Untitled 1

DISCUSSION from PrisonPlanet Forum - Videos explaining chattle bonds/SSN/income
tax.
LakeshoreBaby:
This guy Winston Shrout explains the Ponzi Scheme chattle bonds that are created in
our name when we register our names (citizenship) with the federal government at
birth, how this was used to replace lawful money, and how statutes that are not
real law are given force of law through voluntary application for citizenship and
social security. He talks about how we can access these bonds to set off debt from
mortgages, credit cards and loans. He explains how being a "citizen" through our
government registered birth certificate obliges our offset of the spending of the
government, either by our labor or through bond. Be careful though, because he
underestimates the seriousness of the fraud. He mentions the One World Government
but doesn't see the evil behind the system and doesn't recognize that we are
borrowing value from our children. But the information is awesome. He does talk
about admiralty law (limited liability and insurance schemes) and how it's
voluntary. But he does not talk about how common law is voluntary as well, making
it sound like rescinding our federal government contracts of "citizenship" and
Social Security is a bad thing, which it's not, if you know what you are doing and
know how to negate strict liability common law as well.
Winston Shrout (Solutions in Commerce)

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1038276782308887999
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1819046046183789561
http://www.winstonshroutsolutionsincommerce.com/
Other useful links on this topic

http://www.thinkfree.ca
http://mp3.wtprn.com/Gordon07.html
LakeshoreBaby:
I just finished watching all of these lectures and it turns out that there is a get
out of jail free card for the Browns in all of this, which they, and anyone else,
can use to both not pay tax, to not go to prison, and to get out of prison is they
are already there.
It turns out that taxes are a "benefit privilege" from being a part of the Social
Security system.
Going to court is also a benefit privilege.
And even going to prison is a benefit privilege.
The law is voluntary. Always. The problem is that it is hidden from us that the
law, all the notices we get for absolutely anything on the local, state or federal
level, even being sued, are actually there to serve us (that's why they call it
"getting served"). We are being served with privileges and we can waive any of
these benefit privileges served to us at any time, even if the issue ends up in
court, or even after you have gone to prison. We just have to let the government
know that we no longer wish to have this benefit privilege of being in prison or
paying tax. It's as simple as saying the words "I waive this privilege." Knowing
our rights and using the right lexicon.
I'll try to do a simplified summary of those videos and post it in the next week.
All Ed and Elaine Brown have to do is apologize to the court that they did not know
their own right to waiving their benefit privilege of paying taxes and that they
wish to do so now. And that they no longer wish to benefit from the privilege of
being in prison. And they have to let them go. No joke.
So the first problem is getting this info to them. The second is them believing
it. And the third is that I can't see Ed apologizing to any one in government.
But what he actually would be doing in effect is apologizing to himself for not
knowing his rights as defined by government and using them, since, from what I can
tell, he must have volunteered himself into the Social Security system to begin
with. Or at least, someone did, and he went along with it.
chilicharger665:
Very interesting, but you back it up further until I have time to watch all of
those?
LakeshoreBaby:
Sure, actually it's not that long. Each one is about 25 minutes. Give me a couple
of days to rewatch them and write down a summary.
freedomdomain:
I've been trying to tell people about this for 8 years now.
freedomdomain.com/redemption1.html
Winston Shrout is the leading researcher and teacher at this time. Also Sam
Kennedy.
People here don't care about this. They care about what fits into their dark
sinister conspiracies, but solutions are off the table.
Ask Alex, if you don't believe me. Alex tries to dissuade people from this info. He
believes it leads to liens and stuff he supports Becrafty on.
If that's not the case, then why doesn't anyone ever talk about this here? They get
no support from Alex, or his people.
Alex SHOULD investigate this material. I posted many of the most important points
