How To Respond To Charges Against The Strawman

[NarrowPathPilgrim]

We all know that the ALL CAPS name which is on all these court documents isn’t our real name; but rather a sly tactic to change your status from that of a sovereign man to that of a corporation created by the state.
The question is: how do you counter these tactics?

• Just ignore the summons?
  No. They will swear out a warrant for the “Defendant’s” arrest…but you will be the one who ends up in jail.
  
  
• Appear as the defendant?
  No. You have accepted the Alter Ego and became a “Strawman”; they will treat you accordingly.
  
  
• Appear in court, answer “Present” to the judges roll call, then object to the name claiming a “Misnomer”?
  Nope. They will say “Sorry, but this is you”; and according to the doctrine of Idem Sonans you have just admitted it.

So how should you respond to their tactics? Why not claim the defendant is a trust; then appear as trustee to represent the trust? That way you retain your sovereign status, AND if they find the defendant guilty as charged you get to walk out free, because you cannot be liable for the actions of another!

What do you guys think of this approach?

[J.W.]

If we were to accept unconditionally that there was in fact a conspiracy by government and or the banking establishment and others to create a "STRAWMAN" there exists an issue, a problem, one of which I have been looking at for some time now. Presently, and as time allows I have been writing a treatise on this concept with a great deal of tough questions posed but in short here is the problem presented in the form of a question:

As a matter of law what would give anyone the right to create a contract with any corpus or trust when one is not the Creator, Grantor or Settlor of said entity? Again, assuming that the government etc. created this STRAWMAN in some master plan there exists a problem if you were to put the concept under a microscope as particular evidence yet remains to be seen or conclusively proven thus far. Certainly there are many oddities with regard to the name with regard to law and banking and my opinion to date is that there is too much smoke to not indicate there is a fire ablaze somewhere but let's take a very critical look here.

Many are of the opinion that "All you have to do is fie a UCC-1 accompanied by misc. supporting documentation i.e. a security agreement and so forth. Generally in the everyday lending/commercial realm UCC filings are completed by lendors or contracting parties where collateral is involved. The UCC Filing as many know constitutes public notice that a lien exists, so that in the event of a default of breach of contract the creditor may protect his/her interest in whatever collateral has been pledged. If there was not a public record in the event of a bankruptcy or a wide-spread default by the debtor party the debtors creditors may experience what may be termed as "claim jumping'. There is much more to this however, the further inquiry I bring forth is: If one is not the Creator, Settlor, or Grantor what gives one absolute, iron clad, irrefutable capacity to contract with a corpus or entity that one did not create or have any contract with the corpus/entities creator? Simply because there is a presumption that one is responsible for the liabilities or debts associated with the infamous STRAWMAN there still remains chinks in the armor of this concept or at least this is my present contention.

I suggest all who are sympathetic to the theory/concept serious consider what I have proposed. Certainly I am willing to entertain all rebuttals in the interest of truth.

Lastly, consider expanding further than asserting as a rebuttal the following: Since we the people are the base of government we have a right to contract with a product or creation “the STRAWMAN” of government without any formal communication i.e. contract with an appropriate agency, agent, or instrumentality thereof who is ultimately responsible for the creation and liabilities of the STRAWMAN.

I am confident that this should be a very interesting and productive thread.

[David Merrill]

Originally Posted by NarrowPathPilgrim

We all know that the ALL CAPS name which is on all these court documents isn’t our real name; but rather a sly tactic to change your status from that of a sovereign man to that of a corporation created by the state.

***

So how should you respond to their tactics? Why not claim the defendant is a trust; then appear as trustee to represent the trust? That way you retain your sovereign status, AND if they find the defendant guilty as charged you get to walk out free, because you cannot be liable for the actions of another!

What do you guys think of this approach?

