October 28, 2021 by D. Allen
First, a very basic refresher on ‘The Strawman’.
Your strawman is known as a corporation, a legal fiction, just like all businesses that are ‘incorporated’. The business corporation is just a lifeless entity, granted certain functions through legal authority. The corporation only comes ‘alive’ and functions when human activity is added.
The exact same happens to you, the flesh and blood human adds ‘life’ to the corporate you that was generated either by and/or with your birth certificate and other franchises (agreements, contracts) you entered with government.
That corporate entity, in your name, is a creation of government. Therefore, with the axiom that the creator holds dominion over the created, the STATE holds dominion over your strawman. But NOT you, the flesh and blood human.
Birth Certificate
There is debate about the true purposes of your birth certificate, a government created tool that is sold to you as a benefit. History shows that it was initially intended to primarily get an accurate count of the citizenry for census purposes. The first U.S. Government required birth certificates arrived on scene in 1902 and became fully required by the federal government in 1946.
That is all well and good … except … now you, the flesh and blood natural human have been added to a government database, with a number attached to you. A key point to remember.
The certificate is a document that registers first and foremost, the ‘birth’ of a corporation in your name.
In 1933, under President Roosevelt, the United States became bankrupt. To collateralize the debt, the current and future labor of U.S. citizens were used. Your birth certificate is an instrument traded on the open market to accomplish this.
It is still occurring today.
Next time you are in the hospital having a child. Tell them you want no birth certificate for your baby. You will not leave the hospital with your new child without a birth certificate.
The Birth Certificate is Not the Only Method By Which Your Strawman is Created
Any time you line up to obtain government privileges and services, you become a franchised entity with the government, to do its bidding against you, the natural human.
Activities such as:
- Becoming a registered ‘voter’ rather than an ‘elector’
- Becoming a notary public
- Becoming an officer of a corporation
- Serving as a jurist
- Attorney licenses
- Marriage licenses
- Driver’s licenses
- Professional licenses
- Fishing licenses
- Hunting licenses
- Social Security benefits
- Medicare
- Medicaid
- FDIC of banks
- And many more
Other relevant Items and Dates of Interest
- The Federal Reserve was created in 1913
- The Social Security number was created in 1936
- Social Security taxes began in 1937
- Taxpayer ID numbers (employer EIN#) started in 1954
All the items mentioned, and more have been designed to ensnare the natural human into thinking that he/she was gaining benefits from government.
When, in fact, just the opposite has happened.
The American population has become enslaved by a series of deceptive acts. These acts allow government entities to extract property from the flesh and blood natural person through contract with the government created, legal fiction, known as the strawman.
The States of the union have all been ensnared as well and follow suit.
Today, all laws, statutes, codes, executive orders, rules, regulations, court proceedings, motor vehicle citations, etc. act ONLY upon the strawman.
The natural human has been unknowingly deceived into acting as the surety for the corporation in his name.
Let’s Define Surety
First, Proverbs 11:15:
He that is surety [a guaranty] for a stranger shall smart [suffer] for it: and he that hateth suretyship is sure [secure].
In Webster’s 1828 Dictionary we find:
In law, one that is bound with and for another; one who enters into a bond or recognizance to answer for another’s appearance in court, or for his payment of a debt or for the performance of some act, and who, in case of the principal debtor’s failure, is compellable to pay the debt or damages; a bondsman; a bail.
And also:
A hostage.
Black’s Law Dictionary, First Edition, 1891, in part defines surety as:
[A] person who being liable to pay a debt or perform an obligation, is entitled, if it is enforced against him, to be indemnified by some other person who ought himself to have made payment or performed before the surety was compelled to do so. (emphasis added)
Who is the ‘some other person’?
Your strawman.
And Suretyship
In Webster’s 1828 Dictionary:
The state of being surety; the obligation of a person to answer for another and make good any debt or loss which may occur from another’s delinquency. (emphasis added)
In Black’s law:
A contract of suretyship is a contract whereby one person engages to be answerable for the debt, default, or miscarriage of another. (emphasis added)
Who is the ‘another’?
