62 votes

FBI/FDA Raid on Natural Cancer Center Brings Medical Tyranny to Oklahoma

We've all heard the stories of overreaching government, police abuse and federal raids on peaceful, voluntary transactions. Up until yesterday I had not personally experienced it.

Sam and Yvonne have been dear friends of our family for several years now. Four years ago Yvonne was diagnosed with stage 3 melanoma and given 6 months to live. Her doctor recommended a treatment of chemotherapy and didn't offer a good prognosis, neither in how she would feel during the course of the treatment, nor in the ultimate effectiveness of the treatment to cure the disease. Through prayer and careful consideration, Yvonne opted to decline this path of treatment and decided to pursue natural alternatives that would at least help her live out what seemed to be the last days of her life without the ill effects of chemotherapy. Homeschooling three children was already a tiring job, but complicating that with the side effects of toxic cancer treatment was not something Yvonne was willing to do. To the best of her ability she has educated herself on diet, essential oils, and other natural ways to help her body heal. The results have shocked her oncologist, and she has vibrantly outlasted her predicted 6 month death sentence. Although her progress has been steady, recently she has had some setbacks that are once again threatening her life.

Tumors began to once again develop that were noticeable under her arm. She began feeling weak and experienced several other problems. She began looking towards natural solutions such as the Gerson Therapy and other treatments with injected vitamins. After what she would describe as some divine coincidences, she chose to explore a natural cancer treatment center just a few hours away in Tulsa, Oklahoma, Camelot Cancer Care. Camelot offered an injection of a solution of DMSO, Laetrile, and Vitamin C. They advertised this clearly on their website and also explained it clearly in their treatment plan that they discussed with Yvonne. After much research and prayer Yvonne and Sam decided that this was the course of treatment they would like to take.

Having no health insurance and with Sam recently recovering from an on the job injury which required a knee replacement, money was tight. Through the charity of friends and family they were able to raise enough money to at least pay for the first round of treatment at Camelot. Camelot required a PET scan prior to treatment. The Doctor that read the PET scan remarked that Yvonne's cancer, although aggressive, seemed to be contained near the skin, and hadn't spread to the rest of her body. He said that if she would have had surgery on this kind of cancer, which was previously recommend to her by another doctor, that it would have "spread like wildfire" throughout her body. He also was shocked that her liver was almost as healthy as that of a person without cancer. He informed her that people with this stage of cancer generally have a hard time healing because of the damage that had already been done to their liver, both from the disease and from the toxic treatments. He was familiar with the protocol at Camelot and felt that this was a very good course of treatment for Yvonne to take. They were filled with hope!

The Camelot procedure is at a minimum a 20 day procedure that includes the injection of their formula every day via an IV solution. The entire process is overseen by a medical Doctor as well as a naturopath. Yvonne's PET scan Doctor, and the Doctor at Camelot felt that she would need more than one course of treatment in order to effectively batter her cancer. The first 8 days of the treatment are done at Camelot's facility in Tulsa, where the patient is monitored, blood tested, and trained on the procedure. For the remaining portion of the procedure the patient is able, if desired, to go home with their medicine and continue the protocol in the comfort of familiar surroundings.

Tuesday April 23rd 2013 was day 8 of Yvonne's treatment. She and Sam were eager to get back home to their children, continue her treatments there, and try to re-establish at least some modicum of normalcy. That morning, in the midst of her treatment at the center, agents from the FBI and FDA raided the facility. They forced all patients to stop their treatments. They told Sam that B17 was not approved for the treatment of cancer and this was the reason for the raid. My friend Sam reached down to grab the box of medicine that would be used to continue the treatments at home, only to have an agent slam his fist down on it and tell him he couldn't take it. Sam argued that it was HIS personal property that he had paid for! The agent did not relent, Sam said, "well you are going to have to read me rights then", and the agent threatened to arrest him for "obstructing justice". One agent turned to Yvonne and said "We are doing this to protect you", Yvonne replied "How are you protecting me? You are taking my medicine, I will not be able to continue my treatment." He actually responded "I am just doing my job ma'am".

The FBI and FDA agents held Sam and Yvonne for over 2 hours under constant armed guard. They tolerated this at first because they had been told there would be a chance they would be able to leave with their medicine, but after calls to "federal prosecutors" their hopes for this were dashed. The stress of this incident left Yvonne shaking for hours. Sam and Yvonne finally left without their medicine. They were not even allowed to take the cleaning solution or flushing solution that is needed to keep her PICC line from getting infected. With a serious blow to their hope by the "benevolence" of the state, they now had the added stress of recovering the money they had spent on this treatment. They are racing against the clock as Yvonne's condition worsens and the prospect of quickly retrieving the money seemed to be slim, this beside the fact that Camelot Cancer Care's protocol is the treatment that Yvonne WANTS to pay for!

The future of Yvonne's treatment is uncertain as I write this. The owners of Camelot Cancer Care have reached out to them and are working to find a solution. The FBI has said the clinic can reopen the next day if they quit using Laetrile (B17), but Sam and Yvonne specifically chose that clinic because it openly stated that they used this natural substance. The situation our government has created is one that will ultimately pit the patient against their provider of choice, while also denying the care to a person who has chosen to treat their cancer in this way.

