing to go explain to the panel about my lien and get my Writ that way - but I had to get into the courthouse to do that. [When I really need to get into the courthouse I just call the clerk to the front door and he clears me. I find it more effective to pay $35 for Certificate of Mailing through a process server, as you see by looking closely.] Now I also request of you to notice that last entry - about lawful money - note the last page on the bill itself, was filed once again in my original evidence repository while the Notice of Lien itself, was filed in originally in the clerk's civil suit.
In fact, true name and lawful money are of similar character just as legal name and elastic currency of the Fed are. The lien arose from the chief judge overriding an abatement for misnomer - four and a half years after the alleged crime! This of course violated my speedy trial rights and was obviously done on the presumption that I would plead guilty and accept a week of Community Service instead of 18 months in prison. Bad gamble. I will upload over 100 pages I saved from SuiJurisClub about that drama soon so you can refresh yourselves if you like. My point here is a bit more succinct.
When I wanted a transcript of the billing notice in open court I paid in lawful money. The chief judge, standing there as I photographed the order, corrected my name; a major confession to violating the original abatement for misnomer. Looking over that definition for misnomer notice that I was never arraigned in his court - because the clerk never would correct the name on the case to my name. Thinking it over the judge even established the name of the trust, DAVID MERRILL to deposit the $20M in lawful money, as demanded on the published lien, upon settlement.
If the bill were really to effect me I would find the notice in the federal register and refuse it for cause.
The articles that rely on sensationalism like that are so common I really can ignore them anymore. Like I said, I only read the first paragraph. The sickening feeling of suppression stopped me from reading past the citation. My theory is by knowing your identity you have a tuning fork based in truth by which our solar plexus (Chinese call it abdominal brain) either creates resonance or dissonance. In the attached diagram that part of our system is even called sympathetic.
Regards,
David Merrill.
Comment