PLEASE DO NOT SKIP THESE VIDEOS. I KNOW THIS IS LONG, BUT EACH POINT LAYS GROUNDWORK.
The FBI has reported that there are more murders are committed with ordinary items than via guns. This proves that the liberal traitors who fan the flames of gun confiscation and bans is not about making us safer, but about disarming Americans in order to empower the government’s tyrannical policies. It is my hope that logic will prevail in this issue and that people will see the true reason for focusing on guns. Why has the government bought 1.6 billion rounds of hollowpoint ammunition in various calibers this past year? Why are police departments practicing martial law drills to disarm Americans? Why are drones being used to target American’s to assassinate us with no charges, arrest, or trial as our constitution demands? The fact is our Constitution was suspended over 150 years ago by Abraham Lincoln and he was murdered by the cabal for trying to print money and gain control of our finances as the Constitution demands. That order of martial law was never rescinded and that is why Presidents can still issue executive orders as if they are kings.
There needs to be an overt and non-yielding demand, protest, and non-compliance against the corporate U.S. of America. Yes, it is a corporation folks. It was done in the dead of night with media compliance. You need to learn the true history of America and not just read the revised version.
FBI: More People Killed with Hammers, Clubs Each Year than Rifles
by AWR Hawkins
According to the FBI annual crime statistics, the number of murders committed annually with hammers and clubs far outnumbers the number of murders committed with a rifle.
This is an interesting fact, particularly amid the Democrats’ feverish push to ban many different rifles, ostensibly to keep us safe of course.
However, it appears the zeal of Sens. like Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Joe Manchin (D-WV) is misdirected. For in looking at the FBI numbers from 2005 to 2011, the number of murders by hammers and clubs consistently exceeds the number of murders committed with a rifle.
Think about it: In 2005, the number of murders committed with a rifle was 445, while the number of murders committed with hammers and clubs was 605. In 2006, the number of murders committed with a rifle was 438, while the number of murders committed with hammers and clubs was 618.
And so the list goes, with the actual numbers changing somewhat from year to year, yet the fact that more people are killed with blunt objects each year remains constant.
For example, in 2011, there was 323 murders committed with a rifle but 496 murders committed with hammers and clubs.
While the FBI makes is clear that some of the “murder by rifle” numbers could be adjusted up slightly, when you take into account murders with non-categorized types of guns, it does not change the fact that their annual reports consistently show more lives are taken each year with these blunt objects than are taken with Feinstein’s dreaded rifle.
Another interesting fact: According to the FBI, nearly twice as many people are killed by hands and fists each year than are killed by murderers who use rifles.
The bottom line: A rifle ban is as illogical as it is unconstitutional. We face far greater danger from individuals armed with carpenters’ tools and a caveman’s stick.
And it seems fairly obvious that if more people had a gun, less people would be inclined to try to hit them in the head with a hammer. SOURCE
The fact is the argument many use against the gun ban or new laws against gun ownership that it’s our right under the second Amendment to own guns is a fallacy. If you are no longer under the constitution by you willingly participating in the incorporated United States government! The only come back is to really deny this system and to reclaim your inalienable God given rights as a human being. We must end this subterfuge now.
You are interested in truth and facts if you are reading this blog. If you are not familiar with the machinations of the shadows of power whom President Eisenhower warned us about then what you are here will be very surprising, but it is all based on factual history. It’s a history they do not teach in schools. It’s a history that is available if you know where to look or if someone such as myself shows it to you. There are two United States of America:
… one formed in 1787, the collection of the several sovereign states of the union, and another separate and different one formed in 1871, which only controls the District of Columbia and it’s territories. Others may can give you specific references and explain this further. Here is an outline of the concepts.
The date is February 21, 1871 and the Forty-First Congress is in session. I refer you to the “Acts of the Forty-First Congress,” Section 34, Session III, chapters 61 and 62. On this date in the history of our nation, Congress passed an Act titled: “An Act To Provide A Government for the District of Columbia.” This is also known as the “Act of 1871.” What does this mean? Well, it means that Congress, under no constitutional authority to do so, created a separate form of government for the District of Columbia, which is a ten mile square parcel of land.
