Apr 26 2014

Forgive? Really?

Published by under Knowing Who You Are

I just heard Elissa Hawke’s interview with Sherry Peel Jackson, wherein she mentions me.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8_OzgeBm8I

Her website is: http://elissahawke.blogspot.ca


She mentions that part of my book is based upon ACIM, which is accurate, yet, as I have since become suspicious of those texts, she prompted me to write this.  Not only do I question the strange circumstances under which the texts came to be published, but also, over the years, I’ve observed the circumstances under which we either do or do not forgive.


When I realized that ALL propaganda is about 90% truth –for the purpose of gaining our confidence– and the final 10% is the scam, I began to see that same final 10% in ACIM. When I took another look at it, about 3 years ago, and its prime theory –that of forgiveness– I was forced to ask: Who benefits?  The popular thinking is that we all do, as the result is peace of mind and peace with our fellow man.  I did believe this until I began to discover otherwise.


I noticed it first within myself; then I noticed the hypocrisy of other people who claimed to have forgiven someone, yet, by their deeds, revealed that they had not.  A year ago, I heard a woman lecture about forgiving a man who had held her daughter for ransom and, in the months it took her to raise the ransom, her daughter’s health was destroyed.  The woman spoke of her rage, torment, grief, etc. but found that the only way to escape how she felt was to forgive him. I might have believed her had I not overheard what she had to say, to a select group, after the lecture.  There is no question that very few of us can come to terms with anyone who has caused us huge harm or loss. Even for cases of very little harm or loss, it seems we cannot forgive without, at least, an apology.


Again, I wondered, then, who, if not we, benefits from this concept?  For all the horrors that people have suffered at the hands of the Vatican/Crown/Bank and all their subsidiary  agencies (the list is endless), if they have convinced us to “forgive” and that “love is the answer whatever the question”, then, their intent and hope is that, when we figure out the details of this phenomenal abuse, we might just overlook the fact that, were the situation  reversed, we would be severely punished.  We have all heard the cliché, “If men ran their businesses the way the government operates, they would be out of business in a day.”  So, I wonder why we are being taught to forgive.  Forgiveness is neither instinctive nor a natural solution to having been harmed.  No animal forgives the one who abuses it.


In season 4, episode 6 of Boston Legal –the funniest, most brilliant TV show, ever– we hear Alan Shore defend a woman who killed her daughter’s murderer.  Please do not miss this.


Go to:  18:38-21:35,  then,  30:05-33:30


We must “take the law into our own hands” and forget all about Statute.  I do not advocate ‘murder’ however, keep in mind that the definition of murder is the “senseless killing” of another.  What must occur is the “sensible” putting out of commission, those who are destroying us.


“Man possesses the Natural Right to defend himself, from violence, with any amount of force necessary to stop the attack, up to and including deadly force.” –Mark Passio

THAT, not “love, light, and peace”, IS Natural Law.


Gilbert & Sullivan, in The Mikado, say “… let the punishment fit the crime.” THIS, and only this, is where a “jury of one’s peers” comes into play.  Jurors must have the same qualities, experiences, and knowledge of the man who is accused; i.e.: knowing that no man can be charged, 1. by a legal fiction; or, 2.  under Statute.  That would be the end of all court cases, except claims by one man against another.  Those of us who have been harmed must assemble, and do whatever is necessary to take down the insipid, stupid people who work for and protect legal fictions, and that their job is to cause us harm and loss.  I often wonder if people truly grasp what types of low-lifes we all are having to deal with every damn day.


We can no longer simply “stay out of their way”; they are actively and deliberately intruding in our lives and attacking us.  We all admit to feeling slight anxiety when we see a cop car.  This was unheard of until 30 years ago; in part, because we don’t see cops anywhere BUT in cars.  Cops used to mozy the streets of town, chatting with vendors and townsfolk.  I have lived in a several small towns, over the past 30 years and have not once seen a cop walking his beat, looking for people whom he can assist.  Prior to that, I was stopped by cops, at least 6 times that I can recall, and all were friendly and helpful, and not just because I was cuter then than I am now.


Now see this:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kX0Y5jv6tlM

It warms the cockles of your hearts, doesn’t it?   So, get a megaphone and yell this at them, “Whatever you do to me, you can count on someone doing that to your children.”


Certainly, we forgive people in our lives whom we love and with whom we want to continue a friendship, but what triggers it?  An apology.  Prior to an apology, the matter is still “out there –in the ether”. Without an apology, the matter cannot be put to rest and, in those cases, as much as people like to say they have forgiven, they have not.  Most of us do have compassion, but even that is short-lived if the offender shows no remorse. We are given NO compassion by the ones who judge us.


True, in a sense, all our behaviour is forgivable, as most of it is simply due to our traumatic childhood programming. But we, the people, get punished for our behaviour, whilst we cannot even access those who deliberately damage the planet and the people on it. We must NOT forgive that, as doing so is utterly illogical. We must end this by causing them as much fear, harm, and loss as they have caused us.  It is NOT up to God to judge; it is up to us; and Jesus is NOT coming to play ‘saviour’; it is we who must save us from those who are doing the damage.  For millennia, people have been praying to God, “Thy will be done on Earth”, so, either they are being completely ignored, by “God”, or what we’re experiencing IS, indeed, God’s will, in which case, God is Evil. Jesus’ “second coming” is just more propaganda from those who want us to continue to WAIT and DO NOTHING.  Christians have been phenomenally duped by those whose intent it is to destroy not only us but also the entire planet.


I don’t know why we’re here and I’d bet no one else knows, either.  “Forgiveness” was presented to us by psychopaths, to convince us –once we caught onto their fraud– to forgive them, rather than hang them up by their balls which is what they deserve. Well, we’ve caught on, so now it’s time to round them up.

No responses yet

Mar 10 2014

If it isn’t simple, it isn’t accurate.

Published by under Knowing Who You Are


Lately, I’ve been reading ‘murder mysteries’.  Invariably, people are dragged into the cop-shop and interrogated.  When I read how people answer the infuriating questions, I always think: Hell, I wouldn’t have answered that question.  I figure that the mere fact that the cops are asking any questions, at all, proves that they don’t actually know if the culprit murdered anyone, not to mention, isn’t this the job of a prosecutor in court?  Isn’t it he who ought to be asking the questions?  It’s all just more drama for them –thinking of creative ways to get someone to admit his guilt, only to fill their days because they have nothing more constructive to do.  


Once these people are in court, they are not only asked the same questions asked previously but also now to answer “under oath”.  So as not to lie under oath, people say what’s true. Then, the prosecutor says, “But that’s not what you told the police. Did you lie to the police?  How can we believe anything you say, now?”  I’m always stunned that the alleged culprits don’t know how to respond to that idiocy.  It’s so damn obvious:  “Are you claiming there is a law against lying to police?  If so, prove it.  Was I “under oath”, then?  Since you knew you would be asking me the same questions, now, why was I asked any questions, then?  Wasn’t it so you can use that information against me?  Isn’t this why you actually warn us, “anything you say will be used against you”?  No one is obliged to answer hired thugs who are employed by corporations.  If we had an actual government who hired real peace officers, then I expect we would be bound to answer their questions, but not when the purpose is trick people into incriminations and false confessions.  Don’t talk to police, other than to say, “Am I going to have to answer these questions in court?  If so, I’ll wait and tell my story, then.”


When I read how people are treated, I always think, I would have said, “You say I murdered someone?  Prove it.  No; you don’t get to ask me questions.  You wouldn’t have brought me in if you didn’t think I did it, so, what makes you think I did it?  If what you think doesn’t prove I did it, that’s called ‘reasonable doubt’.  Sorry, you lose.”


None of us has to explain a damn thing.  In ANY case, all we have to say is, “You got a claim?  Alright, prove it.”  Their questions are ludicrous and a waste of our time.  “Where were you on the night of the murder?  Did you receive money?  Were you driving 120 in a 90 zone?  Did you use that credit card to obtain goods?  Were you wearing your seat belt?  Did the house get paid for you?  Did you stop for that red light?   Did you use the bank loan for your schooling?”  IMMATERIAL!  IRRELEVANT!  The ONLY thing we have to ask is, “You say I owe you?  Prove it. You claim I didn’t have on a seatbelt?  Prove it.  You claim that the bank paid for my house?  Prove it.  You claim I murdered someone?  Prove it.”


I always imagined being stopped by a cop who might say, “Do you know why I stopped you?”  “Are you asking me if I can read your mind?”  “I clocked you at 120 in a 90 zone.”  “How are you going to prove that?”  “I got you on radar.”  “How are you going to prove, three weeks from now, that the detector even works, never mind that you didn’t fabricate that?”  Or, how about those camera trucks. How can they prove that it wasn’t photo-shopped?  The burden of proof is always on the accuser.  Answering questions only fuels them.  If they think we violated a statute –not that any of them apply to us, anyway– it is their job, and I do mean their job, to PROVE IT.


I am certain that we so complicate matters, by saying anything other than “prove it”.  In a bank case, it would be “Yeh?  Says who?”  “The attorney for the bank.”  “What’s his name?”  “Mr. Smith”  “Alright, Mr. Smith; prove I owe you money.”   “Well, you don’t owe me money; you owe the bank.”  “Alright, I’m going to subpoena the bank; what’s its name?”  “Bank of America”  “Alright, have Bank of America in court next week and, if it can speak, have IT prove to me that I owe IT money.”  Her Majesty The Queen (an entity which the Crown hopes we will think has something to do with Elizabeth II, when, really, it is a legal fiction/corporation) has a claim against the NAME.  “Have Elizabeth II show up next week and prove I injured her.”   I realize this sounds idiotic but that is my entire point.  The entire fiasco is idiotic.  For us to be doing/saying anything only proves we are not clear on the concept of their fraud.


If they cannot prove that we owe a legal fiction, that we injured a legal fiction, etc., then, they are out of luck.  Remember, no one can ‘prove’ anything; e.g.: the only way to “prove” our fingerprints are unique is to compare them to every other fingerprint on the planet.  Since it is ‘they’ who started this harassment, then it is ‘they’ who ought to get charged. We must bill them for stopping us, hindering us, and questioning us, as their doing so is subject to a  ‘consultation fee’, at least, and even more for our time.  “Please tell me what it is that makes you think that you, a public servant, have any authority over me, one who funds your salary.”


I don’t know about our having to prove we are not dead; that seems ludicrous to me.  I think the most valuable information we have, now, is that, via intimidation, threat, coercion, indoctrination, e.g.:  “everyone knows you have to have a driver licence” ?!?!?!, somehow, they obtained from us our Power of Attorney.  In their doing so, they have violated our trust. That is Breach of Trust –the only crime there is.  Since a PoA is the document which seems to have clout above all others, I guess we ought to cancel those PoAs, which we unwittingly gave them, and submit ours, proving we have PoA over our commercial affairs.


The only laws which apply to the people are contract law and trust law. We use common law courts to enforce private contract and public trust, by claiming “breach”.  All other “law” is really statute, enforced by fictitious corporations, i.e.: legal fictions, masquerading as Government but NOT Government, and applicable to equally fictitious “persons”, not a man or a woman. As it is impossible for a man to contract with a legal fiction, yet, it IS possible for a public servant to breach our trust in what we thought was a Government, existing solely for our protection, so then, not only could a public agent have NO claim against us, for breach of contract, but also we have EVERY claim against Public Agents, for breach of trust. The Public, via their fraud, has caused us ALL much harm and loss.  We must, first, lay claims against them, not allow them to file charges against us.


Parents are not ‘persuaded’; they are ‘threatened’ to hand over their property, i.e.: signatures, and told that it is for the benefit of their children, yet, it is for the benefit of  Crown agents. The children are already entitled to the benefits which agents claim to be conditional upon the procuring of the BC.  We simply repeat what our parents did. We hand over signatures, allegedly for our benefit, when, actually, we hand our Power of Attorney, for the benefit of Crown agents.


“Ignorance of the law…”  has nothing to do with our responsibility to learn “trust law”.  We “trusted” public servants.  That is the entire point of “trust law” –that a trust is built between us and them who claim to mind our possessions, yet, out of which they deliberately fleeced us.  It is they who are in breach of trust.


What CCC §19, which applies only to ‘them’, means is: those with titles (public entities), who are in breach of the people’s trust, are guilty of defrauding the people and cannot use the excuse that they didn’t know they were defrauding us. They KNOW they are committing fraud!  It has nothing to do with: we were supposed to investigate trust law.  NONE of us had an inkling that those whom we trusted would deliberately breach that trust.


Whenever we discover that there is anyone in our lives whom we cannot trust –e.g. a parent, it is NOT our fault for not having investigated.  We were raised to trust; (no coincidence).  The entire viciousness of the world is based upon the pretence of trust and we all discover, too late in life, that there is NO ONE we can trust.


Conclusion:  there was an intent to defraud when they deliberately set out to gain our trust, knowing we wouldn’t investigate if we trusted them to protect our children and our assets. Then they betrayed that trust for their unjust enrichment.  It was premeditated, that trust was breached, and it was for their profit. That is FRAUD.



“It’s easier to fool people than to convince them they have been fooled.” –Mark Twain

No responses yet

Feb 10 2014

Let’s NOT “give peace a chance”

Published by under Knowing Who You Are


John Lennon, the best-known, recent promoter of peace, continually said, “Give Peace a Chance”.  A decade ago, I wrote that if I hear it on TV, radio, from a politician, or see it in print,  I can count on the opposite being the truth –not quite so.  When Lennon was assassinated, it was because he was promoting peace and, at the time, over 30 years ago, we all figured that the CIA didn’t want anyone promoting peace because they want to promote war.  It is worse than that. The operatives martyred him. John’s death forced us to cling, even more tenaciously, to peace, as, surely, the thugs didn’t want that!  Don’t they want us to believe in their wars? AGAIN, they don’t care what we believe –as long as our belief is not in ourselves.  They care only that we DO NOTHING!


As long as we stay in “peace, love, and light”, we remain powerless to be in opposition to them. They do NOT want us to retaliate, to march into their offices and bodily remove them, to go and talk with the armed members of their society, in order to convince armed forces that, by siding with the psychopaths and fighting us, they are ensuring not only their own slavery but also the enslavement of their children.  We must actively convince the cops and military that if they continue to choose unconsciousness, they are slitting their own throats.


Our thinking that we can love a psychopath into wellness is just New Age nonsense.  We are being harmed by psychopaths and so we must retaliate with force. No longer is it the matter of corporate fraud which upsets me; rather, it is people who continue to live as if corporate fraud is acceptable. It is NOT.  The psychopaths and the willfully blind –people who choose to remain in ignorance, as acquiescent slaves– are our enemy. We actually co-exist with these people –our enemies– pretending they have redeeming characteristics, when it is they who are further entrenching us in our millennia-old enslavement.


The ‘system’ is our enemy and the people in our lives who adhere to the system and, in fact, even defend it, are opting for willful blindness and are, therefore, also, our enemy.




Whereas, Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law.”

Supremacy of God:  This must mean, Natural Law, since God made no laws (LORD God –not Creator God– dictated the 10 Commandments). So, Natural Law  is superior to the Rule of Law, but it seems as if we live in “a nation of laws”;

Rule of Law:  This is man-made Law, which dictates:  “No one is above the law and all are equal before the law”.

1.  This means we all have the same Rights. Since our rights are our Creator-given birth-right, then no man can either “grant” Rights to, or “revoke” Rights from, another.

2.  There is no “law”; there is only Statute. What law-enforcers call “laws” are all just code, act, regulation, etc.  There is no  ‘law’ which is titled, “law”;

“Laws” are something which cannot change –e.g.: “law of gravity”.  Although gravity can be countered with “anti-gravity”, the fact of gravity still remains. This is how we know that there are NO man-made “laws”, only statute, to which no man is subject.  However, it is the ever-changing nature of statute –what’s legal today is illegal tomorrow– that makes the justice system truly insane; even MORE insane than whether or not man is subject to statute.

3.  Since law-enforcers –judges, attorneys, cops, etc. behave both above the law and not equal, to us, before the law, and all of them violate the alleged “law”, with impunity, then, THEY have proven that the Rule of Law no longer exists;


The Law Society can’t have it both ways: neither ‘supremacy of God’ nor “rule of lawexists, so, the preamble to the Constitution, albeit convoluted, is a bloody lie.


As we now see that there is only statute (codes, rules, regulations, ordinances, bylaws, acts, bills, legislations, constitutions, policies, charters, and treaties) which serves only to restrict our Natural, God-given Birth-Rights, then Statute must apply to something other than man.  Statutes apply only to NAMES.


Over the years, we have all vacillated on “who owns the name?”. It’s been the prime question: how did thugs come to believe they have authority over us?  Answer: someone, whom they believe has authority over them, told them, and they foolishly believed it.


We know it is via the NAME.  They create debt in OUR Name, and are holding us as surety, but the eternal question is, how did they manage to get what they believe to be the right to do this?  We all know about the birth certificate is backed by a bond and that the NAME on the BC is what is charged, for the benefit of the public, not us, and then we are made liable for a debt we did not create. Not only that but also no debt could possibly exist, if all debts and charges were handled properly, i.e.: via offset and discharge, respectively.


The NAME was made into a legal fiction, called a “person”, to which all statute applies. NOT ONE Statute applies to “man”.  In only a few acts/codes, is there any definition for person, and NONE for man or woman.  In the BC Motor Vehicle Act the word person is mentioned over 1200 times; in Alberta’s Traffic Safety Act, the word person is mentioned 938 times, however, in the list of 49 definitions, “person” is not defined. Since “person” is to whom the entire Act applies, logic dictates that the word would be defined, if obfuscation were not the motive for the deliberate omission.


If any man or woman (“man”) chooses to identify himself with a NAME which is, again, somehow, under the control of the province/state, whether upon demand or under threat, intimidation, coercion, or even voluntarily, then all 100 million statutes apply to him, yet, if he is smart enough not to identify with a legal fiction/person/NAME on the BC, then, only Natural Law applies to him.


Our holding the BC proves that only we have a right to use the name.  No one can use our (or our parents’) intellectual property without our consent and, since the public has, indeed, used it for their unjust enrichment, it was fraud because their access to the name came only from having deceived and coerced our parents into signing over the name, and intimidating us into obtaining and paying for unnecessary documents. This is extortion, all in order to defraud us of our labour.  The main issue is that there was no full disclosure.  If only the agent, at the hospital had said, “We’re going to set up a trust, in your child’s name, making him the beneficiary, so that any debt he incurs, will be offset as soon as he signs, because he is entitled to his share of Canada’s value (GNP).   But, any sane parent, used to the old way –prior to the bankruptcy of 1933-34– of having to pay debts with cash, would ask, “What’s the catch?”  Due to the fraud, undertaken when parents are not in a state of mind to handle this type of situation, our use of the NAME causes them to think we are the trustees and liable for the accounting, and they made sure that we cannot access the credit of the trust, in order to do so.  So, we had better be very careful not to identify with the name/trusteeship, until we gain control.


From Salhany’s Police Manual: “Refusal of Citizen to Identify Self:  The common law does not require a citizen to identify himself or carry identification of any sort. Therefore, while it may be the mark of a good citizen to identify himself when asked to do so, a police officer must not use force to compel someone to identify himself when he refuses; otherwise, he will be guilty of criminal assault and be liable to vicil damages.”


No officer has the right to demand identification from any man, unless said officer is witness to a breach of common law. This does not mean statute; it means: if there is an injury to a man or damage to his property. Otherwise, officers have the right to request identification, but not demand it. An officer can charge only a NAME so, without that information, a man is not subject to charges under statute.  Since everything, including theft, assault, and murder are under statute, you can see that no man is subject to charges of statute.  Your question ought to be: so, how can a victim of such crimes obtain justice?


As all alleged provincial/state courts operate under statute, and no man can be charged under statute, unless he actively consents or reluctantly acquiesces or tacitly agrees, then, the only way to seek justice is to take the offender into civil court under common law jurisdiction. No man is permitted in any other court and no court has jurisdiction over man.


The best example of this is the OJ Simpson trial. How is it that a jury could not convict Simpson, but his ex-wife’s family could?  Is it because Judge Ito told the jury what verdict to return?  On what grounds?  It is because that case was won in the first few minutes of the trial, specifically, the instant Simpson’s attorney asked, “Which Orenthal James Simpson do you want?”, after Ito called the NAME.  This told Ito that Cochran knew that it was the NAME/a “person” which was charged. No man can be charged in state court; a man can be charged only in civil court which is where Nicole’s family took Simpson.


I have searched for the opening remarks of this trial and cannot find any indication of this.  Only in the news of the day did we see/hear that this is what Cochran asked.  We all know that this sort of information disappears before anyone can take notice (just as the intruder in the queen’s bedroom, in 1982, was a black man, but now, Michael Fagan is the fall guy, as he had sneaked into the palace, previously.  Was the news changed because the black man had actually been invited?) The entire trial, after the first few minutes, was only a dog and pony show, during which advertisers had a field day.


All court cases are about only the drama –acting, script, cast, set design, etc.  They are NOT about justice, clients, or truth. I dated an FBI agent who told me that “all lawyers are just frustrated actors.”  They couldn’t make it on stage so they opted for litigation. The courtroom is their stage.  Like all actors, their ability to act is the crux of whether they win or not, however, their script is almost equally important. Therefore, it is a wise defendant who tells his attorney what is true, as truth will offer him a better script. Truth serves no other purpose in court.  An actor can be great, but a good script determines his win or loss, so he must know what’s true. Give him a better script so that he has more to work with and he will perform better.  Just know that neither truth nor justice matters in fiction and all court cases are in fiction.  If someone is guilty of a true crime (not a statutory commercial crime) and feels the need to hire an attorney, then, he ought to hire a good actor and give him a good script, i.e.: the truth, as truth cannot harm a defendant; however, truth will assist the performer.




I keep hearing, “Money is created out of thin air” or “out of nothing”.  “Money” is NOT “created out of thin air”. Credit, which can be ‘monetized’, is created based upon an IOU –a promise-to-pay, an agreement to payment terms, i.e.: a  security, which can and will be sold, on the securities market. The only requirement, in order for the bank to give us credit, is our agreement to pay, i.e.: a note, which includes: date, payee, amount, and signature. That note is securitized and sold.


Think “pawnbroker”:  We trade an item of value, e.g.: a ring, for cash. If we bring back the cash, we get back the ring. Yet, if, in the meantime, the pawnbroker sells the ring/security to someone else, then we no longer owe the pawnbroker the cash that he gave us, in exchange for the ring, because he already got it. It’s simple. The transaction BEGINS with US: WE bring the value and, in exchange, we receive cash. Since the value we bring to the transaction must equal the value we receive, then, the account books are balanced and the ledgers show zero. Anything but “balanced” would have the auditors down their throats.  Ergo, at the end of the day, there is NO outstanding “debt”. The “Accounts Payable” ledger proves this, but that ledger is well-hidden. Still, nothing is owed.  In such a case, one ought to subpoena the Accounts Payable ledger.


A serious problem arises when one offers his house or car as collateral, i.e.: a secondary security, in the event that we do not “pay back” the alleged loan. In the event that we wake up and realize that we never owed ANY debt, and we opt not to succumb to their fraud, they can steal the collateral which, in this case, is the house or car. This –people waking up to the fraud– along with loss of jobs, increased property taxes, the myth of interest rates, etc. is why the banks are stealing so many houses/cars. (A decade ago, I wrote that property taxes would increase to the point of “unaffordable” and the bank would steal houses, whether or not they were “paid-for” which is now occurring and no questions to the banks are being answered.)


If one is being harassed by a bank, these idiotic questions might be asked, in court:  “Is this your signature?  Did you receive a loan?  How did you buy your property?”  “No; no; and via funds based upon our agreement to exchange my note for your cheque; i.e.: an IOU for an IOU.”  A signature indicates agreement to terms but, since the terms are based upon fraud, then the signature is moot.  No loan took place; it was simply an exchange of credit. It’s not up to us to prove we did or did not receive anything; it is up to the claimant to prove he suffered a loss.  If the bank no longer has the note/agreement, then it was sold and the “debt” was paid. Why would we pay for the thing which was, essentially, pawned, but then sold by the pawnbroker?


If the bank’s books were not balanced at the end of the day on which the alleged “money” was “lent”, then, wouldn’t the auditors have discovered this debt and thrown the “lender” in jail?  Are banks allowed to lend money? or just exchange credit?   Didn’t “lender” and I simply exchange notes of equal value?  Since when would any institution ever give a man a cheque, without getting the equivalent value in advance?  Are you asking if I signed an agreement to “pay back”?  Maybe, but, wasn’t that before I discovered the fraud, which vitiates my agreement?  Show me the Accounts Payable; the part of the ledger which proves that the bank accepted my note as an asset.


How can a live man owe a dead person/legal fiction?  The signature of the witness, on their document, is a wo/man’s; banks can’t sign.  So, who is the live wo/man claiming I owe him/her money?  Whatever wo/man has a claim against me must provide proof that s/he “lent money”, on behalf of the bank, sworn under penalty of perjury, and signed in wet-ink.  You have 10 days.  Your failure to provide sworn proof that a bank lent me money constitutes your agreement that I was never indebted to a bank which operates in fraud.


Where one ought to be vigilant, in this fraudulent fiasco, is not to answer any of their questions.  We’re the ones with the questions. As always, the burden of proof is on the accuser/plaintiff.  They must prove their claim.  If it gets to court, I would continue to re-iterate: this isn’t about ME; this is about your proving your claim that I owe you. Go ahead; I’m waiting.  Since nothing can ever be proven, they’re sunk. The problem, as always, is the court, which always sides with the banks.  I’d let the judge know that he cannot possibly rule in favour of the bank when they have failed to prove their claim.  Getting caught up in their questioning appears as if we are defending ourselves and that is NOT what this is all about.  There is no ‘defending’; it is about their ‘proving’. This is what ALL court cases are about, yet, no one seems to grasp this.




Of all the successes I’ve heard –no matter what the situation– there is one thing they all have in common:  no paper or documents were mailed or filed.  All were won by the spoken word.

I heard that, as of 1676, law is no longer auricular; so, unless it is ‘written’, it has no existence in law (statute).  So, just as with all statute, this also applies to only fictions.  Anything written in 2-D (on paper) is in fiction.  As we are not fiction, we must not deal with paper; we must speak.  Each has its own realm. Dead men tell no tales –meaning fictions cannot speak– and only the living can voice. What the law society writes has meaning to only them, in an illusional, fictitious, flatland (2-D) world. Paper is for their purposes, as a record, so what we write does not exist for them. That is why our paper is always ignored. Statute/paper applies to only them, unless we get trapped in it.  They live in paper; we do not.  They cannot ignore us when we are face-to-face. I’m not suggesting anyone go to court; I am suggesting that we make our paper live, by hand-writing upon it.


We know that when they speak, it is all lies, so we must have them “put it in writing”, since this is all that has any meaning to them. Why would anyone go to court where they are all armed, they lie when they speak, and we cannot voice-record their lies.  We must stop acquiescing to their means of communication. This is why they all hide behind P.O. Boxes. They fear our spoken word.  Remember, a fiction and a live man cannot communicate, ergo, the worthlessness of going to court, not to mention the obvious –it is hazardous to our safety.  That said, we still must resolve issues but we must voice to one who must write. We must not write to fictions; we must not allow fictions to speak to us.


“Inasmuch as every government is an artificial person, an abstraction, and a creature of the mind only, a government can interface only with other artificial persons. The imaginary, having neither actuality nor substance, is foreclosed from creating and attaining parity with the tangible. The legal manifestation of this is that no government, as well as any law, agency, aspect, court, etc. can concern itself with anything other than corporate, artificial persons and the contracts between them.”  –S.C.R. 1795, Penhallow v. Doane’s Administraters (3 U.S. 54; 1 L.Ed. 57; 3 Dall. 54), Supreme Court of the United States 1795




In my book, I relate the story of a hunter who was accosted by a forest ranger who had seen animal skins in his truck. The ranger pointed to the fur skins and asked, “Where did you get those furs?”  Our hero answered, “What furs?”  Even in court, he acted as if he had no idea what this was all about. “What furs?”


Never make a statement, always ask questions. Acknowledgement of cops, attorneys, judges, etc., and consent to their accusations and demands are the actions which take us down.  Speaking of whom, have you ever noticed that, when these people sense that they know less than you do, but pretend otherwise, they yell and talk over you?   It’s good evidence of with whom we’re dealing. Those who really DO know speak calmly.  Cops, attorneys, and judges know nothing, other than what they are told to know, and, since attorneys and judges remained in school longer than the rest of us, you know that they have been indoctrinated better than the rest of us. They have no clue about how the economic/justice system really operates. At some level they must know that they know nothing or they wouldn’t have to lie to us.  Their lying is proof that we know more than they do. Remember this, when dealing with them.


The time for rebellion is well-overdue. Whether you call it peaceful non-compliance, revolution, renaissance, protesting, or enough is enough, we must get these crooks off our land.  They have pulled every stunt in the book to distract us and to offer us some bogus peace-of-mind.  In the texts, A Course In Miracles, the concept of “forgiveness” was propagandized so that when we figure out who is the cause of all our problems, we won’t lynch them.  They have given us channeled entities (I used to get a kick out of Bashar, until I realized that he was just another “peace, love, and light” guru); the ETs are coming to save us, but, even if they arrive tomorrow, it is too little, too late; and my favourite scam of all, the second coming of Christ.  Since people have been praying, for centuries, for “God’s will” to be done on Earth, then, given the hell we have always had, either this IS God’s will or God is completely ignoring those who pray. If people are still waiting for Jesus to ‘save’ them, then, Jesus has truly let them down.  ALL this is  propaganda to get people to sit on their hands and do nothing except wait to be saved, and foolishly forgive their tormenters, whilst the order-followers systematically destroy the planet and everything on it.


I think we have erred in our strategy to get the psychopaths off the planet.  Assisting our fellows to deal with thugs has only delayed our freedom. We want agencies to raise, dramatically, the cost of property tax, citations, income tax, utilities, insurance, etc.  Yes, it will cost us more, but the win is that people, who now complain but still pay, i.e.: those who are still part of the problem and not yet part of the solution, will become enraged and wake up to their slavery.  I heard that a young man was fined for an air freshener hanging from his mirror because it “obscured his vision”.  We need MORE of this idiocy.  In most cases, those of us who are awake, woke up because we got beaten up.  So, we intend that the people who choose willful blindness will get beaten up, so they wake up to the tyranny and oppression.  We ought to thank those rotten people, who snitch to IRS/CRA, on our unaware friends and relatives. Their acceptance of slavery makes them our enemy.  “It’s easier to fool people than to convince them they have been fooled.” –Mark Twain


Many in-the-news people talk about the income tax fraud and how it pays for war, etc. yet, they still pay tax.  They tell us to lead the charge against the fraud, to create a new system, all whilst they continue to fund the old system and those who perpetrate it.  As long as they are part of the problem, they cannot be part of the solution.  Are they just rabble-rousers who are only repeating what we already know?


When bureaucrats cause us harm or loss, we have to attack the ones who do so. Forget the hot shots whose signatures are nowhere to be found. As my friend said to her banker, “YOU signed this; I don’t see Rothschild’s signature. He’s too smart to be liable. He told YOU to do his dirty work, so YOU are operating under your full, personal, commercial liability. YOU are the one who is being dangled over the snake’s cage and I am the snake. Where’s your bond?”   We have to take them down. We can’t get to the order-givers; we can only get to the order-takers who are the true terrorists.  If they cry, “I’m just doing my job”, then, their job is causing us harm and loss, so we get their public hazard bond and 2 pieces of gov’t-issued ID, along with an address. Nuremberg Principle IV: Those who claimed, “I was just doing my job” were also hanged. If they try to weasel out of their actions, which are wrong, immoral, and unethical, all of which indicates they are evil, by their saying, “I’ll get my supervisor”, this doesn’t let them off the hook; rather, this just means we can sue both. When we are harmed, we have the right to retaliate in whatever form we see fit.  Maybe this will wake them up.


Do we allow our fellow slaves to tell us, “it’s not so bad”?  –that we will get hurt much more by standing up for our principles?  Do we just accept that the world is run by psychopaths who cannot be defeated and so we might just as well try to make the best of second-rate life in a world gone bad?  We know the system is our enemy, but those who adhere to the system are also our enemy.


No responses yet

Oct 22 2013


Published by under Knowing Who You Are


In the 1976 movie, “Network”, Peter Finch yelled, “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it any more.”  Why did it take us over 35 years to feel what he felt?  In the same movie, Ned Beatty says, “There are no countries; there are only corporations.”  We’ve had this information a long time. What have we been doing with it?  Trying to remain in honour? – peace? – forgiveness? – love?   None of that worked; did you notice?


In my article, wherein I wrote, “Ye are gods”, I received a few emails which suggest that people still believe in an “external authority”. The controllers do not care which “authority” that is and the “religion authority” fraud seems to be the most efficient means used to keep us from knowing who we are.  Shifting our “authority” from gov’t, money, law, over to LORD God, Allah, or whatever is just re-arranging the deck-chairs on the Titanic. There is no authority outside the God within us. Our authority is we.


A man emailed me about how to avoid the school’s threat of “vaccinate your child or she can’t attend.”  That’s easy, eh?  Talk about two wins in one fell swoop.  Which poison is worse? Indoctrination or vaccination? The issuer of such an ultimatum ought to be made to put it in writing and sign it.  On paper, it looks even stupider than it sounds. If the word, “you”, is on paper, make them define it. Who is you? 


The only thing over which they have jurisdiction is the NAME, not the man, so, if we make it abundantly clear that they can do whatever they want to the NAME, but we are not their property, they might catch on that they had better leave us alone. My ‘name’ is private and I can use it, privately, but I’d better be bloody careful if I intend to use it in public because, publicly, my ‘name’ becomes a ‘NAME’, owned by the CROWN, and my using it is in violation of §403 CCC (Personation/ Identity Theft), i.e.: fraud . Their demanding that we use it means they are enticing us to commit fraud.


The NAME belongs to the CROWN, so if we register things –children, homes, cars, accounts, businesses– then, we do not “own” them, but that which we obtained via our labour –a verifiable, logical, true exchange; i.e.: compensation for labour– is our property. Don’t make the mistake of surrendering that which was earned, to the CROWN Corporation, by registering them.


Remember, in my book, I wrote the story about the fellow in the store whose kids were acting up and he yelled at them.  Some twit woman overheard this, called CPS, and the next day ALL 5 of his kids were stolen. The following day, they returned one –the boy with no BC, saying, “This one’s not ours.”  What does this tell us?


A man’s children were kidnapped by CPS or Children’s Aid or whatever that corrupt agency is called. It seems that feeding children real food and keeping them safe from the Medical Mafia is a crime.  The children were returned only when he finally yelled, “You stole my property! Give it back!”  Remember I wrote that Jay Weidner said that the way to deal with Archons (or any bully, thug, corporate stooge) is to stand up to them, politely. Keep this in mind when you next encounter one of those automatons.


Compensation for labour in the form of cash, or any other gratuity, is not commercial, as it is based upon private contract and we get paid. Operating in commerce via public contract requires use of the NAME which gets paid and that compensation belongs to the CROWN.  Keep ALL transactions private.


In 1996, I was in court. When asked if I were the NAME, I said, “That’s not my name.”  I was in handcuffs before I knew what happened. But, now, I know what happened. They are in irons, if we do not admit to being the name.


I was in Toronto, in 2001, with an ex-friend who was stupid enough to fall for a Nigerian scam. When she realized she got fleeced out of $4,000, she couldn’t get out of town fast enough.  After I waved good-bye to her, I hailed a cop and asked him if there were anything we could do about this. I could describe the man with the suitcase, I had a telephone number, did the cops know where this gang might be?, etc. BUT, when he asked me only about the NAME and DOB, I became suspicious. When I refused to give information, he walked away, saying “I can’t help you.”  We now know that what he meant was, “I can’t make any money, if you won’t give me the account details.”


In my book, I also told about the woman who was being transferred from jail to prison. Upon arrival, she was asked her NAME.  She asked, “How can you imprison me if you don’t know who I am?”  I don’t know the outcome but I do know that they are stymied if they cannot catch us committing fraud; i.e.: if we do not admit to being the NAME.


I was at the passport office, a decade ago, and when asked if my ‘guarantor’ would know me as “Mary Croft”, when contacted, I said, “Of course”, until I remembered that he knew me by another name, which I told her. She said, “It’s against the law to go by two names.” I said, “Not if there is no intent to defraud.” She never said another word. Fraud is the issue, here.


The court is banking on (and I do mean ‘banking on’) our committing fraud by identifying with a NAME which does not belong to us. This is Personation/ Identity Theft. All public agents work for the CROWN and their business is fraud. This includes their enticing us to aid and abet their fraud. Forcing us to participate in their fraud, via threat and intimidation, which is extortion, is against their law: CCC §423 –Intimidation.


Now that the Pope has lifted their immunity, we can file a Claim of Trespass, because their intent is to make us accomplices to their fraud. To write a common law claim: use no adjectives or pronouns; define names and NAMES; use no periods until the very end; use semi-colons in place of periods, throughout; keep it in present tense; use point-form, not sentences; use “i” not “I”; use the name of the one to whom you are writing, not “you”; keep it short, calm, and lawful.  Seal; do not ‘sign’.


Be sure to include both the Pope’s Apostolic Letterhttp://www.vatican.va/holy_father/francesco/motu_proprio/documents/papa-francesco-motu-proprio_20130711_organi-giudiziari_en.html


How can the reprobates in law enforcement and the “justice system” not see that every one of their work days takes their own children closer to harm, loss, and utter ruin?  Are they just hoping that their kids will remain the “elite”?  Can’t they see that their inheritance will be stolen, just as ours has been stolen, by them? Can’t they figure what they, by their actions, are creating for their children?  It is mind-boggling that they do not grasp that which John Taylor Gatto did.  He quit the NYC school board, saying, “I refuse to harm one more child.” Can’t cops, attorneys, judges, even for the sake of their children, quit doing the dirty work of the CROWN?


Our parents were extorted, tricked, deceived, enticed, coerced, i.e.: defrauded. Had my parents declined to hand over the name, they would have been told, “But if your daughter does not have a birth certificate, she will not be permitted to attend school.” Since, back then, people thought school was a good thing, my parents would have acquiesced. That is extortion. Also, had my father not paid income tax, the “benefit” of the Baby Bonus cheques would have come to a screeching halt. So, “benefits”, based upon the BC, did, indeed, cost my parents.


I ask again, what is it which causes people like cops, attorneys, judges, to think they have authority over us? The answer can only be that someone, whom they believe has authority over them, TOLD them they had authority over others and they BELIEVED this crap!  NO ONE has a right to tell another how to live. We were created as equal and no one has authority over another. It is staggering to a logical mind that these people do not grasp this concept.


There is no hierarchy of slavery, but, when we quit using the NAME, we will be free and they will become subordinate to us. They will be in huge trouble because many  have sworn oaths to the B.A.R. and cannot escape it. This is similar to, “It’s really, really, really difficult to get into the CIA, but it is absolutely impossible to get out.”


I wish I could get the word out that, as of a particular date, we shall all stop going to work, stop signing papers, take our cash out of the bank, and stop paying –bills, etc. everything! We would disempower them in a heartbeat.


Use of the NAME is what requires us to pay. We are meant to use our dominion.



No responses yet

Sep 29 2013

AGAIN, Remember Who You Are

Published by under Knowing Who You Are


There is NO solution within commerce. The solution to everything is within US. Every “solution to commerce” required that we use statutory law, which only further  entrapped us in “commerce”, where we lost our standing.  ANY “commercial solution” IS, itself, the trap.


Thanks to “minister Edward-Jay-Robin”, and his ‘owlmon’ videos, and also Bill Donahue’s Ten Commandments lectures, I now grasp the Ten Commandments the first three of which are the most significant:


First Commandment (C1): Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

Second  (C2): Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, …

Third (C3): Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: …


“Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the Supremacy of God and the rule of law”. Well, which is it? It can’t be both. This means, “Now that we’ve conned you into believing God is supreme, we’ll add our laws, so you’ll think they, too, are God’s laws.


Deuteronomy 12:32  What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.


Michaelle Jean, former Governor General, revealed the fraud by declaring Canada a “de facto government”, about which the World Bank says: A “de facto government” comes into or remains in power by means not provided for in the country’s constitution, such as a coup d’état, revolution, usurpation, abrogation or suspension of the constitution. – web.worldbank.org , meaning, “The Government of Canada”, along with all other alleged countries, is a corporation.


De facto governments:

1.  ”added” their laws to God’s laws, thereby making “governments” false gods; and demanded we fear their ostensible authority and follow their ‘laws’; (Leviticus 18:3-4)

2. “respect persons”, i.e.: “make graven images” of man, by giving us titles and names. They deal with only ‘persons’, and demand we BE ‘persons’. (James 2:9)

3.  ”bow down to” these fictions/systems, e.g.: justice, medical, law enforcement, financial, military, etc. and intimidate and threaten us to do the same.


Live men and women:

1.  are God and have dominion; there is no authority outside ourselves;

2.  cannot BE ‘persons’ which are dead, as we are live;

3.  must ignore all alleged authorities distracting us from the Kingdom of God within.


The Commerce Game is the 3D version of our ignoring the first 3 commandments, which, if we obey and meditate on, we can raise our frequency, from 3D. Being in 3D, none of us knows anything about any of the “holy books”. Religious controversy, dreamt up by the controllers, is to make us believe we are separate from one another, make war, and make money.  Remembering who we are will end this controversy.


Deuteronomy 12:32  What thing soever I command you, observe to do it: thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it.

Leviticus 18:3-4  After the doings of the land of Egypt, … neither shall ye walk in their ordinances. 4 Ye shall do my judgments, and keep mine ordinances to walk therein:


Deuteronomy 1-17  Ye shall not respect persons in judgment;

Romans 2:11  For there is no respect of persons with God.

James 2:9  But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors.


Exodus 23:24  Thou shalt not bow down to their gods, nor serve them, nor do after their works: but thou shalt utterly overthrow them, and quite break down their images.


It is our job to “overthrow them”.  We are to stand up to thugs, NOT accept their nonsense as ‘law’; it is their law. Don’t get caught up in the “oath” hoax, unless the man has sworn a correctly-worded oath to us, the people. All their oaths are nonsense –either false, or to a false monarch, or even, in the case of the RCMP, to the RCMP.  How enigmatic!  and tantamount to the BAR protecting fraudulent lawyers and the CMA protecting negligent doctors.