in my "challenge to BeCrafty" post, and my list of questions for the false promise
attorney.
And I want to add, that Winstons material SHOULD NOT be posted online for anyone to
watch. THAT IS WHAT GET'S PEOPLE IN TROUBLE!!!! -- People learning step one, and
step two, and then going out and doing something dangerous. Learn the material by
ordering it from Winston. Then study it. Then apply it, if you feel confident and
completely knowledgable. Otherwise the feds will use it as an excuse to lock you
way for 20 years like they did to some people.
LakeshoreBaby:
Yah, well Alex doesn't believe in this stuff. This is why I'm sure. Or it scares
him. Who knows. But there is definitely something beautiful in all of this. I
think the trick is knowing these rights, all the angles, and not being
confrontational. To understand and to show clearly that it's simply using our
rights as defined by government and the courts. If you are never a part of the
system it doesn't matter. If you are then it's important to know. In fact it's
important for anyone to know because anyone can end up in court these days, and if
you don't know that it's all voluntary and that we can waive any privileges of
using the system, then...
I think this stuff should be available free anywhere. Obviously it's use at your
own risk. But anything in life is. There will be plenty of people always that
will need Winston's help. Confidence doesn't just come from knowing the basics.
Yes, he's done a lot of work to figure this stuff out, but I'm sure he has
benefitted in many ways that make up for having this info out there for free. And
if the Fed's lock you away for 20 years you can just waive that benefit privilege.
If you were using these rights without confidence and it got you there in the first
place but then are struck with an epiphany of freedom behind the wire, you'll scare
them enough to get you that hearing from prison. They don't want to be
commercially liable for anything they do.
Sane:
I kinda like this message a little better, but that's just me. Also after seeing
the way NWO circumvents all laws, common or constitutional, we would probably need
some agreement before that became a worthwhile angle to pursue rather than the RP
revolution or even the constitutional revolution.
LakeshoreBaby:
Um, Sane, I don't think that post quite belongs in this thread.
Sane:
Quote from: LakeshoreBaby on October 16, 2007, 07:00:46 PM
Um, Sane, I don't think that post quite belongs in this thread.
probably not, but it was just getting so darn litigeous. Basically the thought is
that we are complying with a system that we can choose to no longer comply with.
This will give us a defense against unlawful imprisonment, taxes, etc.
but the people we are dealing with do not obey the law anyway, so why not create
sound compliance to the constitution which defines us as a country and then look
into all of the illegalities added to it like IRS, SS#s, Fed Reserve, Brady Bill,
Patriot Act, MCA, etc.
Perhaps this video more accurately defines the state of the nation at the moment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DqY8iIxe2c
freedomdomain:
Quote from: LakeshoreBaby on October 16, 2007, 06:19:43 PM
Yah, well Alex doesn't believe in this stuff. This is why I'm sure. Or it scares
him. Who knows. But there is definitely something beautiful in all of this. I
think the trick is knowing these rights, all the angles, and not being
confrontational. To understand and to show clearly that it's simply using our
rights as defined by government and the courts. If you are never a part of the
system it doesn't matter. If you are then it's important to know. In fact it's
important for anyone to know because anyone can end up in court these days, and if
you don't know that it's all voluntary and that we can waive any privileges of
using the system, then...
I think this stuff should be available free anywhere. Obviously it's use at your
own risk. But anything in life is. There will be plenty of people always that
will need Winston's help. Confidence doesn't just come from knowing the basics.
Yes, he's done a lot of work to figure this stuff out, but I'm sure he has
benefitted in many ways that make up for having this info out there for free. And
if the Fed's lock you away for 20 years you can just waive that benefit privilege.
If you were using these rights without confidence and it got you there in the first
place but then are struck with an epiphany of freedom behind the wire, you'll scare
them enough to get you that hearing from prison. They don't want to be
commercially liable for anything they do.
Personally, I don't believe (I have to experience it or see it for myself) that

