2012.06.

03 Boris (Nightwing)
http://www.fileconvoy.com/dfl.php?id=g28036b85a5a26b0a11873680c6a45aca14fe9a

01:15:45 A guy walked into court for a child
support case, and just kept saying "I'm just
a natural man." and everyone kept asking
what? what do you mean? The guy
replied: "I'm like a deer, does a deer pay
child support?"

case dismissed,
discharged... wife got all paid up and
getting her checks regularly.
we are just like one of god's creatures.
do they pay for anything? do they pay
for their place to live, for anything?

01:16:40 - Take any application for
ANYTHING and sticky note it with ONE
question: "When did I surrender my
allegiance to nature (and nature's god) for
this? exactly when did it happen?"
(like to the BC, etc)

01:17:05 - all boils down to this: once you
can demonstrate you are not a PERSON,
because you are questioning when you
surrendered your allegiance. because you
had to do a conscience act of doing it.
WHY? because here in U.S. there is an
actual procedure for doing this. There are 3
things you have to do. you have to
physically and consciously renounce all
allegiances to any prince, principality, any
'higher power'. when did you do that? its
all presumptions, because you have a D.L.
(no

doesn't matter if you got the DL, work for
FRNs, filled out tax forms, have social
security cards, voter registration, etc....
WHEN did I actually surrender my
allegiance to nature.
, I just use it to keep the peace. when
did I agree to surrender my allegiance?

)
01:19:39 - how do you know if you belong
to a club, if you never asked? in any
matter... even in your foreclosures, did
anyone ever ask: "Where is the
controversy involving me?" (i.e. do you
have a claim against me?
... it is all the same thing. exactly when
did I surrender my allegiance to nature?
right out of law of nations... god created
heaven above, gave earth to mankind for
their advantage (both rich and poor)... those
resources are for their use and god put no
tax on it. so what are they doing putting a
tax on it?
) last thing NW
did in court: asked that question and
nobody has answered to this day. then it
must not involve him, because he is not
involved in the controversy. .

01:22:10 - what do you mean by "pay"?
exactly when did I surrender my allegiance
to nature? if they can't provide that, then
you have no liability to man's laws under
their own law of nations.
the only duty you have is to help prevent
piracy, rape and plunder by asking these
questions of their agents. :-)
you are a
stranger, sojourner upon the earth... not to
be of this planet, but a walker upon this
land.

01:23:30 - The statutes are not bad or good,
they just are. do they apply to you?? or
apply to them? do the rules apply to you,
or the one who swore an oath to them?
That is what I mean by surrendering my
allegiance to nature, because i can't serve
two nations. so which one is going to be?


the original of nature, or of the IMAGE-
NATION?
01:24:48 - they use 'non-resident alien' in
their laws to determine man. if man is
anything in their codes and statutes then it
would be a non-resident alien.


01:26:42 - your alien to this jurisdiction. it all
comes under law of nations, lieber code,
and the military manuals. when you come
out of the birth canal, it is of water and
blood (as was christ), and the spirit is truth,
the spirit is just your awakening the fact that
the little baby is there, because it is self
evident and there is a spirit inside of him.
if they claim authority of the baby, let them
claim it but once they do that they also
claim duties of god with it and are not
allowed to alter that being, because they
are then usufruct of that being and you are
not allowed to alter the thing subject to the
usufruct. so if someone makes a claim,
they are automatically a usufruct
because that claim is what they are
existing off of. And as long as they are
profiting, benefiting from it, and that claim
exists and they have the ownership of it?
what was man given ownership of? only
usufruct (i.e. dominion of it) so anyone
making a claim is claiming the usufruct.
that is why don't care if they make a claim
because, you are claiming it? alright fine,
you want a claim, here ya go: take the bill...
you get it all. like the Pope, who claimed
everything, fine then he gets the bill for
everything because what part of everything
does he not understand?

01:30:03 - they know the difference
between a dude and a PERSON, but it is
our job to make sure they know the
difference. all you really need to do pin
prick your finger and hold up a piece of
paper and go: "until your client can do
this" (put one drop on a piece of paper)
... " because god is no respecter of
PERSONS, so neither should you.
01;31:58 - what's the advantage of replacing
"I" with "one"? because it gets rid of the
possessiveness. because now you are just
asking, "How does one do it?" and "if you
can't show it, then we need to talk" - like
Batman would say, "How does one own
such a thing?"
can a
corporation bleed?

not "I" but "one" use the
right tool (word) to communicate the best
intent.

01:54:50 - zippy went into bank with
questions: 1. is xyz bank a public bank?
2. is ___ bank providing a public service?
3. what exactly are your duties as a public
servant? those questions really 'worked on'
lady at the bank. Question 4. are you
aware of any breaches of public trust? and
penalties for breaching the public trust as a
public servant?

01:56:38 - C02Man story about fellows who
successfully turned away bailiffs from an
eviction thru accepting their oath of office to
protect the people, as long as they don't
claim to be occupants/residents.

- - -

03:15:08 - this is the castle I am using, that
god provided me, who are you to go against
the will of god?

03:16:10 possession case up in
minn/mich? guy walks into court, judge
said: blah,blah,blah, and guy asked: "well,
god made this good green earth, and i'm
just using it, what part of what jurisidiction
do you claim?" and he walked out. Once
you know what they are bound to, then
you just ask them questions about what
they are bound to.

if they can't enter a
man's castle without his permission, then
this castle was provided to me by god, so
who are you to move against the will of
god?












