Land Patents and Property Tax Abatement - Urban Myth or for Real?

[Jerry Pitts]

Originally Posted by rottweiler

Jerry takes serious umbrage at anyone who claims to be a "sovereign without subjects". I am sure he means well but the problem is he doesn't know what the term means. He thinks it has something to do with being over YHWH but it is actually just the opposite.

Come on now Rottweiler. Surely you don't believe what you have stated above. You suggest that I do not know what the term means, yet I have posted definitions from both common and legal dictionaries regarding the term 'sovereign'. Am I the one that designed those definitions? No! Are those the 'accepted' definitions of the term? Yes! Then how is it possible that I "don't know what the term means"?

You then go on to cite an historical statement, in which the term 'sovereign' is not even mentioned per se. Though it does mention "their Creator", it does not give meaning of the phrase "their Creator" by virtue of applying a known name. As such, the phrase "their Creator" is an ambiguous statement which can be applied to many different scenarios. Some men and women would and could argue that this 'Creator' that was mentioned was 'Mom and Dad'; or in this day and age when technology has been advanced, another man or woman could conceivably make it to mean "the research technicians who were performing 'test tube baby' research" (absurd of course but possible). With enough equipment and adequate research, one could build a 'robot' and program it to repeat the statement "Rottweiler is not only the accepted name of a canine species, but Rottweiler is also the name of my Creator."

Let us look at the term 'Creator' from those same source dictionaries:

From Bouviers' 1856 OOOps not found, therefore, it is not a legal expression.

From common dictionary:

creator
crea·tor (krē āt′ər)
noun
one who creates
Etymology: ME creatour < L creator

Well let us look a little further and see what 'create' means:

create Definition
cre·ate· (krē āt′; often krē′āt′)
transitive verb

1. to cause to come into existence; bring into being; make; originate; esp., to make or design (something requiring art, skill, invention, etc.)
2. to bring about; give rise to; cause new industries create new jobs
3. to invest with a new rank, function, etc.
4. to be the first to portray (a particular role in a play)

Etymology: ME createn < L creatus, pp. of creare, to create < IE *rē-, var. of base *ker-, to grow, cause to grow > cereal"

I see no reference in any of these definitions that even gives an inference to "YHVH" by means of secular interpretation. By applying religious precepts, one could conceivably 'interpret' these definitions to infer a Creator such as God or "YHVH", but that in itself would be a violation of the 1st Amendment and the alleged 'separation of church and state' clause. By including the name of such a being, one would be denouncing the validity of the Constitution, and by not mentioning such a name, one would be denouncing the name of God "YHVH" and placing such a being in a secondary role to that secular interpretation of your citation.

However in 1Timothy 6:15 it is mentioned in the Latin form "potentate".
11. But thou, O man of God, flee these things; and follow after righteousness, godliness, faith, love, patience, meekness.
12. Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art also called, and hast professed a good profession before many witnesses.
13. I give thee charge in the sight of God, who quickeneth all things, and before Christ Jesus, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed a good confession;
14. That thou keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ:
15. Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of Lords;
16. Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see: to whom be honour and power everlasting. Amen.

Jerry

Originally Posted by rottweiler

Read.

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world."

[rottweiler]

Land Patents are treaties between two sovereigns. They are a grant of land from the Executive of the United States sovereign to a sovereign Citizen of of one of the sovereign states of the union.

If you can read this article you can see the difference between a Citizen of a sovereign state of the Union and a United States citizen.
http://www.commonlawlibrary.com/MiscDocs/essay.htm

I will answer your question with a question. How can a master also be a slave?

Are you a natural born Connecticutian?

Originally Posted by andrewmitch

"Land Patents are issues (and theoretically passed) between Sovereigns. Deeds
are executed by 'persons' and private corporations without these sovereign
powers." -- Leading Fighter vs. County of Gregory, 230 N.W.2d. 114.116 (1975)


Not to mix mud and make sludge but is it possible to be a Sovereign and to also be a "US Citizen"? Hear me out. If "Andrew Mitchell" is a sovereign could he enter into a contract with "ANDREW MITCHELL"? Maybe create a middle man/buffer such as a Common Law Trust so that "Andrew Mitchell" the Sovereign, never has direct contact with "ANDREW MITCHELL", the person?

[Jerry Pitts]

Rottweiler

Why on earth do you insist on profaning the Title of Jesus the Christ, Son of the Most High God, by attributing (assigning) that title to state and federal governments and particular men and or women?

See 1Timothy 6:15
Which in his times he shall shew, who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings, and Lord of Lords;

Jerry

Originally Posted by rottweiler

Land Patents are treaties between two sovereigns. They are a grant of land from the Executive of the United States sovereign to a sovereign Citizen of of one of the sovereign states of the union.

If you can read this article you can see the difference between a Citizen of a sovereign state of the Union and a United States citizen.
http://www.commonlawlibrary.com/MiscDocs/essay.htm

I will answer your question with a question. How can a master also be a slave?

Are you a natural born Connecticutian?

[rottweiler]

Well excuse me, I said term but I meant the phrase "sovereigns without subjects".

Perhaps you can give up all of your rights, if you so choose, but who has the power to give your rights up for you?