The Constitution for the United States of America was adopted on September 17, 1787, by the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and ratified by conventions in each U.S. state in the name of “The People”. SOURCE
You will hear people say this or that is unconstitutional, and that is true for citizens of the Unites States of America, but if you are no longer such a citizen, then you are under a different sent of rules and regulations. But, you say, “I was born in America, and I am a citizen”. Did you know that birth certificates did not exist before 1933? Did you know you are a commodity traded on the stock exchange? Did you know that only those who willfully enter into a contract with the incorporated United States of America are subject to the laws of that area? You or your parents contracted with that entity when you applied for a social security card!
When I was growing up, we did not get a ssn until we went to get a job because we were told that without that you could not legally work. That was a lie. You could fill out a W8 and file as a non- D.C. citizen and thereby keep your common law citizen status. Have you not noticed that you are never asked if you are a Citizen of the United States of America, rather you are asked if you are a U.S. Citizen? Words have meanings, and just because they sound similar does not mean that they are legally the same.
And Whereas: The Constitution does provide that Congress has the power to exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever over such district not exceeding ten miles square, as may, by session of particular states and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of government of the United States.
And Whereas: On February 21, 1871, the Forty First Congress passed an act entitled “An Act to Provide a Government for the District of Columbia,” legislating the organization of a municipal corporation to run the day to day affairs of the District of Columbia, the seat of government, which transferred the United States of America, the Republic, into “a corporate entity” entitled UNITED STATES, in capital letters, having “no” jurisdiction outside the District of Columbia.
And Whereas: Congress adopted the text of the federal constitution as the constitution or charter of this municipal corporation. This municipal corporation was granted the power to contract to provide municipal services to the inhabitants of the District of Columbia and necessarily as an operation of the privileges and immunity clause of Article Four of the Constitution, any other person who chooses to contract for its services.
That was how you got hooked into giving up your common law rights and Citizenship rights of being born in the United States of America. Oh, that land still exists, but as when a magician deftly distracts you with one hand while their other one is doing the trick, so were we distracted by words and slight of political hand into giving up our rights. Let me ask you one question that should help you understand.
As an American Citizen are you not under the impression that before you can be thrown into jail as punishment for a crime that you first have to be charged and then have the opportunity to defend yourself, face your accuser and be given a verdict by a jury of your peers? If that is so, then how can a judge throw you into jail for contempt of court until you comply with their demands? You see, that is not common law, but Admiralty law also called UCC law. Those courts are not Common Law Courts which govern by what is called the law of the land. No, those courts operate under Admiralty law or the law of the Sea otherwise called commerce law. It’s all about contracts and obeying those agreements. When you received your social security card they created a “strawman” of you who has all capital letters. That is why all contracts and legal documents have the parties in the case in ALL CAPITAL LETTERS. When I worked for the Attorney General’s office for the State of Florida and sent our notices to appear or filed any court documents, if I did not capitalize the name of the defendant, my attorney would circle it in bold red ink and send it back to me and I would change the document to correct that. It seemed trivial to me, but nothing in the law is trivial.
MEET YOUR STRAWMAN
Most people have a hard time reading legal documents and that is done on purpose. The harder something is to understand, the easier it is to fool you or make you pay someone who has learned the jargon a lot of money to explain what the court is saying to you. I ask you to bear with me in what I am about to share, and it will buttress the legal information I posted above.