To all of you who continue to refer to “us, the people,” please know that “We, the People” means “We, the Crown”.  Men and women are ‘people’, not ‘People’.


“Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God?”  “I do, but, when I do, you’ll be out of a job. Are you sure you want me to tell the whole truth?”


I am to have no other gods before ME, the I AM; I am not to allow them to make me into a graven image; and I must not bow down to anything outside myself.


If we bow down to anything man-made, if we believe anything to be greater than ourselves and worship it –whether that be money, institutions, medicine, government, possessions, organizations, desires and passions, any external information, doctrine, tradition, religion, ‘persons’, i.e.: titled people with ostensible authority, memberships, relationships with friends, family, lovers, or colleagues, degrees and certificates, laws, belief systems, advertising, Santa Claus –all of which are “false gods”– for whatever seeming significant reason, then, we have denied the God within. Doing so disempowers us and we fall under the spell of believing there is an authority –or multiple authorities– outside ourselves.


We must not give, to any fiction, our regard, obedience, attention, energy, emotion, respect, or time. If we are forced to obey their laws, via threat and intimidation, then we must call them on it, vociferously:  “You are intimidating me. Why are you threatening me?”  These private men and women will either back down or lose their public jobs, hazard bonds, and pensions. Since September 1, according to the Pope, they are no longer immune to our claims. We must not allow them to intimidate us and threaten us into breaching the first three Commandments, the entire principle of which is that we are God, the I AM, and believing that anything else is god only keeps us enslaved. There is nothing of any importance outside our God-selves and that includes agents who compromise their personal integrity, earn their living, sacrifice their ethics, in fact, live their entire lives trying to make us believe otherwise.  The reason we are enslaved is simple: we believe in authorities outside our God-self, the I AM.  When we quit believing in external authorities, we will be free.


Luke 17:20-21  The kingdom of God is within you.

Psalms 82:6  I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.

John 14:12  He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father.


We have no rights –not “human”, not “inherent”, not “unalienable”. We have “inalienable” rights –sold to us, by the government, which, as we all know, can take them from us.  ‘Rights’ are just another red herring, to threaten and control us. (see: Canadian Treasury Board, #3 Policy Statement: It is government policy to collect payment before providing a product, a service, the use of a facility, a right, or a privilege.”  As God, the I AM, we have dominion over all the earth. That is all we have and all we require.


We do have a name, but it is private and we do not use it publicly, unless it benefits us to do so. We do not use it for the benefit of a public entity. Their altering our names without our consent and then registering them is to render us dead, fiction, personae, masked, unreal –a violation of C2. My family motto is: “Esse quam videri” (To be than to seem)  We must not present, to anyone, anything false. “This above all: to thine own self be true, and it must follow as the night the day, thou canst not then be false to any man.” –Polonius, Hamlet, Shakespeare. “Nothing real can be threatened. Nothing unreal exists. Herein lies the peace of God.” –ACIM.   Use of the name, in a commercial environment, such as carrying a driver licence, i.e. as a PERSON, evidences our belief that we are separate from our true God-self.  They, the dead, have no power over us, the living. They know this. No valid contract exists, if it frustrates our ability to practise our faith in God’s law, i.e.: faith in our Godness.


The Bible is written in allegory, as a guide for our spiritual growth. It reads: No one can dictate to us how to live our lives. No one has authority over us.  We have dominion. We are Gods.

No responses yet

Aug 15 2013

If I Could Tell the World Just 3 Things

Published by under Knowing Who You Are

1.  There is NO government. “Governments” are only corporations. What almost everyone calls ‘the government” is a de facto government.  The Governor General, herself, admitted this. We are in anarchy; i.e.: NO government. The employees are not authorities; they are servants who have stolen from us. Quit sending letters which only prove you believe that they have authority over you and that they are the de jure government –neither of which is true. Quit saying “the government” when what we really mean is, “a private, foreign, belligerent, for-profit corporation whose intent it is to diminish the supply of cash on the planet, so that we kill one another in order to get our mitts on it.”  Corporate “laws” apply only to fictions and we were conned into believing, for far too long, they had something to do with us. Quit believing you are a fiction.

2.  There is NO ‘money’, only credit and debt. The credit is ours; the debt is theirs. When they speak of “public debt”, they mean the debt that is payable to us, the private, by them, the public. They owe us. We are the principals; how could we possibly be in debt when we are the ones providing ALL the value?! Quit saying, “my debt” and “I owe…”  We do not own what we think we own, so, if we don’t own anything, how can we owe anything. The debt belongs to the ones who stole the credit from our trust and the cash from our labour. Cash cannot ‘pay’ debt; only credit can ‘offset’ debt. Cash and credit can NOT be used interchangeably. As all debt was created on paper, so, then, all debt can be discharged with other pieces of paper –NOT cash. Their taking our cash is solely to reduce our ability to function in their world.  There is something drastically wrong with a system in which, as Vic said, “The man who built the chair can’t afford to buy the chair.”

It seems as if the only way to remove ourselves from this enslavement is to remove ourselves from their fraudulent system. Maybe we ought to give back every single paper –BC, SIN, licences, property titles– we have in our possession (render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s) and use the Statement of Birth in order to get what we need and want. Werner Erhard said, “Don’t confuse the menu with the meal.”  Quit paying for the menu and exchange it for the meal.

I hear talk of going after the “inheritance/ patrimony/ birthright/ entitlement”.  Knowing that this has been stolen from us and trying to get it back is tantamount to yelling at the crook who just stole our car, “Hey! Come back here!”  It has zero impact. Why would they give it back? Under what conditions?  Do we set up a private trust?  Why would we want it back. Their entire system is an illusion. Chasing an illusion only keeps us in the illusion and keeps the illusion alive. So, do we continue to try to beat them at a game where they not only make but also change the rules? Or do we hand over the damaging “citizenship” and walk away from the game?

3.   The Pope’s Apostolic Letter: Because the frauds believe their sole authority is the Pope, if I were being harassed by any entity for my cash, I would send a letter to the man behind the fiction/ corporation/ ‘person’, suggesting he quit, with a copy of the Apostolic Letter issued by Pope Francis, July 11th, 2013.  http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/francesco/motu_proprio/documents/papa-francesco-motu-proprio_20130711_organi-giudiziari_en.html

All employees of corporations, all of which are established under the Roman Curia, are no longer immune. So, ALL employees of courts, governments, law enforcement, banks, collection agents, IRS, CRA, etc., as of September 1st, 2013, will be held accountable for crimes against humanity which include: refusal to settle accounting; and, prosecution of fraudulent claims.

I’d be sure to have him mail me a certified copy of his Oath of Office –his swearing of which I hereby accept, two pieces of his government-issued ID, and his Public Hazard Bond, listing the underwriter’s name, address, and policy number, which, by law, he is under obligation to do. (see: CCC §337). He is to govern himself accordingly. (A few people have already prevailed with this.)

This is all that is necessary to end the fraud, as we can now go after the men and women who continue to harm their fellow man. Please, let them all know that they will be going to civil court and then to jail, if they don’t quit their jobs.

Why are we told, “Anything you say can and will be used against you”? and then, in court, they ask, “How do you plead to the charges?”  How absurd!  I’d shut up, except to ask, “Doesn’t the prosecutor have to prove his claim?” and “Isn’t the one who charged the trust the trustee?” Going to court, voluntarily, as defendant, only proves we still believe in their authority. Insane! Filing docs is asking for the court’s authority to validate our claim that it has no authority –even more insane.

As I have written, on and off for a decade:  1.  If the solution isn’t simple, it isn’t accurate;  2.  There is no solution TO commerce, IN commerce; and,  3. The only way to win is not to play. We must get out of this maniacal Commerce Game. Quit giving them your attention, time, energy, and emotion.

No responses yet

Aug 12 2013

Why We Can’t Win

Published by under Knowing Who You Are

Why We Can’t Win

Those who know, don’t tell; those who don’t know, sell.

That wraps up our problem, however, here are the details. We have met the enemy and it is we.  We are now competing with one another, never mind with those whose intent it is to destroy us. There is dissension among the ranks.  Those who charge their fellows, i.e.: those of us whose intent it is to end the fraud, have become the perpetrators of the fraud.

I received this Skype message from a fellow I’ve know for years and who, I thought, was intending to assist us.

“This info. is NOT for everyone. I have spent a many of hours (sic) on this stuff and am NOT about to give it all out for free. U feel me?”

I have heard approximately the same words from scores of people who continue to charge for their information.  We have ALL put, at least, “many hours on this stuff”, and, at most, YEARS, yet, I could list dozens of people who are continuing to charge for information –info which NEVER gets us anywhere.  I’m not saying the info is inaccurate; I’m saying it is never the complete story. Very few people are willing to assist others with the entire ‘process’. I continue to be appalled by those who want payment for either the time they spent on research or that which they discovered. We all want information, yet, it seems as if some want it not to use, test, and then to spread the word, but to sell. To all who claim, “I spent years investigating”, I say, “You did that because you wanted to do it; we did not  commission you to do it, nor did we claim we would pay you for the answer if you found it.”  I wrote a book which took me a long time –more time to edit than to write. Reading, dozens of times, to be clear about what I had written, was difficult, yet, I persevered. I notice that very few people bother to edit their work. Most of what I have seen, as “the solution”, is such bad grammar, punctuation, and sentence structure that I wouldn’t know if it were accurate or not. Some of it is almost indecipherable!

So, I shall simply say it again: Do NOT pay anyone for information or time, unless you are CERTAIN s/he has completed the “process”, s/he has tested it and won, many others have tried it and also won, and s/he is willing to spend his time doing it FOR you.  Those are many criteria to meet. I have paid very few people for alleged ‘exigent’ information, but even at that, it is all to no avail.

Tip: no one has the answer. Let’s face it; if anyone has prevailed, in whatever area, then he would not need to charge anyone.  I don’t know of anyone who, for having used someone’s information and prevailed, wouldn’t be willing to compensate the author a percentage of his win for his win. Since I have NO proof of any successes, albeit I have heard some sensational grapevine stories, this suggests that, even if there were a solution, we aren’t going to get it. We are, virtually, on our own.

The Crown Prosecutor revealed that those in the “truth movement” who charge are a huge source of derisive amusement for them. She said, “We don’t have to do anything; you’ll destroy each other.” Those who charge are doing to their fellow man what the banks are doing to all of us.  In my book, I wrote what a bloody lie this excuse for charging is, “If people don’t pay for it, they don’t appreciate it.” Nonsense!  We were never meant to ‘pay for’ anything; and don’t think you are off the hook by saying, “I don’t charge a fee; I only request a donation … and that donation is $500”. Donations are voluntary, not demanding. Stating an amount is charging. Bank fraud will continue, as those who charge are as culpable as the bankers.

We’ve ALL put time and energy into this project, so, are we going to share, or will you join the extortionists?  The banks’ plan is to destroy us by slowly pulling  cash from circulation, so we end up killing each other for it. There IS a ‘they‘ and there IS a ‘we’. “We” are those who charge their fellow man for information which will not result in anyone’s freedom.

The stories I have heard about people, in desperate situations, paying money to the ‘gurus’ –wolves in sheep’s clothing– and getting nothing for it, would curl your hair. If we, who appear to be on the same team, are NOT, then to what have we to look forward?  If you gurus want “money”, then get a job. Quit fleecing your teammates.

If I Could Tell the World Just 3 Things (coming soon)

No responses yet

Mar 18 2013


Published by under Knowing Who You Are

We come to a fork in a road where we know twin brothers live. One always lies; one always tells the truth. We can ask only one question of one brother, and we don’t know which one is the liar.

What question can we ask so that the answer reveals which road to take?

The question is: “Which road would your brother tell me to take?”

If we ask the truth-teller, “Which road would your brother tell me to take?” he will honestly tell us that his brother, a liar, would say, “take the road to the east”. If we ask the liar, ”Which road would your brother tell me to take?”, he will lie and tell us that his brother, a truth-teller, would say, “take the road to the east”.

Both brothers will indicate the wrong road, so we would take the other one.

In language, a double negative equals a positive, a double positive equals a positive, and only a negative plus a positive equals a negative. So, we incorporate both the truth  and the lie and we get the LIE. In spirit we all agreed to play a game where what is real is not real and what is not real is real.  We created a duality.  We made life both truth and fiction, but, no matter how we put the two together, we are left with the LIE.

I had a friend who quit seeing her fellow, Ralph. When I asked how she was doing, she said that she noticed that she was either thinking about Ralph or thinking about not thinking about Ralph, so, life was always about “Ralph” and “not Ralph”, but it was STILL Ralph.  When we are faced with opposite concepts: up/down, male/female, dark/light, good cop/bad cop, God/LORD God, war and peace, good news/bad news, wet/dry, etc., then, no matter which we choose to regard, we are always in a LIE. We can’t know ‘good’ without knowing ‘bad’. The mere fact that we label or judge anything, as we perceive it to be, means we are including the opposite: two sides of the same coin. The instant we do so, we are in a LIE.  In the case of good news/bad news we must learn to see it ALL as propaganda because if it seems good, OR bad, then it is a LIE.

The duality for us all on this planet began forever ago, but for our own particular lives, it began with the birth certificate. It split us into two entities: free and slave.  We cannot say we are “free” without noticing the “slave”; ergo, even “free” is part of the lie. The big LIE is the “love and fear” coin.  If we are looking at love as an opposite to fear, we have instantly fallen into a lie. This is why, in the texts of A Course In Miracles, we read that we cannot possibly know ‘love’, as it is NOT a part of our experience within an illusion. We have all felt what we believe to be love, but we truly have no concept of what it is. How can we know, when, on planet Earth, ‘love’ is another aspect of the lie? I am perturbed by life and by my fellow man because I notice that we ALL continue to expect this nightmare to be pleasant, which is insanity. A LIE is never pleasant, even when a lie is meant to protect someone from frightful information.

So, all the concepts we have ever heard which cause us to believe we have a solution to the fraud which goes on all over this planet, cannot be TRUTH.  There is no truth when our entire lives are based upon, constructed with, strived for, lived by, and resulted in LIES.  Everything we have ever experienced is, from the perspective of “truth”, a LIE.  Disheartening, isn’t it? The more we claim a thing to be ‘true’, the more we make the opposite real, and the more we reinforce the lie. “Truth-seeking” only digs us deeper, as ‘truth’ is not where we are.

The only way out of our dilemma is to back out of ALL lies and that includes what we believe to be “truth”, and “love”, and “light”, and “peace”. The more attention we give these alleged aspects of life within a lie, the stronger we make their opposites. Conversely, the opposite is also part of all this. The more attention we give to resisting anything: slavery, fraud, hatred, violence, theft, etc. we further empower it. I know this sounds like a contradiction, because I just said that when we think of love, peace, truth, light, etc. we are empowering the opposite, but here is where we have been royally deceived. 1.  empowering EITHER side of the coin makes the coin, i.e.: the fiction, the lie, the illusion only stronger; and, 2. remember that a negative and a positive always makes a negative.  Sad, eh?  So, if we focus on ‘fear’, we make fear stronger; if we focus on ‘love’, we make the coin, i.e.: the illusion, which includes ‘fear’, only stronger.  Lose/lose; and isn’t this precisely what we have noticed? –NO MATTER WHAT WE DO. We fight, we lose; we behave honourably, we lose; we love; we lose. No good deed ever goes unpunished. It’s all the same concept. We must remove ourselves from the entire fiction and that fiction includes all that we have judged as ‘good’. The ‘good’ is not the problem. The problem is the judgement. Even assessing a situation as anything other than what it is, is keeping us caught in the fiction, lie, illusion; hence, my loathing for the ludicrous comment, so vogue these days, “It’s all good.”  YIKES!

So, with every comment, such as “going to peace”, “bringing in the love”, “seeking the truth”, etc., we make the entire fiction ever more hazardous to us. Yes, we must do, in the moment, what we believe we must do and, if that is demonstrating what we believe to be love, kindness, playfulness, forgiveness, compassion, peace, then, that is what we have to do, but we must remain mindful that it is just another aspect of the lie. There is nothing wrong with living a lie, as long as we  are aware of it. As I used to say to a friend, whom I drove crazy with my comment, “NONE of this matters!”  Even I was incapable of seeing life this way, until just the other day. I knew it, intellectually, but I just never ‘got it’ until I took the concept of “de facto government” down to the basics.

Can we remain outside the choice of everything, all the while knowing that it doesn’t matter what we choose because NONE of it is true?  I used to have a friend, who, when I told her that I didn’t think I ought to be living with my “beau of the day”, said, “It doesn’t matter who you’re with.” (sic)  If it’s all an illusion, what part of an illusion is more important than another part?  What part of a novel is any truer than any other part?  If we can avoid believing that a choice has significance, or is any different from the option we did not choose, as all options involve the duality, then we can avoid continually stepping into the lie  –the sole action which causes our insanity.

Over 30 years ago, I learned what “decide” means.  We think we are deciding among options, but, really, all we are doing is making one aspect of what isn’t so, more important than another aspect of what isn’t so.  NONE of it matters. Again, I am not suggesting that we not do what we feel prompted to do, as, without that, we have no life at all, and, as long as we are on this beautiful planet with utterly insane agenda, we might as well pretend we are creating good, enjoying people, having fun, albeit difficult to do, as we become aware that the only truth is, “Life is meaningless.”

I’ve said for years, “If it isn’t simple, it isn’t accurate” which I still contend is accurate. This does NOT mean, “If it isn’t easy, it isn’t accurate”.  It is not easy to realize that our entire lives are the construct of our flash of insanity when we thought it would be fun to make what is truth, not truth and what is fiction, not fiction. What were we thinking?  How do we stop playing a game which is no longer fun?  Was it EVER fun?  I suppose it was, as long as we had our memory, but, what happened that we lost our knowing that it was all just a prank we played on ourself?  Or, were we deceived?  If so, who deceived us?  If, indeed, the Archons or Aeons or whoever are intending to destroy us, then, what’s to do?  The more attention we give either them OR those who oppose them, i.e.: those of us still trying to find a solution to a problem which does not exist, except in our minds, then we are wasting our time, energy, and emotions, not to mention further empowering the opposite of what we want.

How can we step away from the duality?  Where is there to go when the entire planet and all we know or have ever known is the lie of duality?  As we read in ACIM, we could choose to live a happy dream, as opposed to a nightmare, but it is still not truth. It is all still illusion.  I contend we have to remove ourselves from ALL illusion. How do we do that?  The only way is to continually keep in mind that none of this is real, none of it matters, and judging what appears to be going on is only keeping us attached to what appears to be going on, which is not really going on. Judgement keeps us attached.

How can we judge anything unless we have all the information?  Knowing this, why bother searching when: 1. we will never have it; 2. even if we did, making a judgement will only further entrench us in the LIE.

So, “doing something about” is a waste of our time, energy, and emotion, unless, of course, we adore doing whatever that might be, but, for instance, all that we have heard lately: Notice & Demand, OPPT, arrest the pope, lawsuits, patrimony, bonds, parliament dissolved,  corporations foreclosed, trustees/beneficiaries, appealing to the UN, ICCPR #16, writing to de facto agents, going to court, filing documents, studying “law”, UCC, qualifying signatures, etc. is all just drawing energy to the two-sided coin, lying on the pavement. We cannot choose to value one side of the “LIE coin” over the other; picking up the coin is the problem. The entire façade is an illusion as “they” are all de facto, not real, fiction, dead, a lie.

If we were truly “awake” and “conscious”, we would not be trying to change the events within our nightmares, as even talking about doing so would be a waste of time, energy, and emotion. When we are awake and conscious, we can only intend that the night will arrive when we stop having nightmares. Now, can we bring consciousness INTO the nightmare?  In his book, “Handbook of Higher Consciousness”, Ken Keyes suggested that, in our dreams, we look at our hands. Then we will know we are conscious within the dream.  If, in the nightmare of life, we can remember that all banks and their minion government agencies are de facto, i.e.: fictions, lies, frauds, illusions, then, we can escape their tyranny by letting them know that we know this. This is tantamount to turning to the monsters in our nightmares, standing up to them, and saying, “You can’t harm me. You’re not real”.

“They”, as fictions, cannot DO anything without our empowering them to do so. They cannot recognize our inherent rights; they cannot write us a letter; they cannot judge us; they cannot interfere with us, and they cannot harm us, unless we are already thinking that the other side of the coin –the ‘good’ side– also cannot. The only way to rid nightmares is to realize they are constructs of our imaginations, just like everything else in our mis-created illusion. When did we plan this game to be over? Did we set the clock?  Will it end when our mums call us for supper?  I suspect it will end when we all ‘remember’ that the entire nightmare is only that and we can opt to become conscious, right in the middle of it.

NOTHING is going to get us out of this mess other than removing our thoughts, judgements, “knowledge”, information, attention, decisions, beliefs, and choices. E.g.: chocolate or vanilla?  The answer is, “I don’t care because it doesn’t matter” UNLESS we actually have a preference, as I mentioned above. If we are motivated or prompted to act, then we must do what we feel we must do, as that –and only that– is ‘life’, but we must know, whilst acting, that even that is inconsequential, in the grand scheme.  I suspect that only this will bring us the peace we seek. There is nothing else. As long as we think there is, we’ll remain stuck in the LIE.

No responses yet

Feb 26 2013

Not only NO! but HELL, NO!

Published by under Knowing Who You Are

Re: OPPT.  My sole complaint of it is that I have yet to see or hear of any successes. Has Mustang Scott obtained his car yet?  Is Dean Clifford still in jail?

To those who dreamt it up, I say, “nice try”, and to those who fell for it, I say, “Did you forget their warning?!  They TOLD us, “We will lead every revolution against us.”  I won’t even be certain about the pope-queen-pm scoop, until I see an actual, non-photo-shopped pic of the three of them sitting on cots, behind bars, in orange suits, asking for some toilet paper. I now suspect everything as propaganda.

So, until then, we MUST learn to say “NO!” to their minions –the ones who think they will still be getting a pension from their evil employers. Here is a great video (½ hour):


Remember that the only reason we hesitate to say, “NO!” is because, when we, as kids, said it, we got smacked for it. So, we have a built-in program to do as we are told. Time to grow up and say, “NO!” to those who do NOT have our best interests at heart.

The opposite of courage is conformity – Rollo May

Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one’s courage. –Anais Nin

And the day came when the risk to remain tight in a bud was more painful

than the risk it took to blossom. –Anais Nin

Let’s stop paying attention to what is not real. We KNOW the world of the tyrants is fiction. Anything which addresses the world of fiction is a black hole. We get sucked in. We are to remain out of fiction, if we are to prevail. I apply this to both ‘good news’ and ‘bad news’.  It is ALL fiction.  Let’s quit empowering them –quit handing over our time, attention, energy, emotion. Submarine them!  To acknowledge them, in any way, is to keep them alive. Put them out of commission! It is they who must prove they have authority/ jurisdiction over us. We are not bound to prove a thing. THEY are NOT real. We operate in the real world and they are not a part of what is true.

If I see mail addressed to the NAME and I don’t want it, I write:  “Undeliverable as addressed. RTS”. On the back: “Please do not send mail, meant for the Trustee, to this address.”

“I notice your laws apply to legal fictions/‘persons’ and not to Man. So, if you claim otherwise, show me the law which proves I have to ….  or show me the paper I signed proving I agreed to ….   Incidentally, if you’re a public servant, then you work for ME and you are MY employee. I do NOT work for you.”

My son went through a spell of getting speeding tickets. Since his car is in his father’s NAME, the photo-radar (to which, by the way, the people of Michigan said, “Not only NO but also HELL NO!” so there is NO photo-radar in that state) tickets end up with him.  I suggested what to do with them but, as we all know, “we are never a prophet in our own land”, and he insisted upon paying them because, he complained, “I won’t be able to re-register or insure the car, until I do.”  I suggested (read: “ranted”) that all he had to do was ask the servants some questions:  “Are you telling me that I can’t do something that YOU want ME to do, until I pay YOU?!  This isn’t even something I want; it is what YOU want.  That’s extortion!”  Tell them to put it in writing –just something to hand a cop if he asks. Their idiocy is glaring.

This nonsense about our begging them to do that which we have a natural and inherent right to do only proves OUR idiocy.  “May I please have a driver licence so you can fine me and make me pay you with my labour?”  “Will you please let me travel?” “Is it alright with you if I live with my beloved?”  What in hell is going on that any of us have EVER requested permission to do anything which is lawful?!  Insanity!

In order for them to have any clout, at all, we must step into their fiction. If we stay out of their fiction, they have no power. Without paper, they have nothing. Writing anything to them only demonstrates that we believe they exist in reality. They do NOT.  So, if we quit sending, signing, acknowledging their paper, they are out of commission. They come to a screeching halt.  As Glinda, the Good Witch of the North in, The Wizard of Oz, said to the Wicked Witch of the West, “Oh, Rubbish!  You don’t have any power here!  Begone!”


A fellow tells me that, since there is no law requiring one to accept mail, he returned a photo-radar ticket.  Then he was served a summons which he also returned with a note  reading:NO SIGNATURE. NO CONTRACT. WITHOUT PREJUDICE UCC 1-207”

His friend checked, two months later, and the case read: DISPOSITION: Dismissed on motion of court or defendant. (Code 43)  JUDGMENTS: There are no judgments on file.

He also refused to contract with the fellows of Border Patrol/Immigration (in the middle of Arizona!!!) who support the illusion of “Authorized Personnel”.

I’ve watched those Arizona Border Patrol videos. I could hear myself respond to their ludicrous questions:  “Are you a US citizen?”  ”Are YOU a US citizen?”  ”Yes”.  ”Well, I’m not and, since a US citizen is a 14th Amendment citizen, that means I have jurisdiction over YOU.”  OR   “I’m ordering you to …”  ”But I don’t work for you.”  OR  “I need you to…”   “I’m not here to placate your needs.”

If we feel as if we must sign –but only in order to get what WE want, e.g.: a CPP cheque– then, as my friend says, print the NAME in upper case, to match the name of the Trust –the fictional entity (but not the last name); e.g.: “MARY”

Remember that their pay-cheques are for ACTING!  NOT for a job well-done.  Our problem is that we participated in their fiction long after we KNEW they were de facto. Mustang Scott has proven, as we all have, by now, that THERE IS NO GOVERNMENT!  It’s all a ruse, a scam, a deception, sleight-of-hand, trick, etc.  Quit participating, complying, consenting, communicating with them!

A fellow went to court and when he was asked for his name by a woman he thought was the clerk, he asked, “What’s YOUR name?”  He was ignored.  Then, she asked and again and he repeated his question. Then she directed him to go and set up a court date. A few days later, he received a notice stating the case had been dismissed. He then knew that the woman was the Crown Prosecutor.

Maybe, when we order a service, such as telephone, we ought to ask why they want the NAME.  Well, WE know why they want it but the one we are asking does not. We could say, “You can have the name or my labour but you can’t have both. Either this service gets paid up front, as no corporation would ever grant service without getting paid first, or you get paid upon my receipt of service, but you don’t get to double-dip using MY trust account.  Pick ONE!”  Do not do this AFTER you have agreed to pay both the advance and the statement (neither of which requires anything from us.  A statement is simply a documentation of the activity of the account. When the bank sends a monthly  statement, do we pay the “balance” at the bottom of the statement?  Wouldn’t that shock the bank, eh?  So, why do we feel compelled to pay the statement from any other corporation, the service of which we have solicited?

A fellow was visited by two CRA agents. He, surreptitiously, managed to find out where they live and told them never to bother him again, because, if they did, he knows where they live. He told them to quit their jobs and never to tell anyone about this. When they asked him, “Are you threatening us?”, he answered, “No; this is an offer of contract. I’ll know, by your actions, if you agree to the terms.” He and his friends monitored their whereabouts for awhile and he has now learned that they did, indeed, resign from their jobs. This is the Golden Rule, in action.

If you are still doing as you are told, you are part of the problem, as you have not grown up. The excuse of most is that they just want to live their lives and not bother with this, but they have yet to see that, soon, they won’t have a life to live. If they’re not part of the solution, they’re part of the problem.

The propaganda, on both TV AND the internet is rampant. We don’t know anything anymore, but we must focus on how to defeat the Archons –NOT the tyrants, who are only victims of the Archons, as we are. The only difference between them and us is that they are stupider than we are. Our focus ought to be on nothing other than defeating the Archons.  I continue to hear that the solution is simple: All we have to do is “stand up to them”.  They cannot tolerate our innate spiritual power, as not only do they lack it but also they do not understand it. We really DO have an edge. Let’s use it.


No responses yet

Feb 16 2013

The Golden Rule: Enough is Enough

Published by under Knowing Who You Are

Forty years ago, there was a TV show called, “Marcus Welby, MD”.  The star of the show was Robert Young who later lamented that he receives letters from people who ask him medical questions and he is obliged to write back, “I’m sorry I cannot help you. I am NOT a doctor; I am an actor playing the ROLE of a doctor.”

Mailing anything other than “NO!” to any employee of any corrupt, fraudulent, foreign, illegal corporation, masquerading as “government”, is tantamount to writing to Dr. Welby. They operate in fiction; their paper is fiction; their ‘laws’ are fiction; their jobs are fiction and, likely, their lives are fiction.  Robert Young would ask us, “Why write to a fictional character for a real life answer?” We can’t possibly get one.

Over the past decade or two, we have learned valuable information about how the commerce game is played. We would never know how to deal with tyrants if we had not learned and implemented what does NOT work. So, let’s review inaccurate beliefs.

1.  that anyone or anything outside ourselves has any authority over us. “Authorities” have done a great job of trying to convince us that we must be subservient to some  entity outside ourselves. This is a huge lie to overcome because we have believed it from our helpless, dependent infancy. But, we have come of age, now, so, “To thine OWN self be TRUE”, NOT to anyone or anything else before ourselves. We are our own authority; there is NO AUTHORITY.  In MY universe, MY word is law.

2.  that a “government” exists. Our second biggest hurdle to overcome is the belief that there is a government of the people, by the people, and for the people.  It does NOT exist and has NOT existed over the entire duration of our lifetime, if EVER!  We must put this notion out of our heads, now and forever. THERE IS NO GOVERNMENT. The Gov. Gen. of Canada even ADMITS the “government” is de facto, meaning: in position, in fact, but by force and fraud and, thus, unlawful.  A de jure government is lawful but it is not in office. Corporate minions are personating public officials, in violation of their ‘law’. The notion that any corporation –even those named “US Government” or “Government of Canada”– can EVER give us anything which WE haven’t already given to IT is absurd. WE produce it ALL. It is ALL ours.  The land is OURS, yet it has been handed over to the banks, as collateral, by those who masquerade as “public servants.”


The biggest error that all pundits and talking heads make is their continual reference to a private, foreign, fraudulent, belligerent bank as “the Government”.  We might recover, if we can give up the belief that there is or ever has been a ‘government’.

3.  that the fictional concept of “law” has any clout. There is NO “law”!  The instant we make use of, or so much as just quote their codes, statutes, acts, case law, etc., we lose our status and become one of them. All ‘courts’ are fraudulent, and all “law” is fiction and applies only to fictional entities, not to live men and women.

4.  that we can EVER possibly know what is really going on. It is ALL propaganda. When we hear or read either “good news” or “bad news”, we must suspect, “Someone wants me to believe something; my believing it supports his agenda, so what might that agenda be?”

A Crown Prosecutor (“CP”) revealed that they are powerless to do anything about the dire situation which not only we but also, thankfully, they suffer. The suggestion is that we sue the judges, bankers, et al, for TREASON.  Any “public servant” who is savvy enough to know what is really going on, ought to quit his job, yesterday.  Since the Governor General of Canada has ADMITTED that the ‘government’ is de facto, we are not required to give them the time of day, so, for us to pay any attention, whatsoever, to these vicious, loathsome people who will not find honest work, is to grant them our power. By writing to them, by explaining the ‘law’ to them, by acquiescing in any way to their demands, is only giving them the power they require to destroy us. Every flicker of ‘power’, which they believe they have, must and does come from us, via our compliance, our signatures, and our fear.  This has been a case of ‘give them an inch and they’ll take a mile’. How best to deal with a bully?  Face him and say, “NO!”

Civil disobedience means saying, “Not only NO but also HELL NO!” More important is non-compliance. This means that we do NOT do what they want us to do: get a driver licence, hand over ‘ID’, file tax forms, go to court, open mail that is addressed to fictions, etc. Once we have written, “NO!” to them, we can return subsequent mail, ‘RTS’ or ‘Returned for Fraud’, without opening it, whether it be from IRS/CRA, the courts, etc., and they will be inundated with post. We must do whatever it takes to put them out of commission. When a cop (corporate security guard) stops us, we ask, “What’s the breach of the peace?  Give me a certified copy of both your and your boss’s public hazard bonds and risk management company. If you delay me more than one minute, it will cost you. Here’s my fee schedule and I’ll need to see “gov’t-issued ID” plus your driver licence.”  Note home addresses so they know that, by treating us so dishonorably, THEY are endangering their children. I told a Can. Rev. agent to quit his job. He said, “I have children to support”. I replied, “Your children will have way more respect for you if you are doing honourable work, rather than destroying the lives of your fellow man. What would your children think if they knew what you are doing?”

We must rebel and revolt. Remember Peter Finch in the movie, Network ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_qgVn-Op7Q “I’m mad as HELL and I’m not going to take it anymore!”  They are supposed to be working for us, not vice versa. We don’t take orders from servants. We have had enough of their bogus threats and, in the states and the provinces, we rank in the millions.

It seems that the ‘love frequency’ didn’t work. Nor did “peace on earth, good will towards men.” Being decent and honourable towards them didn’t work. We are dealing with bullies and to think that someday we will write the perfect Notice, Declaration, Contract, Claim of Right, Affidavit, Trust,  whatever, is just nonsense. Remember with whom you’re dealing. The story of the woman and the snake is analogous to our dealings with the bullies. The snake begged the woman to take him in from the cold, appealing to her good nature. After she complied, he bit her. She was stunned and demanded, ‘Why?, after I have been so kind to you!” He said, “You knew darn well I was a snake before you took me in.”  We are co-operative, polite, and compliant for these tyrants, which they pretend will put us in good stead with them, but it is our good nature which dooms us. They are snakes!  That is their nature and for us to expect anything better from them is idiocy. Do not be conned by a “good cop”.

We’ve tried to be pleasant; we know their law but they don’t. I contend that if you’re being accused of having an affair, then you might as well be having one. Similarly, if we’re being accused of being terrorists, we might as well be terrorizing them.  We’re not robo-cops with guns; they are. We don’t wear bullet-proof vests; they do. We don’t  travel with “back-up”; they do.  Who are the real terrorists?

The more I hear about the Bible, the more I realize that so much of it is LORD God’s propaganda. “The meek shall inherit the Earth” and “Turn the other cheek”, etc. are meant to convince us that we ought not to come after them for their crimes. Their best trick was the concept of “forgiveness” –designed so that we wouldn’t be so hard on them, once we caught onto their fraud. In the KJV version of the Bible, the “Jesus” character says, “Forgive them for they know not what they do.” How convenient for the tyrants! The original Bible was written in Aramaic and reveals that “Jesus” actually said, “Forgive them NOT, for they KNOW what they do.”  We must NOT forgive evil people; we must destroy them, just as they are intending to destroy us. Remember the Golden Rule: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” Based upon how they treat us, I guess they want us to steal their children and their assets. I am grateful to Kevin Annett who has, apparently, filed commercial liens against the evil Pope and the Vatican assets. About bloody time the devil was put out of commission!

But the minions ARE in fear. They KNOW that their progeny is in danger; they KNOW that, after their work, they are dispensable. Nuremberg Principal IV states that those who claimed, “I was just doing my job/I was only following orders” were also hanged.

There has NEVER been any ‘paper’, EVER, which, when filed, has freed us. The only thing that “paper” has ever done is fuel the fire of the tyrants, since ‘paper’ only further acknowledges them. The only “papers” to be filed are their “walking papers”, as they ALL ought to be fired!  Write: “YOU stole OUR credit, via OUR bonds, so YOU owe US. YOU are frauds. WE don’t owe anyone.” 

The only way out of their crap is to say “NO!” Remember, there are vastly more of us or, at least, there would be, if the snoozers would grow a vagina and join us. Yes, it is going to take the “feminine” aspect of us to defeat them. It is mothers, not fathers, of all species, who defend their homes and their young.

Individuals must stop trying to find the perfect solution; we must join forces. Can we all have just one website, where we agree on the basic premise of “NO!”?  On one page, only, let them know that we are live human beings, not dead fictions; their laws do not apply to us, as we waive our right to be recognized as ‘persons’; we do not recognize them, as they are a de facto, fraudulent, foreign corporation with no rights, whatsoever, to be on our land or in our lives.  Let’s show up and order them out of OUR public buildings, just as in Iceland. We can no longer remain separate amongst ourselves.  United we stand; divided we fall.

The list of what has NOT worked, because it was initiated by THEM, is endless:

Paper Processes: EFT, AFV, EDP, RAP, BEA, CP, UCC/PPSA, DP, OPPT, IBHR, Notices, Private/Public, Honour/Dishonour, Declarations, Affidavits, Appropriation, Trusts, etc. Few of us have the time and the inclination to learn all this. Those who slave-labour for the tyrants don’t have the time and anyone with a hobby has not the inclination. The CP said, “Every day we get a memo about a change” (changes to block our wins). “We cannot deal with it all.”  Aw, poor kids; they ought to quit their jobs!

Why would anyone, in their, now, precarious positions, not quit?!  Ah, the almighty buck! The CP admits they need the cash as they KNOW they will not see their pensions but, like addicts, they can NOT quit!  They all KNOW they are frauds and only good actors.  I used to date an FBI agent who told me, “All attorneys are just frustrated actors!” (Yes, he was also an attorney ……. and a rather good actor, as it turned out.)

Think of all the Patriot/Sovereignty/Freedom Gurus we’ve listened to, over the years. So far, no one has come up with a win. Why?  No matter what we do, even when it is both lawful and accurate, the minions simply will not allow us to prevail (“a flaw in the Bob Loblaw law”).  Think of all we have studied:  Trust, Contract, Admiralty, Equity, Procedural, Maritime, Federal, State, Provincial, Municipal, Statutory, International, Codes, Regulations, Rules, Treaties, Policies, Legislations, Acts, Bills, Constitutions, Charters.  NONE of it has anything to do with us. What a waste of time and cash!

To any and all whose intent it is to interfere in our private affairs: “Until you provide proof that your codes, statutes, acts, etc. even exist, (e.g.: the ITA –Canada’s Income Tax Act– does NOT exist. There IS a document proving this and, if I had it in MY possession, I would send it out en masse. Employers be warned: if you take tax from paycheques, be prepared to be sued, personally, for Breach of Contract), let alone are actual “law”, and not just  ’colour-of-law’:  conduct based upon the apparent authority of law but, in reality, is a violation of law”, and proof that they apply to people, and not just to “persons” (titled dead entities/legal fictions/corporations/trusts) who work for an institution which is NOT ‘government’, and proof that any man has authority over another, when we know we are all created equal, then you have no standing in ‘law’, no jurisdiction, and, most significant, no authority over me.”  The CP also revealed that judges laugh at the hypocrisy of our griping that the tyrants are “all about the money”, whilst “freedom gurus” charge their fellows for worthless “solutions” to the tyranny.

I have gathered over a dozen stories on how we have won, simply by saying “NO!”  They are varied and clever. I ask that, once you begin to say “NO!” to the tyrants’ minions, you email me:  lovelaughlearn22@gmail.com and tell me of your successes and I shall post them, for the encouragement of others.


1.  if you are asked if you are a “freeman”, ask what it means, then accuse them of profiling and discrimination, both of which are against their law.

2. when you see someone stopped by cops (security guards), stop behind the cop car and ask him if you can assist; what’s going on?; who are you?; what’s the breach of the peace?; let’s see your DL.  Yes, he will tell you to leave, but, a) We do not have to do as we are told by programmed drones; and, b)  if there are enough of us, they’ll soon learn that theirs is a dangerous occupation. United we stand; divided we fall. No more standing around whilst one of ours gets abused.

3.  We must let them know:  “I do not recognize you; you work for a corporation not unlike Sears and no Sears employee tells me what to do; I am NOT an employee of your corporation so your manual does not apply to me; there is NO de jure government and, thus, no government agents, no matter for what alphabet agency you pretend to work; you are de facto and the people want you OUT; you are frauds and thieves; you are on MY land so you are here illegally; get off my land and out of my life!  You’re a public servant, right?  Great!  You work for me, then. You’re fired!

If the American people ever find out what we have done, they’ll chase us down the streets and lynch us. –G.H.W. Bush    Well, it’s time to start chasing.

We wouldn’t have any of this trouble if we were dealing with honourable, elected-by-the-people, true representatives, but we’re not. We’re dealing with dishonorable, stupid, unlawful, brain-washed, corrupt, tyrannical, fraudulent, vicious, dishonest, abusive, angry, compartmentalized, unloved, masochistic, boring, evil, entities.

The best reason to have a gun is so the cops WONDER if we have a gun. The tyrants are about to reap what they have sown, when they least expect it. We mind our own business; they are the ones who interfere in our private affairs, so, when they do, we ask, “Do you know who I am?  One phone call…. Say sayonara to your family. What’ll it be?”  They won’t know who is serious and who is not. Our job, now, is to put them out of commission, one way or another. If not we, who?  If not now, when?

Individuals must stop trying to find the perfect solution; we must join forces. Can we all have just one website, where we agree on the basic premise of “NO!”?  On one page, only, let them know that we are live human beings, not dead fictions; their laws do not apply to us, as we waive our right to be recognized as ‘persons’; we do not recognize them, as they are a de facto, fraudulent, foreign corporation with no rights, whatsoever, to be on our land or in our lives.  Let’s show up and order them out of OUR public buildings, just as in Iceland. How about a class-action lawsuit against them, in their personal capacity, in a Common Law Court?  We can no longer remain separate amongst ourselves.  United we stand; divided we fall.

Since we already have several wins under our belts, our mission will get exponentially easier, as more of us take them on, by simply saying, “NO!” I wonder if the controllers of the planet have taken on the thankless task of forcing us to stand up for ourselves, by hiring thugs for us to smite and defy, for when we do, at a certain point, when enough of us have experienced the elation of beating the bully, we will “remember who we are”.  OMG!  I really AM God!

Away you go. Be polite. Report back to me when you have, in whatever form you choose, defeated those who would, if left unchallenged, force us to be just like them.

No responses yet

Next »