When Sam and Yvonne found Camelot Cancer Care, we were all filled with hope. The outpouring of support from friends and family bolstered that hope all the more. So you can imagine, when armed agents of our oppressive state stormed in, how far the fall seemed to feel as our hopes were attacked. Please share and pray and do whatever you are led to help get the word out, and to lift up my friend, and all of us, from the oppression of this government.

A news story of this incident can be found here:

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.


It would be amazing to see healing centers open in Washington where people could enjoy the benefits of the gentle herb.
And I pray I only need to come visit you to enjoy sharing tales of the r3VOLution, not because I need to take you up on your kind offer. It is a comfort having the offer, thank you.

Love or fear? Choose again with every breath.

Those "healing centers" you're talking about

are going to be "cafes" like in Amsterdam. Since legislators like the business of Cancer, we have to re-word "healing" with "consuming" so it fits a business profile.

There's already legislation trying to ban cannabis being smoked in business establishments. Of course, Patty Murray (D-WA) and Maria Cantwell (D-WA) are both Obama supporters and will do whatever the DNC/WH want them to.

If you don't know your rights, you don't have any.

Thank you for the great info,

Thank you for the great info, and personal testimony, but laetrille does NOT contain cyanide. From what I read and have heard from personal testimony, it is an inactive cyanide (different name) that is contained in laetrille, which turns into cyanide when enough of the enzyme "glucosidase" comes into contact with it. Which cells in your body contain enough of that glucosidase to release the cyanide? You guessed it, the cancerous cells. The pharma industry will never replicate it. I consume 7+ on a regular basis. Only cancer cells are in danger. DISCLAIMER; I am not a doctor, proceed at your own risk.


It is hard to stay on top of all the LIES. Thanks for the info!

Love or fear? Choose again with every breath.

The pharmo-medical industry

has it all monopolized. Chiropractors and natural doctors are not allowed to give care in hospitals. It has to be a medical college grad to work in a hospital.

Medical college grads treat patients by mainly writing prescriptions according to a recipe page drawn up by the medical college and pharmo industry. No natural substances there.

If a doctor saves a life using any method other than the ones allowed by medical-pharmo, he/she can lose their license as a doctor. That is how deep the corruption goes.

Every time I hear the excuse "Just doing my job"...


If men are good, you don't need government; if men are evil or ambivalent, you don't dare have one.

mods, please front page this

mods, please front page this

Christians should not be warmongers! http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance87.html

Under Comon Law

All of those people in the facility now have a valid cause of action to arrest the men claiming to be Officers. They could go on the offensive now if they were to pierce the corporate veil of the "Officer" and take their criminal and civil accusations against the men claiming to occupy the "Officer" directly to the Jury. If anyone obstructs their access to the Jury that man or woman would be obstructing Justice and would also give them another valid cause of action.

Those men claiming to "Officers" have committed several felony level crimes in their actions and if they claim to be operating under the Capacity of their Constitutional contract they are also in breach of duty under Common Law.

We really need to relearn Common Law. Under Common Law we can pierce the corporate veil and seek justice for the crimes the men are committing under color of law.

How long is it going to take America to remember Common Law and the REAL protections of law? If someone harms your peace then you have a valid cause of action for Breach of Peace. If someone is under contract with you and breaches that contract then you have a valid cause of action for Breach of Duty. How long is it going to take us to realize that crime cannot be remedied through politics?

We are wasting our time with politics. Politics is the game TPTB want us to play because it removes our inherent sovereign power through our juries.

Please wake up!!!

The law is there for our protections. In our ignorance of the real law we are throwing away thousands of years of law and its pinnacle of realization in our DOI and Constitution. The Constitution is the contract between Men and the men bound by its prohibitions and duty can only be held accountable for this contractually binding duty through Common Law and our Juries. Officers are legal fictions and can never be held accountable as a limited liability capacity. We are going to lose EVERYTHING if we don't realize this soon.

The most powerful Law of Nature is Time. It is finite and we all will run out of it. Use this Law to your advantage, for it offers you infinite possibilities...

no you need to learn

No you need to learn common law. There is not a separate system of laws that mean whatever you want them to mean. Common law is not that. Common law refers to case law. That is all it means. No one has forgotten case law.

And stop with the sovereign internet kiddy in the basement faux legal mumbo jumbo - that won;t get you anywhere except arrested by someone who can make it stick. Reality, as opposed to fantasy, must first be appreciated if you want to work for change.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

Common Law is derived from case law

but Common Law is not just Case law. That is why we call them by two different names because they have discreet meanings. Logically case law is subset of common law. Not all case law is common law either. If all cases are considered "law" then this logically means that we would not have any case law "repugnant" to our laws. Even statutes strictly construct that only Common Law not "repugnant" to our laws is lawful.

