Judges wants to negotiate on the.POW"
« on: Today at 01:28:57am » by Carmen

 

Re:Judges wants to negotiate on the.POW"
« Reply #5 on: Today at 04:05:38pm » by Andy©

 

What's below is exactly what I sent you as an IM.  This way we might get some pertinent input and valuable thougths from other members as well... 

 

[The above Paragraph added in post to the below IM]

 

 

Private Message to Carmen:

 

Carmen,

 

Never forget that you must always be honest and true to your own highest convictions lest you be distraught with yourself and feel at odds with yourself and your own beingness!  I want to emphasize that first such that you won't be tempted to do something that you won't fully understand and will later regret without really knowing why.

 

Now, think carefully about what I'm about to say to you.  Who exactly are they offering to let go on a bond? Your hubby or his STRAW MAN?  If you've really studied CTC3 you positively know the answer to that question, correct?  It's not your hubby is it?  Thus the bond is a contract stipulating that the STRAW MAN will show up in court at a later date, correct?  Is there also a stipulation that the STRAW MAN will consent to the use of his name once he's there, or more correctly to a name that isn't even property of said STRAW MAN?  I don't think so.  Should anyone later try to make such claims, such claims are easily countered by an appropriate CA&R.

 

Next, who would be signing the bond?  I.e. who makes him/her self responsible for making sure the bonded promise is being kept?  It's whoever signs the bond, isn't it?  Now, I've never done such a thing so be cautious as I'm on unfamiliar territory and merely guessing based upon what may seem to make sense...  However, if you are asked to sign something, e.g. in re to the bond, who are you really signing for?  You or your STRAW MAN?  It's always your STRAW MAN, isn't it?  Yet, if you're not careful and don't know how to do it correctly you'll sign yourself on as surety for your STRAW MAN and you're putting yourself into bondage at the same instant.  Thus make sure you know exactly what you're doing and don't do ANYTHING you're not absolutely sure of!  You must be convinced in your own mind about what you're doing!  Otherwise DON'T do it AT ALL!  Just like you're saying in your message!  However, if and when you're convinced that you can sign as the Authorized Representative for your own STRAW MAN, and that you can do so without any liability whatsoever, then you can do so and you hubby will be as free as the freedom of his and your freedom of thought, i.e. as limited as you yourselves limit one another and your selves!  If you're not already absolutely certain about the teaching in CTC3 pages 315-321 then sit down and study these pages over and over again until you are.  When you're convinced in your own mind that you can do what you always could then go down and have your hubby released for $50 and then go on from there doing what you've already started and without falling back even one inch!

 

Don't forget to add the words "Without prejudice" next to your signature however you choose to sign it!  It may not be absolutely necessary, but it will add much strength to your position and that of your STRAW MAN!  Also don't forget the ©-sign after each name you choose to sign, just like in the book!  If I were you, I'd go to pay for the bond, and at the first instant I'm handed a paper to sign I'd take the paper and go home.  Then in the safety and seclusion of your own home while taking your own good time I'd make very sure I do everything just right before I return with the signed document, if ever.  If it takes a day or ten, who cares?  Better do it right the first time!  Next time, if any, it'll be much quicker, particularly if you did it right the first time.  Then, remember I'm still guessing but this is basically true for any form that requires a signature...  Then, apply your STRAW MAN name, i.e. CARMEN NICHELLE COLLIN JACKSON©, just like that in each and every corner of the document.  Write it quite small such that it doesn't glare out at everyone as soon as they are looking at the document.  Do so front and back on every page/sheet of the document.  Once you've done that, enter the necessary signatures in the appropriate space(s) as requested.   Use this format:

 

[color=Blue]By order of: CARMEN NICHELLE COLLIN JACKSON©

                            Authorized Signature[/color]

[color=Red]Without prejudice.  All Rights Reserved.

by [i]Carmen Nichelle Collin Jackson©, [/i] Authorized Representative[/color]

 

That should do it.  Take it down and be reunited with your beloved!

 

If they give you trouble make some appropriate CA&Rs, e.g. "I conditionally accept your offer of getting me to admit that I cannot sign my name any way I want to upon proof that my name is NOT under my jurisdiction to do with what I will in accord with the law of the Creator of the Universe, my one and only Master and King"

 

If nothing seems to fly just turn on your heels and go back home.  You never know what they'll do when they see that you're serious and won't budge.  Stand you ground and don't submit to even the smallest suggestion, request, or order of theirs.  Be proactive and do your own thing every moment along the way!

