PERSONS FOR IDIOTS
Scott Duncan
July 12, 2014 ·
THE TENDER FOR LAW: PERSONS FOR IDIOTS (c) 2014 ROGUESUPPORT INC. THE TENDER FOR LAW: PERSONS FOR IDIOTS (c) 2014 ROGUESUPPORT INC. under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
All of you reading have, at one point or another, encountered the term "PERSON". After very little investigation, you are forced to accept the realization that you are not a PERSON, rather you HAVE a PERSON. This distinction is the first "lie of ommission" that you will encounter in the world of the "LEGAL". THE TENDER FOR LAW axiom "LEGAL=SURETY AND ACCOUNTING" makes navigating "law" a lot simpler, and it's very easy to spot the lies of ommission/ambiguity.
You did not create this PERSON and it has nothing to do with you. THIS ONE FACT is lost on most, and can lead to JOINDER if you are not careful.
When asked if you are a PERSON, some of you will answer that you are a NATURAL PERSON. This is a really dumb thing to claim in COURT because you are making several DECLARATIONS by saying so! First, you are DECLARING that you are in their JURISDICTION. Not only are you DECLARING that you are in their JURIDICTION, but you are also DECLARING that you do NOT enjoy LIMITED LIABILITY. This, of course, means you have 100% SURETY. Let me say that again: If you DECLARE in COURT that you are a NATURAL PERSON, you DECLARE that you accept 100% SURETY. NATURAL PERSON = "picking up the tab". INDIVIDUAL=SURETY.
Now that that's out of the way, I must digress for a minute to testify to an interesting phenomenon that I experienced tonight; I was shown a POINT OF LAW that I had missed. To make it even stranger, this was pointed out to me by a man many of you know as "The Fender". He often plays the role of "Lou Manotti" here on Facebook.
("Lou Manotti" is of course, the CORRECT spelling of the name of the PERSON who controlls the government and the banks. Often mis-spelled "Illuminati", Lou Manotti rules over all, and stops the US from using the metric systems... Plays the HAARP, and eats babies, and stuff. OH, and he's a lizard too! ...and people call ME crazy! :P )
Few people know more about LAW than I do. This is not bragging, it's simply a fact. I have studied LAW since I was 9, but I haven't studied it like "The Fender" has. He has a unique talent of identifying all the players (Using LEGALLY DEFINED Identifiers), and what their roles are. Rather than concentrating on why and how the rules came to be, he studies "who does what" and follows the money. This has the interesting side effect of producing an extremely precise map of the LEGAL MATRIX. One, I dare say, that rivals mine, and today, it was shown to me the advantages of his methodology. My LEGAL knowledge and knowledge of LAW spans the globe, that scale comes at a price. The finer details are lost when you manage knowledge of that scale; here is an example.
One of the standard "Tender For Law" doctrines is to detach yourself from the NAME. It doesn't matter if it's an extreme detachment, like mine, where the name is SECURED by a JURIDICAL PERSON, or like Pete does in an ADMINISTRATIVE capacity only. I've shown you the many ways you can stump the COURT with the questions "what evidence does this court have that I have any SURETY in this matter?", and "by what authority does this court attach ANY name derived from a PUBLIC DOCUMENT to me?". These two questions effectively remove any LEGAL PRESUMPTION as regards the NAME. This, of course, is NOT the classic "I am not a PERSON" argument. The mere fact that the COURT is hearing that DECLARATION means it can be reasonably presumed that the INDIVIDUAL making that DECLARATION is lying. Canada is rife with case law regarding PERSONHOOD. Look for yourself.
In that previous paragraph, you'll notice two words that actually form the LEGAL connection I hadn't noticed until "The Fender" pointed it out. In the "who does what" methodology that he uses, we took a little virtual walk through the world of "who does what", and this is the frustrating part; I know all these things, yet I did not notice this.
We start with the JURISDICTION we're all familiar with; ONTARIO. It's the JURISDICTION I deal with the most, and the one I'm most familiar with. The COURT system in ONTARIO is ADMINISTERED and managed by the ATTORNEY GENERAL of ONTARIO. Walk into any ONTARIO COURTHOUSE and you do not see the word "CANADA", and you only see "ONTARIO" in the context of the ATTORNEY GENERAL. The ATTORNEY GENERAL is a seperate ADMINISTRATIVE BODY from the rest of the province, yet is still "government". The ATTORNEY GENERAL writes a JUSTICE'S paycheck, and it writes a CROWN ATTORNEY'S paycheck. This blatant conflict of interest is rabidly ignored in the same way Christians rabidly ignore the nastier parts of the Bible. Like the Catholic Church, the ATTORNEY GENERAL just makes up the rules as it goes along. Several cases regarding this matter of a blatant and obvious conflict of interest had the ONTARIO COURT OF APPEAL respond with the very compelling "no it isn't", backed up with the authority-based "because I said so". As far as I know, the argument hasn't continued since because the LOWER COURTS can now simply answer "that issue has been ruled on". And because of THE UK CANADA ACT, the time has long passed that we could legally do anything about it. All of this is public information, and even Christians shouldn't have trouble finding it, and that's the ATTORNEY GENERAL giving a big, public, happy "fuck you" to all INDIVIDUALS...
