Discussion:
A Texan's View of Things
(too old to reply)
Vicegerent
2005-12-07 15:55:41 UTC
Permalink
Sovereigns' verses inferior Commercialized Courts
within the entire sub-Corporatism STATES/TERRITORIES
UNDER THE UNITED STATES CORPORATION.
By Ed Brannum 12/05/05

I am writing this document to all the Patriots that
have fought the long hard battles in today's
Commercial Courts to find out it was all wasted
time and effort and most leading contenders are
in prison.

I am so tired of watching these good men and
women go down just because they have this tunnel
vision that they know they are smarter than these
Commercial Court British Agents called Attorneys.
It makes no difference how smart you are in a
10 x 10 cell.

You cannot stand as a living man or woman American
sovereign of God in today's fictional corporate courts
acting without the people's creator God. God does not
deal in fiction. He deals only in truth. Therefore I
re-iterate:

THESE ARE NOT YOUR COURTS SO STAY OUT OF
THEM.

OR to survive you must stand as a sovereign of
God under international Treaty law. If you do not
take God into a court with you then by entering
without His veil of protection into the dark side
is very dangerous territory for believers.

Non-believers have at it; your turn comes at the
end when you appear before Him the Judge over
all Judges to go through your part of the Book
of Life.

"When you have ridden a dead horse for five
years or more it is time to dismount and get you
a new live horse". By Ed Brannum

Try riding with the republic of Texas; it's alive
and well. To my neighbors outside the Nation
of Texas; your State is a republic from the
beginning so do one simple act by standing up
as a sovereign and take it back by claiming
the land.

The UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT was
officially Commercialized in 1871 under the
United States Statutes at Large 419; FORTY
FIRST CONGRESS SESSION III; CHAPTER 62,
1871; CHAP. LXII. -- An act to provide a
Government for the District of Columbia.

Special Note (Read the last sentence) Section 28.
"And be it further enacted, That the said legislative
assembly shall power to create by general law,
modify, repeal, or amend, within said District,
corporations aggregate for religious, charitable,
educational, industrial, or commercial purposes,
and to define their powers and liabilities:
Provided, that the powers of corporations so
created shall be limited to the District of Columbia.

So how do they come into your house and arrest
you and drag you into their religious rituals when
they have no authority outside of the District of
Columbia (DC)?

Answer; You VOLUNTEERED AND BECAME
USA PROPERTY by signing onto commercial
contracts with the Demons. Such as Voters
Registration, Passports, Birth Certificates,
Drivers license, and all other documents
where you become a registered Federal Employee
such as signing under penalties of perjury on
the 1040 form and contributing to the biggest
scam ever in North America; the so called
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE INC. (IRS).

Also UN-BE KNOWING to most of you;
you gave your children away upon their birth
to these same Demons. Who is going to tell
your children they are not free that they are
nothing but property of the STATE.

If you're not telling them maybe before they
end up in prison for violating one of the
60,000,000 million US laws with color, your
worshiping 501-C3 IRS controlled church
fathers will tell them the truth. Don't hold
your breath waiting for that to happen either.

ALL CRIMES ARE COMMERCE; ALL
JUDICIAL SYSTEMS, FEDERAL, STATES,
COUNTIES, PARISHES, CITIES ETC. ARE
COMMERCE. ALL COMMERCE IS CONTRACTS.
A CONTRACT IS JURISDICTION.

NO CONTRACT = NO JURISDICTION = NO CASE.
ERGO: QUIT CONTRACTING.

In order to gain immunity for any type of
organization's top managers you incorporate
and make everyone fictions or just pieces of paper.

Under the Corporate rules of today no living
man or woman can take any action into a
commercial court without a representative
acting in the corporation's behalf.

These are called 3rd party Attorneys. Third parties
usually are after the fact and do not have 1st hand
information. These Attorneys do not need to know
law. They only need to know court procedure because
you are already guilty from the start and all that is
left is HOW MUCH can they get (bottom line theft)
from the living body thats standing up for the
corporate fiction name on the paper in front of
the black robed ritual thief or so called judge.

On or about 1971 in Texas and probably every
where else the plea of innocent was removed.
Why? Because in any court setting of today
you are in a commercial court and can only
appear and be heard as a corporate PERSON
with Attorney. A corporate PERSON is a piece
of paper and cannot plead innocent. Only a
living man or woman can plead innocent
therefore everyone going to court as a
defendant is guilty before being proven innocent.

When the living man or woman stands as a
sovereign the courts have no contract to attach
to the commercial paper with the all CAPS
fiction name on it therefore no jurisdiction.

If the court continues to move against you
then somewhere or somehow you the
sovereign have given the court a contract with
presumption or assumption Jurisdiction and
there lye's its contract. Appearing in Court is
a contract in most cases.

To survive you must get away from the dead
horse you have been riding and get on a living one.
Dead is opposite from living just as daylight
and dark therefore you must do something
opposite of what you have been doing. There
are over two million prisoners in North America
and every one of them had an Attorney.
Lotteries have better odds for winning.

What happens if a sovereign files a court
action in a commercial court? Answer NOTHING:
A sovereign cannot be recognized in the
Corporatism Courts of today. A sovereign can
only deal in a Common Law court. Like
the republic of Texas common law courts.
These are the people's courts. Common Law
and Treaty law are superior to all the so
called Constitutional Charters of the corporate
world.

To file a court action in today's inferior courts
you must file as a Corporation against another
Corporation and if you are acting without a
3rd party Attorney the court does not have
to hear anything you enter or say.

A Corporation cannot legally represent itself.
They always ask: "Where is your Attorney" or
state "If you do not appear on date so and so
with an Attorney I will hold you in contempt
of court". These things can not be said or
mean anything to an American standing as a
sovereign outside the corporate court and
under Treaty law.

me By Ed Brannum ©
No assured value, no liability

Posted by: Vicegerent
Chris Clay
2006-01-18 14:25:58 UTC
Permalink
This is the MOST ridiculous buch of hogwash I've read in at least a year.
Further proof that the ability to log onto the internet is not a sign of
intelligent life on Earth.



