How the government stole the rights of American citizens

[Truth-Bringer]

This is one of the biggest scams in history. This is how the U.S. government has stolen everyone's rights.

Your "Straw Man" is the ALL CAPS name you have written on your social security card, driver's license, government documents, etc. It's also the only spelling you will ever see on a criminal or civil complaint filed against you. This is because the corporate federal government has no jurisdiction over flesh and blood people. And, yes, there are three separate United States that they use to shift definitions on you and deceive you.

You say "We don't have a corporate government as one part of three different United States. That's crazy." Here's the proof:

SUPREME COURT RULING ON THREE UNITED STATES

United States v. Bevans, 16 U.S. 3 Wheat. 336 336 (1818)

United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1876).

HOOVEN & ALLISON CO. v. EVATT, OCTOBER TERM, 1944. Syllabus. 324 U.S.


UNITED STATES CORPORATION

TITLE 28 > PART VI > CHAPTER 176 > SUBCHAPTER A > § 3002

§ 3002. Definitions (15) “United States” means—
(A) a Federal corporation;
(B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or
(C) an instrumentality of the United States.
CORPUS JURIS SECUNDUM VOL 20 SECTION 1785 DEFINE THE UNITED STATES AS A FOREIGN CORPORATION
TITLE 5 > PART I > CHAPTER 1 > § 103
§ 103. Government Corporation
For the purpose of this title—
(1) “Government corporation” means a corporation owned or controlled by the Government of the United States; and
(2) “Government controlled corporation” does not include a corporation owned by the Government of the United States.


Next you say "Writing our names in all capital letters has no real significance. That's crazy."

Wrong again. Here's the proof:

CORPORATION NAMES

DEL CODE TITLE 8 Chapters 6 § 617: Delaware Code - Section 617: CORPORATE NAME

The corporate name of a corporation organized under this chapter shall contain either a word or words descriptive of the professional service to be rendered by the corporation or shall contain the last names of 1 or more of its present, prospective or former shareholders or of persons who were associated with a predecessor person, partnership, corporation or other organization or whose name or names appeared in the name of such predecessor organization.

Texas Administrative Code
Subject: 1 TAC § 79.31 CORPORATIONS (ENTITY NAMES)
§ 79.31. Characters of Print Acceptable in Names
(a) Entity names may consist of letters of the Roman alphabet, Arabic numerals, and certain symbols capable of being reproduced on a standard English language typewriter, or combination thereof.
(b) Only upper case or capitol letters, with no distinction as to type face or font, will be recognized.


Delaware legislation March 10 1899
“An Act Providing General Corporate Law” This Act allow the corporation to become a “PERSON”

3 /10/ 1899 which was the Delaware Wilmington trust & the corporate trust company of America. They went submitted into the Delaware legislation a private bill in called “An act providing a general corporate law." In this act that was put before Delaware legislation to creates the corporation to presume the rights & privileges in the standing of a person in the human sense but not as a natural person.

. When this happened the bar assoc began changing the definitions of the word “person” , statue says that a person is a corporation . So the problem occurs when the court brings me in as a person but fails to clearly define me as a living breathing man, or as a corporation . If u are bringing me in a natural living breathing human , then the US Constitution mandates that I have the right to 11th amendment immunity & the court has no choice but to dismiss this case for lack of jurisdiction .

. If the court recognizes the “person “as a corporation then I too have immunity under title 28 1608 as a corporation. Because it is stated in title 28 3002 sect 15 a - in the judiciary in judicial procedure books of usc it clearly defines the UNITED STATES as a federal corporation & that includes all instruments thereof all departments, all agencies & entities that come under this are defined as a corporation. So if the court ,the clerks office , the cities , the county , the state all are political subdivisions of the corporation as defined in Title 28 3002 , the court & its employees are shown to be a corporation. So if I appear as a “person” “ defined as a corporation , I have immunity pursuant under r title 28 the same as the court , the county , the cities , & the state pursuant to 1608 .
At this time I invite u to notice on my writ of error of corum nobis that any party pursuing a claim against me as a “person “ defined as a corporation will now be required by law to file with the dept of state against me to have my immunities lifted .