WHEN YOU GO TO COURT, YOU ARE NOT DEALING WITH "GOVERNMENT", YOU ARE ONLY DEALING WITH AN ATTORNEY GENERAL. ALL FARMERS ARE HUMAN, BUT NOT ALL HUMANS ARE FARMERS... And you semi-evolved chimps, are simply CATTLE, legally. (everybody get that?)
Which brings us back to the topic of this article. "The Fender" knew he was not going to trip me up with that knowledge, so he turned to THE LAW SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA, and we went through a surreal walk through The Enchanted Forest of the Fucking Obvious. It starts with a single question: "Who does THE LAW SOCIETY claim JURISDICTION over?" While a quick look at their bullshit-ese CHARTERS will reveal that they CLAIM JURISDICTION over "ALL INDIVIDUALS", I seem to have missed this BLATANTLY OBVIOUS THING. I KNEW it, but it was just data. No connection had been made, because it was hidden in plain sight. Using the LAW dictionary of your choice, you will find that "INDIVIDUAL" is distinctly a "PRIVATE or NATURAL PERSON" (One OR the other! NO LIABILITY or FULL LIABUILITY), and the LAW SOCIETY CLAIMS JURISDICTION. Continuing in the LAW dictionary of your choice, you will find that "NATURAL PERSON" is defined as "a human being, naturally born" and will in some way indicate that it is distinct from a LEGALLY generated, JURIDICAL PERSON.
I'll let that sink in.
INDIVIDUAL = NATURAL PERSON.
THEREFORE: THE LAW SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA CLAIMS JURISDICTION over ALL NATURAL PERSONS. (that's you)
None of this is hidden, you can go look yourself, they tell you. THE LAW SOCIETY has CLAIMED JURISDICTION over all of you and I didn't even notice. A CROWN ATTORNEY exists to ATTORN the INDIVIDUAL to the GOVERNMENT'S JURISDICTION. All CROWN ATTORNEYS are members of THE LAW SOCIETY OF UPPER CANADA. And there is the JOINDER in the LEGAL MATRIX. The trinity is formed when the COURT hands you the BILL, and you have a good old-fashioned CONSTRUCTIVE TRUST. None of this is hidden, and I didn't see it. Let that serve as a warning to all of you. None of you could ever hope to be half as good at this as I am, and even I missed these hidden in plain sight and blatantly obvious things.
I mention this because some of you are going into COURT and doing some very, very, stupid things. One of the things I've always objected to Dean Clifford doing, is encouraging people to put themselves in situations where they would end up in COURT. Some of you can't even grasp that your signature equals PROOF OF UNDERSTANDING. This one simple fact seems lost on all of you, and that alone should be enough to convince you that you have no business speaking to a court! None of this is hidden, so none of this is the FRAUD all of you CLAIM. The actual FRAUD, all of you have ignored. And while we're on the topic of frauds, Robert Menard is now publically stating the blatant lie about the definition of "LEGAL TENDER". You'll often hear the piece-of-shit use the words "HONOUR", and "HONOURABLE" which are simply LEGAL TERMS referring to CONTRACTS. He, of course, fails to mention this, because "lying through omission IS his bag, Baby"!
So, covering the many kinds of PERSONS, we have so far encountered the "INDIVIDUAL", which is simply a LEGAL TERM distinguishing a NATURAL PERSON (FULL LIABILITY which may be ATTORNED) from a (LIMITED LIABILITY which IS ALREADY ATTORNED by its creation) JURIDICAL PERSON, which means of course we have seen a JURIDICAL PERSON. A JURIDICAL PERSON is a LEGAL CONTRUCT. This may be a CORPORATION and/or a SECURITY and/or a TRUST. I know what you're thinking; "How can a TRUST be a PERSON?". The COURTS recognise some TRUSTS as "PRIVATE PERSONS". In fact, the COURT recognises the GOVERNMENT as a PRIVATE PERSON, and therefore "HER MAJESTY, AND AN ORGANIZATION" is recognised by the COURTS as a PRIVATE PERSON. Those of you hardcore researchers should have no trouble finding PUBLIC DECLARATIONS that the COURTS recognise the GOVERNMENT as a PRIVATE PERSON. This raises some ugly COMMON LAW JURISDICTION issues that the UNITED STATES simply doesn't have. But that's for another article.