Your strawman.
Did you consent to this/these contract(s), knowingly?
Remember, the strawman is a dead entity. It is unable to ‘pay’ debts and ‘perform’ obligations. But a live flesh and blood human can.
Before we get too hung up on the word person, which we naturally expect the definition to only mean another flesh and blood natural man, look at the definition in Black’s Law:
Persons are divided by law into natural and artificial. Natural persons are such as the God of nature forms us; artificial are such as are created and devised by human laws, for the purposes of society and government, which are called “corporations” or “bodies politic.”
Well. Isn’t that special?
In short, and visually represented, we find:
It’s almost as though:
There is much more on this strawman subject.
For extensive information proving the existence of the strawman, you can visit this off-site publication.
Let’s Define Franchise
From Webster’s 1828 Dictionary: Of four entries, the first three are relevant to this discussion:
1. A particular privilege or right granted by a prince or sovereign to an individual or to a number of persons; as the right to be a body corporate with perpetual succession; the right to hold a court leet or other court; to have waifs, wrecks, treasure-treve, or forfeitures. So the right to vote for governor, senators and representatives, is a franchise belonging to citizens, and not enjoyed by aliens. The right to establish a bank, is a franchise
2. Exemption from a burden or duty to which others are subject.
3. The district or jurisdiction to which a particular privilege extends; the limits of an immunity.
From Black’s Law Dictionary, First Edition, 1891:
A special privilege conferred by government upon an individual, and which does not belong to the citizens of the country generally, of common right. It is essential to the character of a franchise that it should be a grant from the sovereign authority, and in this country no franchise can be held which is not derived from a law of the state. (emphasis added)
Continuing from Black’s Law:
A franchise is a privilege or immunity of a public nature, which cannot be legally exercised without legislative grant. To be a corporation is a franchise. The various powers conferred on corporations are franchises.
Question. Who is supposed to be the sovereign authority under our Constitution?
Answer. We the People.
And notice, NO franchise can be held unless the ‘law’ allows it. Hence, virtually everything you wish to do is by default ‘illegal’ unless the government grants permission.
Where did Lewis and Clark get their fishing licenses before setting out on their journey? Hunting licenses? Camping permits? Right to travel (such as today’s driver’s license) permit?
What changed?
Here is a graphic which explains where we are today in this country. This by the way represents what has happened since the District of Columbia Organic Act of 1871 (DCOA 1871) was enacted on February 21, 1871, which began the process of placing the government(s) above the people as absolute authority in this country.
Please note that ALL dates of government enactments previously mentioned are AFTER February 21, 1871. Isn’t that interesting?
In today’s environment (at least post-1871), a question comes to mind. Can something be deemed ‘legal’ but yet still be ‘unlawful’?
Breaking Their Own Rules with Vaccine Mandates
As sinister that this near century of deception foisted upon the American people is, it is going even further.
Now, these government entities wish to go beyond their ‘legal’ albeit deceptive boundaries, that of your strawman, to invade your flesh and blood realm.
Your body, which they DID NOT CREATE, is now being demanded up for invasion against your will.
This is not negotiable.
As stated earlier, only the creator has dominion over the created. And, God has granted mankind dominion over everything of this earth except one thing … another man. No adult human holds inherent dominion over another adult human.
Your body is fully under the control of you and your God.
Oh, you can choose to surrender dominion to another. But the operative word here is CHOOSE.
And this ‘jab for a job’ scenario, IS NOT A CHOICE!
It is BLACKMAIL!
The strawman is an unlawful (against God) situation placed upon mankind. Governments can only enact statutes, rules, regulations … which define the terms legal/illegal.
The STATE is now ‘illegally’ crossing their own self-imposed boundary placed by them on the individual, and interjecting itself into, and violating, the ‘lawful’ man/God relationship.
This is unacceptable.
May 20, 2021 by D. Allen
Fellow anglers, I have a question for you. What are the penalties for fishing without a license? And for fellow citizens; what are the penalties for public servants who ‘fish’ without a license? Has there been some illegal fishing going on by our public servants? Fishing, as reported by a fellow citizen, in the form of police officers stopping motorists, for no other reason than to, ‘check papers’, because they were instructed to make at least one stop per hour?
That’s it?
Where is the probable cause?
Please tell me this isn’t true.
We the people, through our written instruments of law called Constitutions, confer permission to no one, any arbitrary ‘licenses’ for this kind of activity; in fact, quite the opposite. The 4th amendment to the United States Constitution says: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
And Article II, Section 11 of the Montana Constitution says: The people shall be secure in their persons, papers, homes and effects from unreasonable searches and seizures. No warrant to search any place, or seize any person or thing shall issue without describing the place to be searched or the person or thing to be seized, or without probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation reduced to writing.
Let’s look at ‘probable cause’, shall we? In Brinegar v. United States (1949), the Supreme Court defined ’probable cause’ as information that would lead “a man of reasonable caution” to believe “that an offense has been or is being committed.” Even further, in Illinois v. Gates (1983), the Court described probable cause as, “a fair probability.”
In regard to our ‘fishing expedition’ what is the offense that our public servant has information on, that would need them to stop a passing motorist? Is there psychic ability by the officer, being able to determine that there is no proof of insurance, or an expired driver’s license, in the vehicles they so choose to stop?
The ‘license to fish’, by our public servants, comes in the form of a properly executed and signed warrant, resulting from the previously determined ‘probable cause’. And the only ‘fish’ that may be caught are the specific items delineated within that warrant.
And, just as a friendly reminder to all who are interested, and especially for the protection of our public servants; the U.S. Code and the Montana Code, in support of their respective Constitutions, spell out the ramifications for anyone who willfully violates any person’s constitutionally secured rights, while performing their duties under the color of law.
Here are the specific texts:
US Code:
DEPRIVATION OF RIGHTS UNDER COLOR OF LAW
TITLE 18, U.S.C., SECTION 242
Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
Montana Code:
45-7-401. Official misconduct.
(1) A public servant commits the offense of official misconduct when in an official capacity the public servant commits any of the following acts: …
(b) knowingly performs an act in an official capacity that the public servant knows is forbidden by law;
(2) A public servant convicted of the offense of official misconduct shall be fined not to exceed $500 or be imprisoned in the county jail for a term not to exceed 6 months, or both.
46-6-420. Arrest, citation, or stop quotas prohibited.
(1) A state or local government agency employing a peace officer may not adopt and require a peace officer to comply with a quota and may not suggest a quota for arrests, citations, or investigative stops for any criminal offense or class of criminal offenses, including violations of traffic or motor vehicle laws, contained in state law, an administrative rule adopted by an agency of the state government, or a local government ordinance.
(2) For purposes of this section, “quota” means a specific number of arrests, citations, or investigative stops.
Yes, tough economic times are upon us. But, that doesn’t give a person the right to rob his neighbor of food just because he’s hungry. And as well, it wouldn’t justify the unlawful activity by public officials ‘fishing for revenue’ in the form of fines.
For the sake of preserving our Constitutional Republic(s), let’s hope we are not heading down this, another, slippery slope.
May 13, 2021 by D. Allen
The powers not delegated to the United States by the constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
– 10th Amendment to the Constitution for the United States of America
Just what is the Federal Government only allowed to do?
(The following is excerpted, courtesy of the book The Constitution of the United States, An Introduction– by Floyd G. Cullop)
01) Lay and collect taxes for the purpose of national defense and the general welfare of the United States.
02) Borrow money on the credit of the United States.
03) Regulate foreign and interstate commerce.
04) Make naturalization laws and bankruptcy laws.
05) Coin metal money and print paper money used in the United States. Set up standards of weights and measures used in the United States.
06) Punish counterfeiters.
07) Establish post offices and post roads for the purpose of transporting and delivering mail.
08) Pass patent and copyright laws.
09) Set up inferior (lower in rank to the Supreme Court) courts.
10) Make laws to punish piracies and felonies.
11) Declare war.
12) Raise and support the US Army.
13) Set up and supply the US Navy.
14) Make rules for the operation and control of the armed forces, keeping the military under civilian control.
15) Add the states’ militias to the US military, if needed; and to organize, arm, and make rules for them while under the control of the US military.
16) Govern the District of Columbia and the city of Washington; and to have full power over places purchased from the states for the building of forts, ammunition magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and any other federal buildings needed.
17) Implied powers (not listed in the Constitution)- make laws necessary to carry out the above listed duties.
Makes one wonder just what today’s budget would be had the United States Government continually complied with the Constitution.
Bet the dollar figure would be absolutely SHOCKING (extremely low).
Would be fascinating for someone with the means, the wherewithal, to research and compile this data.
May 12, 2021 by D. Allen
As is often attributed to Edmund Burke, the quote, “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil, is for good men to do nothing” shows itself to be truer with each passing day.
Take the Constitutional reference to grand juries for example. The 5th amendment reads, in part, “No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury …”
To gain the greatest understanding of the founders’ intent, looking in Webster’s 1828 dictionary, we find the following definitions:
Capital
Punishable by loss of the head or of life; incurring the forfeiture of life; punishable with death; as, treason and murder are capital offenses or crimes.
Infamous
Of ill report, emphatically; having a reputation of the worst kind; publicly branded with odium for vice of guilt; base; scandalous; notoriously vile; used of persons; as an infamous liar; an infamous rake or gambler.
Branded with infamy by conviction of a crime.
Crime
An act which violates a law, divine or human; an act which violates a rule of moral duty; an offense against the laws of right, prescribed by God or man, or against any rule of duty plainly implied in those laws.
Presentment
In law, a presentment, properly speaking, is the notice taken by a grand jury of any offense from their own knowledge or observation, without any bill of indictment laid before them at the suit of the king; as the presentment of a nuisance, a libel or the like, on which the officer of the court must afterwards frame an indictment, before the party presented can be put to answer it.
In the United States, a presentment is an official accusation presented to a tribunal by the grand jury in an indictment; or it is the act of offering an indictment. It is also used for the indictment itself. The grand jury are charged to inquire and due presentment make of all crimes, &c. The use of the word is limited to accusations by grand jurors.
Indictment
A written accusation or formal charge of a crime or misdemeanor, preferred [to offer, to present, to exhibit] by a grand jury under oath to a court.
Grand Jury
A jury whose duty is to examine into the grounds of accusation against offenders, and if they see just cause, then to find bills of indictment against them to be presented to the court.
Let’s take a look at a couple of cases that shed further light on what our founders put in place regarding the grand jury … and why.
An independent grand jury is to “stand between the prosecutor and the accused,” and to determine whether a charge is legitimate, or is “dictated by malice or personal ill will”
~ (Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43 (1906)).
The Supreme Court states that the independent grand jury’s purpose is not only to investigate possible criminal conduct, but to act as a “protector of citizens against arbitrary and oppressive governmental action,” and to perform its functions; the independent grand jury “deliberates in secret and may determine alone the course of its inquiry”
~ (United States v. Calandra, 414 U.S. 338 (1974)).
“‘[R]ooted in long centuries of Anglo-American history,” Hannah v. Larche, 363 U.S. 420, 490 (1960) (Frankfurter, J., concurring in result), the grand jury is mentioned in the Bill of Rights, but not in the body of the Constitution. It has not been textually assigned, therefore, to any of the branches described in the first three Articles. It “’is a constitutional fixture in its own right.’” United States v. Chanen, 549 F.2d 1306, 1312 (CA9 1977) (quoting Nixon v. Sirica, 159 U.S. App. D.C. 58, 70, n. 54, 487 F.2d 700, 712, n. 54 (1973)), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 825 (1977). ‘ In fact, the whole theory of its function is that it belongs to no branch of the institutional Government, serving as a kind of buffer or referee between the Government and the people. See Stirone v. United States, 361 U.S. 212, 218 (1960); Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43, 61 (1906); G. Edwards, The Grand Jury 28-32 (1906). Although the grand jury normally operates, of course, in the courthouse and under judicial auspices, its institutional relationship with the Judicial Branch has traditionally been, so to speak, at arm’s length. Judges’ direct involvement in the functioning of the grand jury has generally been confined to the constitutive one of calling the grand jurors together and administering their oaths of office. See United States v. Calandra, 414 U.S. 338, 343 (1974); Fed.Rule Crim.Proc. 6(a). [504 U.S. 36, 48] “
~ United States v. Williams, 504 U.S. 36 at 48 (1992), Justice Scalia
And from the Creighton Law Review article titled, If It’s Not a Runaway, It’s Not a Real Grand Jury we find, “The function of a grand jury to ferret out government corruption was the primary purpose of the grand jury system in ages past.”
What happened? What does the Creighton Law Review mean … ages past? Well, the power of government, when left unchecked, tends to grow, like a vicious uncontrollable cancer. It is the force of evil that causes those in power to exercise ever expanding excessive, oppressive power over others … when allowed to do so.
Those in judicial power, in recent decades, have found another way to remove (or so they think) another piece of the people’s final authority over its government.
From the Creighton Law Review article once again, we find:
In 1946, the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure were adopted … In the area of federal grand jury practice, however, a remarkable exception was allowed. The drafters of Rules 6 and 7, which loosely govern federal grand juries, denied future generations of what had been the well-recognized powers of common law grand juries: powers of unrestrained investigation and of independent declaration of findings. The committee that drafted the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure provided no outlet for any document other than a prosecutor-signed indictment. In so doing, the drafters at least tacitly, if not affirmatively, opted to ignore explicit constitutional language.
What all authorities recognize as a “presentment,” however, has been written out of the law and is no longer recognized by the federal judiciary.
A “runaway” grand jury, loosely defined as a grand jury which resists the accusatory choices of a government prosecutor, has been virtually eliminated by modern criminal procedure. Today’s “runaway” grand jury is in fact the common law grand jury of the past. Prior to the emergence of governmental prosecution as the standard model of American criminal justice, all grand juries were in fact “runaways” according to the definition of modern times; they operated as completely independent, self-directing bodies of inquisitors, with power to pursue unlawful conduct to its very source, including the government itself.
The loss of the grand jury in its traditional, authentic, or runaway form, leaves the modern federal government with few natural enemies capable of delivering any sort of damaging blows against it. The importance of this loss of a once powerful check on the “runaway” federal government is a focus that has remained largely untouched in the legal literature.
Just because something is not ‘recognized’ by a government entity, does not render it nonexistent. When I previously said, that those in judicial power … found another way to remove (or so they think), the granted power of the grand jury, think again. It still resides in the 5th amendment.
If we don’t use it, we lose it. Well, “they” think they have “lost it for us”.
Not any more! It’s time to breathe life back into this power, granted solely to the people, so that we may correct the wrongs inflicted upon us … one ‘unaccountable’, unconstitutionally acting, public official at a time.
No longer do we have to wait, and hope, for the next election to hopefully ‘turn things around’. The power is truly, in the hands of the people. This is one more tool available to exercise that power.
Just like Dorothy, we are wearing a pair of ruby slippers; although, our pair of ruby slippers is the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution for United States of America. For me, it is becoming more apparent, as I research such topics, that we’ve had the power to ‘go home’ all along, I just didn’t know how much … until now.