HOW I CLOBBERED EVERY BUREAUCRATIC CASH-CONFISCATORY AGENCY

[joeblow]

http://www.hackcanada.com/canadian/free ... _croft.pdf

HOW I CLOBBERED
EVERY BUREAUCRATIC
CASH-CONFISCATORY AGENCY
KNOWN TO MAN

... a Spiritual Economics Book
on $$$ and
Remembering Who You Are

by:
Mary Elizabeth: Croft

[youtube:2rs0yy1m]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2c2byZlTsOA[/youtube]2rs0yy1m]
[youtube:2rs0yy1m]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KAnkVqmBew[/youtube]2rs0yy1m]
[youtube:2rs0yy1m]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1X_Lc7jAigE[/youtube]2rs0yy1m]
[youtube:2rs0yy1m]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A5diW7poIkk[/youtube]2rs0yy1m]
[youtube:2rs0yy1m]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xxUe_r3BEk[/youtube]2rs0yy1m]
[youtube:2rs0yy1m]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YvVQmq38jCs[/youtube]2rs0yy1m]

[targa2]

She has some interesting research in her book ( which I have read twice ) . However, the notion that we are supposed to just sign for something we want is the fucking dumbest shit I have ever heard.   This is premised upon the idea that our signature CREATES the money . Well........ it may be one of the steps necessary for money creation , and I will agree that we are the surety for the money, but it is our future labor that is what creates the money, not our signature.  The signature is just a facility.  I agree with some of the spirit and philosophy behind what she is saying , but she high on something if she thinks her signature is the actual item of value and not her labor.

[mobes]

She has some interesting research in her book ( which I have read twice ) . However, the notion that we are supposed to just sign for something we want is the fucking dumbest shit I have ever heard.   This is premised upon the idea that our signature CREATES the money . Well........ it may be one of the steps necessary for money creation , and I will agree that we are the surety for the money, but it is our future labor that is what creates the money, not our signature.  The signature is just a facility.  I agree with some of the spirit and philosophy behind what she is saying , but she high on something if she thinks her signature is the actual item of value and not her labor.

There is some truth to what she is saying, however if you operate within the banks jurisdiction, you can have limited liability. There's always the option of going outside the banking system to create your own money. The trouble is, most of the time, the banks will not accept it. This is where people need to get down and dirty. I'm in the middle of a fight between my bank, my credit card company, and myself based on what lawful money is.

[targa2]

It's THEIR system.  So...money is what THEY say it is. Money is a medium of exchange. What makes it lawful is the consent of the people exchanging it.  This is the old argument that only gold and silver are lawful money. At least that is implied when we say " lawful money". I suppose Mary will try to tell me that a barter exchange is not lawful because there was no lawful money involved.  Exchanging paper or electronic currency simply an advanced representation of barter. It's accounting or keeping track of the debt obligation between two consenting parties.  The financial institution either issues the currency anew or it keeps track of the existing currency when a cash or check transaction is passed through and account.  The debt is NOT WITH THE BANK  !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  It is WITH THE OTHER PARTY (IES ) TO THE EXCHANGE. The bank acts as a witness ( account manager ) to the exchange between the two parties. It charges a fee for account keeping and interest on new money issues.  The fees and interest are the only portion the bank has any ownership of.  Principal portions of loans get canceled out of circulation when they are collected as part of a loan repayment.  Only the interest remains as an asset to the bank.

[scorpio]

...but it is our future labor that is what creates the money, not our signature.  The signature is just a facility.  I agree with some of the spirit and philosophy behind what she is saying , but she high on something if she thinks her signature is the actual item of value and not her labor.

only labor, production, goods  or a service can produce real 'value'
money is just the middle man.

I had a friend who got into the no tax stuff. He had multiple tax agencies on his arse.
Cost him around 50k.
Of course if you have no assets, then that might be a different story....

[§N9sh2bj]

I had a friend who got into the no tax stuff. He had multiple tax agencies on his arse.

Mary's book is 'ok'. I don't care for her presentation and it seems like her ideas are borrowed from other more serious researchers, and that she is a mouthpiece, possibly ego-centric, which is the first thing which must die in order to be free. She certainly wears enough makeup to keep me far away from her  :lol:

And scan down to the bottom of her book, the second-to-last page. There is a scam inserted there. If she is truly a 'people' of integrity, why does she have a scam in her book?

She seems to be in a similar orbit to Rob Meynard in canada. He gives better presentations, while both of these people are short on solutions.

'Scorpion11's mention of 'no tax stuff' is a fraud and misnomer (nothing personal). This term, 'no tax' or 'tax protesters', is bantered about by the various corporate agency agents, like IRS, and the news agencies owned by the same people, CBS, NBC, CNN. There have also been people who have been agents for these agency owners, operating in the 'alternative' or 'counter' sphere, getting people into a lot of trouble, Irwin Schiff (father of the gold promoter), and Pastor Tony King most recently. The term 'no taxer' itself is a fraud. The problem is not the tax, the problem is there is no way to 'pay' for anything - all the money was taken out of circulation under misnomer back in the 30's and shortly after from other countries. The only kind of currency are evidence of the 'good faith and credit' of the people. Federal Reserve Bank Notes are only one such kind of evidence of credit, backed by hypothecated value based on promissory notes signed by people; for house loans, car loans, credit card applications, etc. This is directly in the Federal Reserve of Chicago publication Modern Money Mechanics.

I have not seen any evidence to the contrary, and the legal codes support the idea, the people can and do get together and issue their own Notes and Bonds, based on their own 'good faith and credit'. They do not need a monopolistic intermediary like those people at the Federal Reserve Bank or it's branches to parasite off their credit. Parasitism has been what happens when the people abandon the faith element of the transaction, the Fed's owners funding Trotsky, Lenin, Hitler, and so-on, from the credit of the american people; the faith being abandoned when the people failed to ask for a receipt on the car or home 'loan' promissory note.

A proper accounting is happening, and these various corporate Courts which engage in fraud every day, are being brought down. The real people in this movement, not those who ascribe to the idea of 'tax protester', are settling their accounts without controversy, according to natural international law and existing legal codes, and creating enormous international (maritime) liens against the false judges, clerks; the Judges, Clerks, Lawyers, and other representatives of the 'voluntary slavery' system devised by rothschild. Besides the Bankers for the Fed, the fictitious Legal arm is another big parasite on the american people, generating Bonds out the wazoo every day.

The other western corporate Governments follow a similar template.

[/tab]

.
Take a look to this old video from the 90's:

Johnny Liberty Reclaiming Your Sovereign Citizenship - 1:50:13
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... 7266095672

The Book - The_Global_Sovereign_s_Handbook.pdf
http://www.conspiracyresearch.org/forum ... 45811.html

Summary of content:

Reclaiming the American Mind
American and World History
American Citizenship
American Law
Commercial Law
International Law
Terrorism
Money
Bankruptcy
Individual Sovereignty
Indigenous Sovereignty
Sovereign Power Structures
Global Sovereignty Movement
Social Security and Income
Taxes
Visions and Solutions
Introductory and Advanced Tools for Freedom
Restoring a Republic
Freedom Technologies
New World Order


Of course some flows from Johnny Liberty like the references to Coleman's [Club Of Rome and] The Committee of 300 if I remember right from the video and then johnny himself later getting into jail; but hey, nobody's perfect . . .

Then you have those if you are interest in this very same issues :

http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p ... 387BF1BF29

Don't forget Irene-Maus: Gravenhorst :

http://video.google.com/videosearch?hl= ... =N&tab=lv#

At last this with a big warning because of Jordan Maxwell himself:
The Occult World of Commerce - by Jordan Maxwell & Jason Whitney

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... +law&hl=en

greetings
/tab
.
.

[Anonymous]

your signature on the original instrument "IS THE MONEY."
Because....if it was'nt then the bank, credit card co, etc. would have no problem giving you the original instrument after fulfilling your obligation....RIGHT?
And why can't they?
They took your signature and cashed out.
Now there is a lien on the instrument.

[mobes]

your signature on the original instrument "IS THE MONEY."

That also includes electronic signatures. If you want to master this, start learning the 1099oid process

[mobes]

your signature on the original instrument "IS THE MONEY."

I stand corrected....your signature is authorization for the money based on whatever amount the contract is worth.

i.e. - credit card application for $5000. If you sign it, you've just authorized the creation of $5000 regardless if you get approved or not.

[mobes]

Money is a medium of exchange

Money is not limited to legal tender under the UCC. The problem with these people who claim only gold and silver is lawful, is that they refuse to look at the LEGAL side. Under the UCC money also equates to cheques, drafts, notes, promissory notes, bills of exchange, and negotiable instruments. (usc 1813 L'1)

[§N9sh2bj]

Don't forget cancelled stamps.  :lol:

Lawful money is dollars (one ounce) of .999 silver, upon which the paper Dollar was originally based. Before then, there was colonial script, which had no gold or silver backing, only the 'good faith and credit' of the colonists/american people.

This is why in the commercial liens done by people vying for the republic side of things (certainly not what the judas goat AJ is yammering about), they are sure to define 'dollar' as a one ounce .999 pure silver coin. It doesn't matter what Rothschild does with the currency at that point, a dollar is what you define it to be; and if you don't define it, your adversary (brother) defines it for you, and that means USD currency.

Very quickly the lien gets into the multi-billion USD range.

And if they kill him, because he's the only one who can abandon the lien, it's still good for fifty years.

So either way, they are 'screwed', however, what is really happening is one brother coming in to balance another brother's books with their creator. See it as tender loving kindness, not in any kind of mean-spirit, or it backfires. People who want the 'money money money', I get real tired of these people.

If the parasitism is removed from the system, there is so much excess wealth, and so much owed by the owners of the Federal Reserve/IMF to the people, that the entire UNITED STATES Federal debt could be settled the next day, and that would be done with less than 1% of the funds available. It says somewhere 'the wealth of the wicked is laid up for the just'. I tend to agree.



I further agree with mobes that croft, with all her makeup, seems to pinch ideas from Winston Shrout and others, but does not have a substantial amount of original material. It doesn't mean her book isn't any good; the point I raised before, was that there is only so much time in the day, and rather than get information second-hand...

Regards to 'Johnny Liberty' - if this guy is in jail it's no surprise. Where did Winston get most of his information from? People who had a lot of time on their hands at the law library, this means people in prison. He says he'd hear someone had found something out, so he'd drive hours in one direction, then another, stopping at the various prisons to get information from them. If you look at it as a slave management system, with slaves trying peaceably to get out of the matrix box, there's bound to be goofs, mistakes that end them up in jail, or people who repented from violent ways, and started seeing scripture for what it is, a book on contracts. From that they studied the UCC. contract law, and so-on.

[Anonymous]

A promise to pay, is itself, the money.
Supreme Court of Canada.
There you go...
If I sign on the dotted line thereby promising to pay then that instrument becomes, a monetize able instrument.
That...is how banks create money.
No bank can create money without someones signature.

[Anonymous]

He who does not repel a wrong when he can....occasions it.

This applies to more than just equity courts...
This must be internalized to the point of comprehending even the most minor nuances within this tale.
Once one comprehends this, the questions stop.
All the bullshit stops.
All the apprehension...ceases.
The only remaining question is...When do I act?

On the subject of courts and the prospect that "He who does not deny....admits"
 
"They are trying to use contract law...."

Now let's get back to this court scenario...."if the 'defendant' does not rebut the unproved assumptions and presumptions."
 
Then, according to the laws of procedure in an equity court their failure to rebut them....must mean what???
 
THEY MUST BE TRUE!!...BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T REBUT THEM!!
 
Which under the terms of contract law, you, have accepted the proposition.
 
You didn't rebut them right?....which is acceptance...
 
So, when you have offer and acceptance...isn't that a contract??
 
Absolutely!

Doesn't that supersede any provisions required by formal law and procedure?
 
YES!!.....Because the parties are in agreement!!
 
And they can agree to waive remedies and provisions of law anytime they want.
 
Now I said to these people that I knew that are confused as to why in the world the judge found the defendant guilty when the judge knew there was no evidence for the plaintiff in the case.
 
I said he found the defendant guilty because he allowed and agreed that he should be found guilty.....you volunteered.
 
After all...haven't you heard before that everybody in prison is there because they volunteered.....of their own free will?
 
Well....if you volunteered....doesn't that mean you had a contract??
 
Then....WHAT'S THAT GOT TO DO WITH LAW???
 
The end result was there was no evidence to rebut the presumptions.
 
So... the defense rested.
 
If the defense didn't rebut the presumptions.....did the plaintiff have a duty to bring evidence into the case???
 
OF COURSE NOT!!!
 
Because, they only have to bring evidence if, the defendants rebut the presumptions.
 
ALL RISE FOR THE JUDGE!!
 
Okay?...so here is what's going through the judges mind....he's going... "okay, there was charges of wrong doing...there was no evidence by the state, but the defendant's came on and didn't rebut any of the charges...because they didn't rebut the charges....I, as the judge must weigh...well then, are the charges true as far as this case is concerned...or are the charges wrong?...as far as this case is concerned."
 
It has to do with what's the intent of the parties here...if there's no evidence...we can't rule on evidence...so it's not a law case.
 
It's a case in equity....we want to know what the intent of the parties are....isn't everybody out to gain all the news serviture?.....because the news never gets to the facts....they just want to know how you feel about the news all the time.
 
There's no facts before the court....there's no evidence before the court...we just want to know how everybody feels about it.....do they want to be found guilty or not??
 
And if they want to be found guilty...then we will go ahead and because we have their agreement ....we'll find them guilty!
 
The judge will sit back and he says, "well look... the charges, even though there not proved.... must be true."
 
ALL RISE FOR THE JUDGE!!
 
Regards,

Free-man Jack
 
author, freelance journalist and entrepreneur (INGENUI) at large
- the masterful use of a lawful word, is a mighty sword – Harper

p.s. "Lawyers" never rebut the unproved assumptions and presumptions and therefore, you go in guilty as charged where only a point in law MAY save your sorry ass.
But then again.....it all depends on how everyone feels....you know.....where 51% dictate to the rest, how to feel.

_________________
A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine. Thomas Jefferson

[Anonymous]

The problem with going in at equity is you leave everything up to the discretion of the judge.
If one goes in at Law then everything is left up to you and the notary who just happens to be the Registrar.
YOU note the defendant for default.
YOU enter judgement against the defendant.
YOU call the shots.
If one goes in as defendant, one must spin the table 180 degrees with a counter claim in order to become the plaintiff.
This is done before court opens.
Plaintiffs always win...
Defendants necessarily, always lose.

[Anonymous]

One thing everyone should bear in mind is this: Lawyers only go where they are instructed to go.
The last time you were in trouble did you instruct your counsel on where you wanted him to go?
Or...did you just spill your guts and have him state...Just leave every thing to me...Ill take care of it....for a fee.
 :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:
Do you honestly think the government allows its hired mercenaries (lawyers)  to just run around doing things their own way?
Do you honestly think the government does not instruct its counsel on where to go?
And how to get there?
Do you honestly think the lawyer you hired to do battle for you is not working for the enemy?
 :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:
Real bright bunch out there.

[mobes]

Do you honestly think the lawyer you hired to do battle for you is not working for the enemy?

All lawyers are members of the law society. LOL

 :roll: I kick myself for not knowing this before and hiring lawyers previously......

Screw that shit, I'm studying the law myself, forget what anyone else says! I wanna call the shots in the courtroon and I will!

[Anonymous]

Hank Paulson's testimony before Congress firmed up my suspicions that bankers are NOT at the top of the food chain.
Lawyers are!
Anyone who, watched A.J s latest production will see Hank spilling his guts to Congress and admitting that he was in a conflict of interest in flushing Lehman Bros. down the shitter.
So what did Hank do?
He ran down to the hall to the office of ethics and obtained a: WAIVER OF ETHICS.
Did you get that?
Do you see how this scum gets around the rules and law?
I wonder what the lawyers name is (at the office of ethics) that gave Hank the power to commit fraud and treason?
This is THE question everyone should be asking and not just concerning Hank.

[Anonymous]

Did Obama get a waiver of ethics to run for president?
Are lawyers handing these out like pink slips from Government Motors?

[Anonymous]

I wonder what Jewish lawyers charge for a waiver of ethics? :roll:

[Anonymous]

Once these mental case Zionist Jews get control of YOUR law....YOUR FUCKED!!! :twisted:  :twisted:

[Anonymous]

I heard that the Canadian government is passing around a bill whereas, they would allow someone from Iraq to launch a civil suit against the USA...for example.
These fucking lawyers sure know how to create employment.
Can you imagine that for a moment
Someone may even hold some CEO hostage in his own country.
The launch pad for this was preconceived some time ago.
It is now being given the big push by a liberal JEW lawyer-M.P. in Ottawa by the name, IRWIN COTLER

Here is a little insight as to what this bum-buddy of Allan Dershwitz is up to....

 Irwin Cotler, the Liberal party's Special Counsel on Human Rights and International Justice, travels today to Geneva, Switzerland, ...
http://irwincotler.liberal.ca/en/news/n ... -in-geneva

[Anonymous]

Michael Ignatieff, the escapee Jew from Russia is Irwin Cotlers boss.
Michael Ignatieff, claims his is the only family, close to the Royal Family, to escape the slaughter of the Czar.
A perfect gang of spies......is what it is.

[Anonymous]

Come to think of it...
It may not be a bad idea...
So long as Palestinians get first kick at the can.
I wonder how many Jew lawyers would step up to bat for a Palestinian suing Israel for damages$$$$ done to his life in the last war?
Personally, I think he would be better off with no lawyer.

[mobes]

Do you see how this scum gets around the rules and law?

It is interesting to note that the president, vice president, secretary of the treasury, and secretary of state are not US citizens. Before they serve their roles in theses positions, they must be stripped of their person or have a copyrighted name, and they must expatriate to what is known as JURISDICTION 'A'. All citizens of the world, regardless of what country are in what is called JURISDICTION 'B'.

Jurisdiction A has much more power than jurisdiction B.

http://recordings.talkshoe.com/TC-39098/TS-246151.mp3

He explains it much better than i do.

[Anonymous]

Ever notice that when your government is signing a treaty with some other government, that some fellow standing directly behind your president, prime minister, etc comes forward and picks up the original treaty?
Who is this fellow?
I bet he is a foreign banker.
I bet he is a rep of the Treasury (UN agency) that picks it up and takes it to the office and proceeds to monetize it.
And then lends the value at interest back to the government.

[Anonymous]

If I were an American....
I would go absolutely ballistic over Obama being a lawyer acting as president!!!!!!
All lawyers are sworn to the crown forever via the law society and BAR.
How a lawyer becomes a politician in America is beyond me.
All lawyers are spy's for the crown.
Once a lawyer becomes a member of a law society he is forever a member, just like it states in the legal professions act.
A lawyer is bound by code to represent both sides in a matter.
A lawyer, without failure always abandons his client at some point.
I really don't understand why people call them lawyers because, the law has been absent in court rooms for nearly 100 years.
The courts are running strictly on the rules of equity and as such, the law does not enter that picture.
So just exactly who, is this clown representing?.....the law society?.....the crown in right of ? ? ?.....the Bank of England?....the U.N?
It sure looks to me he is not representing the people and if he was, he abandoned them right off the get-go.
If I was an American I would have this scoundrel in federal court and no half baked judge would be in a position to rule on whether the charges were inadmissible or not.
It would simply be between I, the claimant....Obama, the defendant and the court Registrar, the wild card, who just happens to be the notary in charge of it all.
And under the rules of equity, he would find himself completely fucked. :twisted:  :twisted:  :twisted:

[§N9sh2bj]

If I were an American....
I would go absolutely ballistic over Obama being a lawyer acting as president!!!!!!
All lawyers are sworn to the crown forever via the law society and BAR.
How a lawyer becomes a politician in America is beyond me.

Lawyers were banned from holding public office in the original 13th amendment.
Ergo the war of 1812 where england (jewish cabal, not to be confused with the common people on the land, same as today) sends navy/military, and in the chaos created, infil-traitors on the republic succeed in burning down the two major libraries (along with the original white house) holding the founding fathers documentation.
The organic constitution for the united States is replaced with a Constitution of the United States of America, more closely resembling documents of INCORPORATION. Later on, the united States becomes formerly incorporated with Abraham (nee Springstein) during the 1860's, when the southern senators walk out, and congress no longer has a quorum.

My source's info say the Constitution was on display on the mall on the district of columbia, until too many people were asking questions, why it was on different paper and done in a different writing style, compared with the declaration of independence next to it. The Constitution of 1812 was done in a writing style not present on the states until 1816.

[Anonymous]

succeed in burning down the two major libraries (along with the original white house) holding the founding fathers documentation./quote]
It was the British, French and Indians from north of the border that did that.
I don't think there was a Jew amongst them unless the Indians were Jews :lol:  :lol:  :lol:

[§N9sh2bj]

succeed in burning down the two major libraries (along with the original white house) holding the founding fathers documentation.

It was the British, French and Indians from north of the border that did that.
I don't think there was a Jew amongst them...

Like some one told me who knows the language of the argentine, their castellano word for 'history' and 'story' are the same.

Seems like a specific target: most of the 'founding father's' documents were in those two libraries. I think a similar fate happened with the library at Alexandria.

Not to get too far off the subject of the thread. It was started with the book 'How I....' by a 'Mary Croft'.
More or less a thread dealing with remedy.
Thus the topic is occasioned, of controlling the Trust, and/or issuing one's own notes/Notes, to get remedy -access to one's natural wealth. Whose wealth the unholy Rothschilds' and general jewish 'leadership' seek to covet for themselves, controlling through their 'Free' Masonic and primarily Jewish tentacles, the BAR associations (and banks), making a seeming monopoly on representation of the wealth of the people, within their fictional realm of the public.

As they do with the Doctors and A.M.A.! Begun for the same purposes at about the same time, the early 1900's, the 'American' Medical Association is an analogy example, it is perfect!

To those who believe what the Jews have taught us is so-called 'Law' - their Statutes, Bills, and Acts, a microcosm in the system by which we get remedy, this specific avenue may be 'all wrapped up by the Jews', but those are not law. To imply thereby 'there is no remedy with law', that implication is a fraud. The jews have defined the playing field of your mind, have you on the MindLock Kaminski writes about.

What happens when you take the basic path (re)-expoused by this 'Mary Croft' character, apply it to the health realm, and fire the Doctor? On firing the BAR'd attorney, doesn't the Court become yours as you are now the only non-fiction character in the proceedings, whereas before you were a deaf, dumb and blind mute, re-presented by a BAR'd attorney-at-law?


And to your sub-point JackieG: I suppose no Jews nor Jewish agents ever passed through the island of the brits or land of the french? On their way to the american colonies? 20% of the Federal employees were sacked during the President Andrew Jackson administration for supporting the central bankers. Hamilton married into the Rothschild family. 22 jewish-owned/controlled distilleries, not allowed to do business with the colonies, bartered 'firewater' with the natives in exchange for valued pelts and other items. The crew of the 'Christopher Columbus' voyages were jewish, cutting off hands of native islanders for not comprehending or understanding. The perception jewish infiltration of american politics and administration as an exclusive phenomena to the twentieth and twenty-first centuries is a misnomer. Furthermore, their 'leadership' took direct action to destroy the economy of the colonists upon discovering they used debt-free script and no one suffered for lack of productive (and I would add meaningful) work.

City of London corporation ring a bell?