Common Law is exactly what it says. It is the law of commoners or those not under regulated capacity. It is the lawful procedures for non-violent dispute resolutions between Men (Law is always written in the masculine form and means both men and women). Those procedures require all simultaneous elements of a valid cause of action claiming some form of breach of peace or breach of duty for a jury to have subject matter jurisdiction to be seated for a trial. The jury will weigh the facts of the case and then determine the facts and law. This is the process of common law. The law Universities teach that Common Law is case law as a form of subversion to American Organic Laws. The universities also teaches Locke's interpretation of the social contract as another subversion to our form of law.

You said:
"There is not a separate system of laws that mean whatever you want them to mean"
It is not about me. The Jury decides both the law and the facts and is the supreme authority in American form of law.

This is not about "...the sovereign internet kiddy in the basement faux legal mumbo jumbo" as you put it, either. You don't need to attack me with hollow threats of kidnapping. All I ask is that you point out to me where there exists in law any more supreme power than a Jury? Supreme authority is Sovereign.

Here is my proof:

US Constitution Article 3 section 2 clause 3

"The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed."

Amendment 7 Bill of Rights

"In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law."

"In the United States the People are sovereign and the government cannot sever its relationship to the People by taking away their citizenship."

Afroyim v. Rusk, 387 U.S. 253 (1967).

The Jury is explicitly made of the People not the Government. Their is really deep reasons for this but it is mostly about impartiality for fairness in trails and secondly about total authority over interpretation of law.

The power of the Jury cannot be superseded by any body except upon another jury according to the rules of the common law which means things like new evidence coming to light that would change the outcome, or anything found to have a valid cause of action for redress.

Yes these things are documented in Case Law but the long and winding road that was to taken to get to through the cases became standard procedures in Common Law that were very organic in nature and had certain bounds of applicability related to Breach of Peace or Breach of Duty between Men. Contracts between Men are under Common Law.

We the People have a contract with other men who chose to be bound to duties and prohibitions under the capacity of a regulated Citizen. We the People are men under Common Law and Citizens are a constitutionally created capacity bound to procedures of first and foremost the supreme law of their Constitutional contract and to the statutory code procedures and regulations placed onto the capacity. Laws have an inherent hierarchy logical congruency and applicability. Common Law is what is before and higher in supremacy than strictly constructed Organic Laws.

The hierarchy of the laws of Man is this:

Divine Law
Natural Law
Common Law
Organic Law
Constitution Law
Statutory Law
Regulatory Law

Each level has applicability to those who have voluntarily gone into its jurisdictional capacity. All law also has a logical congruency inherent to its form in order to distinguish real law from color of law. This logical congruency I state as Real law is when no laws are broken in the act of enforcing the law. Their does exists a lawful logical procedural path to do this but We the People do not realize this.

The case law you are referring to actually has precedent for forms of law from Common Law to Regulatory Law. So Common Law is not just case law. It is much more than that. Common Law also includes maxims of law.

The fact that America lost the history and knowledge of common law and the hierarchy of law is exactly why we are so screwed. Now we have a system where most are ignorant chuckleheads who have no business being on jury but are called and serve. Lying politicians saying that they get to make all the "laws" without presentment from their constituents for representation, Corrupt Judges saying the only law we need to refer to is other recent case law by other corrupt judges. This is why America is going the tubes. It is not because of them it is because of our own individual disconnection from law.

Oh and as far my arrest. I have won in court every time since learning the real law with the exception of one kangaroo farm I went to a while back but once they looked into the facts I presented they realized I destroyed their logic and altered some of their procedures. As soon as we wake up to the real law then we can actually bring justice to men who harm others without just cause.

So are you saying we cannot bring justice to those who harm others as long as they were told to do their harmful acts under color of law? Or maybe as long as a judge says its ok to harm people as long as they were enforcing a statute?

The most powerful Law of Nature is Time. It is finite and we all will run out of it. Use this Law to your advantage, for it offers you infinite possibilities...

here's some reality for you, feast away!


"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

Your source reinforces what I am saying

"The common law is more malleable than statutory law. First, common law courts are not absolutely bound by precedent, but can (when extraordinarily good reason is shown) reinterpret and revise the law, without legislative intervention, to adapt to new trends in political, legal and social philosophy."

Thank you! Are we there yet?

The most powerful Law of Nature is Time. It is finite and we all will run out of it. Use this Law to your advantage, for it offers you infinite possibilities...


We're not. Maybe read it again?

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

"they realized"

they realized that you "destroyed their logic" so they "changed their procedures?" LOL. Sounds more like you didnt know what you were doing, didn't have representation, argued a bunch of fake sovereign citizen gobbledygook that you learned off the internet, and you lost. LOL

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

You've regurgitated well

what you learned by surfing sovereign citizen fake legal websites. Unfortunately, none of it is accurate. Common law is not the "law of the commoners". Go to law school, ask any professor, is that what it means. It isn't. Look it up in any credible legal dictionary. That is not what it means.

And, no the jury does not judge the facts and also rule upon the law. The judge rules upon the law in our system. The jury rules upon the facts. I agree there should be such a thing as jury nullification but that is different qualitatively than what you are saying. You have quoted the Constitution for jury trial rights but havent considered that it doesn't cover unlimited ground - it gives no jury trial rights for equitable causes of action (which have existed at common law for centuries) or for infractions. Sorry, reality.