Just remember: While you may be RIGHT, the Gomer Pyle-esque thug with a costume and a gun (NOT A PERSON, LEGALLY) does not know anything outside of the "rules". They are intentionally selected for their limited intellect and the courts have ENDORSED this practice. This man KNOWS he's worthless in the real world, so "keeping his job" and "pension" will ALWAYS trump YOUR RIGHTS. This one point seems lost on most of you. They need stupid, obedient people to keep you stupid, and obedient. Hairdressers have more training to practice their trade, than cops have, regarding legal matters, and/or YOUR RIGHTS. Their "job" trumps your rights, and that is what they REALLY mean when they use the cop-out "I'm just doing my job". They are simply an armed gang for those claiming "authority" over you. Driving without a license/plates is JUST STUPID. It attracts the attention of armed thugs following "rules" so they can bring you before a court that SELECTIVELY follows those rules, in much the same way Christians and MuslimsSELECTIVELY follow their own "laws".
Muslims consider the Qu'ran "law".. Read the Qu'ran and you will see these "laws" are in every measurable way, EVIL. The same is true with the Christian/Jewish "laws". Every Christian, Muslim, and Jew KNOWS that rape and slavery are wrong, but their "perfect" and "loving" god couldn't quite grasp the point. To "god" rape and slavery are ok... BUT NO "GRAVEN IMAGES"! You are taught from childhood to "respect" this ethical vacuum of "belief". That's the first seed that's ever planted. The delusion may now be echoed. "AUTHORITY" trumps rights, and you are "bad" if you think otherwise. When they violate your rights, they claim it's "all perfectly legal", and "they're just doing their jobs"... and you are supposed to be OK with that.
The ONLY place the government is recognized as a PERSON, is in court, and ONLY in the capacity of PRIVATE PERSON (no LEGAL liability). You will not change that. "Exposing" them will not change that. NOBODY IN GOVERNMENT HAS SURETY! EVER! When you point this out, you will be accused of "symantics", "word games" or your position will be dismissed as "jibberish"... which is ironic, considering what REALITY shows. Those who work for "government" actually BELIEVE it's their RIGHT to do what they do. THEY REALLY BELIEVE THEY HAVE "AUTHORITY" over you because of GEOGRAPHY. LET THAT SINK IN. This point was, of course, lost on Dean Clifford.
Like the Christians, the Government is ignoring the OLD laws, and replacing them with NEW laws to make their UNLAWFUL actions, "legal". Even Hitler kept things "legal". Hitler did not do ONE "illegal" thing. He just kept the population stupid... Just like the Christians. He made "new Law" to replace the old law... Just like the Christians. He even said, "The old Law still applies", but in practice, is largely ignored... just like the Christians. Then comes the "peaceful" and "loving" CONVERSIONS that you'd better accept and be grateful for...because you'll be sent to a "happy camp" otherwise. See the pattern here? ALL BASED ON BELIEF.
ALL BELIEF IS EVIL. PERSON=BELIEF. Nothing more. You did not create the PERSON. It has nothing to do with you. IT IS NOT YOURS. You are simply the LAWFUL HOLDER IN DUE COURSE of the PERSON. You do not OWN a $10.00 BILL. You MAY be the LAWFUL HOLDER IN DUE COURSE of a $10.00 bill but YOU ARE NOT THE ONLY BENEFICIARY. This is true with ALL SECURITIES. A PERSON is, in reality A SECURITY. THAT IS NOT "BELIEF", that is simply a FACT.
THE TENDER FOR LAW [ https://www.facebook.com/groups/tenderforlaw/ ] is NOT about LAW, it's about MONEY and the TENDER FOR LAW attached to it. THAT TENDER IS A FRAUD. All the group has ever done is teach you WHAT that fraud is, and what WE as thinking humans can do about it! THE RESULTS ARE IN!
...It turns out you're all stupid, and can't really help.
...so we started without you. Two years ago, when I said I intend to teach people to make their own BANKS and CURRENCY, I was of course, labeled "crazy"... Until I taught you to make your own banks and currency. I'm STILL called "crazy" when i say I'm going to collapse the banking system and start a war... but not as much as I was 2 years ago; There is now a growing camp of those who think I might just do that. ;)
PERSONS are going to suffer that fate too, if I have MY way. Just remember who you are. YOU ARE NOT A PERSON. You HAVE a PERSON. This was NOT a choice you made, and it's not your FAULT! You have the RIGHT TO "SECURITY OF THE PERSON"! THIS DOES NOT MEAN WHAT YOU THINK IT MEANS! THIS IS A LEGAL DECLARATION. NOWHERE does it say the GOVERNMENT has the right to "SECURE THE PERSON". YOU DECIDE what happens to your person, just like YOU DECIDE what happens to that $10.00 bill in your wallet, even though it's NOT YOURS.
IT'S YOUR RIGHT.