"Vicegerent" <***@mail.samhill.co.uk> wrote in message news:***@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Sovereigns' verses inferior Commercialized Courts
within the entire sub-Corporatism STATES/TERRITORIES
UNDER THE UNITED STATES CORPORATION.
By Ed Brannum 12/05/05

I am writing this document to all the Patriots that
have fought the long hard battles in today's
Commercial Courts to find out it was all wasted
time and effort and most leading contenders are
in prison.

I am so tired of watching these good men and
women go down just because they have this tunnel
vision that they know they are smarter than these
Commercial Court British Agents called Attorneys.
It makes no difference how smart you are in a
10 x 10 cell.

You cannot stand as a living man or woman American
sovereign of God in today's fictional corporate courts
acting without the people's creator God. God does not
deal in fiction. He deals only in truth. Therefore I
re-iterate:

THESE ARE NOT YOUR COURTS SO STAY OUT OF
THEM.

OR to survive you must stand as a sovereign of
God under international Treaty law. If you do not
take God into a court with you then by entering
without His veil of protection into the dark side
is very dangerous territory for believers.

Non-believers have at it; your turn comes at the
end when you appear before Him the Judge over
all Judges to go through your part of the Book
of Life.

"When you have ridden a dead horse for five
years or more it is time to dismount and get you
a new live horse". By Ed Brannum

Try riding with the republic of Texas; it's alive
and well. To my neighbors outside the Nation
of Texas; your State is a republic from the
beginning so do one simple act by standing up
as a sovereign and take it back by claiming
the land.

The UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT was
officially Commercialized in 1871 under the
United States Statutes at Large 419; FORTY
FIRST CONGRESS SESSION III; CHAPTER 62,
1871; CHAP. LXII. -- An act to provide a
Government for the District of Columbia.

Special Note (Read the last sentence) Section 28.
"And be it further enacted, That the said legislative
assembly shall power to create by general law,
modify, repeal, or amend, within said District,
corporations aggregate for religious, charitable,
educational, industrial, or commercial purposes,
and to define their powers and liabilities:
Provided, that the powers of corporations so
created shall be limited to the District of Columbia.

So how do they come into your house and arrest
you and drag you into their religious rituals when
they have no authority outside of the District of
Columbia (DC)?

Answer; You VOLUNTEERED AND BECAME
USA PROPERTY by signing onto commercial
contracts with the Demons. Such as Voters
Registration, Passports, Birth Certificates,
Drivers license, and all other documents
where you become a registered Federal Employee
such as signing under penalties of perjury on
the 1040 form and contributing to the biggest
scam ever in North America; the so called
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE INC. (IRS).

Also UN-BE KNOWING to most of you;
you gave your children away upon their birth
to these same Demons. Who is going to tell
your children they are not free that they are
nothing but property of the STATE.

If you're not telling them maybe before they
end up in prison for violating one of the
60,000,000 million US laws with color, your
worshiping 501-C3 IRS controlled church
fathers will tell them the truth. Don't hold
your breath waiting for that to happen either.

ALL CRIMES ARE COMMERCE; ALL
JUDICIAL SYSTEMS, FEDERAL, STATES,
COUNTIES, PARISHES, CITIES ETC. ARE
COMMERCE. ALL COMMERCE IS CONTRACTS.
A CONTRACT IS JURISDICTION.

NO CONTRACT = NO JURISDICTION = NO CASE.
ERGO: QUIT CONTRACTING.

In order to gain immunity for any type of
organization's top managers you incorporate
and make everyone fictions or just pieces of paper.

Under the Corporate rules of today no living
man or woman can take any action into a
commercial court without a representative
acting in the corporation's behalf.

These are called 3rd party Attorneys. Third parties
usually are after the fact and do not have 1st hand
information. These Attorneys do not need to know
law. They only need to know court procedure because
you are already guilty from the start and all that is
left is HOW MUCH can they get (bottom line theft)
from the living body thats standing up for the
corporate fiction name on the paper in front of
the black robed ritual thief or so called judge.

On or about 1971 in Texas and probably every
where else the plea of innocent was removed.
Why? Because in any court setting of today
you are in a commercial court and can only
appear and be heard as a corporate PERSON
with Attorney. A corporate PERSON is a piece
of paper and cannot plead innocent. Only a
living man or woman can plead innocent
therefore everyone going to court as a
defendant is guilty before being proven innocent.

When the living man or woman stands as a
sovereign the courts have no contract to attach
to the commercial paper with the all CAPS
fiction name on it therefore no jurisdiction.

If the court continues to move against you
then somewhere or somehow you the
sovereign have given the court a contract with
presumption or assumption Jurisdiction and
there lye's its contract. Appearing in Court is
a contract in most cases.

To survive you must get away from the dead
horse you have been riding and get on a living one.
Dead is opposite from living just as daylight
and dark therefore you must do something
opposite of what you have been doing. There
are over two million prisoners in North America
and every one of them had an Attorney.
Lotteries have better odds for winning.

What happens if a sovereign files a court
action in a commercial court? Answer NOTHING:
A sovereign cannot be recognized in the
Corporatism Courts of today. A sovereign can
only deal in a Common Law court. Like
the republic of Texas common law courts.
These are the people's courts. Common Law
and Treaty law are superior to all the so
called Constitutional Charters of the corporate
world.

To file a court action in today's inferior courts
you must file as a Corporation against another
Corporation and if you are acting without a
3rd party Attorney the court does not have
to hear anything you enter or say.