Finally, there is no heirarchy in our legal system (the one that exists, not the one you dream up in mommy's basement) where statutory or regulatory law is somehow "inferior." Common internet myth and you can get thrown in the pokey over statutory violations as easy as anything else.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

You are telling me

to source information from the very people who have subverted our laws and destroyed our country and our freedoms.

If you can't understand the inherent hierarchy of law then you are not observing reality. Its not that statutes are inferior its that they are only applicable to the entities that claim applicability. I do not just look things up in dictionaries but I also examine the evolution of their meaning over all dictionaries I can find all the way back to clay tablets of Babylon. If you can't understand that most in our law schools and courts are relatively intellectually lazy and seek interpretations of law that justify what is going on then you can't understand what or why America is being destroyed by these people.

You mentioned:
"it gives no jury trial rights for equitable causes of action (which have existed at common law for centuries) or for infractions"

This is because the actions may not be applicable to Court in the Constitutional Judicial Branch. These disputes may be settled in various ways depending on the applicability defined in the contractual creation. It may be a private arbitration or some other body politic that governs the contractually created capacities that explicitly defined their own independent fact finding process. This is the why behind your statements its because of the applicability that people voluntarily agreed to. It may be with the State or it may not. Private arbitration governing contracts is common in all forms of business law and is now even gaining traction in private security contracted outside of the insane State "court" system.

The DOI states:
"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed"

just powers = powers of justice

The reason WHY this is so that the court can maintain impartiality at all times and eliminate all potential conflicts of interest and pecuniary advantages. This also has derivations from common law as one's right to face their accuser and others.

Does the "government" derive lawful procedures of justice from governed right now? NO! They claim that we are our own accuser or that the STATE is the accuser. In other words they have unlawfully established "mock trials" in which there is no one accepting liability for the accusations. Do they guarantee a jury trial in all criminal actions? NO! These are not only breaches but they are crimes of fraud and extortion.

When there is no liability for one's acts of seizure of liberty tyranny will flourish as is self-evident right now with the current state of affairs. The men who claim their "power" of the "Office" from their contractually binding agreement of the Constitution are actively in breach of that contract with the People by using an private banks debt note as unlawful tender when the Constitution Article 1 section 10 states:

"No State shall...make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts;"

Every state bureaucrat is in breach of this binding obligation right now. In fact everything they are doing is based around using violent force to "make" this "thing" called the "federal reserve note" have "value".

Why can't we bring them to Justice for this breach of duty? Because they are psychopathic tyrannical barbarians who have overthrown our Constitutional government. If they where actually operating lawfully then they would not obstruct justice with their acts of blocking our access to our juries. They are criminals and they are not only violating their own applicable codes and statutes but are also in breach of duty to the people. How are you going to justify that? You can't because they are simply breaking the law.

Also, I don't know who in your delusional fantasies think I am but I am not some mooch on mom's couch. I founded and run a technology company that develops leading edge automation systems for laboratory research and production. I deal with top scientists, engineers, business executives, and business attorneys across the country. I have patented leading edge fabrication technology around the world. I have worked with developing and scientifically published world records in thermal transfer. I have been in the belly of the military beast and seen the nightmare weapons technologies that they are trying implement for the future. I left that world specifically for the reason of the scientists and military generals actually stating their intent to use these nightmare technologies on "Protestors inside the United States"

My dad was also a federal agent for most of his career and I grew up around federal agents; Secret Service, US Marshalls, FBI, Postal Inspectors, and many other alphabet soup agents. I have debated with them only to have many of them acknowledge the valid logical points as needing to be challenged in court and stating everything would be much better if the law was interpreted in this way. The only problem is that I need a real court where direct access to a jury knowledgeable in law can review the facts. The courts block my access because the implications are that they are all in breach of duty and face consequences for those breaches and they know it. They have a pecuniary advantage (the definition of "corruption") and have mens rea to protect that advantage.

I have debated these concepts with sitting judges privately who ended debates by squirming in their chairs and leaving due to the uncomfortable truths and logical dots connected. The judges offered no counter logic, no case law and no clear challenges to the logic. Real law includes the laws of nature and has its effects in the biochemical processes in the brain as patterned logical stimuli is deciphered and put into the framework of experience which is in turn the driver for motor function of the human body. When the failures are pointed out logically to real truth seekers (yes many judges are actually good and do see real truth) the evidence is undeniable. This is why you attack me with your delusions of being some mooch on a couch. You have no logical foundation of law and cannot retort with facts and therefore you intentionally divert the argument by attacking me without any facts. If you think that you can escape the inviolate laws of nature then you are delusional. Your neurons operate in a very specific way and their applicable laws are the laws of nature. The laws of nature is inherent in the hierarchy of law because they are inviolate. This fact is self-evident. If you don't realize the full scope its applicability within all law then you are not talking about real law.

