7 votes

The Greater Sovereign Solution - for all!

This post was prior directed at Boneless Chicken for they thread he/she posted "The Great Sovereign Challenge" - now I direct it to all of you and hope you find some rectification within it.

So first let me say that the challenge presented by your thread appears to have been put forth in order to gloat and presume of others that their efforts in administering the law they may have “practiced” is inferior in some way to your “practice” of law. You state and imply that you have all the answers and that because of your “practice” of law you are entitled to post such a challenge to us all in order to prove your achievement of practice and foreknowledge upon the a stage therefore predetermined. Let me make it clear that I was and am not discouraged by your thread, rather interested all the more as to why you would post such a challenge when you clearly possessed all foreknowledge of the content of the responses invoked. It seems a bit trite to reduce sovereignty to a practical joke, whereby you solicit responses, many quite heartfelt and genuine, in order to induce an atmosphere that is insensible and insensitive to a driving force behind the search for sovereignty: independence.

I am not intending this post to come off as retaliatory, rather look at it as vigilant in the defense of an idea that is very important to many. If you truly weigh victories of law merely by the judgments awarded, then you have unfortunately overlooked a vital aspect of what sovereignty can imply to those you disregard of effort and persistence, ESPECIALLY of efforts in accepting your challenge. As a believer in my own sovereignty I am not so deluded to believe that inquiring for and asking for help or collaboration is comparable to loss of sovereignty, rather a notion that empowers and makes healthy the sovereignty of each individual affected by and from the collaboration and the efforts volunteered therein.

Sovereignty implies self-governance, independence and having supreme power over your affairs as paramount. The sovereign citizen movement isn’t just about the ties that bind us to government and the dependency exacerbated by the degree we are bound, it is about consciously and consistently, when possible, learning to break the dependencies that are negatively affecting one’s ability to become sovereign of mind. I WANT TO BE FREE! I accepted your challenge and was disavowed based on your “practice” and experience of law and for the reason that I wasn’t awarded the judgment by the judiciary presiding over my case. I am not interested in winning for the purpose of winning. I am interested in claiming my supreme power over my own affairs…and I believe I did just that by defending myself against tantamount odds. I did not win the judgment, but then again I wasn’t seeking favor for the purpose of seeking favor, rather I had challenged the conscionability of an unsigned, misrepresentative contract and the solvency and integrity of a corporation that had conspired to strip citizens of their wealth despite usurious and abusive and fraudulent tactics of finance.

I would like to believe that those who are seeking their own sovereignty are seeking it foremost for their hearts and minds and not for the day when they can wave an indignant and childish finger at the convoluted system that awards those with the unbalanced privy of legislating, determining and enforcing thousands of pages of text regulation and law over those who may not even understand that they are not the “person” described in the contract they’ve just signed, or that by signing they are not only subject to laws they may not or cannot fathom, much less that they are subject to those laws as a commercial, legal fiction.

Sometimes the purpose of sovereignty is growth of self, growth of mind and growth of spirit. If you base the sovereign “movement” on the failure of us to stand victorious of your challenge then you have surely missed out on what sovereignty truly means. The most important step is to realize the cage we have created for ourselves…the steps that follow are not outlined, determined or set in stone...we each create our own sovereignty and I wish you well in creating yours.

Peace and Love to all.

Comment viewing options

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

( Yawn ) :

Guess I better put up some chicken wire to keep the barn yard out of my back yard. The eggs laid by this flock are pretty tasteless and show little nutritive value. No more free range.

The Constitution is a Trust : http://www.The-Legacy.Info

still no victories to share?

yeah, in that case, you should be terrified of small flightless breakfastfowl

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

we're not so much looking for the victories you push...

because either way, judgments are nothing more than an obligation to "pay" a debt that cannot be "paid", only discharged...so really, what does it matter if a credit report is blemished beyond the risk willing to be assumed by an institution who deals in collecting on "discarghable" debts?

Imagine for a moment the American people simply defaulted on their debts in response to the organized THEFT of their wealth in 2008 through the Troubled Asset Relief Program and the subsequent QE being perpetrated by the Federal Reserve...kinda hard to approve people for credit when the models used to lend it become obsolete in the face of mass default.