U.S. Supreme Court
STOUTENBURGH v. HENNICK, 129 U.S. 141 (1889)
129 U.S. 141
STOUTENBURGH, Intendant of Washington Asylum,
January 14, 1889
Sections 1 and 18 of the act of congress of February 21, 1871, entitled ‘An act to provide a government for the District of Columbia,’ (16 St. 419,) are as follows: ‘Section 1. 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 and be contracted with, sue and be sued, plead and be impleaded, have a seal, and exercise all other powers of a municipal corporation not inconsistent with the constitution and laws of the United States and the provisions of this act.’ ‘Sec. 18. That the legislative power of the District shall [129 U.S. 141, 144] extend to all rightful subjects of legislation within said District, consistent with the constitution of the United States and the provisions of this act, subject, nevertheless, to all the restrictions and limitations imposed upon states by the tenth section of the first article of the constitution of the United States; but all acts of the legislative assembly shall at all times be subject to repeal or modification by the congress of the United States, and nothing herein shall be construed to deprive congress of the power of legislation over said District in as ample manner as if this law had not been enacted.’ These sections are carried forward into the act of congress of June 22, 1874, entitled ‘An act to revise and consolidate the statutes of the United States, general and permanent in their nature, relating to the District of Columbia, in force on the first day of December, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and seventy-three,’ as sections 2, 49, 50.
This case proves that the area known as Washington D.C. is limited to 10 square miles. This was NOT in the original constitution. They changed the Constitution which originally was titled, “The Constitution FOR the United States of America” to “The Constitution OF the United States of America” and slipped in the new D.C. area. They also were given power to make their own rules and laws for those who lived there and any territories / persons who chose to align with that area. The trick was, “How do we get American’s to enter into this agreement willingly and yet not be any the wiser? That was why the wars happened, the great depression which led to the creation of the Social Security Act. It all goes back to planning.
If I want to make someone do something they might not want to do, the best way is to make them think that doing it is in their best interest. Forcing people does not usually work out well for government when you are talking about massive changes to the population and norms. They wanted control. They did not want to deal with the Constitution as it stood, and they needed to convince people to join in with their plan. After the Great Depression people believe Social Security was to help them when in fact it was to become a piggy bank for the bankers. Oh, you’d get back some portion of the money you paid into it, but nothing like you would if you just invested that same amount of money and controlled it yourself. As we know, Social Security is bankrupt,and filled with a bunch of IOU’s. They of course they created the central bank which is privately owned, but to fool us they yet again played word games and called it the “Federal Reserve” which is no more part of the government than Federal Express. Then they created the IRS to be their henchmen to force compliance.
Why does this matter? It matters because when you enter a U.S. Court you cannot demand your constitutional rights. It means you are under Admiralty law. They are sneaky in this, but they do things legally. That pretty flag in Federal buildings is not just made to look pretty, but it means something. The real United States Flag looks like this when we are not at war or under Marial law:
The Military Flag of the United States looks like this:
The Admiralty Flag which signifies you are under Admiralty law looks like this:
Some important points concerning flags, pursuant to U.S. and International Law:The appearance of our flag is defined in Title 4 sec. 1. U.S.C. “The flag of the United States shall be thirteen horizontal stripes, alternate red and white; and the union of the flag shall be forty-eight stars, white in a blue field.” This doesn’t say much and is remiss in the important details. There is a foot note on page 1113 of the same section which says: “Placing of fringe on the national flag, the dimensions of the flag, and arrangement of the stars are matters of detail not controlled by statute, but within the discretion of the President as commander-in-chief of the Army and Navy.” 1925, 34 Op.Atty.Gen. 483.One president added a yellow fringe to our flag: “Pursuant to U.S.C. Chapter 1, 2, and 3; Executive Order No. 10834, August 21, 1959, 24 F.R. 6865, a military flag is a flag that resembles the regular flag of the United States, except that it has a YELLOW FRINGE, bordered on three sides. The President of the United states designates this deviation from the regular flag, by executive order, and in his capacity as COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF of the Armed forces.”“…The agency of the master is devolved upon him by the law of the flag. The same law that confers his authority ascertains its limits, and the flag at the mast-head is notice to all the world of the extent of such power to bind the owners or freighters by his act. The foreigner who deals with this agent has notice of that law, and, if he be bound by it, there is not injustice. His notice is the national flag which is hoisted on every sea and under which the master sails into every port, and every circumstance that connects him with the vessel isolates that vessel in the eyes of the world, and demonstrates his relation to the owners and freighters as their agent for a specific purpose and with power well defined under the national maritime law.” Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1914. Note: Admiralty law came on land in 1845 with the Act of 1845 by Congress.See: Ruhstrat v. People, 57 N.E. 41, 45, 185 ILL. 133, 49 LRA 181, 76 AM.“Pursuant to the “Law of the Flag”, a military flag does result in jurisdictional implication when flown. The Plaintiff cites the following: “Under what is called international law, the law of the flag, a ship-owner who sends his vessel into a foreign port gives notice by his flag to all who enter into contracts with the shipmaster that he intends the law of the flag to regulate those contracts with the shipmaster that he either submit to its operation or not contract with him or his agent at all.”It is important to know the language you are speaking, for you can be held accountable under the law for the word’s legal definition. Just as words have legal definitions that are sometimes antonyms of the laymen use of the same word, flags have specific legal meanings also.My advice to understand how egregiously you have been mislead into your own enslavement is to get your hands on a Black’s Law Sixth Edition and look up the following words, it is imperative that you completely understand the last four (4):1) Marriage license; and2) Enrolled; and3) Person; and4) Include;5) Acquiescence; and6) Chancery.
