Prisoners in New Orleans city jail were 'abandoned'

Prisoners in New Orleans city jail were 'abandoned': "A leading US human rights group accused prison officials in New Orleans yesterday of abandoning hundreds of men in the city jail in the run-up to Hurricane Katrina, leaving them locked up without food, water, electricity, fresh air or functioning toilets for four days as the floodwaters rose to their chests, necks and higher. "

Stevens Point Journal - Easter has links to ancient myths Christian celebration adapted

Stevens Point Journal - Easter has links to ancient myths Christian celebration adapted

Are you Chattel Property?

Are you Chattel Property?
>
> The arguments which I am about to use will sound
> pretty wild to most Americans, as we do not have
> the background in Law and History to easily
> understand.
>
> first I will give some background explanation;
> then
> I will explain how one becomes chattel property;
> then I will explain how to keep it from happening
> again
> in the future; and finally, I offer REMEDY to undo
> and
> rescind your chattel property status. Feedback
> will be appreciated.
>
> 1.) BACKGROUND INFORMATION:
> Most Americans have become unknowing Sureties
> and Chattel Property, through implementation of
> CHATTEL PAPER for the so-called National Debt of a
> Congressionally created bankrupt Corporation (UNITED
> STATES) under the auspices of a Congressionally
> owned
> Corporation called "United States" (note the
> spelling
> difference) as created by the Sovereign States
> through
> approval and implementation of the United States
> Constitution.
>
> Unrecognized by most scholars, the Congressmen
> under the Articles of Confederation called
> themselves "We the People" in the Preamble of
> the Constitution for the "United States of
> America".
>
> If one understands the rudiments of capitalization
> in
> the English language, one knows that capitalization
> of
> the first letter in "People" designates a very
> specific
> and special "People"; in this case, Congress and
> their
> very specific Posterity, i.e. future Congressmen.
> They could not have meant the people of the several
> states, as that would have been rather vague and
> non specific, and would therefore have meant
> spelling "people" with a small "p".
> Once ratified, this vested in Congress broad and
> plenary power and authority unrecognized by the
> sovereign people of the several nation states. The
> =46ederal Government bankruptcy is not a bankruptcy
> of a nation, but rather is a bankruptcy of a private
> corporation called "UNITED STATES" belonging
> exclusively to Congress, via the Corporation,
> "United
> States", all of which is without full disclosurel,
> for
> the benefit of present and future United States
> Congressmen.
>
> 2.) HOW IT IS DONE:
> "`Chattel paper=B4 means a writing or writings
> which evidence both a monetary obligation
> and a security interest in ... specific goods. ...
> When a transaction is evidenced both by such
> a security agreement ... and by an instrument
> or a series of instruments, the group of
> writings taken together constitutes chattel
> paper." (UCC =A7 9-105(1)(b))
>
> The foundational writings for Chattel Paper are the
> corporate issued Marriage License and Birth
> Certificate, which, when taken together are proof
> of the commercial DELIVERY "TRANSACTION" (in the
> hospital Delivery Room) and creation of a "personae"
> (mask; i.e. your corporate name or Strawman
> identity) by a corporate federal or state agency.
>
> If one looks up the term "Delivery" in Black's Law,
> 4th ed. at page 515, one finds "DELIVERY. The act
> by which the res or substance thereof is placed
> within the actual or constructive possession or
> control of another." While the term"res" normally
> means thing or property, it can also apply to
> people,
> when they are considered to be chattel property,
> i.e. "human resources".
>
> If one looks up the term "Marriage License" in
> Black's Law, 6th ed. at page 973, one finds that
> the license is required for legalizing
> INTERMARRIAGE:
> Looking up "Intermarriage" at page 815, it says "see
> Miscegenation": Looking up "Miscegenation" in
> earlier
> editions, e.g. Black's Law, 1st ed., it says
> "MISCEGENATION. Mixture of races; marriage between
> persons of different races; as between a white
> person
> and a negro."
>
> The public schools teach that the negro race here
> in America was freed by the 13th Amendment, and
> became citizens of the United States via the 14th
> Amendment. But many subsequent Supreme Court
> decisions show that U.S. citizens do not have the
> same rights and priveleges as state Citizens. And
> in California, the Legislature passed a Statute
> saying
> that one was a California Citizen, or else he was a
> Citizen of one of the several states of the Union,
> or
> else he was an alien. So, it appears, at least for
> California, that all U.S. citizens are aliens, who
> have
> to pay taxes and have only priveleges rather than
> Rights.
>
> The 13th amendment states that slavery is
> acceptable as punishment for crime, but not