Waiver is the answer, by itself.
If you believe you can commit a commercial crime and just tell the judge "I waive
the benefit of court etc.", then go out and try it.
In the 15 years of research I have done in regards to these matters I have never
seen any one issue work for completion. If it were that easy, obviously Winston
would not bother teaching the rest of the avenues.
There are many areas to understand, in regards to this material, in order to
accomplish "Freedom" and even then, Freedom can still be taken away with a bullet
to the head or worse yet, to the groin or any paralyzing area. Then there is
kidnapping, and breaking you down with torture like rendition and driving you
around for endless days and weeks blindfolded and bleeding. Ask George Hansen the
Congressman.
So, the way to do things, I believe....
Is to File your UCC-1 Claim on your Strawman after doing your Security Agreement
with the Strawman Debtor.
Deposit your Certified Birth Certificate with the Treasury, and now the Treasury is
your Securites Intermediary, and you have an Indemnity Bond and Security Deposited
with the Treasury. That will secure your position for your claims.
Now, you need to also understand court tactics and procedures. There are many
ways to get caught up in court matters and be viewed as a defendent or show that
you are arguing and not in agreement. The Waiver will only work, I believe, if
everything else has been done correctly. Because how can you say I waive the
benefit priviledge of this or that, when you have been using nothig but federal
reserve notes, using your Social Security Benefits, etc.? You can try....but they
can trick you very easily, into stepping right back into their "agreement" of your
"disagreement".
The next step is to file an affidavit of truth and Negative Averment stating
there is no evidence you are the US Citizen, and there is no evidence of a defect
in the counterclaim or the negotaible instrument or whatever you need to state as
the facts of the matter. "There is no evidence that I, John Smith have accepted any
benefit prveledges from the state or California or Teaxs Corporation, or any
govenment agency, etc.". Have a Notary do the presentment under Notary Seal to the
court, wait for default, and get your Notice of Non-Response/Dishonor from the
Notary and File that with the Court. Now you have evidence to present to the judge
that you have recieved no benefit priviledges, etc. Have the Clerk file that in the
Evidence File, not the Public File. Now it will be before the judge.
Failure to understand many aspects of Sovereignty like Court Procedures and
Administrative Process will do nothing but get people in trouble. That's what we
have to be careful of.
freedomdomain:
The next steps taken have to do with "Enforcement" of the Dishonored Instruments.
That's where we notify the IRS of the Income Recieved from the Parties who have
tried to make a false claim against us.
We file papers forgiving the debt to the party, and showing them wiht income
sometimes as much as 500 Million or More.
The Tax liability on 500 Million income is a hell of a lot. They now have to
explain to the Treasury what happened to the funds that were last seen in their
possession.
Treasury does a Fed Wire into their account to retrieve the funds. Risk Management
is contacted and the Public Official's Public Hazard Bond is attached and they are
now Publicly UNEMPLOYABLE!
There are a few more details, but I don't want anyone taking this material, and
jumping over any cliffs. Learn and study the material.
Sane:
Quote from: freedomdomain on October 16, 2007, 07:38:59 PM
possession.
Wouldn't it be important to get out of war powers that executive branch has at the
moment (with the flimsiest of reasons)?
freedomdomain:
Quote from: Sane on October 16, 2007, 08:03:21 PM
Quote from: freedomdomain on October 16, 2007, 07:38:59 PM
possession.
Wouldn't it be important to get out of war powers that executive branch has at the
moment (with the flimsiest of reasons)?
War and Emergency Powers are only in effect for the Government Corporation. The
system cannot circumvent the right to contract. And therefore cannot affect the
right of the Private Individual.
Sane:
But isn't the gov corporation a recent phenomena?
Where does the constitution call the gov a corp?
Shit I'll just watch the damn videos and see what there is, but so far they are
starting to remind me of the VatAss stuff, 50% reality and 50% ding-dong nobody
home.
freedomdomain:
home.
"Governments descend to the level of a mere private corporation and take on

the characteristics of a mere private citizen where private corporate commercial
paper [federal reserve notes] and securities [checks] is concerned..." --
Clearfield
Trust Company v. United States, 318 U.S. 363-371, 1942
"When governments enter the world of commerce, they are subject to the same
burdens as any private firm or corporation" -- U.S. v. Burr, 309 U.S. 242
See: 22 U.S.C.A.286e, Bank of U.S. vs. Planters Bank of Georgia, 6L, Ed. (9 Wheat)
244;
22 U.S.C.A. 286 et seq., C.R.S. 11-60-103
"The entire taxing and monetary systems are hereby placed under the U.C.C. (Uniform
Commercial Code)" -- The Federal Tax Lien Act of 1966
Here is the Act that set up the new Corporate Government in 1871, after the Civil
War;
In 1871, the following Act was passed in Congress;
16 United States Statutes at Large 419
FORTY FIRST CONGRESS SESSION III
CHAPTER 62, 1871
CHAP. LXII. -- An Act to provide a government for the District of Columbia.
Then it goes on to read:

"Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States in
Congress assembled, That all that part of the territory of the United States
included within the limits of the District of Columbia be, and the same is hereby,
created into a government by the name of the District of Columbia, by which name it
is hereby constituted a body corporate for municipal purposes, and may contract
with, sue and be sued, plead ..."
In 20 Corpus Juris Secundum [Corporations] at 1786;

"The United States government is a foreign corporation with respect to a state"
"[the federal United States] is a for profit corporation which 16 Stat. 419 created
by the name District of Columbia" - District of Columbia vs. Cluss, 103 U.S. 705,
26L. Ed. 455
Sane:
Quote from: freedomdomain on October 17, 2007, 12:36:13 AM
home.
"Governments descend to the level of a mere private corporation and take on

the characteristics of a mere private citizen where private corporate commercial
paper [federal reserve notes] and securities [checks] is concerned..." --
Clearfield
Trust Company v. United States, 318 U.S. 363-371, 1942
"When governments enter the world of commerce, they are subject to the same
burdens as any private firm or corporation" -- U.S. v. Burr, 309 U.S. 242
See: 22 U.S.C.A.286e, Bank of U.S. vs. Planters Bank of Georgia, 6L, Ed. (9 Wheat)
244;
22 U.S.C.A. 286 et seq., C.R.S. 11-60-103
"The entire taxing and monetary systems are hereby placed under the U.C.C. (Uniform
Commercial Code)" -- The Federal Tax Lien Act of 1966
Here is the Act that set up the new Corporate Government in 1871, after the Civil
War;
In 1871, the following Act was passed in Congress;
16 United States Statutes at Large 419
FORTY FIRST CONGRESS SESSION III
CHAPTER 62, 1871
CHAP. LXII. -- An Act to provide a government for the District of Columbia.
Then it goes on to read:

"Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States in
Congress assembled, That all that part of the territory of the United States
included within the limits of the District of Columbia be, and the same is hereby,
created into a government by the name of the District of Columbia, by which name it
is hereby constituted a body corporate for municipal purposes, and may contract
with, sue and be sued, plead ..."
In 20 Corpus Juris Secundum [Corporations] at 1786;

"The United States government is a foreign corporation with respect to a state"
"[the federal United States] is a for profit corporation which 16 Stat. 419 created
by the name District of Columbia" - District of Columbia vs. Cluss, 103 U.S. 705,
26L. Ed. 455
I do not believe these decisions are constitutional, are they supreme court
decisions?
freedomdomain:
No offence Sane, but it appears to me that you may need some basic law studies
before even analyzing this material.
The Constitution authorizes certain things that government can and cannot do. The
Constitution guarantees the right to contract. The Constitution itself is a
contract.
Laws are written by way of Codes & Statutes. This is the Legislative Branch of
Government. The Legislature writes the laws. and so on and so on. Blah, blah,
blah.......
But, in 1861, Abraham Lincoln suspended the Constitution and declared Martial Law.
Then in 1868, the government was put back together, BUT, not the proper way. The
Government was reconstructed, as a corporation, not reconvened by Congress.
and this section is from a book soon to be published by myself,