DEFINITIONS; per Black’s Law Dictionary Sixth Edition: (emphasis mine)Letter of marque and reprisal: page 905;An authorization formerly granted in time of war by a government to the owner of a private vessel to capture enemy vessels and goods on the high seas.Note: There are three points that must be met for a LOMAR to be validly applied;i) Against an enemy; andii) Against vessels and goods; andiii) On the high seas.Absent any one of the requisites the LOMAR is defective and void, not just voidable, ab initio(from its beginning). Also, nowhere are the words human being and/or fines written in thisdefinition.Authorize: page 133;To empower; to give a right or authority to act. To endow with authority or effective legal power, warrant, or right. People v. Young, 100 Ill.App.2d. 20, 241 N.E.2d 587, 589. To permit a thing be done in the future. It has a mandatory effect or meaning, implying a direction to act.“Authorized” is sometimes construed as equivalent to “permitted”: or “directed”, or similar mandatory language. Possessed of authority: that is, possessed of legal or rightful power, the synonym of which is “competency. Doherty v. Kansas City Star Co., 143 Kan. 802, 57 P.2d 43War: page 1583;Hostile contention by means of armed forces, carried on between nations, states, or between citizens in the same nation or state. Gitlow v. Kiely, D.C.N.Y., 44 F.2d 227, 233Laws of war: This term denotes a branch of public international law, and comprises the body of rules and principles observed by civilized nations for the regulation of matters inherent in, or incidental to, the conduct of a public war; such, for example, as the relations of neutrals and belligerents, blockades, captures, prizes, truces and armistices, capitulations, prisoners, and declarations of war and peace; e.g. Geneva Convention.Note: Even if the country is at war with another nation, you and this country are NOT at war witheach other.Owner: page 1105;The person in whom is vested the ownership, dominion, or title of property; proprietor. He who has dominion over a thing, real or personal, corporeal or incorporeal, which he has the right to enjoy and do with as he please, even to spoil or destroy it, as far as the law permits, unless he be prevented by some agreement or covenant which restrains his right………….Note: Person ONLY includes human being, and not a corporation, in this case as the word“he” is used interchangeably with the word “ person.”Private: page 1195; Affecting or belonging to private individuals, as distinct form the public generally. Not official; not clothed with office. People v. Powell, 280 Mich. 699, 274 N.W. 372,Note: Any corporation publicly claiming to be and/or acting under the color of law as apublic and/or government office is therefore not a private entity.Vessel: page: 1562;A ship, brig, sloop, or other craft used, or capable of being used, in navigation on water…….On the other hand, however, everything that floats is not necessarily a “vessel”, in purpose of the Jones Act.Note: Although human beings may float they CANNOT be considered “vessels” underthe legal term as the legal definition does NOT include anything living.Enemy: page 528;Adversary; e.g. military adversary. Enemy alien……..; Enemy belligerent……; Public enemy.Note: the definitions are very long and not ambiguous. Basically, an enemy is exactlywhat a reasonable laymen thinks an enemy is.Goods: page 694;A term of variable content and meaning. It may include every species of personal property or it may be given a very restricted meaning.Note: the definition of goods shall NEVER include human beings.High seas: page 728;That portion of ocean which is beyond the territorial jurisdiction of any country. The “high seas” lie seaward of a nation’s territorial sea, which is the bank of water that extends up to three miles out from the coast. U.S. v. Roero-Galue, C.A.Fla., 757 F.2d 1147, 1149.Note: High seas are a real place and NEVER a