> otherwise. So the question becomes "what is the
> crime, and when was the conviction." Is the crime
> "intermarriage" or "miscegenation"? Perhaps. But
> could the crime be the crime of using Foreign
> Currency
> to tender for debt, rather than paying debt? The
> Emergency War Powers Act of March 9, 1933 makes any
> U.S. citizen who uses foreign currency within the
> United States, into an enemy of the United States.
> Is
> that the crime? I believe so.
>
> When you formally adopt your corporate personae
> by claiming to be a citizen of a congressionally
> owned and purposely bankrupted corporation, by
> applying for a Social Security Number, you have,
> in law, requested a U.S. citizen benefit in the form
> of
> future expectations of Social Security benefits,
> in exchange for regular Social Security payments,
> thereby becoming the "debtor" to the "secured
> party" (the lienholder in due course of the federal
> bankruptcy debt). Therefore the "series of
> instruments" (Birth certificate plus the Social
> Security Application Form) is evidence of a
> monetary obligation (by the lienholder, the
> International Monetary Fund and the Federal
> Reserve System of the United Nations banking
> system, through the bankruptee, the UNITED
> STATES, via the agency, Social Security
> Administration) and a security interest in specific
> goods (YOU)! Thereafter, when one signs and files a
> =46ederal Tax Form 1040 under penalty of perjury, or
> signs some other agreement such as a Traffic
> Citation NOTICE TO APPEAR, one has completed the
> "series of instruments" or "group of writings"
> which "taken together constitutes chattel paper"
> making you into CHATTEL PROPERTY (Human
> Resource) under the Uniform Commercial Code.
>
> 3.) HOW TO KEEP IT FROM HAPPENING AGAIN:
> The Personae which you and the government
> corporation(s) have created, together with all of
> your d/b/a's, are not your private property until
> you have copyrighted them. Your various "word of
> art" Personae's are "literary property" as
> recognized and sanctioned by positive law
> (Copyright definition, Black's Law Dictionary, 6th
> ed., pg. 336). You have an intangible and
> incorporeal right to the use of your name, as
> recognized or granted in Law. But in order to
> protect one's SENTIENT SELF against intrusion of
> chattel paper interests by the Congressionally
> created or controlled enforcement agencies (e.g.
> the IRS, and the Executive Courts), one must take
> extreme care not to make public use of one's
> personae by signing any federal, state, county,
> city,
> or other government agency document without
> copyrighting one's signature and name (also
> including the social security number) on the
> signatory instrument (1040, Traffic citation, etc.).
> The instrument containing your copyrighted
> signature may not be used or copied for profit in
> commerce, by the for-profit Court without violating
> copyright law.
> The copyright is created simply by writing
> "Copyright =A9" followed by the date, e.g. 10 June
> 2000, or June 10, 2000, at the beginning and END of
> the document, or following your signature and
> names. They are bound down by the corporate
> Copyright Act (17 U.S.C.A. =A7 102) dating from time
> of publication of the copyright of your name(s) in
> written form. While the Feds have attempted to
> abolish the distinction of Common Law Copyright,
> their own courts hold them to be unsuccessful.
> The corporate Act protects the copyright once it
> is recorded in some concrete way in a tangible
> medium. Protection under the corporate Act is
> good until 50 years after death of the author (17
> U.S.C.A. =A7 302(a)). Civil damages for copyright
> infringement are located at 17 U.S.C.A. =A7 502 et
> seq.; and Criminal damages are located at 18
> U.S.C.A. =A7 2319. The Judge and Prosecutor may not
> use your copyrighted material without incurring
> copyright infringement liability; e.g. it appears
> that
> they may not prosecute a traffic citation against
> you if you copyright your signature at time of
> execution.
>
> 4.) REMEDY BY RECISION:
> It appears that recision of the Birth Certificate
> and
> of corporate rights to the Social Security Number
> can be accomplished in several ways:
> a.) Mail back to the issuing agency(ies) the birth
> certificate(s), social security card, etc., marked
> REFUSED FOR FRAUD or some other equivalent
> notation, together with an Affidavit claiming your
> signature(s) as copyrighted private property. I
> suggest that you also might wish to copyright the
> Social Security Number assigned to your all
> capitalized d/b/a name.
> b.) Publish your refusal with the County Recorder
> by hand delivery to the proper Officer (the County
> Recorder or Deputy Recorder), not to some clerk. In
> California, the 1872 Civil Code (the copyrighted
> master index to the non-copyrighted Statute Laws
> dating from 1850) states that delivery into the
> hands
> of the Proper Officer means "Recorded" at Law.
> c.) Publish and mail certified copies of an
> Affidavit and an Abatement, both sworn true,
> correct, and certain, to the Officer in Charge of
> each offending Agency, via certified mail, returned
> receipt requested. The Officer should be identified
> as John Doe d/b/a Officer in Charge, or whatever
> his or her name and title happen to be. This makes
> the Officer liable in both his private capacity and
> in his d/b/a corporate capacity, thereby making his
> homeowner's insurance policy as well as any
> corporate bond available for future remedy.
> d.) Publish your Refusal by newspaper in the Legal
> Notices section once a week for four weeks and
> obtain a certified statement from the Pater that
> you have done so, or else post on fence-posts and
> power poles in your community.
> e.) The "HANDBOOK OF COMMON-LAW PLEADING" BY
> BENJAMIN J. SHIPMAN, 3rd ed., 1923, is one of
> several handbooks of the "Hornbook Series" as
> published by WEST PUBLISHING CO., ST. PAUL, MINN..
> This info is so powerful that West Publishing has
> denied ever publishing said handbook. At Ch. 16,
> =A7
> 225, pgs 388 - 392 is listed PLEAS IN ABATEMENT.
> In the middle of page 392 is stated:
>
> "The corporate existence of the defendant
> can be denied only by a plea in abatement.
> A plea of general issue alone admits the
> corporate existence of either plaintiff or
> defendant. The plea of nul tiel corporation
> is a specific traverse, which as regards the
> plaintiff is a plea in bar; but as regards
> defendant it is a plea in abatement and must
> give the plaintiff information by which he
> may amend.
>
> =46or example, if you contest the amount of a bill
> by
> the IRS, you thereby admit that the IRS's has the
> right to bill you, and that only the amount is in
> question. Whereas a plea of "nul tiel corporation"
> against the plaintiff IRS, would deny their court
> action, as the IRS is not an agency of the United
> States, and has never registered with your
> Secretary of State, and therefore has no standing in
> your state to do business or commence a court
> action. The IRS must then enter proof into
> evidence, countering your sworn plea, or else have a
> judgement entered against them. However, if you
> do a cross complaint for "nul tiel corporation", and
> you do said complaint as a U.S. citizen, you have no
> standing to complain as you are considered at law
> as chattel property, or at the very least as a
> member
> or franchise of a bankrupt corporation, meaning in
> Law that you are bankrupt and have the very limited
> liability of a bankrupt corporate franchise.
> One must be very careful how one presents oneself
> in the statutory-executive-Admiralty courts to
> maintain the proper status of a non-bankruptee
> state National having UNLIMITED COMMERCIAL
> LIABILITY. Also, one should let the IRS know that
> the
> IRS has filed on the "wrong side of the court", so
> that
> they have the opportunity to amend to the right side
> of the court, the equity side of a JUDICIAL court,
> which is outside of the bankrupt corporate forum,
> venue and jurisdiction of the Admiralty side of the
> executive courts now in common commercial use
> against U.S. bankruptcy Sureties (i.e. YOU).
>
> A claim of Unlimited Commercial Liability is one of
> the keys to freedom: U.S. citizens, in Law, are all
> corporate bankruptees with very limited liability.
> A claim of unlimited liability on one's own
> authority
> is a statement to the Judge that you are not
> bankrupt, and therefore could not possibly be a
> U.S. citizen franchisee or chattel property.
> I believe that the case in Washington state, wherein
> three Supreme Court Judges resigned within 48 hours
> of filing of a lawsuite wherein the claimant,
> Kenneth
> Wayne of Pierce County, states at paragraph number
> 3:
> "The Claimant, Kenneth Wayne, brings this
> Petition for Redress in his own name, and
> under his own authority as retained at
> Article 10 in Amendment to the
> constitution..."
>
> And again at paragraph number 4, Wayne states that:
> "Claimant, on his own authority, expressly
> grants ..."
> proves my points above as to proper status
> and the effect it has on the court, because all at
> once
> they have before them someone who has the proper
> status to state a claim for which relief MUST be
> granted, unless they can trick him into changing his
> claim of status.
>
> Don't get angry. Have fun.
>

Groom & Groom - Bride & Bride

Well it seems gay Men and Wemen can now get married in The Common Wealth Of Massachusetts, now im sure everyone seems to have an opinion here..............At first i was sorta opposed, to the word marriage i felt as long as it was a same legal union then that was good enough.............well then i t was shown to me that if a state offered two citizen's a right or privilege, then they must extend that same right to all citizen's, just because they declare there love and plan to spend the rest of there lives together, how is it that any one group gets a better deal than another group???? And don't start all that church crap cause this ain't got a damn thing to do with church, the church did not even get in to the BUSSINESS of marriage till the 12th century..........