"Some would argue, "but they must have reinstated the government afterwards."
Or, "how do you know we didn't just revert right back to the same form of
government after the Civil War? -- The Senate must reconvene according to the
Constitution and proceed as before. But, instead, all Presidents since Lincoln
have issued Executive Orders. The Senate itself was reconvened by Executive Order
# 2, not by Constitutional procedure, so then the current Senate is under the
direct authority of the Executive office of the President. That's why the
President today, can do whatever he wants, bypassing Congressional authority,
because the Senate's legal authority to meet exists only by Executive Order.
That's also why we have the President, an Executive Branch position appointing
Federal Judges, of the Judiciary Branch, violating the Seperation of Powers
Doctrine."
This is the main reason why Constitutional arguments fail in court, and why the
government does not uphold the Constitution. It has been all
Corporate/Military/Martial Law/Admiralty/Maritime -- Which means...it has all been
Commercial ever since.
All of the PROOF I just listed are Court Decisions that currently STAND as law in
this country. Law is Supported by the ILLUSION of the Constitution still being in
place. It is necessary in order to maintain ORDER, instead of CHAOS. People MUST
believe the Constitution is still in place or all hell would break loose. I listed
COURT DECISIONS that stand as the law in the courts.
Now you see, the court decisions are for the public......the Corporation.....
The acts of "accepting the offer" and Payment by Bonded promissory Note, IS PAYMENT
and clearance of DEBT, and it is PRIVATE, not public.
Those are NOT listed in court decisions, however, court decisions can show where
our Private rights lie as well. Private Law of Contracts cannot be ruled on.
Contracts are the Agreement, therefore, they are Private and cannot be ruled on.
Unless there is a controversy. That is what courts are for, settling controversies.
In Bankruptcy, since 1933, as well. Adjudicating Bankruptcy issues and deciding WHO
is the Creditor and WHO is the debtor.
Does that make sense, Sane?
Sane:
Quote from: freedomdomain on October 17, 2007, 02:38:20 AM
No offence Sane, but it appears to me that you may need some basic law studies
before even analyzing this material.
No offense taken, I wholeheartedly agree
Quote
The Constitution authorizes certain things that government can and cannot do. The
Constitution guarantees the right to contract. The Constitution itself is a
contract.
My understanding is that the constitution by itself is a guideline for the USA.

The bill of rights allowed a contract with the citizens.
Quote
Laws are written by way of Codes & Statutes. This is the Legislative Branch of
Government. The Legislature writes the laws. and so on and so on. Blah, blah,
blah.......
Yes, that is outlined in the constitution
Quote
But, in 1861, Abraham Lincoln suspended the Constitution and declared Martial Law.
Then in 1868, the government was put back together, BUT, not the proper way. The
Government was reconstructed, as a corporation, not reconvened by Congress.
Well that seems to be anti-constitutional.
Quote
and this section is from a book soon to be published by myself,

