Dave,

There are lots of crazy, stupid ideas promoted by lunatics in this movement, and I believe that you are obviously listening to them, and most likely Jean Keating. What you alleged in that note to me last night was unmitigated garbage. Let me answer them (in RED) as follows:

You stated:

·         December 26th 1933 49 Statute 3097 Treaty Series 881 (Convention on Rights and Duties of States) stated CONGRESS  replaced STATUTES with international law, placing all states under international law.

This treaty may be read here:

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/intam03.asp

Please inform this list of the exact parts of this treaty that support the above assertions. If you believe the above, you know nothing about treaties and international law; international law does not apply internally within a country in reference to matters between citizens. A treaty only affects an alien inside our country. This treaty expressly states: “No state has the right to intervene in the internal or external affairs of another.” And the above treaty simply deals with international matters between countries. May I suggest that have been bamboozled.

You stated:

·         December 9th 1945 International Organization Immunities Act relinquished every public office of the United States to the United Nations.

I attach this particular law hereto and state it does not do what you allege. Please respond to this list and send back to us in highlighted yellow exactly where in this act every public office was turned over to the UN.

You stated:

·         22 CFR 92.12-92.31 FR Heading “Foreign Relationship” states that an oath is required to take office.

I provide below the link to this chapter in this title of the CFR:

http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_07/22cfr92_07.html

This chapter simply deals with public documents possessed by the State Department that may be needed abroad, as well as others matters like taking testimony and other evidence needed for cases filed in other countries. Please inform this list which regulation in this title and chapter of the CFR deals with the matter you assert above.

You stated:

·         Title 8 USC 1481 stated once an oath of office is taken citizenship is relinquished, thus you become a foreign entity, agency, or state. That means every public office is a foreign state, including all political subdivisions. (i.e. every single court is considered a separate foreign entity)

This complete section appears below:

Section 1481. Loss of nationality by native-born or naturalized citizen; voluntary action; burden of proof; presumptions

      (a) A person who is a national of the United States whether by

    birth or naturalization, shall lose his nationality by voluntarily

    performing any of the following acts with the intention of

    relinquishing United States nationality -

        (1) obtaining naturalization in a foreign state upon his own

      application or upon an application filed by a duly authorized

      agent, after having attained the age of eighteen years; or

        (2) taking an oath or making an affirmation or other formal

      declaration of allegiance to a foreign state or a political

      subdivision thereof, after having attained the age of eighteen

      years; or

        (3) entering, or serving in, the armed forces of a foreign

      state if (A) such armed forces are engaged in hostilities against

      the United States, or (B) such persons serve as a commissioned or

      non-commissioned officer; or

        (4)(A) accepting, serving in, or performing the duties of any

      office, post, or employment under the government of a foreign

      state or a political subdivision thereof, after attaining the age

      of eighteen years if he has or acquires the nationality of such

      foreign state; or (B) accepting, serving in, or performing the

      duties of any office, post, or employment under the government of

      a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof, after

      attaining the age of eighteen years for which office, post, or

      employment an oath, affirmation, or declaration of allegiance is

      required; or

        (5) making a formal renunciation of nationality before a

      diplomatic or consular officer of the United States in a foreign

      state, in such form as may be prescribed by the Secretary of

      State; or

        (6) making in the United States a formal written renunciation

      of nationality in such form as may be prescribed by, and before

      such officer as may be designated by, the Attorney General,

      whenever the United States shall be in a state of war and the

      Attorney General shall approve such renunciation as not contrary

      to the interests of national defense; or

        (7) committing any act of treason against, or attempting by

      force to overthrow, or bearing arms against, the United States,

      violating or conspiring to violate any of the provisions of

      section 2383 of title 18, or willfully performing any act in

      violation of section 2385 of title 18, or violating section 2384

      of title 18 by engaging in a conspiracy to overthrow, put down,

      or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to

      levy war against them, if and when he is convicted thereof by a

      court martial or by a court of competent jurisdiction.

      (b) Whenever the loss of United States nationality is put in

    issue in any action or proceeding commenced on or after September

    26, 1961 under, or by virtue of, the provisions of this chapter or

    any other Act, the burden shall be upon the person or party

    claiming that such loss occurred, to establish such claim by a

    preponderance of the evidence. Any person who commits or performs,

    or who has committed or performed, any act of expatriation under

    the provisions of this chapter or any other Act shall be presumed

    to have done so voluntarily, but such presumption may be rebutted

    upon a showing, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the act or

    acts committed or performed were not done voluntarily.

This section is posted on FindLaw here:

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/uscodes/8/chapters/12/subchapters/iii/parts/iii/sections/section_1481.html

Can you send each of us back a copy of this section and highlight the parts thereof that support your allegation?

You stated:

·         Title 22 USC (Foreign Relations and Intercourse) Chapter 11 identifies all public officials as foreign agents. 