fictional location.Ocean: page 1080;The main or open sea: the high sea; that portion of the sea which does not lie within the body of any country and is not subject to the territorial jurisdiction or control of any country, but is open, free, and common to the use of all nations. U.S. v. Rodgers, 150 U.S. 249, 14 S.Ct. 109,37 L.Ed. 1071. Body of salt water that covers over 70% of earth’s surface.Note: Land is the other 30% of earth’s surface and may NOT by law be confused even forVenue and/or jurisdictional purposes. Any and all acts occur on one or the other and NEVERboth and the court CANNOT purposely confuse this issue to falsely gain jurisdiction.Privateer: page 1195;A vessel owned, equipped, and armed by one or more private individuals, and duly commissioned by a belligerent power to go on cruises and make war upon the enemy, usually by preying on his commerce. A private vessel commissioned by a nation by the issue of a letter of marque to its owner to carry on hostilities by sea, presumably according to the laws of war. Formerly, a state issued letters of marque to its own subjects and to those of neutral states as well, but a privateersman who accepted letters of marque from both belligerents was regarded as a pirate. By the Declaration of Paris (April, 1856), privateering was abolished, but the United States, Spain, Mexico, and Venezuela did not accede to this declaration. It has been thought that the constitutional provision empowering the Congress to issue letters of marque deprives it of the power to join in a permanent treaty abolishing privateering.Piracy and privateering are federal offenses, 18 U.S.C. § 1651 et seq.Note: this is the reason police vehicles are known as “cruisers.”Belligerent: page 155;In international law, as an adjective, it means engaged in lawful war. As a noun, it designates either of two nations which are actually in a state of war with each other, as well as their allies actively co-operating, as distinguished from a nation which takes no part in the war and maintains a strict indifference as between the contending parties, called a “neutral.”As a personally trait, refers to one who is overly assertive, hostile or combative.Note: You are NOT a nation.Belligerents: page 155;A body of insurgents who by reason of their temporary organized government are regarded as conducting lawful hostilities. Also, militia, corps of volunteers, and others, who although not part of the regular army of the state, are regarded as lawful combatants provided they observe the laws of war.Ex dolo malo no oritur action: page 567;Out of fraud no action arises; fraud never gives a right of action. No court will lend its aid to a man who founds his cause of action upon an immoral or illegal act.Note: the definition of fraud does not exclude the actions of government(s).Jurisdiction: page 853;…It is the power of the court to decide a matter in controversy and presupposes the existence of a duly constituted court with control over the subject matter and the parties…...Areas of authority: the geographical area in which a court has power or types of cases it has power to hear.Note: if the letter(s) of marque and reprisal are not authentic, and/or valid and/or do notapply to you then they should not be used against you. But, if you don’t object to them thenyou are agreeing they are valid and may be used against you.Venue: page: 1557;Formerly spelled visne. In common law pleading and practice, a neighborhood, the neighborhood, place or county in which an injury is declared to have been done, or fact declared to have happened……..Venue does not refer to jurisdiction at all. …As such, while a defect in venue MAY be waived by the parties, lack of jurisdiction may not.Note: if a court is in Admiralty then it CANNOT be in the correct venue as concerningMATTER(s) on land and NOT the high seas.Vi et armis: page 1568;With force and arms.Note: acting under force of arms is NOT voluntary.