Father - Husband - Son - Spirit - Consciousness

i agree with you on TARP

and bank bailouts. Revolutions have been fought over less, arguably including ours...

But not every "debt" or judgment is "fraudulent". Usually, the opposite - someone owes money for a reason. That's just reality, rearing its ugly head, again. So, while there are a lot of people who would cheer at the idea of mass debt defaults, that isn't really good for anyone. If there is never any mechanism to collect anything from anyone, suddenly it becomes very hard to get loans, do transactions, get jobs, buy things, etc. And that isn't good for anyone. I'm just talking the free market here.

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

Keep discussing...

this is what is needed to break the system.

Thanks for the downvote - it shows that someone is looking...it really doesn't discourage.

Father - Husband - Son - Spirit - Consciousness

Made number 7 ...

on the most contentious posts thread...who decides?

Father - Husband - Son - Spirit - Consciousness

Government is a tool that

works for the sovereign citizen. The police work for the individule instead of against the individual. The government is accounable to each sovereign person. As I see it being defined as a movement against governemnt by those who do not understand. Note those court claims by the sovereign citizen people are not about anarchism but about who has what authority over whom. The state controls the citizen or the sovereign citizen controls the state.

Anyway that is the way I see it being played out. Me I did not ever agree to be a member of any gang not even the citizen gang.

Said my final farwell to windows, ubuntu gave me freedom.

sovereign

hmmm

Well, I don't have much interest in what you were hoping I would know.

I haven't advised you one way or the other on any of these things, nor would I, without a signed retainer agreement and full knowledge of your case.

Speaking generically and purely theoretically, however, it is possible to cross-complain against third parties and I do it all the time.

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

Wouldn't you need to be a lawyer to

take on a client? You say you are a lawyer but you've offered up no proof?

Fraud! You Lose!!!

"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere".
--Voltaire

It's hard not to be a menace to society when half the population is happy on their knees. - unknown

ya know

I've seen your court vids, you're not one to talk. ROF

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

I'm not skeer'ed

Besides, I don't claim to be a lawyer, just an American standing up for what's right. Excuse me if it's not to your standards ROFLMAO!

What state do you pretend to practice law in, spineless chicken?

"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere".
--Voltaire

It's hard not to be a menace to society when half the population is happy on their knees. - unknown

okay you got me

I really am a motocross rider and not a lawyer. Here's my vid. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2HHc8fkRGI

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

What're you afraid of?

Really? What, you specialize in cheapie divorces? Admit it, you're really a dentist!

"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere".
--Voltaire

It's hard not to be a menace to society when half the population is happy on their knees. - unknown

I am not a dentist

nor am I a toother

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

OK then

Used car salesman?

"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere".
--Voltaire

It's hard not to be a menace to society when half the population is happy on their knees. - unknown

Creditors in Commerce

Just found a great site about this topic.

http://creditorsincommerce.com/videos-watch

Start with the first video:
The Living Temple - Introduction

more like

half wits in wonderland

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

so for $500

you thought you bought unlimited time and submitted a 70-80 page brief? Ok, I think we can agree that is what you said. That is frankly stupid. $500 is about what it takes to get a lawyer off the couch. A minimum. You should expect at most two hours with an arbitrator for that fee. And even if you paid twice that, you should try to make your pointclearly and concisely in your writings, unless you want them ignored. What kind of sense of entitlement do you have that the arbitrator is a bad guy and therefore should spend an inordinate amount of time on your matter? the world doesn't work that way.

But as I said before I still think he likely got it right. Not close to right, but right. Not sort of right, but right. Maybe you pointed out a couple of evidentiary problems and maybe you pointed out minor errors that don't affect anything. Maybe you had some points you made and maybe you just blathered about the magna carta all day. It sounds like you definitely offended the arbitrator if he said what you quoted. Rule one should always be don't offend the judge or the arbitrator. No good lawyer would do that.

You fail not only on the law but on basic common sense and common courtesy. You went in expecting to be treated unfairly, and you probably got much more fair treatment than you even deserve, IMO. Especially if you pitched a hissy 'cause he wouldn't read your damned tome of photocopied sovereign citizen nonsense. Jeez.

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

You know what...