This is completely and utterly wrong. This Chapter 11 deals only with registering agents of foreign govts, not public officials of the US govt or the States. You may read this chapter via this table of contents:

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/uscodes/22/toc.html

You stated:

·         Title 28 USC 3002 Section 15A states that the United States is a Federal Corporation and not a Government, including the Judiciary Procedural Section.

I address this contention as follows on my website:

XXIV. 28 U.S.C. § 3002 (15)(A):

The FDCPA simply regulates the collection activities of all federal agencies, departments, commissions, boards and instrumentalities, including the above federal corporations. Rather than repeatedly state in this 30+ page act that all "federal agencies, departments, commissions, boards and instrumentalities, including federal corporations" shall do certain things, all these entities are, for purposes of this particular act, encompassed within the words, "United States." Wherever the words "United States" appears in this law regulating these federal collection activities, it means all these various entities, including "Federal corporations".

You stated:

·         Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 4j states that the Court jurisdiction and immunity fall under a foreign State.

This particular rule is posted here:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/Rule4.htm

Please tell us the specific part of this rule that supports your allegation.

You stated:

·         The 11th Amendment states ”The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of an Foreign State.” (A foreign entity, agency, or state cannot bring any suit against a United States citizen without abiding the following procedure.)

·         Title 22 CFR 93.1-93.2 states that the Department of State has to be notified of any suit, and in turn has to notify the United States citizen of said suit.

These regs are posted here:

http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_07/22cfr93_07.html

You stated:

·         Title 28 USC 1330 states that the United States District Court has to grant permission for the suit to be pursued once the court has been supplied sufficient proof that the United States citizen is actually a corporate entity.

Here is that section:

Section 1330. Actions against foreign states

      (a) The district courts shall have original jurisdiction without

    regard to amount in controversy of any nonjury civil action against

    a foreign state as defined in section 1603(a) of this title as to

    any claim for relief in personam with respect to which the foreign

    state is not entitled to immunity either under sections 1605-1607

    of this title or under any applicable international agreement.

      (b) Personal jurisdiction over a foreign state shall exist as to

    every claim for relief over which the district courts have

    jurisdiction under subsection (a) where service has been made under

    section 1608 of this title.

      (c) For purposes of subsection (b), an appearance by a foreign

    state does not confer personal jurisdiction with respect to any

    claim for relief not arising out of any transaction or occurrence

    enumerated in sections 1605-1607 of this title.

It is posted here:

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/ts_search.pl?title=28&sec=1330

The argument that citizens are corporations is insane.

You stated:

·        Title 28 USC 1608 I have Absolute Immunity as a Corporation

Here is that section:

Section 1608. Service; time to answer; default

      (a) Service in the courts of the United States and of the States

    shall be made upon a foreign state or political subdivision of a

    foreign state:

        (1) by delivery of a copy of the summons and complaint in

      accordance with any special arrangement for service between the

      plaintiff and the foreign state or political subdivision; or

        (2) if no special arrangement exists, by delivery of a copy of

      the summons and complaint in accordance with an applicable

      international convention on service of judicial documents; or

        (3) if service cannot be made under paragraphs (1) or (2), by

      sending a copy of the summons and complaint and a notice of suit,

      together with a translation of each into the official language of

      the foreign state, by any form of mail requiring a signed

      receipt, to be addressed and dispatched by the clerk of the court

      to the head of the ministry of foreign affairs of the foreign

      state concerned, or

        (4) if service cannot be made within 30 days under paragraph

      (3), by sending two copies of the summons and complaint and a

      notice of suit, together with a translation of each into the

      official language of the foreign state, by any form of mail

      requiring a signed receipt, to be addressed and dispatched by the

      clerk of the court to the Secretary of State in Washington,

      District of Columbia, to the attention of the Director of Special

      Consular Services - and the Secretary shall transmit one copy of

      the papers through diplomatic channels to the foreign state and

      shall send to the clerk of the court a certified copy of the

      diplomatic note indicating when the papers were transmitted.

    As used in this subsection, a "notice of suit" shall mean a notice

    addressed to a foreign state and in a form prescribed by the

    Secretary of State by regulation.

      (b) Service in the courts of the United States and of the States

    shall be made upon an agency or instrumentality of a foreign state:

        (1) by delivery of a copy of the summons and complaint in

      accordance with any special arrangement for service between the

      plaintiff and the agency or instrumentality; or

        (2) if no special arrangement exists, by delivery of a copy of

      the summons and complaint either to an officer, a managing or

      general agent, or to any other agent authorized by appointment or

      by law to receive service of process in the United States; or in

      accordance with an applicable international convention on service

      of judicial documents; or

        (3) if service cannot be made under paragraphs (1) or (2), and

      if reasonably calculated to give actual notice, by delivery of a

      copy of the summons and complaint, together with a translation of

      each into the official language of the foreign state -

          (A) as directed by an authority of the foreign state or

        political subdivision in response to a letter rogatory or

        request or

          (B) by any form of mail requiring a signed receipt, to be

        addressed and dispatched by the clerk of the court to the

        agency or instrumentality to be served, or

          (C) as directed by order of the court consistent with the law

        of the place where service is to be made.

      (c) Service shall be deemed to have been made -

        (1) in the case of service under subsection (a)(4), as of the

      date of transmittal indicated in the certified copy of the

      diplomatic note; and

        (2) in any other case under this section, as of the date of

      receipt indicated in the certification, signed and returned

      postal receipt, or other proof of service applicable to the

      method of service employed.

      (d) In any action brought in a court of the United States or of a

    State, a foreign state, a political subdivision thereof, or an

    agency or instrumentality of a foreign state shall serve an answer

    or other responsive pleading to the complaint within sixty days

    after service has been made under this section.

      (e) No judgment by default shall be entered by a court of the

    United States or of a State against a foreign state, a political

    subdivision thereof, or an agency or instrumentality of a foreign

    state, unless the claimant establishes his claim or right to relief

    by evidence satisfactory to the court. A copy of any such default

    judgment shall be sent to the foreign state or political

    subdivision in the manner prescribed for service in this section.

It is posted here:

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/ts_search.pl?title=28&sec=1608

You stated:    

·        Title 28 USC 1602-1611 (Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act) allows the jurisdiction of a court to be challenged, and a demand of proper jurisdiction to be stated.

This chapter may be read here:

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casecode/uscodes/28/parts/iv/chapters/97/toc.html

You stated:

·         July 27th 1868 15 Statutes at Large Chapter 249 Section 1 “Acts Concerning American Citizens in a Foreign State”, expatriation, is what is broken when jurisdiction is demanded, and it is not met with an answer.

This act is posted here:

http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=015/llsl015.db&recNum=256

Please scroll thru and read it.

You stated:

·         Under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12b 6 the prosecution has failed to provide adequate proof that the parties involved in this situation are actually corporate entities. I have provided ample proof that the prosecution and other agents are actually corporations.

I am just a dummy lawyer and have never heard how the rules of civil procedure apply in a criminal case where the rules of criminal procedure apply. Also, I am utterly stupid as to how any natural, human being citizen can be a corporation. Can you please supply to me some real law, and not patriot fantasy, that people are really corporations?

You stated:

·        1950 81st Congress Investigated the Lawyers Guild and determined that the B.A.R. Association is founded and ran by communists under definition. Thus any elected official that is a member of the B.A.R. will only be loyal to the B.A.R. and not the people.

There are FBI and IRS agents that populate this movement that spread lunatic ideas around among the insane and stupid. Thru this method, the movement attracts no other Americans because they correctly perceive that lunacy controls this movement.

You stated:

Executive Order 11647 February 14, 1972 (NIXON) relinquished all states and created ten (10) Regions under which the United States is actually working.

I was born and have lived in Alabama all my life. But I guess Yankees can believe garbage; we don’t.

You stated:

March 1861 7 states walked out of congress and Congress was forced to adjourn “without day” meaning they had not enough votes to conduct business. Thus they had not enough votes to call the next session. Our Constitution did not deal with this.

We have not had a legal assembly of Congress since 1861.

Beam me, Scotty!!!! I want to leave this place where the people are insane!!!!

Larry

2.  (Reply)

 Message:

 ***I wanted to comment on RR's response to "METRO 1313 - HEAD OF THE BEAST". I was blown away when I read this 3-part report: it connected a lot of dots for me (and for other researchers with whom I\'ve been working). The recent alarm bells concerning the proposed Constitutional Convention (Con-Con) only throw the METRO scam into starker relief - as does the excellent CAFR info from Walter Burien.

 

 I question the motives of RR in attempting to "debunk" the thrust of the METRO 1313 report. My gut feeling is that this person may have a stake in the fraudulent legal overlay, and was taken aback at further exposure of the CORPORATION\'s shell game: so RR reacted with petty legalistic obfuscation and diversionary tactics. "Crazy" "stupid" "lunatics" spewing "garbage", eh? The report sure seems to have hit a nerve!

 

 Most reasonably well-informed people now know about the 1913 Federal Reserve scam; fewer know of the Municipal Corporation of the District of Columbia\'s incorporation in 1871, or of 1933\'s Birth Certificate securitization fraud on Americans. (Or of the Talmudic-Masonic MYSTERY BABYLON collusion among the British Crown, the Vatican, and DC.)

 

 Any further exposure of the CORPORATION will be most welcome!! Thank you once again for your righteous efforts, Patrick and Anne: they are much appreciated and are making a great difference in the world. May Love and Light be with you!

 

• Corporate Law
• Go Back

Related in this Category