"Some would argue, "but they must have reinstated the government afterwards."
Or, "how do you know we didn't just revert right back to the same form of
government after the Civil War? -- The Senate must reconvene according to the
Constitution and proceed as before. But, instead, all Presidents since Lincoln
have issued Executive Orders. The Senate itself was reconvened by Executive Order
# 2, not by Constitutional procedure, so then the current Senate is under the
direct authority of the Executive office of the President. That's why the
President today, can do whatever he wants, bypassing Congressional authority,
because the Senate's legal authority to meet exists only by Executive Order.
That's also why we have the President, an Executive Branch position appointing
Federal Judges, of the Judiciary Branch, violating the Seperation of Powers
Doctrine."
well i look forward to reading it!
Quote
This is the main reason why Constitutional arguments fail in court, and why the
government does not uphold the Constitution. It has been all
Corporate/Military/Martial Law/Admiralty/Maritime -- Which means...it has all been
Commercial ever since.
that seems to seriously suck ass.
Quote
All of the PROOF I just listed are Court Decisions that currently STAND as law in
this country. Law is Supported by the ILLUSION of the Constitution still being in
place. It is necessary in order to maintain ORDER, instead of CHAOS. People MUST
believe the Constitution is still in place or all hell would break loose. I listed
COURT DECISIONS that stand as the law in the courts.
more ass sucking
Quote
Now you see, the court decisions are for the public......the Corporation.....
The acts of "accepting the offer" and Payment by Bonded promissory Note, IS PAYMENT
and clearance of DEBT, and it is PRIVATE, not public.
Those are NOT listed in court decisions, however, court decisions can show where
our Private rights lie as well. Private Law of Contracts cannot be ruled on.
Contracts are the Agreement, therefore, they are Private and cannot be ruled on.
Unless there is a controversy. That is what courts are for, settling controversies.
In Bankruptcy, since 1933, as well. Adjudicating Bankruptcy issues and deciding WHO
is the Creditor and WHO is the debtor.
Does that make sense, Sane?
kinda sorta.
i kind of go by the constitution and bill of rights. the rest (specifically the
16th amendment) seems to be a bunch of bullshit and does not stand up to the legal
test.
but as i said earlier the whole idea that the legislative is at the mercy of the
executive denies the entire constitution and is a basis (as far as i am concerned)
for some serious blowback to these assertions. now it could be that this requires
digging up dirty laundry from after the civil war, so be it. you seem to be able
to assist in this effort and that is very helpful. thanks
marcianne:
This is good stuff!
Standing up for truth is difficult in this corrupt government.
Keep up the great discussion.
Peace.
LakeshoreBaby:
I see your point Sane. We should worry about the suspension of the constitution.
But it's also good to understand the whole concept of admiralty/contract law which
we are adjudicated under now, and which taxes and gun control and pretty much every
other unfair thing occurs (and how voluntary it is at the moment anyways), and
which the world government is under now.
The thing I want to do research on now is the idea of equity under admiralty law.
Everyone being equal under the law. And rescinding admiralty contracts.
psholtz:
Quote from: LakeshoreBaby on October 17, 2007, 06:02:40 AM
I see your point Sane. We should worry about the suspension of the constitution.
But it's also good to understand the whole concept of admiralty/contract law which
we are adjudicated under now, and which taxes and gun control and pretty much every
other unfair thing occurs (and how voluntary it is at the moment anyways), and
which the world government is under now.
My sense is that the Constitution has been effectively suspended since at least
1933, possibly earlier.
Quote
The thing I want to do research on now is the idea of equity under admiralty law.
Everyone being equal under the law. And rescinding admiralty contracts.
Doesn't "equity" in this sense simply mean law pertaining to trusts? It's a form of
law that the government greatly desires, since when judges rule on a trust
(equity), they may do so unbound from any "laws" that may be in effect. Hence, you
have no legal rights to stand on, and the judge may do as he pleases w/o regard to
law (i.e., in Russo's film, where the judge exclaims: "I will not allow the law in
my court".. in equity, this is 100% OK).
Admiralty contracts are one thing.. The thing you really want to rescind, though,
are the adhesion contracts.
______________________________________________-
What to do when ... http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=1626.0;wap2

Untitled 1

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Untitled 1

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

DISCUSSION from PrisonPlanet Forum - Videos explaining chattle bonds/SSN/income

Winston Shrout (Solutions in Commerce)

Other useful links on this topic

Personally, I don't believe (I have to experience it or see it for myself) that

Quote from: freedomdomain on October 16, 2007, 07:38:59 PM

Where does the constitution call the gov a corp?

But isn't the gov corporation a recent phenomena?

Where does the constitution call the gov a corp?

"Governments descend to the level of a mere private corporation and take on

Then it goes on to read:

In 20 Corpus Juris Secundum [Corporations] at 1786;

Quote from: Sane on October 16, 2007, 08:34:07 PM

But isn't the gov corporation a recent phenomena?

Where does the constitution call the gov a corp?

"Governments descend to the level of a mere private corporation and take on

Then it goes on to read:

In 20 Corpus Juris Secundum [Corporations] at 1786;

and this section is from a book soon to be published by myself,

Does that make sense, Sane?

My understanding is that the constitution by itself is a guideline for the USA.

and this section is from a book soon to be published by myself,

well i look forward to reading it!

that seems to seriously suck ass.

more ass sucking

Does that make sense, Sane?

Standing up for truth is difficult in this corrupt government.

Keep up the great discussion.

What to do when ... http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=1626.0;wap2

S-ar putea să vă placă și