A Corporation cannot legally represent itself.
They always ask: "Where is your Attorney" or
state "If you do not appear on date so and so
with an Attorney I will hold you in contempt
of court". These things can not be said or
mean anything to an American standing as a
sovereign outside the corporate court and
under Treaty law.

me By Ed Brannum ©
No assured value, no liability

Posted by: Vicegerent
Abbot
2006-01-19 14:52:17 UTC
Permalink
Abbot) Eldon, in the 1980's you claimed the U.S. courts didn't
understand the "pursuit of happiness" which you claimed exempted
you from taxes. That didn't fly and resulted in your conviction of
tax crimes and the self-destruction of your family.

Then in the 1990's you tried to argue that you had no contract with
the Canadian government and hence couldn't be held to account for
your assault of a traffic cop. When you failed to answer the summons
the cops dragged you off to jail and you were subsequently convicted of
assault.

At your appeal you theory was again soundly rejected.

About this same time you helped Tommy Kennedy develop his theory that
natural persons are not subject to tax law. That failed miserably.

The you concocted the constructive notice method in which one sends
notice to the government claiming, along with steaming heap of detax
BS, that it no longer has authority over the sender of the notice.

When that pile of BS failed both Fred Kyburz on his driving without
insurance charge and Jean Porteau (who was said to have used your
method slavishly) at his tax evasion trial you were forced to rebottle
your snake oil.

This time, not bothering to do what even a detaxer would consider
minimal research you borrowed the straw man method, not realizing it
had failed in the courts several years ago and is generally considered
to be a loser, even by anti-taxers.

You have recently added to you comedic bandwidth by claiming you used
this new method for years at the same time you said you were using the
previously touted 100% effective constructive notice method.

Then adding to the confusion that is detaxing you alternately argued
that courts are "fictitious" then, that they are real when they
rule the way you see fit.

Now you tell us that legal precedent doesn't apply to your method
unless it specifically mentions you and it . . .unless of course you
find some snippet of a court's ruling which you like and . . . then
it applies directly to you, whether it mentions you or not.

Face facts Eldon you are just a snake oil salesmen constantly searching
for new brew.