 

Later if that didn't work then you can go down again and ask for another blank form, and of course...  if they took the prior signed form while claiming that they didn't accept it, even if they trashed it into their trash can... well then they did accept it, right! Your done!  If they've accepted it then you're in honor and they are in dishonor!  And next you have the NP process, and given a few days all is yours, including your hubby being free as the house-bond he is designed to be. Right there for your family and you!

 

You could also opt for the very simplest safe option, although it may not be as strong as the above.  If so simply sign where requested with this:

 

CARMEN NICHELLE COLLIN JACKSON©

 

Nothing more than that! Plain and simple. Black or blue ink.  ALL CAPS only!  They have no option but to accept that.  Just make sure it's ALL CAPS and with the ©-symbol at the end!

 

Once these things are done you and your hubby together can do the Invoice and whatever else you have to work on for the time being depending on where exactly you're at in your route to freedom.

 

Shabbat Shalom Carmen,

[color=Red][i]

Without prejudice. All Rights Reserved.

Andy©[/i][/color]

 

 

 

 

Re:DO YOU WALK THE WALK OR JUST TALK THE TALK?
« Reply #42 on: Today at 12:22:46am » by kgod999

 

Re:DO YOU WALK THE WALK OR JUST TALK THE TALK?
« Reply #44 on: Today at 08:44:02pm » by Andy©

 

kgod999:  Thanks for your posts, your many valuable thoughts, and your shared experiences! 

 

I've got some thoughts for you in re to the plural and singular aspects of Elohim.  There is also a close and intimate connection between the name Elohim and the thing we know of as Negative Averments.

 

However due to the nature of the matter, and, as you say, the fact that it is a matter of "re [a]legi[ance to] On[e's Creator]" I've put the main body of this post under the thread "Re:Who Is God?" which is found under Philosophy and Religion in this forum.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Re:Who Is God?
« Reply #4 on: Today at 08:38:28pm » by Andy©

 

[u][b]Thoughts upon the meaning and roots of the name 'Elohim'[/b][/u]

 

 

This post is entered as a response to:

 

Re:DO YOU WALK THE WALK OR JUST TALK THE TALK?

« Reply #42 on: Today at 12:22:46am » by kgod999

 

 

 

The name Elohim carries the plural ending "-im" and is thus a plural word. Thus far I agree with you whole heartedly, kgod999. 

 

What's the meaning of the name Elohim, El, and Allah?  Or, is it just another meaningless name?  Like the common folks among the public sheeple use names, i.e. Baaaaaah  Baaaaah baa..... ?

 

 

 

Let me refer first to Strong's Hebrew and Chaldee Dictionary of the Old Testament:

 

[color=Blue]Elohim means: "[i]not [/i] (the qualified negation, used as a deprecative), [i]nothing[/i], [i]strength, mighty, [/i] the [i]Almighty[/i] (but used also of any [i]deity[/i]), [i]these, those,[/i] properly denoting motion [i]towards[/i], but occasionally used of a quiescent position, i.e. [i]near, with [/i] or [i]among[/i]; often in general, [i]to[/i], through the idea of [i]invocation[/i], to [i]bewail[/i], to [i]adjure[/i], im[i]precate, imprecation, [/i] an [i]oak [/i] or other strong tree, [i]God[/i], occationally applied by way of deference to [i]magistrates[/i]."   Cf. Strong's #408-413 & 421-430.[/color]

 

Please notice the close association between the name Elohim as above defined and NEGATIVE AVERMENTS!

 

That covers the bases.  Now let's have a little fun.  Let's analyze the bases underneath the base above:

 

The basic word/name consists of merely two letters, aleph-lamed. 

 

[color=Blue]The word/letter aleph means anything associated, 'family' particularly: "To [i]associate [/i] with; hence to [i]learn [/i] (and causatively to [i]teach[/i]), to [i]make a thousandfold[/i], a [i]family[/i], also (from the sense of [i]yoking [/i] or [i]taming[/i]) an [i]ox [/i] or [i]cow[/i], a [i]thousand[/i]" Cf. Strong's # 502-507[/color]

 