I've wasted more time on this argument than it's worth...believe what you want, but you haven't read a single word of my defense and by the way, my defense was only in slight partiality the strawman defense, the rest were Affirmative Defenses used in common civil court cases...perjured affidavits are cause for dismissal otherwise the point of a Notary and an Affiant are meaningless, trivial bullshit...if that doesn't matter or it just evidentiary problems or minor errors then YOU don't understand Notarial Law and are speaking as if perjury is minor and insignificant to a civil lawsuit.

Father - Husband - Son - Spirit - Consciousness

well

ANY inclusion of the strawman mumbo jumbo probably equates your efforts to complete failure. It is an invalid legal theory, there are dozens of decisions saying so (I've told you a few of them already). There are no facts to support its premises. And it further has nothing to do with anything in your private dealings with another individual or company.

It would be like trying to argue factually that the earth is flat, therefore you should win. It is that stupid to anyone with a legal education, bar none.

So, you start off with something with so little credibility, and you expect the arbitrator to not evaluate your credibility as a witness when these are your rantings/writings. Well, guess what? That's part of his job! He has to do that! And you've already established yourself as one who is a nut.

I'll also refer to the "something for nothing phenomenon" - I've yet to see someone in Court playing sovereign who wasn't arguing some form of the phrase "I want something for nothing." They always want to avoid their duties, their liabilities, their actions, and their consequences. Very unlibertarian IMHO. Since this ALWAYS is the case when someone is playing sovereign, the arbitrator was probably further put off by the fact that you were trying to get out of something, and thereby a big douchebag.

And, I do understand notarial law. In fact, I recently sued a notary for creating false deeds in a sovereign scam. I also know that sovereigns both understate and overstate the notary powers. They seem to think that a notary seal means the contents of their crap is accurate, when it just makes lawyers and judges roll their eyes. Again, it is a tell tale sign of someone not playing with a full deck, yet wanting to waste your time on their crazy crap.

If you'd spent half the time you did trying to put together a meritorious defense, you might've succeeded. Or perhaps you just deserved what was coming to you, and figured what the heck. Who knows.

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

so...

perjury is ok with you? Incomplete notarizations according to notarial law used to establish favor in a case is ok? I was not trying to avoid liabilities, duties or actions, rather making the legitimate point that contracts are deceptive and unconscionable by their very omission of pertinent information that might actually allow a natural person to enter into a contract with a fuller understanding of the capacity they are assuming in signing said contract. There is NO disclosure or definition of "person" in most legal contracts today, rather "you" or "your" as a purposeful replacement to skew the facts of the underlying capacity you assume when entering a contract.

"You" or "your" is always defined to include the "person", which under UCC law does not so clearly reflect what a common human being might understand "person" to mean. How many people do you think question that the "person" notated under "you" or "your" definition of their contract means anything other than a human being? NOT MANY!
Is this not partial to fraud in the inducement of fraud by misrepresentation of material and vital facts of contract? If not, then let me make up my own legal definition for the human being entering into a contract and we'll see how far I get.

Deception is purposeful in a vast number of contracts and that equates to unconscionable derivation of said contract.

"And you've already established yourself as one who is a nut."
So you clearly do not understand what I'm saying. 'And, I do understand notarial law. In fact, I recently sued a notary for creating false deeds in a sovereign scam. I also know that sovereigns both understate and overstate the notary powers. They seem to think that a notary seal means the contents of their crap is accurate, when it just makes lawyers and judges roll their eyes."

I was addressing perjury, an incomplete, inaccurate and illegitimate notarization that was used to establish and win favor of the lawsuit, which is against notarial law. The notarization was done by someone other than me and used in the plaintiff's defense. I never said the notary seal means the contents therein are accurate and that is not the purpose or point of a notary moron. The purpose of the notary in the case I'm describing was to WITNESS under OATH the signing of an AFFIDAVIT/JURAT whereby the legitimacy and legality of the document and contents therein set legal precedent. Get it!

Father - Husband - Son - Spirit - Consciousness

the subject of perjury

It sounds like you probably committed some perjury as well. But even if you didn't, I am not sure you know what the word means. And you haven't shown anyone proof there was perjury, much less that you proved there was perjury to your arbitrator.

It sounds like you are trying to employ that UCC/ straw man mumbo jumbo as a part of your analysis. There is no straw man, the UCC doesn't deal with that, and if that is any part of your analysis you're just simply wrong. A victim of your own design. So, if you have to go through your strawman mumbo jumbo to get to a conclusion that you believe the other side perjured themself, then I know you're full of it, and so did the arbitrator. A person is a person. Really.

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

goodbye...

it really doesn't matter what you think...let's sum it up that we have irreconcilable differences of opinion shall we. I have no hard feelings at all, in fact I am confident now that my attempt at defense was a feasible and correct action as your dire attempt to disprove it shows...peace out.

Father - Husband - Son - Spirit - Consciousness

funny thing about your word games

you post a thread entitled The Greater Sovereign Solution, which ironically is a thread about you losing a case. Some solution. What a great guy - offering this same solution to "all". Yes, you, that's right you, can also lose YOUR case, with the same tried and true methods as Liberty Poet. Ridiculousness.

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

still stuck on the case aren't you?...

you miss the point completely...you sustain the belief that losing is simplified and reduced to statistical data, whereby judgments published against those seeking to expose crime in their defenses are hopeless and delusional...my post was foremost directed to you, but then once you made your response as would my 4 year old son you made it clear that directing it towards you was pointless. I then felt it necessary to open the thread to all regarding sovereignty of mind and spirit, not sovereignty made and decided by a mere man filling a position meant for men. Even if I had "won" the case in the assemblyline of cases, it would have nothing to do with sovereignty of mind and spirit for me...

Father - Husband - Son - Spirit - Consciousness

deliberately feigning stupidity

No one said anything about your "sovereignty of mind and spirit" (whatever you want that to mean). My point is simple, that sov cit tactics don't work in court because they aren't based on the law.

I'm not saying you can't fantasize about them. I'm not even saying society is better off without it. I'm not saying that it isn't an interesting theory. I'm not saying police are wonderful and never do wrong.

But these hucksters who claim that they use this straw man mumbo jumbo and succeed at anything in our legal system are simply wrong if not entirely fraudulent.

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

deacon's picture

a wise woman once told me

some tools remain dull,no matter how long they get sharpened
you waste your time arguing with a butterknife :)
what i love though,is watching it argue with itself when it gets bored
deacon

setting your expectations to high,can cause depression

so far I've won

No one has posted proof that this garbage works. Not even you, Deacon. What's up with that?

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

Perjury

Perjury: is the crime of making a knowingly false statement which bears on the outcome of an official proceeding that is required to be testified to under oath. A statement is made under oath when 1) the statement was made on or pursuant to form bearing notice, authorized by law, to the effect that false statements made therein are punishable, or 2) the statement recites that it was made under oath, the declarant was aware of such recitation at the time he made the statement and intended that the statement should be represented as a sworn statement, and the statement was signed by an officer authorized to administer oaths.

An oath of truthfulness may be made to a notary public, court clerk or other official. False statements under oath made in testimony in court, administrative hearings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, as well as by signing or acknowledging a written legal document (such as affidavit, declaration under penalty of perjury, deed, license application, tax return) are subject to prosecution for perjury under various state and federal laws.

Therefore, if the Affiant signed under oath an affidavit that stated they had knowledge of the account in question and the situation at hand insomuch that they could appear to testify in order to use such testimony as favorable to a decision on the Plaintiff’s behalf and they SIGNED UNDER OATH WITHOUT APPEARING BEFORE A NOTARY, COURT CLERK OR OTHER OFFICIAL, then they would be subject to prosecution for perjury!

This is what happened in my case. I think that should be pretty clear now.

Father - Husband - Son - Spirit - Consciousness

you lost

so by definition you lose.

Sounds like you didn't know the law very well. There are states where if you are dealing with the issue of whether someone owes a debt or not, it may not matter if every instrument in the chain is properly produced...as long as the bottom line is that hte debtor is in default on their obligation. You have to actually know the law, and get legal advice. It really does help. You were all fixated on this thing which, though you may have been right about it, doesn't even help you in court. It may help you if you can convince some agency to go prosecute that person for false notary or perjury or whatever, but it sounds like between you and the creditor, not such a big deal. And once again - reality of the way it is, is often very different from the way it should be.

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