One suspects you would add this Texas "they are not your court's"
spice to your brew if you though it would sell.
Post by Chris Clay
This is the MOST ridiculous buch of hogwash I've read in at least a year.
Further proof that the ability to log onto the internet is not a sign of
intelligent life on Earth.
Sovereigns' verses inferior Commercialized Courts
within the entire sub-Corporatism STATES/TERRITORIES
UNDER THE UNITED STATES CORPORATION.
By Ed Brannum 12/05/05
I am writing this document to all the Patriots that
have fought the long hard battles in today's
Commercial Courts to find out it was all wasted
time and effort and most leading contenders are
in prison.
I am so tired of watching these good men and
women go down just because they have this tunnel
vision that they know they are smarter than these
Commercial Court British Agents called Attorneys.
It makes no difference how smart you are in a
10 x 10 cell.
You cannot stand as a living man or woman American
sovereign of God in today's fictional corporate courts
acting without the people's creator God. God does not
deal in fiction. He deals only in truth. Therefore I
THESE ARE NOT YOUR COURTS SO STAY OUT OF
THEM.
OR to survive you must stand as a sovereign of
God under international Treaty law. If you do not
take God into a court with you then by entering
without His veil of protection into the dark side
is very dangerous territory for believers.
Non-believers have at it; your turn comes at the
end when you appear before Him the Judge over
all Judges to go through your part of the Book
of Life.
"When you have ridden a dead horse for five
years or more it is time to dismount and get you
a new live horse". By Ed Brannum
Try riding with the republic of Texas; it's alive
and well. To my neighbors outside the Nation
of Texas; your State is a republic from the
beginning so do one simple act by standing up
as a sovereign and take it back by claiming
the land.
The UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT was
officially Commercialized in 1871 under the
United States Statutes at Large 419; FORTY
FIRST CONGRESS SESSION III; CHAPTER 62,
1871; CHAP. LXII. -- An act to provide a
Government for the District of Columbia.
Special Note (Read the last sentence) Section 28.
"And be it further enacted, That the said legislative
assembly shall power to create by general law,
modify, repeal, or amend, within said District,
corporations aggregate for religious, charitable,
educational, industrial, or commercial purposes,
Provided, that the powers of corporations so
created shall be limited to the District of Columbia.
So how do they come into your house and arrest
you and drag you into their religious rituals when
they have no authority outside of the District of
Columbia (DC)?
Answer; You VOLUNTEERED AND BECAME
USA PROPERTY by signing onto commercial
contracts with the Demons. Such as Voters
Registration, Passports, Birth Certificates,
Drivers license, and all other documents
where you become a registered Federal Employee
such as signing under penalties of perjury on
the 1040 form and contributing to the biggest
scam ever in North America; the so called
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE INC. (IRS).
Also UN-BE KNOWING to most of you;
you gave your children away upon their birth
to these same Demons. Who is going to tell
your children they are not free that they are
nothing but property of the STATE.
If you're not telling them maybe before they
end up in prison for violating one of the
60,000,000 million US laws with color, your
worshiping 501-C3 IRS controlled church
fathers will tell them the truth. Don't hold
your breath waiting for that to happen either.
ALL CRIMES ARE COMMERCE; ALL
JUDICIAL SYSTEMS, FEDERAL, STATES,
COUNTIES, PARISHES, CITIES ETC. ARE
COMMERCE. ALL COMMERCE IS CONTRACTS.
A CONTRACT IS JURISDICTION.
NO CONTRACT = NO JURISDICTION = NO CASE.
ERGO: QUIT CONTRACTING.
In order to gain immunity for any type of
organization's top managers you incorporate
and make everyone fictions or just pieces of paper.
Under the Corporate rules of today no living
man or woman can take any action into a
commercial court without a representative
acting in the corporation's behalf.
These are called 3rd party Attorneys. Third parties
usually are after the fact and do not have 1st hand
information. These Attorneys do not need to know
law. They only need to know court procedure because
you are already guilty from the start and all that is
left is HOW MUCH can they get (bottom line theft)
from the living body thats standing up for the
corporate fiction name on the paper in front of
the black robed ritual thief or so called judge.
On or about 1971 in Texas and probably every
where else the plea of innocent was removed.
Why? Because in any court setting of today
you are in a commercial court and can only
appear and be heard as a corporate PERSON
with Attorney. A corporate PERSON is a piece
of paper and cannot plead innocent. Only a
living man or woman can plead innocent
therefore everyone going to court as a
defendant is guilty before being proven innocent.
When the living man or woman stands as a
sovereign the courts have no contract to attach
to the commercial paper with the all CAPS
fiction name on it therefore no jurisdiction.
If the court continues to move against you
then somewhere or somehow you the
sovereign have given the court a contract with
presumption or assumption Jurisdiction and
there lye's its contract. Appearing in Court is
a contract in most cases.
To survive you must get away from the dead
horse you have been riding and get on a living one.
Dead is opposite from living just as daylight
and dark therefore you must do something
opposite of what you have been doing. There
are over two million prisoners in North America
and every one of them had an Attorney.
Lotteries have better odds for winning.
What happens if a sovereign files a court
A sovereign cannot be recognized in the
Corporatism Courts of today. A sovereign can
only deal in a Common Law court. Like
the republic of Texas common law courts.
These are the people's courts. Common Law
and Treaty law are superior to all the so
called Constitutional Charters of the corporate
world.
To file a court action in today's inferior courts
you must file as a Corporation against another
Corporation and if you are acting without a
3rd party Attorney the court does not have
to hear anything you enter or say.
A Corporation cannot legally represent itself.
They always ask: "Where is your Attorney" or
state "If you do not appear on date so and so
with an Attorney I will hold you in contempt
of court". These things can not be said or
mean anything to an American standing as a
sovereign outside the corporate court and
under Treaty law.
me By Ed Brannum ©
No assured value, no liability
Posted by: Vicegerent
Jimmy_For_Freedom
2006-01-19 20:47:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Abbot
Abbot) Eldon, in the 1980's you claimed the U.S. courts didn't
understand the "pursuit of happiness" which you claimed exempted
you from taxes. That didn't fly and resulted in your conviction of
tax crimes and the self-destruction of your family.
Then in the 1990's you tried to argue that you had no contract with
the Canadian government and hence couldn't be held to account for
your assault of a traffic cop. When you failed to answer the summons
the cops dragged you off to jail and you were subsequently convicted of
assault.
At your appeal you theory was again soundly rejected.
About this same time you helped Tommy Kennedy develop his theory that
natural persons are not subject to tax law. That failed miserably.
The you concocted the constructive notice method in which one sends
notice to the government claiming, along with steaming heap of detax
BS, that it no longer has authority over the sender of the notice.
When that pile of BS failed both Fred Kyburz on his driving without
insurance charge and Jean Porteau (who was said to have used your
method slavishly) at his tax evasion trial you were forced to rebottle
your snake oil.
This time, not bothering to do what even a detaxer would consider
minimal research you borrowed the straw man method, not realizing it
had failed in the courts several years ago and is generally considered
to be a loser, even by anti-taxers.
You have recently added to you comedic bandwidth by claiming you used
this new method for years at the same time you said you were using the
previously touted 100% effective constructive notice method.
Then adding to the confusion that is detaxing you alternately argued
that courts are "fictitious" then, that they are real when they
rule the way you see fit.
Now you tell us that legal precedent doesn't apply to your method
unless it specifically mentions you and it . . .unless of course you
find some snippet of a court's ruling which you like and . . . then
it applies directly to you, whether it mentions you or not.
Face facts Eldon you are just a snake oil salesmen constantly searching
for new brew.
One suspects you would add this Texas "they are not your court's"
spice to your brew if you though it would sell.
Is Jack'O making sense to anyone?
Post by Abbot
Post by Chris Clay
This is the MOST ridiculous buch of hogwash I've read in at least a year.