SUPREME COURT RULING ON CORPORATE PERSON

SANTA CLARA COUNTY v. SOUTHERN PAC. R. CO., 118 U.S. 394

A legal person, also called juridical person or juristic person,[1] is a legal entity through which the law allows a group of natural persons to act as if they were a single composite individual for certain purposes, or in some jurisdictions, for a single person to have a separate legal personality other than their own.[2][3] This legal fiction does not mean these entities are human beings, but rather means that the law allows them to act as persons for certain limited purposes.

Then you say, "but there's no such thing as a STRAW MAN PERSON that a government can use to shift a natural person to a constructive trust or artificial entity. That's crazy." Wrong again:

STRAWMAN [PERSON], which is defined in Barron’s Law Dictionary, 4th edition, (1996), as “a term referred to in commercial and property contexts when a transfer is made to a third party, the strawman [person], simply for the purpose of retransferring to the transferror in order to accomplish some purpose not otherwise permitted,” i.e., obtaining jurisdiction over a “real party in interest”/American citizen or relying upon the rebuttable presumption that a “real party in interest”/American citizen is a corporation. The definition also contains the admonition to “See dummy,” which, at that entry is therein defined as “a strawman; a sham.”

And that's how you're being controlled and deprived of legal rights, people. The government sees each of you as a "dummy." So wake up and realize what's going on. (http://www.buildfreedom.com/tl/rapecon.shtml)

[Dreamofunity]

None of this holds up in court though, so it's kind of pointless. Even if you claim not to be the corporation they think you are, they'll still throw you in jail.

Back in my paranoid schizophrenic days, I noticed that at my school almost everyone's names were regular, while mine was in all caps. I freaked out a bit, the government was watching me at school, the government owns my school work.

[Truth-Bringer]

None of this holds up in court though, so it's kind of pointless. Even if you claim not to be the corporation they think you are, they'll still throw you in jail.


There aren't any documented wins on the issue because if someone raised the issue, the Court would simply not call the case and bury it. But the reason it has failed in the past is that (1) our court system is completely corrupt, and (2) no one had all the case cites until now. All of that information I presented was just compiled in the last year.

Facts are facts. The legal proof is there.

[Danke]

There aren't any documented wins on the issue because if someone raised the issue, the Court would simply not call the case and bury it. But the reason it has failed in the past is that (1) our court system is completely corrupt, and (2) no one had all the case cites until now. All of that information I presented was just compiled in the last year.

Facts are facts. The legal proof is there.

I have been involved with this for years. People are winning all the time, but it is wise to do a lot of studying before you try any of it, because you’ll have to counter all the tricks the judges and lawyers will try to pull on you to get you to recontract with them.

[Truth-Bringer]

I have been involved with this for years. People are winning all the time, but it is wise to do a lot of studying before you try any of it, because you’ll have to counter all the tricks the judges and lawyers will try to pull on you to get you to recontract with them.

Yes indeed. Everyone out there needs to attend one of these seminars in order to learn all the facts. (http://www.americacanbefree.com)

[Civilradiant_palm_pre]

interesting...

[Truth-Bringer]

interesting...

Thanks. I was discussing the 14th Amendment on another thread, and I realized I should have mentioned that here too.

Before the 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868, Americans were only known as Citizens (with a capital "C") of the united States of America (American Citizen, or American, for short). If you were born in America, you were born a sovereign with inalienable rights. It was a common understanding among the people. Up until then, slavery was still accepted in America. Slaves were not Citizens, state or national, but were merely considered the personal 'property' of the slave holders. The 13th Amendment was ratified in 1865, just 3 years before the 14th. The 13th amendment abolished slavery. But that created a new problem. The newly freed slaves were not Citizens of any state or country, because they were just property, and property did not have citizenship. To solve the problem, the 14th amendment was passed. This amendment created a new class of citizenship. This new class was legally called: 'United States citizen', (with a small "c"). NOT 'United States of America Citizen', but just 'United States citizen'. Notice that the U.S. citizen is spelled with a lower case 'c'. This is to show a lower class of citizenship. This class of citizen (U.S. citizen) is a privilege granted by the federal government, and not a sovereign inalienable right.

This is another legal trick they used to take our rights. They have to make everything "legal" in order to avoid committing crimes themselves. Why does this work? Because the Founding Fathers never assumed anyone would be evil enough to try and control people through deception. That's why there's no clause in the Constitution to forbid passing deceptive laws.

[mport1]

None of this holds up in court though, so it's kind of pointless. Even if you claim not to be the corporation they think you are, they'll still throw you in jail.

+1 Everybody needs to realize that even if there were true, THE GOVERNMENT DOES NOT FOLLOW THEIR OWN LAWS. You can almost never win fighting them in their own courts.

[Truth-Bringer]

+1 Everybody needs to realize that even if there were true, THE GOVERNMENT DOES NOT FOLLOW THEIR OWN LAWS. You can almost never win fighting them in their own courts.

But there are severe punishments available for them if they're caught disobeying their own laws. The problem is most Americans are too ignorant to know them and/or to scared to challenge the government.

Tim Turner, whose site I posted a link to above, just had a $20 billion lien placed on some corrupt judges and attorneys, and it was upheld in federal court.

Victories are possible, but you must know what you're doing and have the courage to go after them.

You can also go after judges on their oath of office. Perjury against one's oath of office is a crime.

[Rael]

There aren't any documented wins on the issue because if someone raised the issue, the Court would simply not call the case and bury it. But the reason it has failed in the past is that (1) our court system is completely corrupt, and (2) no one had all the case cites until now. All of that information I presented was just compiled in the last year.

Facts are facts. The legal proof is there.

This site has a pretty big list of cases where the courts threw out sovereignty and similar cases.

http://www.adl.org/mwd/suss1.asp

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

nt

[heavenlyboy34]

+1 Everybody needs to realize that even if there were true, THE GOVERNMENT DOES NOT FOLLOW THEIR OWN LAWS. You can almost never win fighting them in their own courts.

qft! I said this in several debate threads, but it got ignored. Thanks for emphasizing that. :cool:

[Dianne]

Once you recognize the government is not a government, but a group of dishonest thugs that are robbing you blind, as they blatently flaunt their own fraud as they answer to no one... there is no government, be clear about that. The government is gone.. there is no government .... you have to see that. What is in place at this moment is a group of hoodlums that should (80%) be serving jail time as we speak. You want to cowtower to a bunch of felons?? The government has been hijacked, clear and simple.

[Truth-Bringer]

This site has a pretty big list of cases where the courts threw out sovereignty and similar cases.

http://www.adl.org/mwd/suss1.asp

The site is clearly biased against anyone attempting to assert sovereignty. Give me a break. "Militia watch?"

If this was 1776, people like this would be calling the Founding Fathers traitors.

[Truth-Bringer]

Once you recognize the government is not a government, but a group of dishonest thugs that are robbing you blind, as they blatently flaunt their own fraud as they answer to no one... there is no government, be clear about that. The government is gone.. there is no government .... you have to see that. What is in place at this moment is a group of hoodlums that should (80%) be serving jail time as we speak. You want to cowtower to a bunch of felons?? The government has been hijacked, clear and simple.

Good points. They do not rule by legitimate authority. For those who say the vote legitimizes them, that's complete B.S. Voting does not confer legitimacy and

Lysander Spooner explained precisely why: (http://www.fourmilab.ch/etexts/www/NoTreason/NoTreason.html)

1. The act of voting can bind only those who vote, and who win the vote.
2. Most people do not vote in any given election; many people never vote. Therefore, they have not consented.
3. To be binding, a vote must be “perfectly voluntary” yet a “very large number” vote in self-defense.
4. Taxation is compulsory and many vote only to prevent their money from being used against them.
5. Votes for unsuccessful candidates cannot be binding.
6. A secret vote provides no legal evidence by which to bind any particular voter to the alleged "social contract" or Constitution.

As for what is happening in the political system today, anyone who thinks that it confers legitimacy, (http://www.smartmoney.com/10things/index.cfm?story=november2006&pgnum=1) is seriously delusional.

[Rael]

The site is clearly biased against anyone attempting to assert sovereignty. Give me a break. "Militia watch?"

If this was 1776, people like this would be calling the Founding Fathers traitors.

So, are you denying the validity of the cases posted on the site? Do you have any court cases you can cite backing up your assertions?

[Truth-Bringer]

So, are you denying the validity of the cases posted on the site? Do you have any court cases you can cite backing up your assertions?

How about you show me anyone that was not prosecuted by the IRS in the name of the all caps Straw Man (corporate person). If it's so meaningless, let's see them prosecute someone with the standard Christian appellation - uppercase and lowercase.

You have to look a little deeper to see all the deceptions in their court cases, my friend. (http://www.originalintent.org/edu/lies.php)

"Summary

In this article we have reviewed the techniques the government uses in its publications to mislead American Citizens and keep them "in the system" even when they are under no legal duty to be a part of the system.

1. The government tells only portions of the truth when the whole truth would undermine their goals.
2. The government makes its remarks within a legal context, of which the reader is completely unaware, to make the public believe the government has authority greater than it actually possesses.
3. While the public thinks government publications are written for them in plain English, these publications actually rely almost entirely on "legal terms".
4. Citizens are led to believe that publications are written in plain English because the publications generally state that they are intended to help the public better understand the law.
5. Government publications could be written in plain English if the government truly wanted you to understand the law.
6. Legal terms are used because the government knows that the public is unaware of the meaning of such terms and thus will be left with a false impression of what the publication means.
7. The government does not provide definitions (within the publications) to any of the legal terms it employs.
8. The government itself will tell you that you may not rely on their publications.
9. Congress could pass a law tomorrow if it wanted, requiring all US government publications (intended for distribution to the public) to be written in plain English and prohibit the use of legal terms in such publications.
10. Congress could enact a criminal law punishing private firms for firing a Citizen for not having or providing a SSN, or withholding payments owed to a Citizen if a TIN is not provided.
11. Congress will not pass any of these types of laws because it would reveal the extremely limited scope of State and Federal taxing authority.
12. Congress will not pass any of these types of laws because 274 million robbery victims can make a real ugly scene and Senators and Congressmen hate words like "treason" and "lynching"."

[Danke]

How about you show me anyone that was not prosecuted by the IRS in the name of the all caps Straw Man (corporate person). If it's so meaningless, let's see them prosecute someone with the standard Christian appellation - uppercase and lowercase.



Bouvier's Law Dictionary
1856 Edition

NAME. One or more words used to distinguish a particular individual, as Socrates, Benjamin Franklin.

2. The Greeks, as is well known, bore only one name, and it was one of the especial rights of a father to choose the names for hi's children and to alter them if he pleased. It was customary to give to the eldest son the name of the grandfather on his father's side. The day on which children received their names was the tenth after their birth. The tenth day, called 'denate,' was a festive day, and friends and relatives were invited to take part in a sacrifice and a repast. If in a court of justice proofs could be adduced that a father had held the denate, it was sufficient evidence that be had recognized the child as his own. Smith's Diet. of Greek and Rom. Antiq. h. v.

3. Among the Romans, the division into races, and the subdivision of races into families, caused a great multiplicity of names. They had first the pronomen, which was proper to the person; then the nomen, belonging to his race; a surname or cognomen, designating the family; and sometimes an agnomen, which indicated the branch of that family in which the author has become distinguished. Thus, for example, Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus; Publius is the pronomen; Cornelius, the nomen, designating the name of the race Cornelia; Scipio, the cognomen, or surname of the family; and Africanus, the agnomen, which indicated his exploits.

4. Names are divided into Christian names, as, Benjamin, and surnames, as, Franklin.

5. No man can have more than one Christian name; 1 Ld. Raym. 562; Bac. Ab. Misnomer, A; though two or more names usually ke* t separate, as John and Peter, may undoubtedly be compounded, so as to form, in contemplation of law, but one. 5 T. R. 195. A letter put between the Christian and surname, as an abbreviation of a part of the Christian name, as, John B. Peterson, is no part of either. 4 Watts' R. 329; 5 John. R. 84; 14 Pet. R. 322; 3 Pet. R. 7; 2 Cowen. 463; Co. Litt. 3 a; 1 Ld. Raym. 562; , Vin. Ab. Misnomer, C 6, pl. 5 and 6: Com. Dig. Indictment, G 1, note u; Willes, R. 654; Bac. Abr. Misnomer and Addition; 3 Chit. Pr. 164 to 173; 1 Young, R. 602. But see 7 Watts & Serg. 406.

In general a corporation must contract and sue and be sued by its corporate name; 8 Jobn. R. 295; 14 John. R. 238; 19 John. R. 300; 4 Rand. R. 359; yet a slight alteration in stating the name is unimportant, if there be no possibility of mistaking the identity of the corporation suing. 12 L. R. 444.

[catdd]

Very interesting, I've done some research on how it works but haven't challenged them yet. If I were ever audited I would.

[stilltrying]

Audio 9/22/09 Cestui Que Trust (http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/talkCast.jsp?masterId=49494&cmd=tc listen to 9/22/09)

look here and here

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/forms/sav1455.pdf form 1455

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/forms/sec1071.pdf form 1071

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/forms/savpart306.pdf treasury circular 300

[Carson]

I see it happening this way.

Maybe this will help make the danger of fiat money clear.

Imagine you and me are setting across from each other. We create enough money to represent all of the world’s wealth. Each one of us has one Zero Dollar in front of him.

http://photos.imageevent.com/stokeybob/newbegining/worthless_colorbrianRomero.jpg(click for picture source) (http://brian-romero.blogspot.com/2008/06/zero-dollar-bill.html)

You own half of everything and so do I.

I’m the government though. I get bribed into creating a Central Bank.

You’re not doing what I want you to be doing so I print up myself eight more Zero Dollars to manipulate you with.


All of a sudden your Zero Dollar only represents one tenth of the wealth of the world!


That isn’t the only thing though. You need to get busy and get to work because you’ve been stiffed with the bill for the money I printed up to get you to do what I wanted.


That to me represents what has been happening to the economy, and us, and why so many of our occupations just can’t keep up with the money presses.

They have been beating us with our own stick!!!!1

http://photos.imageevent.com/stokeybob/newbegining/2508h-inflationgraph.jpg(click for picture source) (http://oregonstate.edu/cla/polisci/faculty/sahr-robert)

CPI showing the value and purchasing power of money falling as fiat money is printed up unrestrained.

[Truth-Bringer]

Audio 9/22/09 Cestui Que Trust (http://www.talkshoe.com/talkshoe/web/talkCast.jsp?masterId=49494&cmd=tc listen to 9/22/09)

look here and here

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/forms/sav1455.pdf form 1455

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/forms/sec1071.pdf form 1071

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/forms/savpart306.pdf treasury circular 300

Notice on those forms it says "Department of the Treasury" - not "U.S. Department of the Treasury"

That's another layer of the fraud. The reason for that is explained here:

31 Questions and Answers about the Internal Revenue Service (http://www.supremelaw.org/sls/31answers.htm)

[heavenlyboy34]

There aren't any documented wins on the issue because if someone raised the issue, the Court would simply not call the case and bury it. But the reason it has failed in the past is that (1) our court system is completely corrupt, and (2) no one had all the case cites until now. All of that information I presented was just compiled in the last year.

Facts are facts. The legal proof is there.


If this is the case, why do so many RPFers argue to keep the current system(establishmentarianism)? :confused: (I'm genuinely curious, not trying to be insulting)

[LibertyEagle]

You are treading on a thread, heavenlyboy.

[Truth-Bringer]

If this is the case, why do so many RPFers argue to keep the current system(establishmentarianism)? :confused: (I'm genuinely curious, not trying to be insulting)

Because government has a legitimate function - and that is punishing those who initiate force, fraud or coercion. It just needs to be bound to its proper Constitutional limits.

What we must do is expose the corruption and then once we have honest people in place, enact new laws with harsh penalties for judges, politicians and any other government employees who break any law or violate their oaths of office in any way.

Remove judicial immunity and give them a mandated life sentence with no parole if they're convicted of a crime (including perjury against their oath of office) and I guarantee you, you can keep these people in line.

[stilltrying]

Notice on those forms it says "Department of the Treasury" - not "U.S. Department of the Treasury"

That's another layer of the fraud. The reason for that is explained here:

31 Questions and Answers about the Internal Revenue Service (http://www.supremelaw.org/sls/31answers.htm)

http://www.treasurydirect.gov/about.htm

I am not quite understanding what you are getting at? US Dept of treasury bureau of public debt. just as the audio confirms to close your accounts.

[heavenlyboy34]

Because government has a legitimate function - and that is punishing those who initiate force, fraud or coercion. It just needs to be bound to its proper Constitutional limits.

What we must do is expose the corruption and then once we have honest people in place, enact new laws with harsh penalties for judges, politicians and any other government employees who break any law or violate their oaths of office in any way.

Remove judicial immunity and give them a mandated life sentence with no parole if they're convicted of a crime (including perjury against their oath of office) and I guarantee you, you can keep these people in line.


But TPTB are in control of the system, and are not inclined to let go. What you are suggesting requires something (an enforcement mechanism) above and beyond the Constitution. Thus far, nothing like that has been proposed on RPFs (that I know of). If this is really your goal, I suggest you write some books with detailed solutions and steps to take. Until I see something substantive, I remain cynical that any government can be restrained and will continue to be a peaceful anarcho-libertarian. :cool:

[heavenlyboy34]

You are treading on a thread, heavenlyboy.

Sorry, I missed this before I made the previous post. I didn't mean to derail the thread, I was trying to stay relevant.

[tremendoustie]

But TPTB are in control of the system, and are not inclined to let go. What you are suggesting requires something (an enforcement mechanism) above and beyond the Constitution. Thus far, nothing like that has been proposed on RPFs (that I know of). If this is really your goal, I suggest you write some books with detailed solutions and steps to take. Until I see something substantive, I remain cynical that any government can be restrained and will continue to be a peaceful anarcho-libertarian. :cool:

I don't think politics is as tightly controlled as you imagine it to be. I think there is a lot of progress that can be made in the political realm, especially when it is used as a tool for education. The system is corrupt, but that doesn't mean public pressure cannot force the hand of justice.

[pacelli]

I remember listening to the Intelligence Report a few months ago where someone called in with a site that has a bunch of Tim Turner stuff, including some recordings. The caller indicated the following site. Not sure if this is actually Tim Turner's stuff or not.

ftp://65.60.162.176/

[Danke]

I remember listening to the Intelligence Report a few months ago where someone called in with a site that has a bunch of Tim Turner stuff, including some recordings. The caller indicated the following site. Not sure if this is actually Tim Turner's stuff or not.

ftp://65.60.162.176/

Tim Turner was in the Twin Cities a couple of weeks ago. I have his docs from that workshop if anyone wants them. They are probably the same ones in that link you posted.

[pacelli]

Incidentally if anyone wants to learn another person's opinion about this issue of Redemption & the Strawman, you'd be more informed after listening to George Gordon. Gordon takes a dissenting opinion based on the actual experiences of several of his students who have gone down this road.

Here's the first 1-hour broadcast from Gordon on the subject "Redemption & the Straw Man" (4/09):

http://library.georgegordon.com/node/1592

The entire 7 hour broadcast can be downloaded for free, in 1-hour increments, by going to this page & clicking on the number 5 above the file descriptions (the broadcast series is on the 5th page of his archive):

http://library.georgegordon.com/audio

A short, nonexhaustive list of general subjects covered in the 7 hours:

1)Hey...This Redemption thing Appears to Really Work

2)Buying & Selling your Birth Certificate, How is that Done

3)The Emperor's New Clothes

4)Do you have $630,000 in your Birth Certificate Account with Social Security?

5)Your Treasury Direct Account

6)Income Tax & Social Security Derive from Contract

7)Here are the Defences that do work

Listening tip: There are no commercials, although Gordon does advertise his law school 3 times per broadcast. Once in the beginning (approx first 3 minutes), once halfway through (approx 3 minutes), and once at the end.

Gordon takes more of a narrative style of reporting, but has loads of pro se litigation experience.

[RevolutionSD]

This is one of the biggest scams in history. This is how the U.S. government has stolen everyone's rights.

Your "Straw Man" is the ALL CAPS name you have written on your social security card, driver's license, government documents, etc. It's also the only spelling you will ever see on a criminal or civil complaint filed against you. This is because the corporate federal government has no jurisdiction over flesh and blood people. And, yes, there are three separate United States that they use to shift definitions on you and deceive you.

You say "We don't have a corporate government as one part of three different United States. That's crazy." Here's the proof:

SUPREME COURT RULING ON THREE UNITED STATES

United States v. Bevans, 16 U.S. 3 Wheat. 336 336 (1818)

United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1876).

HOOVEN & ALLISON CO. v. EVATT, OCTOBER TERM, 1944. Syllabus. 324 U.S.


UNITED STATES CORPORATION

TITLE 28 > PART VI > CHAPTER 176 > SUBCHAPTER A > § 3002

§ 3002. Definitions (15) “United States” means—
(A) a Federal corporation;
(B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or
(C) an instrumentality of the United States.
CORPUS JURIS SECUNDUM VOL 20 SECTION 1785 DEFINE THE UNITED STATES AS A FOREIGN CORPORATION
TITLE 5 > PART I > CHAPTER 1 > § 103
§ 103. Government Corporation
For the purpose of this title—
(1) “Government corporation” means a corporation owned or controlled by the Government of the United States; and
(2) “Government controlled corporation” does not include a corporation owned by the Government of the United States.


Next you say "Writing our names in all capital letters has no real significance. That's crazy."

Wrong again. Here's the proof:

CORPORATION NAMES

DEL CODE TITLE 8 Chapters 6 § 617: Delaware Code - Section 617: CORPORATE NAME

The corporate name of a corporation organized under this chapter shall contain either a word or words descriptive of the professional service to be rendered by the corporation or shall contain the last names of 1 or more of its present, prospective or former shareholders or of persons who were associated with a predecessor person, partnership, corporation or other organization or whose name or names appeared in the name of such predecessor organization.

Texas Administrative Code
Subject: 1 TAC § 79.31 CORPORATIONS (ENTITY NAMES)
§ 79.31. Characters of Print Acceptable in Names
(a) Entity names may consist of letters of the Roman alphabet, Arabic numerals, and certain symbols capable of being reproduced on a standard English language typewriter, or combination thereof.
(b) Only upper case or capitol letters, with no distinction as to type face or font, will be recognized.


Delaware legislation March 10 1899
“An Act Providing General Corporate Law” This Act allow the corporation to become a “PERSON”

3 /10/ 1899 which was the Delaware Wilmington trust & the corporate trust company of America. They went submitted into the Delaware legislation a private bill in called “An act providing a general corporate law." In this act that was put before Delaware legislation to creates the corporation to presume the rights & privileges in the standing of a person in the human sense but not as a natural person.

. When this happened the bar assoc began changing the definitions of the word “person” , statue says that a person is a corporation . So the problem occurs when the court brings me in as a person but fails to clearly define me as a living breathing man, or as a corporation . If u are bringing me in a natural living breathing human , then the US Constitution mandates that I have the right to 11th amendment immunity & the court has no choice but to dismiss this case for lack of jurisdiction .

. If the court recognizes the “person “as a corporation then I too have immunity under title 28 1608 as a corporation. Because it is stated in title 28 3002 sect 15 a - in the judiciary in judicial procedure books of usc it clearly defines the UNITED STATES as a federal corporation & that includes all instruments thereof all departments, all agencies & entities that come under this are defined as a corporation. So if the court ,the clerks office , the cities , the county , the state all are political subdivisions of the corporation as defined in Title 28 3002 , the court & its employees are shown to be a corporation. So if I appear as a “person” “ defined as a corporation , I have immunity pursuant under r title 28 the same as the court , the county , the cities , & the state pursuant to 1608 .
At this time I invite u to notice on my writ of error of corum nobis that any party pursuing a claim against me as a “person “ defined as a corporation will now be required by law to file with the dept of state against me to have my immunities lifted .

SUPREME COURT RULING ON CORPORATE PERSON

SANTA CLARA COUNTY v. SOUTHERN PAC. R. CO., 118 U.S. 394

A legal person, also called juridical person or juristic person,[1] is a legal entity through which the law allows a group of natural persons to act as if they were a single composite individual for certain purposes, or in some jurisdictions, for a single person to have a separate legal personality other than their own.[2][3] This legal fiction does not mean these entities are human beings, but rather means that the law allows them to act as persons for certain limited purposes.

Then you say, "but there's no such thing as a STRAW MAN PERSON that a government can use to shift a natural person to a constructive trust or artificial entity. That's crazy." Wrong again:

STRAWMAN [PERSON], which is defined in Barron’s Law Dictionary, 4th edition, (1996), as “a term referred to in commercial and property contexts when a transfer is made to a third party, the strawman [person], simply for the purpose of retransferring to the transferror in order to accomplish some purpose not otherwise permitted,” i.e., obtaining jurisdiction over a “real party in interest”/American citizen or relying upon the rebuttable presumption that a “real party in interest”/American citizen is a corporation. The definition also contains the admonition to “See dummy,” which, at that entry is therein defined as “a strawman; a sham.”

And that's how you're being controlled and deprived of legal rights, people. The government sees each of you as a "dummy." So wake up and realize what's going on. (http://www.buildfreedom.com/tl/rapecon.shtml)

Time to give anarcho-capitalism and www.freedomainradio.com a look...

[Carson]

This link may help explain the Straw Man concept.

http://www.nationwideshoppingcart4.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=CTGY&Category_Code=20strawman

[Truth-Bringer]

But TPTB are in control of the system,

Only because the majority of people remain ignorant and gullible. They could not control millions of awakened Citizens, no matter what their desires.


and are not inclined to let go. What you are suggesting requires something (an enforcement mechanism) above and beyond the Constitution. Thus far, nothing like that has been proposed on RPFs (that I know of). If this is really your goal, I suggest you write some books with detailed solutions and steps to take. Until I see something substantive, I remain cynical that any government can be restrained and will continue to be a peaceful anarcho-libertarian. :cool:

My problem with anarcho-capitalism/libertarianism is this - it doesn't seem to recognize that some group of human beings will always strive for leadership.

I say just recognize that fact and construct an extremely limited, minimalist government, with enforcement powers over its members by the people. Another example, add in a veto power by national referendum for every law they attempt to pass. If you get specific enough, and add enough protections, you can restrain government. It just has to be far more specific than our original Constitution was.

[Truth-Bringer]

Incidentally if anyone wants to learn another person's opinion about this issue of Redemption & the Strawman, you'd be more informed after listening to George Gordon. Gordon takes a dissenting opinion based on the actual experiences of several of his students who have gone down this road.


There is indeed a controversy. But from what I've seen, those who get into trouble just didn't do everything correctly. As Tim Turner has said, "Make one little mistake and the system will destroy you." The government can make plenty of mistakes in its pleadings/motions, and the court will allow them to amend or will overlook it. But the Citizen trying to assert his or her sovereignty will not be afforded that courtesy because the powers that be don't want to give up their control over everyone's lives -and the massive profits they continuously make as a result of their evil manipulations.

[Truth-Bringer]

Something to think about in regards to our present political/legal situation:


"In the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility... In the primitive simplicity of [the mind of the masses] they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying. "

- 1926, Adolf Hitler, 'Mein Kampf', p. 472

[Truth-Bringer]

Here's a link from the Daily Paul site to the case of Rodney Class and Carl Weston on the behalf of the American people against Washington DC. (http://www.dailypaul.com/node/111372)

Also, here's the website for the Assembly. (http://www.oursammie.net) Check out the Urgent Notice at the top. Click on that link to read a draft of their letter to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and their Declaration to be delivered to every elected official in the country by the end of the year.