Ergo, we have at issue a set of questions that courts will refuse to answer;1) What type of court is this court?i) Equityii) Admiraltyiii) Lawiv) Chanceryv) Tribunalvi) Constitutionala) Stateb) Federalc) Foreign2) By what authority does this court operatei) Chartera) From what entityii) Letter(s) of marque and reprisala) Issued by what governmentb) Issued by what agentc) Does the court have the LOMAR3) Where is this court’s venuei) Landa) What countyii) Under what nationa) Are the laws of war being followed* Is the World court being represented by the “STATE”Obviously the list of questions is infinite since the absence of venue creates a lack of jurisdiction. UNLESS, and here is where they ALWAYS get people, the victim of the pirate does not request from the pirate his letter of marque and reprisal that lawfully converts said pirate into a Privateer. By NOT requesting the LOMAR the victim has acquiesced and pursuant to precedent has “agreed” that the pirate is a Privateer and that said Privateer’s LOMAR is authentic and valid and does apply to said victim.Even a lousy lawyer knows two (2) rules:1) Never ask a question you don’t already know the answer to; and2) Always make your adversary ask the wrong question.These two (2) rules can make even an ignorant buffoon seem intelligent and inversely make an intelligent man appear too ignorant to handle his own affairs. See: Non compos mentis, Black’s sixth page 1051.So, all they had to do was get us to NOT ask the right question.You do not ask a pirate to see his badge, you ask to see his LOMAR.You do not ask a pirate to see his accounting, you ask to see his LOMAR.You do not ask a pirate to see his contract, you ask to see his LOMAR.You do not ask a pirate to see his license, you ask to see his LOMAR.For the “accepted for value upon proof of claim” people, the claim is the LOMAR, and they will not show it to you, so you win.For the Title 15 section 1692 (g) people the verification is not the amount, it is the LOMAR, and they will not show it to you, so you win.
Now that they have us dumbed down and dependent upon the government of the U.S. of America, they want to disarm us to complete the ultimate task of controlling us. The final act is going to come upon us soon. Understanding how we got here, what we are fighting is key to stopping this if we can stop it. You have to know your true rights and value. No contract entered into by subterfuge is valid. If you parent applied for your ssn then that is illegal. You cannot contract another into agreement. That is rule number 1 in business law. Whomever enters into a contract must do so willingly and informed of the contract.
We must end the false incorporated United States of America. We must end the Federal Reserve System and the IRS. We must repair the damage worldwide done by these bankers, and believe me, they have trillions of stolen dollars. The world needs a reset, and the heart of the problem is the private bankers. I don’t care if a country wants to live communistic, socialistic or capitalistic. That is for them to decide. If they can make communal living work, great, but it’s never happened because some are always more equal than others and it only holds together by force and violence.
We need to make all corporations illegal, end insurance and the scams pulled on us which plays on one of our most base desires and that is greed for power. We were warned to never strike our hand in surety for another. That is what insurance is. We hedge our bets and get a big pool of money and charge people for the possibility that if something goes wrong all of us will pay for it. How about we go back to a more simple way of living. We behave ourselves, and we are more careful that way. A strong community used to help one another. Mr. Smith got sick, the wives would bake extra food and take it over while he was recovering. He did not want to be a burden so he did his best to get back on his feet quickly and not be a burden. Instead, we have people trying to get hurt, suck off the system, and do nothing. Then when the economy deteriorates enough there is no real work, and you have to depend on the “system”.
We do not need the government. It produces nothing. It only takes. The only thing we need is the ability to protect ourselves via military, common coin, and secure borders. That is it! That’s all the government should do. Everything else is something the States can handle and we control locally better than the Federal government can and much less costly.
The solution is radical, but it’s doable. We need to march on Washington D.C. in the millions and not go home. It would take organization to do this, but there are millions of us who see through the lies, and the world can be healed if we take it one step at a time. Each beautiful soul is worth it.
I thank you for reading this and sharing it with your friends. If you want to be informed of any new articles or updates, please join and you will be notified.