Further proof that the ability to log onto the internet is not a sign of
intelligent life on Earth.
Sovereigns' verses inferior Commercialized Courts
within the entire sub-Corporatism STATES/TERRITORIES
UNDER THE UNITED STATES CORPORATION.
By Ed Brannum 12/05/05
I am writing this document to all the Patriots that
have fought the long hard battles in today's
Commercial Courts to find out it was all wasted
time and effort and most leading contenders are
in prison.
I am so tired of watching these good men and
women go down just because they have this tunnel
vision that they know they are smarter than these
Commercial Court British Agents called Attorneys.
It makes no difference how smart you are in a
10 x 10 cell.
You cannot stand as a living man or woman American
sovereign of God in today's fictional corporate courts
acting without the people's creator God. God does not
deal in fiction. He deals only in truth. Therefore I
THESE ARE NOT YOUR COURTS SO STAY OUT OF
THEM.
OR to survive you must stand as a sovereign of
God under international Treaty law. If you do not
take God into a court with you then by entering
without His veil of protection into the dark side
is very dangerous territory for believers.
Non-believers have at it; your turn comes at the
end when you appear before Him the Judge over
all Judges to go through your part of the Book
of Life.
"When you have ridden a dead horse for five
years or more it is time to dismount and get you
a new live horse". By Ed Brannum
Try riding with the republic of Texas; it's alive
and well. To my neighbors outside the Nation
of Texas; your State is a republic from the
beginning so do one simple act by standing up
as a sovereign and take it back by claiming
the land.
The UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT was
officially Commercialized in 1871 under the
United States Statutes at Large 419; FORTY
FIRST CONGRESS SESSION III; CHAPTER 62,
1871; CHAP. LXII. -- An act to provide a
Government for the District of Columbia.
Special Note (Read the last sentence) Section 28.
"And be it further enacted, That the said legislative
assembly shall power to create by general law,
modify, repeal, or amend, within said District,
corporations aggregate for religious, charitable,
educational, industrial, or commercial purposes,
Provided, that the powers of corporations so
created shall be limited to the District of Columbia.
So how do they come into your house and arrest
you and drag you into their religious rituals when
they have no authority outside of the District of
Columbia (DC)?
Answer; You VOLUNTEERED AND BECAME
USA PROPERTY by signing onto commercial
contracts with the Demons. Such as Voters
Registration, Passports, Birth Certificates,
Drivers license, and all other documents
where you become a registered Federal Employee
such as signing under penalties of perjury on
the 1040 form and contributing to the biggest
scam ever in North America; the so called
INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE INC. (IRS).
Also UN-BE KNOWING to most of you;
you gave your children away upon their birth
to these same Demons. Who is going to tell
your children they are not free that they are
nothing but property of the STATE.
If you're not telling them maybe before they
end up in prison for violating one of the
60,000,000 million US laws with color, your
worshiping 501-C3 IRS controlled church
fathers will tell them the truth. Don't hold
your breath waiting for that to happen either.
ALL CRIMES ARE COMMERCE; ALL
JUDICIAL SYSTEMS, FEDERAL, STATES,
COUNTIES, PARISHES, CITIES ETC. ARE
COMMERCE. ALL COMMERCE IS CONTRACTS.
A CONTRACT IS JURISDICTION.
NO CONTRACT = NO JURISDICTION = NO CASE.
ERGO: QUIT CONTRACTING.
In order to gain immunity for any type of
organization's top managers you incorporate
and make everyone fictions or just pieces of paper.
Under the Corporate rules of today no living
man or woman can take any action into a
commercial court without a representative
acting in the corporation's behalf.
These are called 3rd party Attorneys. Third parties
usually are after the fact and do not have 1st hand
information. These Attorneys do not need to know
law. They only need to know court procedure because
you are already guilty from the start and all that is
left is HOW MUCH can they get (bottom line theft)
from the living body thats standing up for the
corporate fiction name on the paper in front of
the black robed ritual thief or so called judge.
On or about 1971 in Texas and probably every
where else the plea of innocent was removed.
Why? Because in any court setting of today
you are in a commercial court and can only
appear and be heard as a corporate PERSON
with Attorney. A corporate PERSON is a piece
of paper and cannot plead innocent. Only a
living man or woman can plead innocent
therefore everyone going to court as a
defendant is guilty before being proven innocent.
When the living man or woman stands as a
sovereign the courts have no contract to attach
to the commercial paper with the all CAPS
fiction name on it therefore no jurisdiction.
If the court continues to move against you
then somewhere or somehow you the
sovereign have given the court a contract with
presumption or assumption Jurisdiction and
there lye's its contract. Appearing in Court is
a contract in most cases.
To survive you must get away from the dead
horse you have been riding and get on a living one.
Dead is opposite from living just as daylight
and dark therefore you must do something
opposite of what you have been doing. There
are over two million prisoners in North America
and every one of them had an Attorney.
Lotteries have better odds for winning.
What happens if a sovereign files a court
A sovereign cannot be recognized in the
Corporatism Courts of today. A sovereign can
only deal in a Common Law court. Like
the republic of Texas common law courts.
These are the people's courts. Common Law
and Treaty law are superior to all the so
called Constitutional Charters of the corporate
world.
To file a court action in today's inferior courts
you must file as a Corporation against another
Corporation and if you are acting without a
3rd party Attorney the court does not have
to hear anything you enter or say.
A Corporation cannot legally represent itself.
They always ask: "Where is your Attorney" or
state "If you do not appear on date so and so
with an Attorney I will hold you in contempt
of court". These things can not be said or
mean anything to an American standing as a
sovereign outside the corporate court and
under Treaty law.
me By Ed Brannum ©
No assured value, no liability
Posted by: Vicegerent
Abbot
2006-01-19 20:56:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jimmy_For_Freedom
Post by Abbot
Abbot) Eldon, in the 1980's you claimed the U.S. courts didn't
understand the "pursuit of happiness" which you claimed exempted
you from taxes. That didn't fly and resulted in your conviction of
tax crimes and the self-destruction of your family.
Then in the 1990's you tried to argue that you had no contract with
the Canadian government and hence couldn't be held to account for
your assault of a traffic cop. When you failed to answer the summons
the cops dragged you off to jail and you were subsequently convicted of
assault.
At your appeal you theory was again soundly rejected.
About this same time you helped Tommy Kennedy develop his theory that
natural persons are not subject to tax law. That failed miserably.
The you concocted the constructive notice method in which one sends
notice to the government claiming, along with steaming heap of detax
BS, that it no longer has authority over the sender of the notice.
When that pile of BS failed both Fred Kyburz on his driving without
insurance charge and Jean Porteau (who was said to have used your
method slavishly) at his tax evasion trial you were forced to rebottle
your snake oil.
This time, not bothering to do what even a detaxer would consider
minimal research you borrowed the straw man method, not realizing it
had failed in the courts several years ago and is generally considered
to be a loser, even by anti-taxers.
You have recently added to you comedic bandwidth by claiming you used
this new method for years at the same time you said you were using the
previously touted 100% effective constructive notice method.
Then adding to the confusion that is detaxing you alternately argued
that courts are "fictitious" then, that they are real when they
rule the way you see fit.
Now you tell us that legal precedent doesn't apply to your method
unless it specifically mentions you and it . . .unless of course you
find some snippet of a court's ruling which you like and . . . then
it applies directly to you, whether it mentions you or not.
Face facts Eldon you are just a snake oil salesmen constantly searching
for new brew.
One suspects you would add this Texas "they are not your court's"
spice to your brew if you though it would sell.
Is Jack'O making sense to anyone?
Abbot 2) Nobody expects you to understand. At least you are admitting
it is all beyond you. That's step in the right direction. Like I said,
Jimmy all you are trying to do is paste over the questions Eldon can't
address lest he go insane.

You are too stupid to realize that the next time you halfwit master
tries to use bastardized case law to bolster his insane theories the
question comes in play again.

It's called checkmate, Jimmy_sh*t_forbrains.
Post by Jimmy_For_Freedom
Post by Abbot
Post by Chris Clay
This is the MOST ridiculous buch of hogwash I've read in at least a year.
Further proof that the ability to log onto the internet is not a sign of
intelligent life on Earth.
Jimmy_For_Freedom
2006-01-19 21:04:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Abbot
Post by Jimmy_For_Freedom
Post by Abbot
Abbot) Eldon, in the 1980's you claimed the U.S. courts didn't
understand the "pursuit of happiness" which you claimed exempted
you from taxes. That didn't fly and resulted in your conviction of
tax crimes and the self-destruction of your family.
Then in the 1990's you tried to argue that you had no contract with
the Canadian government and hence couldn't be held to account for
your assault of a traffic cop. When you failed to answer the summons
the cops dragged you off to jail and you were subsequently convicted of
assault.
At your appeal you theory was again soundly rejected.
About this same time you helped Tommy Kennedy develop his theory that
natural persons are not subject to tax law. That failed miserably.
The you concocted the constructive notice method in which one sends
notice to the government claiming, along with steaming heap of detax
BS, that it no longer has authority over the sender of the notice.
When that pile of BS failed both Fred Kyburz on his driving without
insurance charge and Jean Porteau (who was said to have used your
method slavishly) at his tax evasion trial you were forced to rebottle
your snake oil.
This time, not bothering to do what even a detaxer would consider
minimal research you borrowed the straw man method, not realizing it
had failed in the courts several years ago and is generally considered
to be a loser, even by anti-taxers.
You have recently added to you comedic bandwidth by claiming you used
this new method for years at the same time you said you were using the
previously touted 100% effective constructive notice method.
Then adding to the confusion that is detaxing you alternately argued
that courts are "fictitious" then, that they are real when they
rule the way you see fit.
Now you tell us that legal precedent doesn't apply to your method
unless it specifically mentions you and it . . .unless of course you
find some snippet of a court's ruling which you like and . . . then
it applies directly to you, whether it mentions you or not.
Face facts Eldon you are just a snake oil salesmen constantly searching
for new brew.
One suspects you would add this Texas "they are not your court's"
spice to your brew if you though it would sell.
Is Jack'O making sense to anyone?
Abbot 2) Nobody expects you to understand. At least you are admitting
it is all beyond you. That's step in the right direction. Like I said,
Jimmy all you are trying to do is paste over the questions Eldon can't
address lest he go insane.
You are too stupid to realize that the next time you halfwit master
tries to use bastardized case law to bolster his insane theories the
question comes in play again.
It's called checkmate, Jimmy_sh*t_forbrains.
Are you challenging me to chess match? I was always pretty good at that
sport.
Post by Abbot
Post by Jimmy_For_Freedom
Post by Abbot
Post by Chris Clay
This is the MOST ridiculous buch of hogwash I've read in at least a year.
Further proof that the ability to log onto the internet is not a sign of
intelligent life on Earth.
Abbot
2006-01-19 21:15:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jimmy_For_Freedom
Post by Abbot
Post by Jimmy_For_Freedom
Post by Abbot
Abbot) Eldon, in the 1980's you claimed the U.S. courts didn't
understand the "pursuit of happiness" which you claimed exempted
you from taxes. That didn't fly and resulted in your conviction of
tax crimes and the self-destruction of your family.
Then in the 1990's you tried to argue that you had no contract with
the Canadian government and hence couldn't be held to account for
your assault of a traffic cop. When you failed to answer the summons
the cops dragged you off to jail and you were subsequently convicted of
assault.
At your appeal you theory was again soundly rejected.
About this same time you helped Tommy Kennedy develop his theory that
natural persons are not subject to tax law. That failed miserably.
The you concocted the constructive notice method in which one sends
notice to the government claiming, along with steaming heap of detax
BS, that it no longer has authority over the sender of the notice.
When that pile of BS failed both Fred Kyburz on his driving without
insurance charge and Jean Porteau (who was said to have used your
method slavishly) at his tax evasion trial you were forced to rebottle
your snake oil.
This time, not bothering to do what even a detaxer would consider
minimal research you borrowed the straw man method, not realizing it
had failed in the courts several years ago and is generally considered
to be a loser, even by anti-taxers.
You have recently added to you comedic bandwidth by claiming you used
this new method for years at the same time you said you were using the
previously touted 100% effective constructive notice method.
Then adding to the confusion that is detaxing you alternately argued
that courts are "fictitious" then, that they are real when they
rule the way you see fit.
Now you tell us that legal precedent doesn't apply to your method
unless it specifically mentions you and it . . .unless of course you
find some snippet of a court's ruling which you like and . . . then
it applies directly to you, whether it mentions you or not.
Face facts Eldon you are just a snake oil salesmen constantly searching
for new brew.
One suspects you would add this Texas "they are not your court's"
spice to your brew if you though it would sell.
Is Jack'O making sense to anyone?
Abbot 2) Nobody expects you to understand. At least you are admitting
it is all beyond you. That's step in the right direction. Like I said,
Jimmy all you are trying to do is paste over the questions Eldon can't
address lest he go insane.
You are too stupid to realize that the next time you halfwit master
tries to use bastardized case law to bolster his insane theories the
question comes in play again.
It's called checkmate, Jimmy_sh*t_forbrains.
Are you challenging me to chess match? I was always pretty good at that
sport.
Abbot 3) Yeah, you played on the little bus, right?

If you will note Eldon can't really pretend that the courts are
fiction any more because, in contradiction, he uses his highly altered
versions of their rulings as real to bolster his theories.

That's why you see him fixate on ". . proven effective for both
Canada and America. . proven effective for both Canada and America. .
proven effective for both Canada and America. . proven effective for
both Canada and America. . .".

Rain man has little else to say.

Now he'll have a whale of a time pretending that only some case law
applies to him.

You see Jimmy, I can tell you the next several moves because there
isn't much you and you insane master can do about it anyway.

It's sweet, eh?
Post by Jimmy_For_Freedom
Post by Abbot
Post by Jimmy_For_Freedom
Post by Abbot
Post by Chris Clay
This is the MOST ridiculous buch of hogwash I've read in at least a year.
Further proof that the ability to log onto the internet is not a sign of
intelligent life on Earth.
Jimmy_For_Freedom
2006-01-19 21:36:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Abbot
Post by Jimmy_For_Freedom
Post by Abbot
Post by Jimmy_For_Freedom
Post by Abbot
Abbot) Eldon, in the 1980's you claimed the U.S. courts didn't
understand the "pursuit of happiness" which you claimed exempted
you from taxes. That didn't fly and resulted in your conviction of
tax crimes and the self-destruction of your family.
Then in the 1990's you tried to argue that you had no contract with
the Canadian government and hence couldn't be held to account for
your assault of a traffic cop. When you failed to answer the summons
the cops dragged you off to jail and you were subsequently convicted of
assault.
At your appeal you theory was again soundly rejected.
About this same time you helped Tommy Kennedy develop his theory that
natural persons are not subject to tax law. That failed miserably.
The you concocted the constructive notice method in which one sends
notice to the government claiming, along with steaming heap of detax
BS, that it no longer has authority over the sender of the notice.
When that pile of BS failed both Fred Kyburz on his driving without
insurance charge and Jean Porteau (who was said to have used your
method slavishly) at his tax evasion trial you were forced to rebottle
your snake oil.
This time, not bothering to do what even a detaxer would consider
minimal research you borrowed the straw man method, not realizing it
had failed in the courts several years ago and is generally considered
to be a loser, even by anti-taxers.
You have recently added to you comedic bandwidth by claiming you used
this new method for years at the same time you said you were using the
previously touted 100% effective constructive notice method.
Then adding to the confusion that is detaxing you alternately argued
that courts are "fictitious" then, that they are real when they
rule the way you see fit.
Now you tell us that legal precedent doesn't apply to your method
unless it specifically mentions you and it . . .unless of course you
find some snippet of a court's ruling which you like and . . . then
it applies directly to you, whether it mentions you or not.
Face facts Eldon you are just a snake oil salesmen constantly searching
for new brew.
One suspects you would add this Texas "they are not your court's"
spice to your brew if you though it would sell.
Is Jack'O making sense to anyone?
Abbot 2) Nobody expects you to understand. At least you are admitting
it is all beyond you. That's step in the right direction. Like I said,
Jimmy all you are trying to do is paste over the questions Eldon can't
address lest he go insane.
You are too stupid to realize that the next time you halfwit master
tries to use bastardized case law to bolster his insane theories the
question comes in play again.
It's called checkmate, Jimmy_sh*t_forbrains.
Are you challenging me to chess match? I was always pretty good at that
sport.
Abbot 3) Yeah, you played on the little bus, right?
If you will note Eldon can't really pretend that the courts are
fiction any more because, in contradiction, he uses his highly altered
versions of their rulings as real to bolster his theories.
That's why you see him fixate on ". . proven effective for both
Canada and America. . proven effective for both Canada and America. .
proven effective for both Canada and America. . proven effective for
both Canada and America. . .".
Rain man has little else to say.
Now he'll have a whale of a time pretending that only some case law
applies to him.
You see Jimmy, I can tell you the next several moves because there
isn't much you and you insane master can do about it anyway.
It's sweet, eh?
Eh? You should know what fixating is all about. You're proving it
everyday.
Post by Abbot
Post by Jimmy_For_Freedom
Post by Abbot
Post by Jimmy_For_Freedom
Post by Abbot
Post by Chris Clay
This is the MOST ridiculous buch of hogwash I've read in at least a year.
Further proof that the ability to log onto the internet is not a sign of
intelligent life on Earth.
Abbot
2006-01-19 21:43:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jimmy_For_Freedom
Post by Abbot
Post by Jimmy_For_Freedom
Post by Abbot
Post by Jimmy_For_Freedom
Post by Abbot
Abbot) Eldon, in the 1980's you claimed the U.S. courts didn't
understand the "pursuit of happiness" which you claimed exempted
you from taxes. That didn't fly and resulted in your conviction of
tax crimes and the self-destruction of your family.
Then in the 1990's you tried to argue that you had no contract with
the Canadian government and hence couldn't be held to account for
your assault of a traffic cop. When you failed to answer the summons
the cops dragged you off to jail and you were subsequently convicted of
assault.
At your appeal you theory was again soundly rejected.
About this same time you helped Tommy Kennedy develop his theory that
natural persons are not subject to tax law. That failed miserably.
The you concocted the constructive notice method in which one sends
notice to the government claiming, along with steaming heap of detax
BS, that it no longer has authority over the sender of the notice.
When that pile of BS failed both Fred Kyburz on his driving without
insurance charge and Jean Porteau (who was said to have used your
method slavishly) at his tax evasion trial you were forced to rebottle
your snake oil.
This time, not bothering to do what even a detaxer would consider
minimal research you borrowed the straw man method, not realizing it
had failed in the courts several years ago and is generally considered
to be a loser, even by anti-taxers.
You have recently added to you comedic bandwidth by claiming you used
this new method for years at the same time you said you were using the
previously touted 100% effective constructive notice method.
Then adding to the confusion that is detaxing you alternately argued
that courts are "fictitious" then, that they are real when they
rule the way you see fit.
Now you tell us that legal precedent doesn't apply to your method
unless it specifically mentions you and it . . .unless of course you
find some snippet of a court's ruling which you like and . . . then
it applies directly to you, whether it mentions you or not.
Face facts Eldon you are just a snake oil salesmen constantly searching
for new brew.
One suspects you would add this Texas "they are not your court's"
spice to your brew if you though it would sell.
Is Jack'O making sense to anyone?
Abbot 2) Nobody expects you to understand. At least you are admitting
it is all beyond you. That's step in the right direction. Like I said,
Jimmy all you are trying to do is paste over the questions Eldon can't
address lest he go insane.
You are too stupid to realize that the next time you halfwit master
tries to use bastardized case law to bolster his insane theories the
question comes in play again.
It's called checkmate, Jimmy_sh*t_forbrains.
Are you challenging me to chess match? I was always pretty good at that
sport.
Abbot 3) Yeah, you played on the little bus, right?
If you will note Eldon can't really pretend that the courts are
fiction any more because, in contradiction, he uses his highly altered
versions of their rulings as real to bolster his theories.
That's why you see him fixate on ". . proven effective for both
Canada and America. . proven effective for both Canada and America. .
proven effective for both Canada and America. . proven effective for
both Canada and America. . .".
Rain man has little else to say.
Now he'll have a whale of a time pretending that only some case law
applies to him.
You see Jimmy, I can tell you the next several moves because there
isn't much you and you insane master can do about it anyway.
It's sweet, eh?
Eh? You should know what fixating is all about. You're proving it
everyday.
Abbot 4) Well it's paying off for me and not for your master who is
reduced to babbling. . .and all you can do is be cute.

Do you want a reminder of this day the next time your drool cup, Rain
man, idiot master starts selectively using case law to bolster his
insane theory?
Post by Jimmy_For_Freedom
Post by Abbot
Post by Jimmy_For_Freedom
Post by Abbot
Post by Jimmy_For_Freedom
Post by Abbot
Post by Chris Clay
This is the MOST ridiculous buch of hogwash I've read in at least a year.
Further proof that the ability to log onto the internet is not a sign of
intelligent life on Earth.
Jimmy_for_freedom
2006-01-19 22:31:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Abbot
Post by Jimmy_For_Freedom
Post by Abbot
Post by Jimmy_For_Freedom
Post by Abbot
Post by Jimmy_For_Freedom
Post by Abbot
Abbot) Eldon, in the 1980's you claimed the U.S. courts didn't
understand the "pursuit of happiness" which you claimed exempted
you from taxes. That didn't fly and resulted in your conviction of
tax crimes and the self-destruction of your family.
Then in the 1990's you tried to argue that you had no contract with
the Canadian government and hence couldn't be held to account for
your assault of a traffic cop. When you failed to answer the summons
the cops dragged you off to jail and you were subsequently convicted of
assault.
At your appeal you theory was again soundly rejected.
About this same time you helped Tommy Kennedy develop his theory that
natural persons are not subject to tax law. That failed miserably.
The you concocted the constructive notice method in which one sends
notice to the government claiming, along with steaming heap of detax
BS, that it no longer has authority over the sender of the notice.
When that pile of BS failed both Fred Kyburz on his driving without
insurance charge and Jean Porteau (who was said to have used your
method slavishly) at his tax evasion trial you were forced to rebottle
your snake oil.
This time, not bothering to do what even a detaxer would consider
minimal research you borrowed the straw man method, not realizing it
had failed in the courts several years ago and is generally considered
to be a loser, even by anti-taxers.
You have recently added to you comedic bandwidth by claiming you used
this new method for years at the same time you said you were using the
previously touted 100% effective constructive notice method.
Then adding to the confusion that is detaxing you alternately argued
that courts are "fictitious" then, that they are real when they
rule the way you see fit.
Now you tell us that legal precedent doesn't apply to your method
unless it specifically mentions you and it . . .unless of course you
find some snippet of a court's ruling which you like and . . . then
it applies directly to you, whether it mentions you or not.
Face facts Eldon you are just a snake oil salesmen constantly searching
for new brew.
One suspects you would add this Texas "they are not your court's"
spice to your brew if you though it would sell.
Is Jack'O making sense to anyone?
Abbot 2) Nobody expects you to understand. At least you are admitting
it is all beyond you. That's step in the right direction. Like I said,
Jimmy all you are trying to do is paste over the questions Eldon can't
address lest he go insane.
You are too stupid to realize that the next time you halfwit master
tries to use bastardized case law to bolster his insane theories the
question comes in play again.
It's called checkmate, Jimmy_sh*t_forbrains.
Are you challenging me to chess match? I was always pretty good at that
sport.
Abbot 3) Yeah, you played on the little bus, right?
If you will note Eldon can't really pretend that the courts are
fiction any more because, in contradiction, he uses his highly altered
versions of their rulings as real to bolster his theories.
That's why you see him fixate on ". . proven effective for both
Canada and America. . proven effective for both Canada and America. .
proven effective for both Canada and America. . proven effective for
both Canada and America. . .".
Rain man has little else to say.
Now he'll have a whale of a time pretending that only some case law
applies to him.
You see Jimmy, I can tell you the next several moves because there
isn't much you and you insane master can do about it anyway.
It's sweet, eh?
Eh? You should know what fixating is all about. You're proving it
everyday.
Abbot 4) Well it's paying off for me and not for your master who is
reduced to babbling. . .and all you can do is be cute.
So you admit to stooping to any low level in order gain a imaginary
hollow victory.
Post by Abbot
Do you want a reminder of this day the next time your drool cup, Rain
man, idiot master starts selectively using case law to bolster his
insane theory?
Post by Jimmy_For_Freedom
Post by Abbot
Post by Jimmy_For_Freedom
Post by Abbot
Post by Jimmy_For_Freedom
Post by Abbot
Post by Chris Clay
This is the MOST ridiculous buch of hogwash I've read in at least a year.
Further proof that the ability to log onto the internet is not a sign of
intelligent life on Earth.
Loading...