It is pronounced like its idem sonans Eleph-ant, as in a thousand ants.  Now if you have a thousand ants, do you have a thousand ants, OR do you have one family, one stack, of ants, one elephant working as a unit, almost indestructible?  Every family has many members, correct?  Every language, i.e. every family of words, has many words, right?  Yet each family, each language is only One, right?  Yet, in each instance there are many members constituting the One, the Unit, the whole elephant body.  So the plurality is a singularity.  Yet the singularity constituted by many singularities is a mighty strong Singularity. Like a true republic and in absolute contradistinction from a demo[n]-cra[z]y. The language that keeps its words well defined is a mighty powerful language, as opposed to a language based upon the common sheeples misconception that the meaning of each word constantly changes while properly defined in accordance with e.g. "Everybody knows that 'I' means 'me' and 'me' only".  Naturally every one among the sheeple has made a comprehensive study such they are able to show proof positive that truly "everybody" does mean what "I" claims that "I" means.  No questions asked, right!  All hands down.  Well, that's what my own defense attorney insisted was the truth.  She was a most attractive young lady, but I fired her anyway.  (Likewise I almost fell in love with my Ms. USA public prosecutor.  The thought even entered my mind asking her to marry me.  I'm not kidding.  She was gorgeous.  More beautiful than any beauty contestant I ever saw.  She even had a heart and some brains cells left as proven by the fact that she quit her lucrative post as Ms. USA within a year of my seeing her as a POW under her accusal.)  Anyways, I thought the better of it and didn't fall for the trap of becoming ONE with a member who was that intimately entwined with Mother Phoenix bird and all her guano statutes.

 

[color=Blue]The word/letter lamed means: "to [i]goad[/i], to [i]teach [/i] (the rod being an Oriental [i]incentive[/i])" Cf. Strong's #3925.[/color]

 

Well, the name 'God' has always been abused by the power mongers among men who enjoy the popularity of the sheeple they are a part of.  Nonetheless, even the goad doesn't have to be a tool of torture used to enforce the policies of one dirty sheeple upon another, not even in washin' to[w]n.  Not even under the Bill[s] of Clean to[w]n. Not even under George [Washin' to[w]n's] burning Bush that don't seem to be consumed by its burning fires around the globe... 

 

On the contrary, the lamed, the goad may well stand for any [color=Blue]well purposed incentive[/color]:

 

Let's say the incentive of a father who's been kidnapped by Mother Phoenix from his beloved sons and daughters.  A father who has the [color=Blue]incentive [/color] that every father ought to have for protecting his family against the brainless Phoenix bird and her guano stained Rock' n' Role-playing fledglings singin' all the songs of the Roll[play]ing [guano stained] Stones.  Cf. Malachi 4:6.

 

Let's say the [color=Blue]incentive [/color] of a mother who understands the true value inherent in accepting the offer of her Creator in consciously directing her desire towards the father of her children regardless of whatever else may be. Cf. Genesis 3:16.

 

Let's say the [color=Blue]incentive [/color] of a child who won't let go of his/her love and longing for a remote and kidnapped parent regardless of any and all bird droppings, i.e. guano, being thrown that way. Cf. Exodus 20:12.

 

 

So as you see Elohim does stand for the Singular One and Only Almighty Family name of Yahweh, the 'I am', the YHWH, the Aleph, the Family of Families.  The One who said "Let uS make man... male AND female created [t]he[y] them". The One who created each family of Man into Their image, such that each among Men would truly be able to intimately know, touch, and speak to the one face of Yahweh Elohim created specifically for him or for her by and in reminiscence of the One Original Elohim. Cf. Genesis 1:27.  As did Noah: "And Noah looked into the eyes of Elohim and saw grace [Hebr. "grace" = the mirror image of Noah's name, a name claimed and copyrighted for ever by Yahweh Elohim]"  Cf. Genesis 6:8.  Is any unauthorized user trespassing upon a name copyrighted under Yahweh Elohim ever held guiltless? Cf. Exodus 20:7 and CTC3.

 

 

 

 

Re:success using a commercial lien
« Reply #8 on: May 02, 2003, 08:40:15 pm » by B

 

How's that B?  Remember always: "Thou shalt not fear!"

 

 

 

Re:THE STUPIDITY NEVER ENDS
« Reply #11 on: May 02, 2003, 07:39:34 pm » by Andy©

 

A favorite mentor of mine, Friedrich Weinreb, author of Roots of the Bible has stated somewhere that [color=Red]the Hebrew scriptures[/color] may well be considered the blue print for the entire Universe as we know it.  Seems incredible, but the more I consider it the more sense it makes...

 

[color=Red]The Laws of Nature and of Nature's Creator [/color] are obviously above all manmade laws.

 

If [color=Blue]Commercial Law [/color] is Man best ability of applying the laws for successful interhuman relationships as taught by the first two above it is a pretty incredible law, but if its subjugated and redefined under statutes, well that's another matter, isn't it?

 

[color=Blue]Common law [/color] is not well defined as it is sometimes in reference to the above, sometimes in reference to old English law, whatever that is...

 

[color=Brown]The rest is for the birds[/color], e.g. the Eagle, the Cormorant, the birds of Prey, Phoenix, i.e. all those who feed on dead corpses...   [color=Brown]and out comes . . .   guano . . .[/color]

 

« Last Edit: Today at 08:03:55pm by Andy »

 

 

 

 

 

 

Re:long story, but i need some help - very big please!
« Reply #13 on: Today at 08:12:13am » by jmunson

 

Re:long story, but i need some help - very big please!
« Reply #14 on: Today at 07:53:30pm » by Andy©

 

jon: I am very impressed with your ability to argue in court, BUT every argument = dishonor = you lose by arbitrary arbitration under a Judge donning nothing but his Judicial hat.

 

You seem not to have stumbled as yet upon the Honor/Dishonor uppermost secret rules of court.  Search, study, learn, and apply, and with your acuity for being exact I have little doubt you'll win quickly, i.e. even within 72 hours, just about every time...  Search this forum or IM me if you will.

 

 

 

 

Re:PATRICK'S BOE TO IRS
« Reply #19 on: Today at 09:55:40pm » by Andy©

 

[center]    :o   [u][b]Another basis for the acronym IRS:[/b][/u] :o[/center]

 

Consider the part "...[color=Blue]and subject to the jurisdiction thereof[/color]" within the 14th Amendment. The word [color=Red]the [/color] is used in a [color=Blue]singular form[/color], not the plural, as is the word [color=Red]jurisdiction[/color]. If Congress meant the several States, rather that the District of Columbia, the correct words would be: "and subject to their jurisdictions." 

 

Obviously the letters "[color=Red]ir[/color]... [color=Red]s[/color]" in "[color=Blue]the[/color][color=Red]ir[/color] [color=Blue]jurisdiction[/color][color=Red]s[/color]" are missing from the corresponding words in the 14th Amendment. As you may recall the 14th Amendment was never ratified, and is, as a consequence, just another DC policy used for the twisted purposes of the Legal Masters.  Thus how do the Legal Masters of deception make sure they implicate their policy upon unsuspecting sheeple living in the several [49] States within the Union?  Easy, they just do what they always do, they add the power of the ALL CAPS principle upon the lower case letters missing in the 14th Amendment:

 

Thus "...[color=Red]ir[/color]...[color=Red]s[/color]" becomes [color=Blue]IRS[/color].  

 

 

      :)    :D    ;D    :-[

 

 

Now, who is being a fool, and who are the ones truly acting as if they have total confidence in the Power of the Word?  Who are truly the ones acting upon their faith and conviction as based upon every Word in the Scriptures?  Who are being guilty of NOT having such a living faith in each and every word as spoken in accord with the truth of Yahweh?  Who are being guilty of sloppy usage of their language as given them by Yahweh?  Who are being guilty of a false application of the Scriptures as based upon a lack of faith in the exactness of every shape and form of each and every letter within the Scriptures?  Who is being guilty of "lack of full disclosure"?  Is it the issuer/sender or the recipient/applicant?  Who is being guilty of duress, menace, fraud, undue influence, and/or of mistake?  Where are the three fingers pointing?    :-[    :-[    :-[   Cf. Glossary under Contract on page 118.   

 

Let's be serious about our responsibility.  For instance as expressed by the words: "...true, correct, complete and not misleading"

 

Are we sovereigns, or are we NOT without guano?  Where is the proper laver for us to be washed? Is it the one filled with Maritime law, OR is it the One within the Tabernacle made in the image of the image made in the image of the Creator?  Which one is Feather-ALL as in Phoenix, Eagle, or all fiction, and which One is Solid Gold as in all substance?

 

Isn't it great to know that the answers to a full redemption are found in a willingness to be willing to learn? And... in a willingness to enjoy learning while learning? 

 

Are we having fun yet?    :D    :D    :D

 

Hope that helps someone...

 

 

PS Is there anything in this that pertains to BoE?  Well, perhaps not the way you usually think of BoEs, BUT perhaps in terms of another kind of Bill of Exchange, what do you think?    ::)

 

 

 

PS II later edit (upon reflection): As even I, as the author, seem to have a hard time remembering what I was originally driving at in my reference to “another kind of Bill of Exchange”, perhaps I owe it to myself to suggest that such could be applied as follows:

 

1. To the Covenant enclosed in the Scriptures, i.e. as a Bill intended to exchange our worthless ignorance, and the undesirable consequences thereof, for infinite values available to each among us by study AND THOUGHT?! 

