Judges wants to negotiate on the.POW"
« on: Today at
Re:Judges wants
to negotiate on the.POW"
« Reply #5 on: Today at
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
Re:DO YOU
WALK THE WALK OR JUST TALK THE TALK?
« Reply #44 on: Today at
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
[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
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.
[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:
How's that B? Remember always: "Thou shalt not
fear!"
Re:THE
STUPIDITY NEVER ENDS
« Reply #11 on:
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,
« Last Edit: Today at
Re:long story,
but i need some help - very big please!
« Reply #13 on: Today at
Re:long story,
but i need some help - very big please!
« Reply #14 on: Today at
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
[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
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
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
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
[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
[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
[color=Blue]"Unless
the defendant can prove he is not a citizen of the
[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
[*]upon
proof that each and everyone within your jurisdiction does NOT have an
obligation as determined in
[/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
« Reply #7 on:
Re:Declaration
of
« Reply #8 on:
Re:Declaration
of
« Reply #9 on: Today at
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:
Re:success using
a commercial lien
« Reply #14 on: Today at
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
Re:ZIP-codes and
IRS jurisdiction???
« Reply #2 on: Today at
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