Beneficiaries never go to jail; chiefly because debtors prisons are against the law. However trustees bear fiduciary responsibility. Trustees are who go to jail over tax matters because trustees bear fiduciary responsibility. Click on my handle here and look back a few posts; you should notice a few Quatlosers with experience in the general collections process who are here expressing me identified by misnomer but that is not the upper case nom de guerre/TRUST/corporation. It is the legal or full name I am presumed to be in commerce under. [Also consider the math; the trustee cannot be beneficiary or the trust is destroyed as an alter ego.]

The Straw Man people were noticing a consistency but the picture they paint is incomplete. Like Helda Reutger CLARK who wrote The Cure for All Cancers and The Cure for All Diseases. Everything has a vibratory characteristic and Hulda noted the vibes from a central South American intestinal fluke caused cancer. She put the math together wrong because she noted if you treat the cancer patient to get rid of the fluke, the patient is cured of cancer. Therefore she surmised a fluke local to a specific area of the world causes cancer.

http://ecclesia.org/forum/images/suitors/Circuits.gif
See Attachments:

In her case, being laughed off to practice in Mexico where she stacks reams of testimony to her cancer cure, it is a good thing just the same. In the case of the complete picture about name theory, it leaves people who know there is something to it vulnerable and uncertain. Randy Lee is the man who (indirectly) taught me to read the definitions properly:

http://friends-n-family-research.inf...Definition.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.inf...Name_legal,jpg

I know there is a comma instead of a period and somebody indicated there is a problem with that link. Let me know.

http://ecclesia.org/truth/irs.html

I have since abated process for misnomer about five or six times*. For medical emergencies and crimes in progress I dial 911 readily and when the dispatcher asks, "Is Merrill your last name?" I respond, "David Merrill is my true name." I give no more information than that. I have no DOB, no birth certificate etc. Information is the technical term for incriminating facts. No man can be compelled to incriminate himself.

Therefore understand the infrastructure and if you proceed identified as the trustee by you, things will go pretty much the same as if you came in the upper and lower case legal name in common law and are therefore before the magistrate (municipal and police power collections officer) as fiduciary responsible for the trust FIRST MIDDLE LAST. It is presumed you know what that nomenclature means as you read it on the summons. That is why Judge Roy Bean consistently insists I am David Merrill Van Pelt - career habit!

1) David Merrill = the man at the keyboard
2) David Merrill Van Pelt = fiduciary held in assumpsit to be responsible for
3) DAVID MERRILL VAN PELT = the TRUST or daughter corporation of the State of XXXX subjugated to the United States corporation in bankruptcy and held in receivership by Governors' Convention of March 6, 1933.

And that is to say, things will not go well for you unless you capitulate like a good sheeple.


Regards,

David Merrill.


* In my opinion Randy Lee's and the Christian Jural Society's abatements were filled with clutter about history and religion. The key phrase in the abatement process was there through, "Therefore your Papers are returned to you timely Refused for Cause with No Recourse to Myself." - something like that.

Also note a strong spiritual Christian I know who signs papers in his true name for the legal name on the documents "Without Prejudice" has had his published abatement (county clerk and recorder) removed from his county court files. On the initial bond agreement sheriff deputies in booking scribbled through "Without Prejudice"; Tampering with the record by his implied consent as responsible fiduciary of the trust foreign investors float bonds against. In setting up for abating for misnomer, one must correct the (name on all the copies) that you are signing for. Do not leave the legal or nom de guerre uncorrected and then sign as if you are that title/entity.

This link below demonstrates abatement before abatement is necessary - to simply zero-out the debit. I could offer a comptroller warrant against the BOE but that would be more trouble than assuring them the Comptroller of the Currency under the direction of the Secretary of the Treasury would simply tell the METRO-owned hospital that being an eleemosynary corporation to zero the debit (adjustment and offset). Does the hospital really expect the Treasury to send them worthless FRNs?

http://Friends-n-Family-Research.inf...ovation_ER.jpg


P.S. There is an error of incompleteness even in the introduction to Randy Lee's testimony linked above:

This is proof that a misnomer or mistaken identity (nom de guerre) is a valid defense for every Christian when He is brought before the present day military rule courts of the Federal U.S.

The religious clutter blinds in my opinion. The Refusal for Cause process is found in the Law Merchant codified into the UCC. It's origins are admiralty and can easily be argued as such before the gold fringes under the law of the flag. However Christians, in the original sense are the Crown Templars of today. Fine. Understanding that correctly describes the Esquire-in the black robe eloquently and comprehensively. If you are the beneficiary, then you are release because there is no taxation for the heirs apparent.

http://friends-n-family-research.inf...y_on_bills.wmv

Pay attention in particular to the 2.00 minute mark.

In other words there are no Special Drawing Rights against men and women unless they express (or imply by appearance) they are trustees, not beneficiaries.

Energy

Energy is recognized as the key to all activity on earth. Natural science is the study of the sources and control of natural energy, and social science, theoretically expressed as economics, is the study of the sources and control of social energy. Both are bookkeeping systems: mathematics. Therefore, mathematics is the primary energy science. And the bookkeeper can be king if the public can be kept ignorant of the methodology of the bookkeeping.

All science is merely a means to an end. The means is knowledge. The end is control. Beyond this remains only one issue: Who will be the beneficiary?

http://www.ecclesia.org/forum/images.../SeizeGold.jpg

[fulltitle]

WITHOUT PREJUDICE
Perhaps this will help clarify some things for those who seek clarity. I hope and pray that it does.

One thing that I found that one or more lawyers or barrisisters in a certain 'jurisdiction' recommend to executives of companies for which they work is to sign under the name of the company.

ACME LIMITED
{signature}.

The name of the company CAN BE CONSTRUED AS a signature. The practice that they recommend is something that I would not recommend simply because if you have a limited liability company you could be underwriting the fiction 'personally'. I did some digging and found a registrar whose 'birth certificates' are 'oversigned':

{signature}
REPUBLIC OF AGENCY OF BIRTHS

Now REPUBLIC OF AGENCY OF BIRTHS is 'undewriter'.

The only time I'd suggest autographing or signing under an ENTITY is in a 'by block'.

ACME LIMITED

By: _______________________
Authorized Representative

Also it might do well to get a grasp on what it means to sign 'in blank' as compared to doing otherwise.

[fulltitle]

Originally Posted by NarrowPathPilgrim

We all know that the ALL CAPS name which is on all these court documents isn’t our real name; but rather a sly tactic to change your status from that of a sovereign man to that of a corporation created by the state.
The question is: how do you counter these tactics?

• Just ignore the summons?
  No. They will swear out a warrant for the “Defendant’s” arrest…but you will be the one who ends up in jail.
  
  
• Appear as the defendant?
  No. You have accepted the Alter Ego and became a “Strawman”; they will treat you accordingly.
  
  
• Appear in court, answer “Present” to the judges roll call, then object to the name claiming a “Misnomer”?
  Nope. They will say “Sorry, but this is you”; and according to the doctrine of Idem Sonans you have just admitted it.

So how should you respond to their tactics? Why not claim the defendant is a trust; then appear as trustee to represent the trust? That way you retain your sovereign status, AND if they find the defendant guilty as charged you get to walk out free, because you cannot be liable for the actions of another!

What do you guys think of this approach?

WITHOUT PREJUDICE
This should be read together with my previous post. There is a lot of material around about this. But in a non-exhaustive nutshell:

1. Refusal for cause
2. Not deliverable as addressed
3. Nonstatutory abatement
4. Abatement for misnomer
5. File a lawful counterclaim naming *them* as *Respondents* and you as a *Demandant*. See also libel of review.

To boil down my interpretation of what you are wanting to do in different terms: you want to avoid joinder.

Its a far more powerful place to file a counterclaim against them.