 

Perhaps another way it could be applied is by realizing this: One can find tremendous value in being able to have full control over responsibilities accepted as One’s own, i.e. in contradistinction to the frustrations inherent in trying to control another who is being blamed.  Do you see the value in this “Exchange”?

 

 

ZIP-codes and IRS jurisdiction???
« on: Today at 10:30:16pm » by Andy©

 

[center][u][b]Re the Issue of

[color=Red]the Acceptance of Mail with a ZIP Code [/color]

Being

One of the Requirements for the [color=Blue]IRS [/color] to Have [color=Blue]Jurisdiction [/color]

to Send You Notices[/b][/u][/center]

 

 

"There has been created a fictional federal "State (of) within a state." See Howard v. Sinking Fund of Louisville, 344 U.S. 624, 73 S.Ct. 465, 476, 97 L.Ed. 617 (1953); Schwarts v. O'Hara TP School District, 100 A 2d. 621, 625, 375, Pa. 440. Compare also 31 C.F.R. Parts 51.2 and 52.2, which also identify a fictional State within a state. This fictional "State" is identified by the use of two-letter abbreviations like "PA", "NJ", "AZ", and "DE", etc., as distinguished from the authorized abbreviations for the sovereign States: "Pa.", "N.J.", "Ariz.", and "Del." The fictional States also use ZIP Codes that are within the municipal, exclusive legislative jurisdiction of Congress. The Pennsylvania Commonwealth is one of the several States. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, also known as PA, is a subdivision of the District of Columbia. [color=Red]If you accept postal matter sent to PA, and/or with a ZIP Code, the Courts say that this is evidence that you are a federal citizen or a resident. [/color] Use of the Zip Code is voluntary. See Domestic Mail Service Regulations, Section 122.32. [color=Blue]The Postal service cannot discriminate against the non-use of the ZIP Code. [/color] See Postal Reorganization Act, Section 403, (Public Law 91-375). The IRS has adopted the ZIP Code areas as Internal Revenue Districts. See the Federal Register, Volume 51, Number 53, Wednesday March 19, 1986. [color=Red]The acceptance of mail with a ZIP Code is one of the requirements for the IRS to have jurisdiction to send you notices.[/color]" 

[center]Quote taken from the White Paper.[/center]

 

 

[color=Red][b]All:[/b][/color] I'd be interested in how you are dealing with this matter of "acceptance of mail with a ZIP Code" as being used as evidence that one is a federal citizen and/or a resident.

 

I'd also be interested in any relevant experiences encountered in said regards.

 

Thanks for your consideration!

 

 

[color=Red][b]jerseee:[/b][/color]  Based upon your insight as a private One among Men, can you help me by shedding some further light upon the above quote, please?  E.g. if you'd care to quote, or else provide unto me a link to, the code referenced within the quote above, I'd find that helpful!  Thanks!

 

 

 

 

 

CA&R to effectively meet IRS claim of jurisdiction...
« on: Today at 11:01:45pm » by Andy©

 

[color=Blue]"Unless the defendant can prove he is not a citizen of the United States, the IRS has the right to inquire and determine a tax liability." [/color] U.S. v. Slater, 545 Fed. Supp. 179,182 (1982). 

 

 

 

[center][color=Red][b]May I suggest, based upon the above wording, that a most acceptable proof to the IRS per the above may be a CA&R on the following format?[/b][/color]

 

 

 * * * * Start * * * *[/center]

 

I, [color=Red][i]John Henry Doe©[/i][/color], the undersigned, a sovereign under none but the One that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters, conditionally accept [color=Blue]your [/color] offer of getting me to admit that I am "[color=Blue]the defendant[/color]" and "[color=Blue]a citizen of the United States[/color]":

[list]

[*]upon proof that every assumption, presumption, and/or claim that I am "[color=Blue]the defendant[/color]" is NOT an assumption, a presumption, and/or a claim based upon duress, menace, fraud, undue influence, and/or mistake;

 

[*]upon proof that every assumption, presumption, and/or claim that I am "[color=Blue]a citizen of the United States[/color]" is NOT an assumption, a presumption, and/or a claim based upon duress, menace, fraud, undue influence, and/or mistake; and

 

[*]upon proof that each and everyone within your jurisdiction does NOT have an obligation as determined in U.S. v. Slater, 545 Fed. Supp. 179,182 (1982), of accepting this conditional acceptance as proof that I am not "[color=Blue]the defendant[/color]" and as proof that I am "[color=Blue]not a citizen of the United States[/color]".

[/list]

 

[color=Red][i]Without prejudice. All Rights Reserved.

 

John Henry Doe©

 

Signed on this Fourteenth Day of the First Moon in the Year five thousand eight hundred Twenty, more or less, after the creation recorded in Genesis One. [/i] [/color] [Said Day being the Day commonly known as the Seventeenth Day of the Fourth Month in the Year of our Lord two thousand Three.]

 

[center] * * * * End * * * *[/center]

 

[color=Red]Your thoughts...[/color]

 

 

Private Message to Carm:

 

I don't see any reason for you not to send me your phone #, do you? 

 

 

 

Private Message to Carm:

 

I believe jmunson may have been working on a writ of habeas corpus.  Perhaps if you send him a private message he might have some reference or link he can share?  I really have nothing worth sharing in that regards.

 

 

Private Message to homefree:

 

homefree,

 

Congratulations!  You are ahead of me in the course material I forwarded to you!  Be blessed!  Hopefully I too will get to it soon...

 

Re your question:  Not seeing exactly what your acceptance for value looks like it's hard to say much about it, but it may seem to need a signature and a date in some form or another.  If you returned it within the 72 hour window then perhaps that fact in itself would be sufficient, but that's merely a wishful guess.  I'd probably opt for correcting any mistake to the best of my ability, the sooner the better, but without running away from my better wits.

 

Private Message to

 

 

 

Re:Declaration of Homestead
« Reply #7 on: May 03, 2003, 07:26:02 pm » by jmunson

 

Re:Declaration of Homestead
« Reply #8 on: May 03, 2003, 09:06:24 pm » by OT

 

Re:Declaration of Homestead
« Reply #9 on: Today at 11:55:18pm » by Andy©

 

jmunson:  You might want to look at OT's recent success in re to mortgage in another thread in case you didn't already.  I don't know that land contract was mentioned in that re, but perhaps that touches upon the same issue somehow?

 

 

OT: That was a mighty impressive win!  Thanks for sharing it all with me and others!  Hope to hear more!

 

 

 

Re:success using a commercial lien
« Reply #12 on: May 03, 2003, 11:00:37 pm » by B

 

Re:success using a commercial lien
« Reply #14 on: Today at 12:30:16am » by Andy©

 

B, my friend, I see no rational basis for your fears.  I see no reason, not even one, for ever swithching sides to the archenemy of all of us.  I'm sure you've read some of my posts where the nature of every archenemy is defined. If not try Searching for 'traducer'. Then go on and search for other terms that you'll find in such posts.

 

What I do perceive is that the hottest battles on an ongoing basis are going on within each of us, particularly in re to our perceptions of and misconstructions of the nature of our enemy and of our enemies.  I find it helpful to try always as best I can to perceive the ultimate basis for the actions of each among my enemies, myself included, such that I can effectively find ways to remove such parts as represent ignorance, error, and destructive/evil intent. 

 

Perhaps this will help you:  Recognize that the nature of BB is the nature of a hierarchy is the nature of a pyramid is the nature of the ultimate traducer...  How could it be otherwise?! 

 

Why would I - or anyone for that matter - ever desire to switch sides to the one who has not only destroyed my very own family, but who is systematically working by stealth towards the destruction of each and every family and who by so doing will accomplish irrational fears and insecurity in all of its victims and... the consequential violent self-destructive actions that always follows in the wake of such insecurities and fears?

 

 

 

 

Re:ZIP-codes and IRS jurisdiction???
« Reply #1 on: Today at 12:05:35am » by jerseee

 

Re:ZIP-codes and IRS jurisdiction???
« Reply #2 on: Today at 12:56:02am » by Andy©

 

Thanks jerseee!

 

Questions:

 

1. Does USPS keep records of what mail is being received?  Say I receive private mail from friends that don't understand the reasons for following my most current mailing instructions exactly.  Will my receipt of such mail be recorded by USPS for courts to use as evidence against me?

 

2. What's the easiest and most effective way of having all bad mail returned, i.e. such mail as I cannot receive without adhesion contracts being activated?

 

3. What exact channels, documents, &c. does the courts utilize for their unspoken claims of anyone's receipt and acceptance of US mail?