Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 2,762 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 1,304,643
Pageviews Today: 2,109,375Threads Today: 669Posts Today: 14,511
05:56 PM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?

 
Shingen

User ID: 33279727
United States
02/14/2013 09:11 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?
I can't believe you people are still beating this dead horse. Go out, buy a girl some flowers and get laid fer Christ's sake.
"Anarchism is not a romantic fable but the hardheaded realization, based of five thousand years of experience, that we cannot entrust the management of our lives to kings, priests, politicians, generals, or county commissioners." - Edward Abbey

"But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist." -Lysander Spooner

"If they take the ship, they'll rape us to death, eat our flesh, and sew our skin into their clothing, and if we're very very lucky, they'll do it in that order." - Firefly
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 17551129
Canada
02/14/2013 09:37 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?
But, when it comes to understanding the nature of currency, specifically what is legal and lawful... I am very far ahead of you...

Maybe. Maybe not. FRNs are lawful money. And they're legal tender. The distinction you'r drawing is irrelevant.
 Quoting: J 34311994


My distinction is very relevant, and is why I am very far ahead of you...
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 34421957
United States
02/14/2013 09:43 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?
Sovereign citizen is an oxymoron and only used by disinformation shills.

Correct terminology is Sovereign though I prefer "Free man on the Land"

Here is the gist of the Sovereignty movement.

Let's say you are born on the King's Land and he claims Sovereignty over you because you are on his Land. He taxes you and he imposes his jurisdiction or claims power over you. Did you consent to that just because you were born on the King's Land. No you didn't.

Same applies here. You were born in North America. Did you ever consent to giving the corporation the USA jurisdiction over you? Did you ever consent to giving the police (statute enforcers) jurisdiction or power over you? No you didn't.

Since you were born on this land and they just claim jurisdiction over you that is neither legal or lawful

For a contract to be valid you need FULL DISCLOSURE with terms and conditions and you need your signature as consent. Did you sign a contract granting the USA corporation or the police (statute enforcers) jurisdiction or power over you? No you didn't. Full disclosure means you are told what you are signing and that you agree to the terms.

The system is neither legal nor lawful because there has never been consent because there has never been FULL DISCLOSURE.

It's the same as if I was born on land owned by Apple computer and they claimed jurisdiction over me and they sent Apple employees over with badges and guns to arrest me. Crazy huh? That's the same as USA corporation. No difference. Thugs with badges claiming power over you yet no contract because you never consented.

Point being the USA corporation and the police ("statute enforcers") have no authority over you just like the King has no authority over you just because you are born. You never agreed to the system so what they're doing is just like thugs with guns claiming power or jurisdiction over you.

Even in their statutory system it isn't even LEGAL what they're doing..it's illegal and also unlawful. There is no basis for their legal standing. Because consent by YOU needs to be given . You need to sign a contract with FULL DISCLOSURE of contract details to give them power or jurisdiction over you

All arguments against Sovereigns are bullshit and lies...

Sovereigns are sovereign in their own right because they were born. No fiction can take away your power.

 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1247669


wtf
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 34362711
United States
02/14/2013 09:51 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?
I really don't know much about this subject. Is this a genuine description of these people of just the M.S.M. demonizing them?

From Kfor TV out of Oklahoma:

"Law enforcement is paying special attention to a re-surging group of individual extremists; sovereign citizens.

They are anti-government Americans who believe the U.S. government has no authority".


snip

"The world-wide web has been a handy tool in sovereign circles, spreading tactics of their particular flavor of lawlessness.

Sovereign citizens usually represent themselves in court, filing nonsensical paperwork on their own behalf.

Many sovereigns document their struggles to be taken seriously, then post them online.

They rarely have much success."


snip

“What I understand people in some of these cases are doing is making the argument that the original constitutional order left people free from the authority of the federal government and maybe from laws at the state level as well,” Blitz said. “So (they say) ‘You can’t apply these laws to me.’ Not surprisingly, the judges have said, ‘Yes we can.’”

Full article with video:

[link to kfor.com]

I just want to thank everyone who contributed to this thread. You've all given me a bit of a crash education on this subject and directed me to some great sources for learning even more. It's bed time for me but I'm looking forward to reading any new post when I get up.
Once again, thank you!

 Quoting: Zuzu



I been thinking this is the real reason for NDAA... once peeps figure out that we have to agree to this system with our free will because we are free will sovereign beings made in God's image, tptb will need the ability to arrest anyone without a reason... cuz the system is a legal free will contrivance... and when people stop complying the whole thing could crumble pretty fast...

clifford dean's story in canada best illustrates this, btw...

:)
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 34421957
United States
02/14/2013 09:52 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?
what gives kings their powers to begin with????


artifcts known as coronation stones

royal lineage.....you could even say nephilim or "holy" blood (san grael)...

the consent of the governed.(more like utter complacency)


treaties


dumb luck


assigned by god himself (king David via prophet samuel)

vast and intricate network of alien dynasties and hierarchies that have existed for hundreds of thousands of years mostly underground and have covertly colonized this suzeraine among many other worlds because they are dodging some extra galactic enemy which also wants to colonize us.
J
User ID: 34311994
United States
02/15/2013 12:23 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?
Then I guess the IRS is in the business of sending full refund checks based on fantasies. I think I have figured out, this type of info must make you feel like an idiot because it leaves you out of the discussion. We get it you we are all idiots, anything else? Now run alonv and troll another thread.

Sending checks to who? And with what evidence can you back the claim?
J
User ID: 34311994
United States
02/15/2013 12:27 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?
we established he is a complete idiot about 7 pages back but the idiot just won't shut up even though he's been proven wrong in many posts yet acts like he is the only one presenting any logic or reason. The problem is he is a sheep who takes pride in being one. Ive met his type before, I even had one tell me "no man is a sovereign", and he happened to be a communist little shitbag too. There is no mystery his beliefs and doctrines came straight out of the socialist slums of europe and totally anathema to America jurisprudence and legal precedent.

So because the constitution *mentions* the federal courts jurisdiction over maritime issues (and about a dozen others), that means all courts are maritime?

Nonsense. If you believe that all courts are 'maritime commercial courts', then show us the law saying this. Show us the courts recognizing this. They don't, because we don't.

Its just another one of those bizarro head job conspiracies that you guys pass around these boards without the slighest question or thought. And of course, without the slightest evidence.

Surely you realize that your imagination doesn't actually change the nature of our legal system...or have any effect in the real world?

Yes?
J
User ID: 34311994
United States
02/15/2013 12:52 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?

at last, spoken like a true communist and someone who has NO IDEA how a Constitutional Republic is supposed to work. You are a moron who refuses to look in the mirror, your arguments are empty and tired, you haven't debunked a single thing on this page yet keep patting yourself on the back (a clear sign of delusion) and ultimately to apply your very same logic to YOU. Who are you? to be taken seriously other than another bootlicker telling the other sheep that they are crazy for wanting to be free.


Ah, but you forget one minor detail: the real world. In this little bubble, you can parrot back and forth to each other whatever fantasies about 'font sizes on birth certificates' or 'maritime courts' or 'lawful money' all you like.

But it has absolutely no relevance in the courts or under the law. This is what you don't seem to get. You genuinely think that if you make up some imaginary loophole or fallacious 'limit' to government power, that the government is bound to whatever idiocy you invent.

Laughing....nope!

There's no secret hand shake or special font or particular syntax that magically makes you immune from the law. And despite all the inane and patently silly little conspiracies that your ilk keep pulling out of your collective asses, you still have to pay taxes. And all the same laws still apply to you.

Oh, you *say* they don't. You can babble endlessly about how all the requirements have But the taxes still get paid. And the speeding tickets. And the property taxes. And the sales taxes.

And for those few who are stupid enough to actually try and use your arguments in court? They go to jail.

As the law and courts don't recognize your pseudo-legal gibberish. Your theories.....are just plain irrelevant. My positions are that the law and the courts are authoritative.

And they are!
J
User ID: 34311994
United States
02/15/2013 12:59 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?
ickman's mistake was the was endorsing fed res credit by not restricting his endorsement on the back of his checks, if you're gonna go spit in the dragon's face make sure you haven't forgotten your armor.

Rickman's mistake was your mistake: he didn't have a clue what he was talking about. He didn't understand the law. And his 'legal' reasoning was simple minded gibberish.

And of course, we have another lovely example of cognitive dissonance.

Your theory that FRNs weren't 'lawful money' was tested and addressed by the court. And then laughed out of it, with the court *repeatedly* recognizing that FRNs are lawful money.

So do you amend your theory? Do you recognize your folly? Do you educate yourself in the slightest?

Of course not.

You just make up a brand new batshyte conspiracy and excuse for the failure of the *last* batshyte conspiracy. With you, citing you, insisting you must be right because you say you are.

You can't fix stupid.
J
User ID: 34311994
United States
02/15/2013 01:01 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?
My distinction is very relevant, and is why I am very far ahead of you...

<patting you on the head> Sure, buddy. Sure.
J
User ID: 34311994
United States
02/15/2013 01:02 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?
wtf



My thoughts exactly.
Shingen

User ID: 33279727
United States
02/15/2013 01:29 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?
Its just another one of those bizarro head job conspiracies that you guys pass around these boards without the slighest question or thought. And of course, without the slightest evidence.

 Quoting: J 34311994


If you have such contempt for us bizarro head job conspiracy types, why the fuck are you hanging around a conspiracy site?

Got nothing better to do than troll GLP?
"Anarchism is not a romantic fable but the hardheaded realization, based of five thousand years of experience, that we cannot entrust the management of our lives to kings, priests, politicians, generals, or county commissioners." - Edward Abbey

"But whether the Constitution really be one thing, or another, this much is certain - that it has either authorized such a government as we have had, or has been powerless to prevent it. In either case, it is unfit to exist." -Lysander Spooner

"If they take the ship, they'll rape us to death, eat our flesh, and sew our skin into their clothing, and if we're very very lucky, they'll do it in that order." - Firefly
J
User ID: 34311994
United States
02/15/2013 01:43 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?
If you have such contempt for us bizarro head job conspiracy types, why the fuck are you hanging around a conspiracy site?

I enjoy debunking silly conspiracies, of course.
J
User ID: 34311994
United States
02/15/2013 03:13 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?
we established he is a complete idiot about 7 pages back but the idiot just won't shut up even though he's been proven wrong in many posts yet acts like he is the only one presenting any logic or reason. The problem is he is a sheep who takes pride in being one. Ive met his type before, I even had one tell me "no man is a sovereign", and he happened to be a communist little shitbag too. There is no mystery his beliefs and doctrines came straight out of the socialist slums of europe and totally anathema to America jurisprudence and legal precedent.

You mean the American jurisprudence and legal precedent that recognizes Federal Reserve Notes as lawful money? The American jurisprudence and legal precedent that has has dismissed the pseudo-legal babble regarding 'sovereign citizens' being immune to taxation or the law as frivious and having no merit? The American jurisprudence and legal precedent that has affirmed your obligation to pay taxes, follow the laws, and possess a driver's license if you want to drive on public roads?

That American jurisprudence and legal precedent? The one you and your ilk routinely ignore in your little bubble of self delusion where you each cite *yourselves* as the law?

Sorry, buddy.....but all the silly nonsense that you imagine up, all the absurd loopholes and fictitious limits to the government (capital letters on your birth certificate anyone?), all the useless bullshyte you tell each other....

.....is contradicted by the law and the courts. And virtually every time one of your ilk is stupid enough to try use this idiocy in court.....they go to jail.

For one fundamental and inescapable reason: you don't have a clue what you're talking about.

Get used to the idea.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 590644
United States
02/15/2013 06:46 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?
Interest bearing hypothecated debt as the basis for a money system grows the total debt in an exponential manner. In every instance, the the debt must finally be written off in a process referred to in the Bible as a Jubilee.

Here is some discovery related to the subject of this email.

*********************************************************

Applying the Odious Debts Doctrine while Preserving Legitimate Lending

Seema Jayachandran
Michael Kremer
Jonathan Shafter1
June 2006

[link to iis-db.stanford.edu] (26 pages)

***********************************************
[link to www.georgewashington2.blogspot.com]
Michael Hudson noted in 2004:

Mesopotamian economic thought c. 2000 BC rested on a more realistic mathematical foundation than does today’s orthodoxy. At least the Babylonians appear to have recognized that over time the debt overhead became more and more intrusive as it tended to exceed the ability to pay, culminating in a concentration of property ownership in the hands of creditors.

***

Babylonians recognized that while debts grew exponentially, the rest of the economy (what today is called the “real” economy) grows less rapidly. Today’s economists have not come to terms with this problem with such clarity. Instead of a conceptual view that calls for a strong ruler or state to maintain equity and to restore economic balance when it is disturbed, today’s general equilibrium models reflect the play of supply and demand in debt-free economies that do not tend to polarize or to generate other structural problems.

Michael Hudson, in reference to Iceland Global Research, April 05, 2009:
[link to www.globalresearch.ca]

*************************************************

Murray Rothbard on repudiating the national debt with reference to odious debt - written 1992 (Rothbard passed away 1995)

[link to mises.org]

***************************************************

My opinion: Fraudulent debt is more applicable and the beneficiaries of such debt should lose all they gained, but the apparent presumption in the writings seems to be allow the gains and simply stop the process with a write off. (Jubilee)

We still need full time professional administration to run a dependable monetary system, but a far superior method of paying such professional administration can be by the process of demurrage (everyone pays). This process is something supported by Bernard Lietaer of Germany in a just released new book MONEY AND SUSTAINABILITY - THE MISSING LINK. This book was written with help from Christian Arnsperger, Sally Goerner, and Stefan Brunnhuber and is subtitled "A report from the Club of Rome - EU Chapter"

People who believe only gold and silver coin shall be money find the demurrage principle a severe blow to their belief system. However, using human time as the basis for redemption of a note enables a far better rationalization. (Time passes away while gold endures)

A far better method of using gold (and other precious metals) is as a recognized method of saving - thus divorcing the medium of exchange from the store of value - and where such precious metal coinage can be used as a partial backing to promissory notes - a performance bond role.

******************************

All of the above is found on page 49:

Thread: Get rid of the money system, then get rid of goverrments (Page 49)

However, I challenge each and all readers of the forepart of this thread on sovereign citizens to go to page one and read all of that thread.

The sovereign movement is closely tied to the money system problem; my goal is to help people rethink money and solve that problem in a far more stable manner.

Levi Philos
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1246378
United States
02/15/2013 06:57 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?
If you have such contempt for us bizarro head job conspiracy types, why the fuck are you hanging around a conspiracy site?

I enjoy debunking silly conspiracies, of course.
 Quoting: J 34311994


If you were born on the King's Land would you be subject to taxes of the King? Would the King have jurisdiction over you because you were born on the King's Land?

Just because I was born in North America doesn't make me the subject of a fiction called a corporation. I didn't agree to any of it did I?

The government (corporation) is a fiction and can't even own property. Only men and women can own property
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 590644
United States
02/15/2013 06:59 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?
More on the "Doctrine of Odious Debt"

[link to www.zerohedge.com]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 9014106
Australia
02/15/2013 07:00 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?
If you have such contempt for us bizarro head job conspiracy types, why the fuck are you hanging around a conspiracy site?

I enjoy debunking silly conspiracies, of course.
 Quoting: J 34311994


You mean, you 'enjoy the cash'
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1245664
United States
02/15/2013 07:01 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?
What J is implying is that just because someone is born on land "owned" by someone else that they are under the jurisdiction of the owner. lol
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1245664
United States
02/15/2013 07:07 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?
If fact J wouldn't you say that all of us were born in North America into a system of slavery? When J did you or I or anyone else agree to the system we were born into? When did we agree to abide by laws that were written by others? When did you and I and everyone else agree to give the corporation the USA or the State corporation jurisdiction over us?

No conspiracy J. We were all born on this land and some fiction called the USA corporation is claiming jurisdiction over us. We never agreed to the system but were born into it. That doesn't mean we consented to the system J does it.

Now how is that a conspiracy J?
Levi Philos
User ID: 590644
United States
02/15/2013 07:44 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?
David M was on the track prior to this piece of writing; Notes of Debt are Not Income was a composite piece that began with a post from the Handyman of Louisiana to which I pasted significant information from "The Informer" (Carolina).

The final document you find in PDF form was composed by "Fred"

[link to duckduckgo.com (secure)]

The underlying but hidden question revolves around the question of seigniorage.

If we are to use credit entries as money, then to whom should the bookkeeping enter as the original creditor?
Levi Philos
User ID: 590644
United States
02/15/2013 08:05 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?
Discussing their system is pointless because you never agreed to it.

Stick with simple.

There has never been consent to their system. Consent must include FULL DISCLOSURE .

What they're doing is unlawful and illegal

Being Sovereign is something internal

Just ignore their system

Throw away all IDs and anything connected to their system

Create your own world bartering or working for cash.

Treat their system as the FICTION that it is

It doesn't exist unless you give it POWER

I'm the power which is why in my world they DON'T EXIST

I don't consent if statute enforcers (police) stop me. I didn't even consent to get a library card and the librarian gave it to me without ID lol

Just create your own world and disregard their system

It's the only way

They have no power

Only you have the power

They have no foundation or basis for their system. The USA corporation are thugs with guns. That's all

 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1247669


Nice piece of writing, but I do not support a version of full anarchy. My personal view is close to the concept of voluntarism.

Modern society is dependent upon division of labor and specialism in skill sets with a high degree of cooperation.

The money system is a complex memeplex - more religion than science while at the same time forms a cultural decision making machine.

Reform and reformation of the present system is discussed in some serious depth in this thread: Thread: Get rid of the money system, then get rid of goverrments

I do not claim to have all of the answers nor do I claim to be always correct.

Your thoughtful replies will be replied to in a respectful manner.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 590644
United States
02/15/2013 08:46 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?
Are you saying the people who run the Government are not okay? Do you really want me to post government sites that talk about Uncle Sam.

I'm saying that 'Uncle Sam' is a character. There's no guy named 'Uncle Sam' that gets your money when you pay your taxes.

And if you can't tell the difference between a character and a real person......you may need to seek some help.
 Quoting: J 34311994


My Uncle Samuel stole my credit card while I had my back turned. He is a trouble maker who gambles wildly and frequently looses. He starts fights all over the place and is a spendthrift.

Now, my Uncle is complaining because I haven't been keeping up the payments...
Levi Philos
User ID: 590644
United States
02/15/2013 09:36 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?
Reflection upon written law...

Natural law trumps written law.

A group of people could get together and decide they were tired of having the sky colored blue. And send the air-force out to spray pink color in the sky until it turned pink.

It might succeed for a while, but then natural law would finally prevail.

No written law is that silly, however hidden presumptions might be embedded into written law that have the effect of error telescoping over time with permutations unforeseen by the originators of the law.

The permutations of using interest bearing hypothecated debt as the basis for a monetary system are now becoming apparent. The initial error was made under Roosevelt when the fifth plank of the communist manifesto was implemented.

The credit of the people was claimed to be the property of the government and the government in turn assigned the credit to the banks via "license." The credit entries the bank creates via the double entry bookkeeping system need to have an offset entry to the people.

This is the hidden error that is causing the present collapse in progress.

Thread: Get rid of the money system, then get rid of goverrments (Page 50)
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 31297288
United States
02/15/2013 09:45 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?
Once a contract is endorsed, it carries lawful effect, until proven fraudulent.

Once FRNs are endorsed by use or signature, they become contractually LAWFUL, but remain DEBT INSTRUMENTS, the only thing that changes is who is obligated (now by law) to pay the debt, in goods and services, evidenced by the FRNS expressed in $$ amounts.

FRNS are NOT as issued, LAWFUL MONEY and NO court cases have ever ruled as such.

The Rickman case (and any other) that Jack off JEW keeps posting about are cases for AFTER the endorsement and use creates a lawful binding contractual agreement that the notes had lawful value.

The lawful 'value' of the FRNs did NOT exist inherently in the note before the agreements between the parties were reached and transpired!

They are then "lawful money" but the same could be said for any medium of exchange, sea shells to horse shit, if a value is agreed upon and the exchange takes place (or a contract is agreed upon) then the contract has just made the 'thing' 'lawful money' and enforceable by a court.

J continually refuses to (or is just too ignorant) to face the facts of contract law and contracts.

AS issued FRNS are legal tender and legal tender is just a legal OFFER until accepted it is NOT LAWFUL MONEY!
Levi Philos
User ID: 590644
United States
02/15/2013 09:50 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?
I fully believe we NEED a strong government. People like J who believe their opinions and interpretations of life carry the weight of law are frankly, dangerous.

Their egos cannot accept the fact their education (real or imagined) and belief system does NOT put them in a position to tell others how to live or what to think.

People J are extremely dangerous persons who need to be controlled and kept from any position of real power because someday, he will realize he is just a mortal with no real control over anyone but himself and even then, he needs others (Government, Judges, Cops or bosses) to regulate every aspect of this life.

Or somebody will come into his life who will show him that the only control over others is pure violence and show him how powerless he is. Maybe that happened to him as a child and now he want to rule over others and be right all the time.

Either way, he is a sick person.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 31297288


Statists usually rise to the top. Control freaks.

The John Birch Society created a half hour video that supports the concept of a limited republic. While I don't give blanket support to the Birch society, this video is quite effective and well done.

At one time or another the links fail, but bookmark both and search for the video (or purchase a DVD from them).

Full version [link to video.google.com]

There is a shorter 10-12 minute extraction from the center of the long version (for people with limited focus time)

Short version: [link to www.youtube.com]
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 32235185
United States
02/15/2013 09:53 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?
There's no secret hand shake or special font or particular syntax that magically makes you immune from the law. And despite all the inane and patently silly little conspiracies that your ilk keep pulling out of your collective asses, you still have to pay taxes. And all the same laws still apply to you.

Oh, you *say* they don't. You can babble endlessly about how all the requirements have But the taxes still get paid. And the speeding tickets. And the property taxes. And the sales taxes.

And for those few who are stupid enough to actually try and use your arguments in court? They go to jail.

As the law and courts don't recognize your pseudo-legal gibberish. Your theories.....are just plain irrelevant. My positions are that the law and the courts are authoritative.

And they are!
 Quoting: J 34311994

I agree we should put all those tax cheats in prison where they belong. Ever hear of Marc Rich? Only if these morons would read Title U.S.C. 26 they wouldn't follow all this wizard of oz bullshit.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 31297288
United States
02/15/2013 10:01 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?
FRNS are issued not as "lawful money" but as negotiable, transferable DEBT NOTES (promissory notes).

Congress issues BONDS in a certain $ amount to the Federal Reserve.

The Federal Reserve BANK, biased on a fractional reserve $ value of its actual "assets" then issues FRNS (printed or electronic) in the $ amount of the Bonds.

Those DEBT FRNS are issued per 12 USC 411 and regulated directly thereby.

The Notes (again, printed or electronic) are then distributed to Federal Reserve Bank accounts. The OBLIGATION to give goods and services (at face value) to the Federal Reserve lies with CONGRESS/the US. Plus interest on the "loan" of CREDIT.

But, persons/corporations are allowed to act in a legal capacity to access the NOTES and when they endorse said NOTES, they assume the OBLIGATION to pay the Federal Reserve (in goods and services at face value) BACK.

This takes the obligation off the US/Congress and places it directly on the back of the endorser.

That endorser also accepts the obligation to pay the interest on the debt.

Once endorsed or used as "money" the endorser is bound by law to pay back, in goods and services at face value, plus interest the face value of the NOTES.

The endorser then refuses to pay (Rickman) because he does not think FRNS are "lawful money". The court finds against him because HE made them lawful by his actions and agreement.

The FACT that the FRNS he used were not issued AS LAWFUL MONEY is moot, he endorsed them, he used them in fulfillment of HIS debts, public and private and the accepted the OBLIGATION TO PAY their owner, The Federal Reserve bank for their use.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 590644
United States
02/15/2013 10:06 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?
The long version of "The Political Spectrum Explained" by the John Birch Society was first titled "Overview of America"

It has been broken into a four part series; part one:

[link to www.youtube.com]

Anonymous Coward
User ID: 31297288
United States
02/15/2013 10:07 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Sovereign citizens: Is this an accurate portrayal?
The courts that idiot J keeps referring too are not "powerful" they are simply enforcing commercial contracts in
a 3rd party intervention.

The CONTRACT makes the law, all the court has to do is identify who was involved in the contract, get their side of the story and enforce the contract if it is not proven fraudulent, that is not the power of the COURT or judge as he likes to believe.

It is the power of the people to contract and make LAW. The power remains in the people but the illusion is it in the COURT or the Government, it is NOT.

It's in your SIGNATURE or ACTIONS.

Stop endorsing their contracts and demand your RIGHT to lawful money and reclaim your Creator endowed POWER.

News