Defending Yourself Against "Legal Fiction"
February 6, 2010
There are critical points to understand. Once the world went off the Gold standard, the people now in effect became dead to the Law.. All courts are courts belonging the central banks, being the creditor in any case. A Judge cannot see the substantive Law in relation to a man or woman's God-given rights anymore under public policy. Public policy refers to the bankruptcy/insolvency of that nation.
The person who is charged is NOT the man but his corporate entity account. All the courts want is to settle a public account and they want access to your Birth Certificate trust/prepaid estate account.
When you argue/defend and a claim, which in commerce is a demand for money, you are in effect saying 'I don't want to pay' and at this point of dishonour there may be more bogus charges/claims come forward due to this. So all legislative acts apply only to these corporate persons, individuals, taxpayers, residents, etc.; and guess what, they are all created fictions of law. They are not real they are created fictions of law.
That is why it is said that 'arguments are for fools'. This information applies in Canada, Australia, America and anywhere else where a central bank exists.
So what happens when there is a 'Charge' against someone? An account is created and it must be settled otherwise someone is placed in prison as collateral for that debt. Arguing and defending creates problems.
Under the rules of Admiralty Law, he who brings forward a charge must also bring forward the remedy and that remedy is your birth Certificate/Trust prepaid asset account. The reason they 'falsely charge' people is because they are well aware of the existence of this Trust account and you are deemed to be in control of your estate, operating as a Trustee of that account.
However they will never openly admit to this under public policy and they will always remain silent and refer you to some legislative act and make you think it applies to you.
They know and understand that all energy comes from the living man who in reality is the creditor, however if you create dishonour they will treat you as the debtor and the debtor has no rights.
What is the false allegation industry really all about? It is proof that you have in fact an prepaid Trust/estate account created at your birth and evidenced by your birth Certificate. Your birth certificate is evidence of two things: 1) that a Trust does in fact exist and 2) it is a security, which is used as collateral by any government to receive funding from the central banks.
Once Adam and Eve dishonoured the creator, they were taken out of the Garden of Eden which was no longer a commercial free zone and absolutely everything that is done, is done in commerce involving commercial accounts.
Ever since then the same principle has applied, creditors are winners and debtors are losers! Were we not told to be the 'head' (creditor) and not the 'tail' (debtor)? Its all about an account, the rest is all illusion, just ask for the bill so that you can do a bankers acceptance by your endorsement of the charging instrument/complaint and proceed to settle and close the account. However be prepared they will test you first.
First Comment: Paul
In our work to date, we have come across these claims
several times: it's important to realize that some of them
can be substantiated with good authority, while others
appear to be theories that have somehow "morphed" into fact
primarily for the one(s) asserting such claims.
These two short essays are good places to begin,
to acquire a necessary foundation:
(Note well that the U.S. Supreme Court has held that
the Federal government is NOT a corporation!)
Our letter to Bill Gates re: USA v. Microsoft, Inc.
goes into many similar issues:
In actual litigation we have already established that the entity
"UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" incorporated twice in Delaware,
but both corporations were later revoked by the Delaware
Secretary of State:
When this fraud was exposed by our office,
The Conspiracy (of which you write so often),
re-incorporated "THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA"
also in Delaware, as if adding "THE" would cure the manifold
problems that resulted from impersonating the Federal government
with a Delaware corporation, when both are legally "foreign"
with respect to each other:
Legally speaking, all corporations chartered in any of the 50 States are
"foreign" corporations with respect to the District of Columbia:
A corporation doing business in one state though chartered
or incorporated in another state is a foreign corporation as to the first state, and,
as such, is required to consent to certain conditions and restrictions
in order to do business in such first state.
Now, we went the next step and inquired with a sample of
Secretaries of State in other States of the Union, and
all confirmed that UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
failed to register as a "foreign" corporation with their offices:
This next one, domiciled in Washington State, is likewise quite deceptive:
UNITED ESTATES OF AMERICA, LLC
The use of "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" [sic] as the "Plaintiff"
on all Federal criminal "INDICTMENTS", and on all Federal civil cases, initiated by the U.S. Department of Justice, appears to be an expertly concealed attempt to avoid invoking the Judicial Power of the United States, by which the U.S. Constitution very clearly requires that the "United States" (Federal government) be the Proper Party:
Instead, they are invoking the legislative power of the United States (Federal government) chiefly by convening a legislative tribunal instead of a constitutional court.
A much longer, and much more detailed explanation, can be
found in these two briefs which I filed at the U.S. Supreme Court,
to which 48 UNlicensed ATTORNeys either fell silent, or
formally waived their clients' right to answer:
Soon after filing those 2 briefs at the U.S. Supreme Court,
Justice O'Connor retired and Chief Justice Rehnquist died.
Also, Ginsburg, Thomas and Breyer turned up withOUT
Lastly, there is some documentary evidence to support
the notion that parties who are in fact at war with each other
may not refer formally to each other by their Proper Names;
instead a "nom de guerre" is a customary legal requirement
under the Law of Nations. For authorities in support of
this proposition, see: