by Mary Elizabeth Croft
"Money" is now created by bankers. Goldsmiths learned that they could issue gold certificates as "promise to pay," rather than moving gold coins around. The present day bank notes represent the confidence of the people to be able to exchange them for goods and services. Its all just bookkeeping entries; shifting of credit and debit. We used to have real money, now only our Strawman has worthless notes. The government created the Strawman in order to engage us in their Commerce Game.
The Strawman's name is similar to ours, only it is in upper case letters. It shows up on everything you think identifies you, but the identification is government-issued. All contracts we sign contain the Strawman name, not our own name. Have you ever noticed that your name on your driver's license, bank statement, and any bill that you receive is in all caps?
How is it that the feds can take our houses, property, cars, bank accounts, children, etc.? Because we don't own them. Living souls do not have names; we have descriptions, e.g: Smith, from Blacksmith, the description of one's trade. Only corporations have names; hence, when a cop or judge asks you your name, it would be foolish to answer him for several reasons:
1. When you state a name before the court, you have contracted with the court, thereby granting it jurisdiction. Remember the "name" is the government-created corporation they want you to believe is you. If you state it is you, you have just contracted with thugs. When a judge asked me my name, I responded, "If I tell you my name will I have entered into a contract with you?" I was promptly thrown out of court.
2. What you believe to be your "name" can't possibly be truth; it can only be hearsay because you don't have first-hand knowledge that this is you. It is only by hearing this name repeatedly in reference to you over the years that you believe this name refers to you. You do not know it as fact.
3. Giving hearsay evidence in court is fraudulent, not to mention "contempt of court." Remember Peter Fonda said: "Try not paying your taxes and find out who owns your house."
4. Judges, et al, tend to address us as Mr. Smith or Ms. Smith. The terms Mr. and Ms. denote "title" and title denotes position in commerce. Since we, the flesh and blood, are not operating in commerce except via the Strawman, the terms Mr. and Ms. presumes we are the Strawman, so do not respond to these titles.
We don't own anything. It appears as if our Strawman does, only it is a fiction and so can't hold legal title. The creator of this fictional entity (the government) holds the legal title. If the Strawman incurs a debt, we are held as surety to "pay" it and, yet, there is nothing with which to pay. Further, why are we paying for something for which we have only "use" privileges? But the fictitious Strawman can pay fictitious funds (Federal Reserve Notes/Bank of Canada Notes). So that the Strawman can pay a debt, the banksters set up an account for it. This is your Social Security / Social Insurance Number. Notice your name isn't on that card. The corporation name is in upper case letters.
The government now refers to us as "human resources"—the collateral on the national debt. The living souls who died in the U.S. government's demolition of the World Trade Center were referred to as "collateral damage." This tells us that we are considered "collateral" by the government. Yet, one must be the holder in due course of the resource in order to use it as collateral and, interestingly, the government does hold the Statement of Live Birth (our warehouse receipts).
It appears that the feds are the holder in due course of our bodies, our labour, our finances, our property, and our lives. They have legal title, while we have only equitable title. We are allowed only the "use" of our bodies, finances, property, all of which are owned by the government; yet, the privilege of using them demands a "use tax." The demolition of the World Trade Center was to wipe out corporate debt. How can a phenomenal debt, created by the corporations of this world, be proven if all the evidence of said debt was lost in those collapsed towers? "Ground Zero" is the balance on the debt.
I read about a man in the UK named John, who defended himself and his wife against two intruders by gaining control of a knife that one of them was wielding. One escaped and John stabbed the other, who died. John was held by police, for how long I don't know. Most people would assume he was held for murder, but it has nothing to do with murder. All crime is commercial and yet "commerce" can’t be a true "crime." The feds have convinced us we are corporate entities and John impeded commerce.
The common law—not to infringe upon the life, liberty, property or rights of another—is based upon the one spiritual law—to treat others as we would like to be treated. It does not allow for any government to prosecute or fine us for "victimless crimes." Statute laws have arisen for this purpose, but their power is limited by common sense and by the resolve of those who would stand up for their natural rights.
One can be fined only if he or she has entered into and breached a contract. Under common law, however, a contract must be knowingly, voluntarily, and intentionally entered into, or it is unenforceable. One of the requirements is full disclosure. Government departments are aware of this and circumvent it by intimidating us into signing agreements that are meant to void common law rights. Be very wary of what you sign. In fact, always write above your signature "All Rights Reserved," which means that, while operating in commerce, you reserve all your common law rights.
This one law—do not infringe on the life, liberty, property, or rights of another—has now been replaced by over sixty million statutes, all of which compel one to do something. Law cannot compel performance. These statutes are all based upon commerce. So John was held because of the only crime now in existence: impeding commerce. What commerce?
Let's take a look at precisely who these intruders were and why they were in John's house. From the government's standpoint, John did not kill another living soul; he destroyed government property (collateral). Since thieves rarely break into occupied houses, we can safely assume that they were on drugs, desperate for something to steal and sell. The creditor of these funds is the banksters, specifically, the CIA / drug cartel.
John thwarted business. He took the intruder out of the Commerce Game and put a damper on the expected funds the dead man would have paid the banksters during his remaining lifetime. He was held as surety for his Strawman since he was not the holder in due course of his Strawman, so he likely will be charged, but with what?
The courts cannot let the cat out of the bag on this Commerce Game, so once the attorneys and the courts collect an extortive amount of the Strawman's funds, via John, from his attempt to defend himself, they will drop charges which were never laid in the first place. I'm sure John has no idea what is going on and he will never understand until he learns how to claim his Strawman, so that he can become the creditor to his debtor Strawman. In fact, all he had to do was decline to contract with the feds, but most people are unaware of the power of contract and, more important, they are unaware of their true nature.
In the USA, the prison business is huge. Under the guise of punishment for a crime, prison owners have extremely cheap labor at their disposal. At least 86% (possibly 94%) of all prisoners are nonviolent. They are there because they were doing or selling drugs, mostly marijuana, and "under the law" they are to be punished. Now they are working for pennies an hour. The drug business is only the means to the end, which is prison. Prisoners' bonds are sold on the securities market to A.G. Edwards and Merrill Lynch. A felon is worth about $4 million; the city of the prison gets $40 million. Investors offer to buy for 40% and increases minimum 200% for bank securities.
Over 50% of money market bonds are purchased in the Orient. The stockholders are the owners of Correction Corp of America, which owns all the private prisons and sells the commercial paper on each prisoner/slave. PaineWebber is the prime stockholder. If you hold stock with these international businesses you are betraying your fellows by keeping them in prison for a commercial crime, not the true crime of infringement on the life, liberty, property, or rights of another living soul. You wonder how the USA can afford a war? The banksters are selling your fellow living souls as goods, which are warehoused in the prisons of the corporate United States of America, Inc. and Canada, Inc.
Sixteen pages of corporations are identified as involved in prison profit. Don't bother to ask to look at their books; this aspect of their business is not published. All investment firms work for the corporate USA/CA. If you are involved, you might want to reassess your intentions from a more ethical perspective. Every prisoner bond has a Committee on Uniform Securities Identification number so you can track the trade and how much the principal (the prisoner) is worth, the funds of which he or she will never see.
In order to take back control of our lives we must take control of our Strawman. Fortunately, we now know how to do this. Since living souls cannot pay debt (HJR 192, 1933 in the USA and Order in Council 16, 1933 in Canada), we can now only discharge debt. Since all debt is created on paper, all debt can only be discharged with other pieces of paper. When you take control of your Strawman you will no longer be held as surety for it, and you can discharge its debts with your signature: a promise to pay, the same way the banksters do it.
Your Papers Please
It might seem that a pragmatic solution is to get assets out of paper and into substance; yet, we must remember that unless we rebut the presumption that we are "juristic persons" (fictions) we won't own any substance we think we might. I have heard it said more than once that the Jews never would have been "relocated" had they had their "papers" in order. I don't think there is one movie about Nazi Germany where some English speaking actor with a bad accent doesn't demand, "Yah papahs, pleahs?" I don't think this is any coincidence. Papers must have meant something. I do not think they are referring to passports; I think they were referring to some document that rebuts the presumption on the part of the feds that we are who they say we are. We are who WE say we are—an extension of our Creator and not a construct of their insidious Commerce Game.
I believe they are referring to papers indicating whether one is a creditor or a debtor, whether one is the holder-in-due-course of one's assets or is being held as surety for alleged debt, and whether one has legal title or only equitable title to one's body, rights, and property. We must get clear about Who We Are. It is not difficult to do, but we have to want to learn this and stop believing propaganda that keeps us enslaved. We must state that we do not stand under their realm of fiction and commerce.
Federal Income Tax
A woman once told me, "I owe Revenue Canada a fortune. Thank God there are no more debtor's prisons." She didn't understand that debtor's prison is all there is, since the only real crime is "impeding commerce."
The feds consider everyone a taxpayer and intend to collect a certain amount of money through taxes up until that amount hits a peak but before they are required to begin to return money in the form of Social Security or Canada Pension, Medicare, etc. There actually is a line; take a look at actuaries. If someone kills another before that line is reached, the government regards it as a financial loss and prosecutes the murderer for "impeding commerce," even though it appears to be under the guise of taking the life of another. Otherwise, its books won't balance. The government doesn't acknowledge living souls; it sees us as surety for a limited liability corporation (LLC), which is a government-created fictitious entity. But the real living soul, the surety/accommodation party, will wind up going to jail for creating a debit on the government's books.
Consider, for example, the outcome of the hurricanes in Florida, which reduced Medicare costs for the federal government since the majority of those who are either dead or "missing" were elderly. Weather control has been used for over a decade in the USA (www.weatherwars.info). Those hurricanes were most certainly strategically planned. Also, families of those who are allegedly missing do not receive any insurance benefits because "missing" is not one of the terms and conditions of the insurance contract. Florida hurricanes were designed for the same purpose as the government demolitions of the WTC: to reduce corporate debt.
When Nelson A. Rockefeller was being questioned by Congress prior to his installment to a government appointment, he was asked, "How much money did you make last year?" Rockefeller answered, "$650 million." "And how much income tax did you pay on that?" they asked. "Nothing," was the reply. If you pay more taxes than Rockefeller does, don't you think you need more education?
The definition of "person" in Interpretive Laws of Canada and under the 14th Amendment in the U.S. is a corporation. Your Strawman is a corporate entity created by the government. If you are the surety you are liable for its taxes; however, if you are the secured party, the creditor to its debtor, you have first lien against it and the feds have zero control over it and no jurisdiction over you. You do not owe income tax; besides, no one has even been able to define "income." A spluttering IRS agent couldn't find in the Internal Revenue Manual where it is written that I am required to pay a tax on my income. Go to H&R Block and pull the same stunt; it makes them crazy.
If you're like me and you like to annoy the bureaucrats, trust me that it is very good entertainment. I now have in my possession "Confirmation of Agreement" evidencing that IRS Commissioner, Mark W. Everson, then-Commissioner of Canada Revenue Agency, Alan Nymark, and Minister of National Revenue Canada, John McCallum, all agree that we are not required to pay income tax, or any other taxes, unless we agree to the terms of their contract.
Most people pay taxes on "income" even though it is not their "income" but belongs to the Strawman. How can we have a tax liability on "income" we never received? Even if it were we who received it there is no law requiring anyone to pay any tax, never mind an "income" tax, but Canadians, in particular, justify the confiscation of their earnings by saying that there is a law, which is not true. They complain about paying taxes; yet, they defend it.
This conflict of emotions is tantamount to the Stockholm Syndrome: the behavior of kidnap victims who, over time, become sympathetic to their captors (named after a 1973 hostage incident in Stockholm; after six days of captivity in a bank, several kidnap victims resisted rescue attempts and later refused to testify against their captors). Captives begin to identify with their captors initially as a defense mechanism out of fear of violence.
Small acts of kindness ("government benefits") by the captor are magnified, since finding perspective in a hostage situation is, by definition, impossible. Rescue attempts (by those of us who intend for the sheeple to wake up!) are also regarded as a threat, since it is likely the captive would be injured during such attempts. It stands to reason that mavericks like me are not trusted; in fact, I am feared even more than the hostage situation in which most people are unwittingly being held captive by their governments.
Those who pay taxes are aggravating the problem; they believe they have no choice. They have been held hostage. Whether they pay the tax or not is not important in the grand scheme. What is important is what is going on in their minds, which happens to be fear. There is no freedom, no aliveness, where there is fear.
Your "income tax" does not go to operate the federal government. You make out the check to the IRS (CRA in Canada), both of which are private corporations. Who endorses the back of the check? A private corporation, the Federal Reserve Board, Inc./Bank of Canada, Inc., cashes the check. Then the check goes to The Governor-Secretary of the Treasury of the International Monetary Fund, Inc. (IMF) of the United Nations. Those who pay taxes on "income" are giving away their "money" to the United Nations, a worldwide Communist organization, the intent of which is Collectivism. Five months of your income goes to support Collectivism.
Tax funds do not run the government or any of its alleged programs. The IMF runs the government; your money is inconsequential to government operation. Taxing is simply the means to confiscate your personal power. No sovereign can be taxed; only corporate entities can be taxed and only by the agreement of the principle/surety (you!), if indeed you agreed to it. Why might you voluntarily, willingly, and knowingly do that? You wouldn't. You've been tricked into it.
Many people highly resent paying taxes. Since they feel thwarted in being able to do anything about it, they figure out ways to get something back for paying into a system that doesn't work for them. They exact their dues by frequenting hospitals, doctors, filing insurance claims, workman's comp, etc. All this does is keep them locked into the belief that they're getting something. This won't work in the long run. Worse, they become dependent upon government benefits. We cannot afford to be dependent upon any entity that doesn't have our best interests at heart. Better, by far, would be to release the fear we have surrounding our beliefs about who we are not.
VAT (Value Added Tax = Sales Tax)
This is just another means to confiscate your funds and your personal power. Goods and services tax (GST) is another "use" tax, which we are not required to pay, not only because there is no law compelling us but also because of who we are, which we have been persuaded to forget. I like to carry around a "Tax Exempt Status Card and a Certificate" which I show the owner/manager of places I frequent to prove I am not obligated to pay any tax because sovereigns are not required to do so. We are sovereign until we acquiesce to behavior that vitiates this fact. Is the queen tax exempt? You bet!
So, we are tax exempt and all we have to do is say so, even though we have been taught not to believe in our sovereignty. My prime concern is the tax on gas, which is at least 37% (possibly 84%). I know I'm not required to pay it; I even have the corroboration of the Canada Revenue Agency; however, I am having trouble with the oil corporations. After perusing my gas receipts I sent the chief financial officer a true bill for $146.00. He has yet to fork over, so I paid for gas one day with a Transfer Instrument. He called the cops on me because his fiduciary (a bankster) didn't recognize it. I straightened it out with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and told the CFO that I wanted the name of the officer at his bank because the Receiver General probably wants to know who is not honoring my transfer instruments, particularly since he and I have his tacit agreement that they will be honored. I shan’t bother to lien this twit’s assets for a measly $146 in GST and fuel taxes, the financial liability of which he has unlawfully passed along to you and me.
Laws Can Only Protect
A cop once stopped me for a seatbelt violation. I asked him, "Who is the injured party?" "The State of New Mexico." The State of New Mexico doesn't exist; New Mexico state exists. When I asked him, "If I were to call The State of New Mexico to the stand, who would show up?" He didn't know how to answer me because no one would or could show up. No name in upper case can be an injured party because it is a fiction, an entity created by the government. Only flesh and blood living souls can be injured.
So, he asked me for a driver's license, which I didn't have because having one would grant him immediate jurisdiction over me, which, as yet, he didn't have. I asked if I were required to have one and, if so, could he provide for me the law that compels me. Later, he did actually show me the statute, "all operators must be licensed," but I noticed that it did not apply to me, nor did it detail any consequences for said operator, which also was not I, if this person were not licensed. There was no implementing regulation: the enforcement clause. It was simply one of many traffic codes, which apply only to those who thought them up. They have no clout with those of us who don't agree to them.
Laws can't compel; they can only protect. If the law doesn't protect me, the law doesn't apply to me. Hence, there is only one law and the breaking of this law results in the infringement upon the life, liberty, property, or rights of a natural being, who has every right to seek just compensation for the injury. Everything else is statute and applies only to those who are subject to them, namely, those who thought them up. All codes, rules, regulations, statutes, and ordinances apply only to those involved within the departments who documented them. So, the Internal Revenue Code applies only to IR Agents and Canada Revenue Codes apply only to government employees, and anyone else who might care to contract with those agencies.
According to G.K. Chesterton, since "Equality under Law is Paramount and Mandatory by Law," and we know everyone in court lies; it's a dog and pony show. Why was Martha Stewart sentenced to prison for lying? It is because she agreed not to. Since contract is the only law, she breached the contract wherein she agreed "to tell the truth." Had she declined "to tell the truth," she would not have gone to prison. There is no law against "lying."
I have been asked rather sarcastically, "So, you think you are above the law?" Of course, I am above the law. Bob Dylan said, "to live outside the law you must be honest." The creator is always above the created. If man made laws, man is above what he made. I never said I was above the Creator's laws. I claim to be above man's laws because they don't apply to me . . . unless I say so.
All My Children
When I was a child, I was taught, "The policeman is your friend. If you become lost, find a policeman and he'll bring you home." Mums would be so grateful that he would be invited in for tea and biscuits. I have been obliged to teach my children, "The policeman is not your friend. If you become lost and go to a policeman, he might bring you home but he will take me to jail for child neglect and for allowing my child to get lost." Remember, the presumption is that my children don't belong to me but to the state and I would be charged with neglect of their property. It just so happens that my boys do belong to me because I have actively rebutted that presumption.
I am reminded of the story of a fellow in Michigan who has five children, the first four of whom have birth certificates. The youngest was born at home and hence has no birth certificate (same as mine). One day the dad was in a store with his kids and was yelling at one of them. A public-minded woman overheard this and, like all good informants, telephoned Child Protective Services to report child abuse. The next day the cops came by and confiscated all five of his children. The following day the cops came by and returned the youngest, saying, "This one's not ours." This is reason enough to make sure your children belong to you and not to the state.
For those who think your public servants are above this type of seeming theft, think again. It is not theft. If you have signed over your children to the public via the birth registration, I suggest you get your papers in order to prevent the feds from collecting their collateral (those whom you call "my children") for the interest on the loan.
Remember always: All behavior unlike love is motivated by our fear of punishment based upon our inaccurate belief in our guilt.
©2005 Mary Elizabeth Croft. Mary Croft lives in Alberta and is the author of "How I Clobbered Every Bureaucratic Cash-Confiscatory Agency Known to Man: A Spiritual Economics Book on $$$ and Remembering Who You Are," in which she teaches us how to remove ourselves from the fraudulent banking system. Her 90-page manuscript can be read for free at www.mayanmajix.com/croft.pdf. She may be reached at: firstname.lastname@example.org. Since we have yet to manifest a world without commerce, she gratefully accepts and appreciates contributions for her work.
Browne, Harry. How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World, Liamworks (1998).
Eden, Donna. Energy Medicine, Tarcher (1999).
A Course in Miracles (Student Workbook), Foundation for Inner Peace (1984); see also Ken Wapnick and Marianne Williamson's work on same.
Frissell, Bob. Nothing in this Book is True But It's Exactly the Way Things Are, Frog (3rd edition, 2003).
Gatto, John Taylor. The Underground History of American Education (read for free at www.johntaylorgatto.com/underground/)
Grabhorn, Lynn. Excuse Me, Your Life is Waiting, Hampton Roads (2003).
Griffin, Edward. The Creature from Jekyll Island: A Second Look at the Federal Reserve. American Media (3rd edition 1998)
Hawkins, David. Power vs. Force: The Hidden Determinants of Human Behavior, Hay House (2002); Eye of the I: From Which Nothing is Hidden, Veritas (2001); I: Reality and Subjectivity, Veritas (2003).
Hotchkiss, Burt. Your Owner's Manual, Fernwood (1992).
Icke, David. Infinite Love is the Only Truth: Everything Else is Illusion, Bridge of Love (2005).
McLeod, Rice. Lectures on "Who Are You?" WWFAR.com Sundays 7pm PST (also, www.beam.to/tapes)
McWilliams, Peter. Ain't Nobody's Business If You Do: The Absurdity of Consensual Crimes, Prelude (Reprint 1996).
Renard, Gary. The Disappearance of the Universe: Straight Talk About Illusions, Hay House (2004).
Szasz, Thomas. The Myth of Mental Illness: Foundations of a Theory of Personal Conduct, Harper (revised 1984).