It is clear to me however, that the highest probability right now of who you are is that professionally you are some low-level law enforcement agent who has had "training" on the "sovereign citizen movement" by ADL and SPLC propaganda. Yes I am watching that too. Closer than you. ADL lost all credibility when they where challenged on the history of the Bush family funded and profited off Hitler and the NAZIs. The ADL simply put out one statement that basically said that the evidence of these claims is "untenable". The facts of the Bush families NAZI ties is overwhelming , their bank was seized by the Federal Government under the trading with the enemy act along with treason charges explored on Prescott Bush among many other things including the Intelligence services out of the Netherlands declassifying all of their internal intelligence on every financial transaction carried out by the Union Bank and IG Farben and Consolidated Silesean Steel Corporation. Yes I am watching them too very closely. The ADL has an agenda to control the interpretations of law to their advantage. They need the funny money FRNs to fund their agenda. They can't have We the People awaken to the fraud because their control will end and their resources of funny money will evaporate as a result of this awakening.

Am I correct here? Are you a "law enforcement officer" trained in ADL and SPLC propaganda? Notice I said highest probability not stating it as fact. This is how truth and honesty works, I am not making assumptions just evaluating logical probabilities from the pattern of words you emit and stating it as a high probability with the information at hand.

In closing I challenge you to show me where Codes and Statutes or Regulations claim applicability to the "People". You can't because it does not claim to and there is a very specific reason why this is so. When you find the answer to this you will then see how so many can be wrong and you can see how strategic usurpations have been implemented for the purpose of confusing People into being "persons". This has nothing to do with the latest internet myths it has to with the fact that "the Law [God] is no respecter of persons" and where all of this personhood comes from in law. Te founders knew this well and the constitution in its very logically precise and careful use of words demonstrates this clearly. Then comes along the elephant in the room of the 14th amendment which institutionalized (unlawfully because article 5 amendment process was not used) the fraud and usurpation of the person but even the 14th amendment does not claim applicability to the "People". The elites left the door open for themselves and left the rest behind in the confusion of person, Citizen, citizen. Its obvious what happened once one steps out of the brainwashing and examines history in its proper context. Why do you think the original 13th amendment was unlawfully deleted from history? Why did America make and ratify the 13th amendment in the first place? All of these things are interconnected within the agenda of the fraud and usurpation of personhood applied to the People.

The most powerful Law of Nature is Time. It is finite and we all will run out of it. Use this Law to your advantage, for it offers you infinite possibilities...


I practice law for a aliving, and I simply know better. DEal with it.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

You have the challenge before you

Demonstrate where Codes and Statutes claim applicability to the people.

Failure to meet the challenge will result in your irrelevancy. I do not wish you to attack you here. I wish to make sure that people are not operating on brainwashing autopilot of baseless assumptions.

I will be happy to modify my understanding of Law if you can prove to me that Codes and Statutes claim applicability to the "People".

Case law does not state persons are sovereign. It states the People are sovereign. The constitution does not claim prohibitions of the People it claims binding contractual prohibitions and duties for the regulated capacities of government employees.

It is possible for almost everyone to be wrong when so many have become so intellectually lazy that they will only accept as face value what is ruled by corrupt courts. Did you ever consider that maybe America has the most people in jail and the criminal justice because the system is corrupt and feeding off of the destruction of others? Did you ever consider that these corrupt men are the real criminals and they are only shaping case law to give themselves pecuniary advantage and power to unlawfully control others.

If you went to law school then maybe that is why you are so abhorrent to this. Part of natural law of man is the ego. Ego is built through reinforcement so that the ego "knows" and then since everything is "known" then there are no more questions to answer.

You have the challenge before you. Lets see if you can prove to me that Codes and Statutes claim applicability to people. You cannot do this because there is a very specific reason why they are not applicable and comes down to one basic concept, one entity cannot force another into contract.

Do you know the difference between persons and people?

If you want to understand a real genius in Law I recommend you read Lysander Spooner's No Treason. MR. Spooner's logic has no fallacies at all and he demonstrates the mechanics of what lawful operation of Constitutional government would actually look like.

The most powerful Law of Nature is Time. It is finite and we all will run out of it. Use this Law to your advantage, for it offers you infinite possibilities...

go back to Civics 101

In our system, we elect representatives. They are the legislative branch. They legislate. Get it? Okay, let me keep going then. They create laws when they legislate. How bout now? Okay, I'll keep going. These laws are called statutes and ordinances. They have legal effect on everyone. This is no mind teaser as you seem to think it is, unless one is incapable of thought and merely existing to consume food, kind of like a flatworm or an amoeba.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

What is a "representative"?

A representative re-presents what is presented to them. In the legislature's case they are suppose to re-present what is presented to them from constituents. Simple!

Can you show me the presentments from constituents that is the source of what the representatives re-presented? No you can't. Because the representatives just do what ever pays them the most. Lawful operation of representatives would simply wait for presentments from their constituents and then re-present them to congress. The representative would also re-present presentments from other congressional representatives back to their constituents. A representative agent of another doesn't just get to do whatever they want.

You state that statutes and ordinances have legal effect on everyone. This is clearly not true for many reasons. But one example is that statutes and ordinances have no effect on native tribes living in the Amazon. So clearly your logic fails on its face. One other more relevant issue in American context is where did you ever presume that legislative actions have or was ever intended to, effect on We the People? No where in the Constitution is this stated or implied. The Citizens are the capacity that have applicable regulatory statutes and codes applied to them. Where America in General failed is that most did not realize that the Citizen is the capacity or office under and bound by the contractual oath.

We the People are the creators. Rights are endowed upon creations by their creator. We the People created, ordained, established, instituted, the government as a standing contract for those who voluntarily accepted the bounds and duty of the contract while under its capacity. Those men and women under the capacity, in other words 'on the clock', of the Constitutionally created Citizen capacity or any government created regulated capacities are the entities subject to codes, statutes, and ordinances.

The example I like to use here is that it is like Walmart applying employee handbook rules and employee standard operating procedures to its shareholders. It doesn't make any sense because the shareholder's already have their shareholder's agreement. The Constitution is We the People's shareholder's agreement. We already had/have common law procedures for dealing with disputes amongst men. Codes and Statutes are applicable to only those entities that contracted for those regulations and benefits.

Look I know all of this sounds strange and foreign to those still in the brainwashing. I was there too. But I am not anymore because I to logic and reason to evaluate things for truth. I cannot find any place in the Constitution or Codes where they even claim applicability. Once I realized this and then began to look deeper into history I realized exactly why the words where used so carefully in Constitution. Knowledge and understanding of law to the framers and ratifiers were much deeper than most people's knowledge today. I am only stated what I found and you keep giving very simple basic arguments with no facts in law pointed to. I tried to give you the shortcut by simply asking you to point out where in the Constitution legislative actions claim applicability to the People. You can't because its not there. Its not in codes/statutes/ordinances either. I know why its not there and where all this came from. If you want to simply attack me go ahead but your efforts and failures will be recorded here for all to see. The challenge still stands unanswered.

The most powerful Law of Nature is Time. It is finite and we all will run out of it. Use this Law to your advantage, for it offers you infinite possibilities...

Mr. "I know this sounds strange"

you know what - I know this may sound strange to you - but I've researched the crap out of all these supposed sovereign citizen legal myths and they are just myths. I have even had to, at a prior legal job, argue against this crap regularly in court. These theories of yours are not revolutionary or beyond my knowledge or comprehension, they're simply wrong. They don't work, and not because the Courts are corrupt and the clerks are out to get you. They don't work because they don't comport with the law.

You might in your heart of hearts believe that you - with whatever level of training you believe you have - have all of the answers. You might beleive that normal law books are wrong, that you have the secret laws and if you apply them you will prevail. As you have noted from your own personal experience, it doesn't quite turn out that way.

When faced with people arguing this stuff, no one breaks a sweat. It is like being given a free pass. When up against a faux sovereign, I always knew I couldn't lose, because even if there were a weakness to my client's case, I could always rely on the opposition to fail to properly address it. They are too busy trying to proffer their supposedly superior theories to actually make any good points, or to take the right actions, or to prove the right things. They lose even when they could have won. It becomes downright hilarious. And when they lose, tehy are always convinced that it is not because they failed to say anything persuasive or meritorious - they are convinced that there is a grand secret conspiracy or as you put it, they claim victory even when they lose by convincing themselves that they didnt get a fair shot because they "destroyed the logic" of the other side and therefore the court had to "change the procedures". Oh brother.

You're not unique, whether you think so or not. You are a loud yapping chihuahua approaching a bulldog when you go into court. You'll make a nice appetizer and that is about it. Then you can go online and brag through your defeat about how you "destroyed the logic" of the other attorney, the court, the law books, and everything else.

But it won't really matter, because you'll still be a loser!

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

You are exactly like the tyrants

You say we know the truth, your a loser, etc. But what about the facts? Why not answer the questions with the very code you claim to be applicable. One line of questions I always ask the "court"/"judge" that they can never answer:

What capacity are you operating under right now?

They say something like "The State of X" where x is the STATE they are in.

Then I ask:

Is the State of X you are referring to the same entity that is under and bound by article 1 section 10 of the US Constitution?

To date: No Answer or "I don't know"

Why can't the Judges answer this question? I know why. It is because they would be admitting to be in breach of duty to their Constitutional Oath and this would give me a valid cause of action against them or they do not want to self incriminate. How am I suppose to know entity they are if it is not stated explicitly on the record? They are tyrants and laugh with hubris.

My research has not been one about internet sovereign citizen websites. Most of that stuff is garbage and even disinformation put out by the ADL in order to lead people down the wrong path. My research has been one of looking through history and especially case law history to find what is logically congruent to meet one criteria:

How do we enforce laws without breaking any laws?

I argue that thee logically derived procedures that are congruent within this is the only way to truly determine whether something is color of law or real law.

My path is not your typical "sovereign citizen" (this is an oxymoron sovereign is supreme authority and citizen is subject to authority). I look for logical ways within the history of common law to find out how can lawful procedures of law enforcement be implemented without breaking the law. Everywhere I look I see the "government" breaking the law; codes, statutes, ordinances, Constitution, Breach of Peace etc. My sole purpose in studying the law is to find its true protections through this logical congruency of not breaking the law to enforce the law. This is a humbling process of seeking truth. The "government" caused me to go on this journey with their all out violent tyranny against me and most people I know. Because of their tyranny I sought truth in the only way I knew how. I utilize the Federal Rules of Investigative Procedure with all bars raised to higher level of corroboration. If you wish to condemn me for simply humbly seeking truth then you go ahead but maybe you need to humble yourself before the fact that you cannot answer the questions I have put forth. You attack me but the facts I point out and requests for you to back up your position fail.

As far as the case I told you about losing this was because I have ID. The ID is gone now so lets see if they attempt to force me into contract. They have already tortured me and told me that I would die in a jail cell if I did not give up my right to remain silent and then proceeded to freeze me of 12 hours into compliance. These people are psycho killers who have mens rea to control others and who claim that they are the law. If that is what you think is correct then you are one of the tyrants.

We the People who seek remedy from their tyranny by attempting to use the courts to stop their violence and extortion in the lawful and just way but we always run into psychopaths like yourself who just want more tyranny and laugh at us while you further injure us. This has a limit.

The most powerful Law of Nature is Time. It is finite and we all will run out of it. Use this Law to your advantage, for it offers you infinite possibilities...

What capacity LOL ROFL blah blah etc.

If you ask a judge "what capacity he is operating under" he'll probably tell you which governor of his state appointed him (if in state court) or which election he ran in. The question doesn't seem to make any sense (like most "sovrun" legal points) to begin with. It certainly won't get you anywhere in court.

if you ask them an off the wall question and they say "I don't know" that might mean they don't know what you are asking. Regardless, I fail to see how an answer of "I don't know" is an "admission they are breaching an oath" etc. Again, you make no sense.

If you want to know what court you are in, hell, that is pretty easy to figure out, to all except sovrun citizens. Look it up online. Go to the clerk's office. Ask the court clerk, the bailiff, the judge. They'll probably tell you. You think you are getting at something with this and there is no "at" to get.

So you arent a typical sovereign citizen, you just use all the same invalid frivolous arguments that they use to lose in court. Wow, how special.

So you lost a criminal case because you have ID? In other words, you lost because they figured out you were the perpetrator?? LOL. I've spent a night in jail, yes, the guards are creeps (oftentimes at least). But that doesn't validate any of the rest of what you're saying. (I managed to get my case dismissed however).

Other than your beef about jail guards, it's pretty tough to tell what you're on about and it probably doesn't make sense anyway. Even if the guards were aholes.

As far as me being "just like the" "tyrants" in court, that is hilarious. Not only did you run into tyrants in jail, but in court, and I am just like them wow. Considering I don;t prosecute crimes, am not a judge or a cop, and am not a govt. official, I fail to see how that is possible. But okay, you're entitled to your opinion. Just don't be surprised if not very many people outside of fantasyland tend to buy into it much.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

Are you trying to be obtuse?

Of course a statute does not apply outside the jurisdiction of the government that enacts it. However, the sovereign myth that within that jurisdiction people get to pick and choose or decide if they want to "consent" is not valid. The "consent of the governed" comes in electing and appointing representatives who do these things.

We have a republic, we do not have a democracy where every little thing is voted on.

And we don't have a form of semi-anarchy where each person gets to decide which laws he will "consent" to after they are enacted. That isn't how it works and it is monumentally foolish that anyone with a high school education thinks it is.

Note I am not arguing as to whether there are unjust or arbitrary or simply bad laws. There are. I am not even arguing that a system like what you propose wouldn't be better. I am merely stating it doesn't exist, and never has. For you to claim superior knowledge and try to dupe others into following you (I bet you charge them for it somehow) when you lack even a high school civics class worth of comprehension is hilarious and disturbing.

And represent means represent. Look it up in a freaking dictionary. There is no secret meaning to it.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

No I don't charge anyone for "truth"

I would never charge someone for this information. I have no intent other than to return to a lawful state of affairs.

Its not about picking and choosing which "laws" we consent to. It is about having a valid cause of action or not. If a valid cause of action is not presented in name of the accuser (the governed) then there is no subject matter jurisdiction of the court because a valid cause of action has not been presented to the court. If the maxims were followed to the tee then the cops and prosecutors would be held in contempt of court (or worse) for the attempts to sue in the name of another. Right now the State makes accusations, the state judges you, and the State collects the remedy. How can this ever be understood to be equal justice or a fair trail?

So consent comes from the accuser and from the accused. The difference with the accused not answering is that under common law back in the day this was known as someone who gives up the protections of law, an outlaw. Most knew the implications of living outside the law because they knew that anyone could just shoot them at will and there would be no justice because that man or woman had already voluntarily chosen to live outside the law as an outlaw. This is lost history that needs to be remembered because of the reasons WHY it was this way. The reason why was because it was the only way to not break the law to enforce the law. That is what real law is; a logically congruent pathway through procedures where justice can be implemented and never lose credibility through any unlawful acts. Breaking the law to enforce the law is not a requirement under real law. Law schools miss that point and that's why I won't go to law school. They would fail me because of my requirement of maintaining a logically congruent path of never breaking the law to enforce the law or seeking justice against anyone who breaks the law whether they claim to be enforcing the law or not.

The most powerful Law of Nature is Time. It is finite and we all will run out of it. Use this Law to your advantage, for it offers you infinite possibilities...

I'm gonna stop

you're not trying to even understand what happens when you go to court. I'm done arguing with you as you're thoroughly debunked and exposed as a charlatan to anyone reading this who has any common sense. But I will suggest the following to you.

If you are interested in this stuff, please study the law. When you understand it, after studying it formally (not faux internet sov citizen website bullshit), you might actually be able to help people. It seems you have an interest in it but there is a complete disconnect between your interest in the subject of justice and law, and the basic factual understanding of our legal system that is needed for you to do anything with that interest.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

I hear ya and I fully agree but good luck telling that to judges

who will throw your case out of court as "frivolous" faster than you can say I object.

Or even if you do manage to get through the administrative gauntlet into a real jury trial, good luck explaining to your peers that the government's laws are null and void when the judge keeps telling you he will hold you in contempt if you continue to argue the legitimacy of the law. Oh and good luck finding the time and money to spend doing it if the government has just shut down your business and seized your property or your person.

Don't get me wrong, everything you said is 100% right but the problem is that we are so far down the rabbit hole most judges, lawyers, and jurors will not get it even when you explain it in detail backed up by historical facts.

For example I have a paper note from the Federal Reserve that says the United States of America will pay the bearer on demand Fifty Dollars, i.e. 38.65 troy ounces of silver coin (FYI a dollar is a coin containing 0.773 troy ounces of silver) or its equivalent value in gold coin. Do you honestly believe I have a chance in hell of successfully suing the United States of America and the Federal Reserve to demand payment on this contract? Dream on.

I can hardly get people in MY OWN FAMILY to understand that these paper notes are bona fide contracts obliging the promissor, i.e. the Treasury of the United States of America and the Federal Reserve, to deliver me actual physical gold and silver coins on demand. Realistically speaking I haven't got a chance in hell of convincing a judge and jury of the facts and the law even though I KNOW 100% based on history, constitutional law, and natural law that I am absolutely in the right on this. As such I choose not to spend my precious time and resources fighting this battle at this time in the courts.

As I see it the only solution is to educate people, and even that is an uphill battle when most are either obsessed with pop culture nonsense or so busy making ends meet they can't spend the time necessary to read and learn about law and history.


Since the law was changed so that you can't redeem silver certificates, you actually have less than a snowball's chance in hell to redeem them for silver. It's simply not possible.

Similarly, if you have a legal case which the courts have interpreted as not warranting a jury trial, it doesn't matter how many gauntlets you run, you won't be getting one. The jurisprudence of what gets a jury trial and what doesn't developed from English common law. In England there were separate equity courts where there were no juries. In the US today, equitable causes of action, administrative actions, etc. do not involve jury trials.

And, no, not everything is a "contract." A dollar bill, federal reserve note, silver certificate is not a "Contract" but rather a medium of exchange.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

Wow! Not a Contract?

You have proven yourself on this one Dave. FRNs, Silver certificates not contracts??? Anything that meets all elements of a valid contract is indeed a contract whether written verbal signed or not. Now maybe if you were to say it is supposed to be a contract but a gang of criminal tyrants have overthrown the government and will not honor the contract would be one thing but to stoop so low as to state that these are not contracts is just more evidence that you are one of the these tyrants trying to put all power in the hands of the state as the final deciders of reality. They just pass a "law" and that is the final say seems to be your final position. The Judge decides whether we have access to our juries or courts for interpreting law. Every conclusion you come to ends with the state deciding.

What happens when it is the Judge and every single person working in the courthouse who is being accused of breach of duty of Article 1 section 10 of the US Constitution. Is the Judge being accused going to be the decider of whether he/she is brought to justice? Your logic fails Dave.

I really think you are a cop and probably a really low level one at that. Your mentality is one of the state being in total control of interpretations of reality and your understanding of law is astoundingly inadequate when you state things FRNs and Silver certificates are not contracts. I suppose you think the Constitution is not a contract either. Are you a cop Dave? Are you sent here to find those dangerous right wing extremist domestic terrorists the ADL told you about?

Why do you want to allow good people to be harmed by "Government" criminal thugs without remedy? Why is not important to you that sick people seeking healing cannot make their own choices on what care they seek? Is that up to the bureaucrats too Dave? No remedy for harm done to innocent people but contracts don't have to be enforced because some corrupt men wrote on a piece paper that they can print all the paper money they want and we have to use that paper money.

The most powerful Law of Nature is Time. It is finite and we all will run out of it. Use this Law to your advantage, for it offers you infinite possibilities...

you obviously don't know what a contract is

because a dollar bill is not a contract.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein