it's ALL about "CONSENT" people!!!! Quoting: Pink Cat with a Telephone Hat
learn that word, understand that word, KNOW that word.
THIS is "your loophole"
this is the one thing that screws them up more than anything.
sure, there will be people who do things to do without your consent, and boy, do they have it coming.
but the ones that have been around, the elites, the actual "elites" who have been here reincarnating through time.
they KNOW this and they don't want that baggage. but they are CRAFTY.
you are ALSO crafty! RECLAIM YOUR ENERGY NOW!
this is YOUR DIVINE RIGHT!
they know this and will NOT intervene because they know to intervene the consequences are too great.
there still are so many in power to grasp this.
and we are here to TEACH them.
let us teach.
I think it all comes down to filing in the public record, at one's county clerk's office, the Affidavit of Truth or whatever one wants to call it, that declares one's status as flesh and blood man/woman, and that any implied Consent is withdrawn, etc.
If you google "Affidavit of Truth", there are plenty of examples, some of them worded pretty well.
Some people advocate the UCC route, taking 'control' of your strawman; the legal fiction. But I'm not so sure this is the best way to reclaim one's total sovereignty and freedom. To me, that's just taking a more active role in THEIR game. It's a tacit approval of their system of basically making us into "persons" or corporations.
So, I don't like that UCC shit for that reason. I think it's just a matter of canceling any invisible adhesion contracts that we unknowingly entered into based on fraud since there was no disclosure of the fact that after entering into the contract, you are giving up your valuable natural Rights.
Whether any of the system appendages want to try to ignore your assertion of sovereignty and natural Rights is another matter.
Getting people to understand this whole issue and actually reclaim their true selves is even more difficult than getting people to take a real look at Ron Paul! Fuck.
But I think it's still a good move to simply put into the public record exactly WHO you are...and it ain't no legal fiction, babeee! I'm a man! And a man/woman has no "name", only an "identity". To bear a name in legal terms implies some entity OWNS the named item. That's why when judge asks if your "name" is such-and-such, one should deny that and simply say that no, you're only their under threat of arrest to assist the court in clearing up the confusion. That you are not that "name", although your "identity" sounds similar.