(Transcribed By: Konig)

------- Notes from call chat window:

-CO2man iLOVEyou (WATerian): The Attorney General for England and Wales is similarly
the chief law officer of the Crown in England and Wales, and advises and represents the
Crown and government departments in court. In practice, the Treasury Solicitor (who also
has the title of Procurator General) normally provides the lawyers or briefs Treasury
Counsel to appear in court, although the Attorney General may appear in person. The
person appointed to this role provides legal advice to the Government, acts as the
representative of the public interest and resolves issues between government
departments.

The Attorney General has supervisory powers over the prosecution of criminal offences,
but is not personally involved with prosecutions; however, some prosecutions (e.g. Riot)
cannot be commenced without his/her consent, and he/she has the power to halt
prosecutions generally. Criminal prosecutions are the responsibility of the Crown
Prosecution Service, headed by the Director of Public Prosecutions. The Attorney General
may appeal cases to the higher courts where, although the particular case is settled, there
may be a point of law of public importance at issue.

The Attorney General's deputy is the Solicitor General for England and Wales.

-Postmaster Larry "LuvLox": LAW OF NATIONS, BOOK II, OF A NATION CONSIDERED IN ITS
RELATION TO OTHERS, CHAP. X., HOW A NATION IS TO USE HER RIGHT OF DOMAIN, IN
ORDER TO DISCHARGE HER DUTIES TOWARDS OTHER NATIONS, WITH RESPECT TO THE
INNOCENT USE OF THINGS. 132. Innocent passage. (121)
"God," said he, "has created heaven for himself and his saints, and has given the earth to
mankind, intending it for the advantage of the poor as well as of the rich. The roads are for
their use, and God has not subjected them to any taxes."

-CO2man iLOVEyou (WATerian): origi-nation or imagi-nation?

-Nightwing:
-?Mark : "all acts of legislature apparently contrary to natural right and justice are..." -
from: Reports of cases determined in the General Court of Virginia: From
1730, to ... By Virginia. General Court, Thomas J efferson:
Calvins Case, Hobb 877 CO 14 (the Brohams case)
all acts of legislature apparently contrary to natural right and justice are in our laws and
must be in the nature of things considered as void. The law of nature are the laws of God
whose authority can be superceded by no power on earth. That means even the pope. a
legislature must not obstruct our obedience to Him and from Whose punishments they
cannot protect us. All human constitutions which contradict His laws, we are in conscience
bound to disobey. Such have been the adjudications of our courts of justice:

http://books.google.com/books?id=YipEAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA114&lpg=PA114&dq=%22all+act
s+of+legislature+apparently+contrary+to+natural+right+and+justice+are+in+our+laws+and
+must+be+in+the+nature+of+things+considered+as+void.%22&source=bl&ots=7s75cblySJ
&sig=c02nr7coyCPBRS7IMdy-k3NZNJA&hl=en&sa=X&ei=etTLT-

axHefg2QX9ydSRBg&ved=0CDEQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=%22all%20acts%20of%20legisl&f
=false

-dadoo: "Charge of the Light Brigade" by Alfred, Lord Tennyson. The exact quote is:
-...---...:
Their's
not to reason why, Their's but to do and die"

http://www.royal.gov.uk/MonarchUK/QueenandChurch/QueenandtheChurchofEngland.as
px - The Sovereign holds the title 'Defender of the Faith and Supreme Governor of the
Church of England'.
http://www.royal.gov.uk/historyofthemonarchy/kingsandqueensofengland/thetudors/hen
ryviii.aspx "...in 1521 Henry was given the title 'Defender of the Faith' by the Pope.

-CO2man iLOVEyou (WATerian): Police oath (England/Wales) - do solemnly and sincerely
declare and affirm that I will well and truly serve the Queen in the office of constable, with
fairness, integrity, diligence and impartiality, upholding fundamental human rights and
according equal respect to all people; and that I will, to the best of my power, cause the
peace to be kept and preserved and prevent all offences against people and property; and
that while I continue to hold the said office I will to the best of my skill and knowledge
discharge all the duties thereof faithfully according to law [the Oath]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Police_oath#England_and_Wales

-?Mark : The maxim that 'An Englishman's home (or occasionally, house) is his castle' is
most often cited these days in articles in the British right-wing press that bemoan the
apparent undermining of the perceived principle that a man can do as he pleases in his
own house, which they hold up as an ancient right. The grumbles centre about the feminist
response 'what about Englishwomen?' and the public disquiet about the smacking of
children, attacking of intruders etc. The proverb was used in almost all of the articles about
the court case of Tony Martin in 2000. Martin was convicted by jury trial of murder, after
shooting and killing a 16-year old who had broken into his house in Norfolk, UK.

An Englishman's home is his castle. Did Englishmen actually ever have a unique right to
act as they pleased within the walls of their own home? Well, yes and no. Yes, in the sense
that it has been a legal precept in England, since at least the 17th century, that no one may
enter a home, which would typically then have been in male ownership, unless by
invitation. This was established as common law by the lawyer and politician Sir Edward
Coke (pronounced Cook), in The Institutes of the Laws of England, 1628: "For a man's
house is his castle, et domus sua cuique est tutissimum refugium [and each man's home is
his safest refuge]."

-
can I help you? http://pradeepmacharla.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/can-i-help-
you.jpg?w=640