Revelation, chapter 5
1: And I saw in the right hand of him that sat on the throne a book written within and on the backside, sealed with seven seals.
2: And I saw a strong angel proclaiming with a loud voice, Who is worthy to open the book, and to loose the seals thereof?
3: And no man in heaven, nor in earth, neither under the earth, was able to open the book, neither to look thereon.
4: And I wept much, because no man was found worthy to open and to read the book, neither to look thereon.
5: And one of the elders saith unto me, Weep not: behold, the Lion of the tribe of Juda, the Root of David, hath prevailed to open the book, and to loose the seven seals thereof.
6: And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth.
7: And he came and took the book out of the right hand of him that sat upon the throne.
8: And when he had taken the book, the four beasts and four and twenty elders fell down before the Lamb, having every one of them harps, and golden vials full of odours, which are the prayers of saints.
9: And they sung a new song, saying, Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation;
10: And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth.
11: And I beheld, and I heard the voice of many angels round about the throne and the beasts and the elders: and the number of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands;
12: Saying with a loud voice, Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and blessing.
13: And every creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in them, heard I saying, Blessing, and honour, and glory, and power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb for ever and ever.
14: And the four beasts said, Amen. And the four and twenty elders fell down and worshipped him that liveth for ever and ever.

[gldskr]

With no disrespect Jerry, you have convoluted the issue. Rottweiler has correctly described the relationship between sovereigns and the land patent. To suggest that we cannot be kings within our own castle is ludicrous.

Given that one believes in God, hasn't it been said that God lives within each of us? Are we not then rulers of our own domain according to his word? Are we not sovereigns without subjects? How could we be anything else?

What you describe is a master/subject relationship where God is the master and we are his subjects. I pity such a God and I doubt he would be worthy of anyone's worship. This is where you err, because surely the rights of the father would pass to his children. In your mind we are merely pawns in a game.

What about non-believers? In their eyes they are the sovereigns, or are they subjects too and subject to whom? Are their rights diminished because of their non-belief?

The framers were smarter than you or I, they knew that they didn't know. Perhaps if we all acquired this mindset the world would be a better place. Experience taught them that that was not the case. The word Creator, which to you is specific, was meant to be ambiguous, so that sovereignty could be enjoyed by all people, not just by Jerry's God.

So this thread doesn't devolve into a sovereignty/religion issue, let's agree to disagree, if that is the case and get back to the land patent.

gldskr

[andrewmitch]

I feel I have enough info now to put together my plan of attack. However, I still need to do a lot of work regarding how to defend the claim that I don't owe property tax not so much in court but out of court. What I mean is I would think the town would have their Police Guards follow me like a hawk and arrest perhaps on a daily basis for made up charges. It could be something as simple as pulling me over and accusing me of a traffic violation or they could try and make up something greater; the costs in fines and/or defending myself (as well as my reputation and ability to earn a living) would be far greater than the annual property tax.

Do you guys foresee such harrassment as an effort for the town to get their money back from me? Is there a remedy for such harrassment as suing the individuals (or commercial liens etc)? At the very least I could chage my vehicle plates and then re-register it into an LLC? Maybe make a couple hundred annual donation to the police dept? Maybe get a video camera installed in my car? If I get arrested even for false charges as long as I am being charged my employer can use that against me and fire me and for a new job I'd have to put that info on the application. This really is extortion in the sense that if you don't pay their annual protection money they will sake you down for 10X the amount.

[Jerry Pitts]

Originally Posted by gldskr

With no disrespect Jerry, you have convoluted the issue. Rottweiler has correctly described the relationship between sovereigns and the land patent. To suggest that we cannot be kings within our own castle is ludicrous.

No offense taken. I will state for the record that exists in the Hands of God, that I have spoken the truth, and while I still speak the truth, some would attempt to rebuke me for having stated that truth.

The issue (though you clearly don't define it by subject title, you allude to you by inference) correctly is the use of the term "Sovereign" or 'sovereign'. Notice, that I have stipulated a singular tense use of the word or title, not the plural. Also notice, that the Holy Scripture indicates that, in reference to Potentates, that Jesus (who is God in the flesh), is ""the ONLY Potentate", the King of kings, and Lord of lords." Call yourself king, all you desire, but DO NOT attempt to use the Title that properly belongs to the ONLY Potentate.

Originally Posted by gldskr

Given that one believes in God, hasn't it been said that God lives within each of us? Are we not then rulers of our own domain according to his word? Are we not sovereigns without subjects? How could we be anything else?

Can you please provide me with a scripture from the Holy Bible that clearly shows that even the 'believe(rs) in God' are authorized to use the Title "sovereigns"? I did not think you would be able to because that scripture does not exist. You ask "How could we be anything else?", and my response to you is: Ephesians 6: 20. For which I am an ambassador in bonds: that therein I may speak boldly, as I ought to speak.; and also: 2 Corinthians 5: 20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God."

Originally Posted by gldskr

What you describe is a master/subject relationship where God is the master and we are his subjects. I pity such a God and I doubt he would be worthy of anyone's worship. This is where you err, because surely the rights of the father would pass to his children. In your mind we are merely pawns in a game.

What about non-believers? In their eyes they are the sovereigns, or are they subjects too and subject to whom? Are their rights diminished because of their non-belief?"

The comments you express immediately above, are your 'personal beliefs' and I will not attempt to respond to those beliefs, as obviously they are not mine. I have not attempted to step on your beliefs, and have not asked that you even read the writings that I have posted much less have I requested a response from anyone that is not of the Spirit. The Holy Scripture tells us in 1 John 4: 1 - 3, that we are to try the 'spirits' to determine whether or not they are from God. With your obvious display of attempting to express your 'pity' toward God, it is evident that you are not speaking as a man with the Spirit of God within him.

May God continue to confront you with His Truth and with a challenge from the Holy Spirit.

Jerry

The framers were smarter than you or I, they knew that they didn't know. Perhaps if we all acquired this mindset the world would be a better place. Experience taught them that that was not the case. The word Creator, which to you is specific, was meant to be ambiguous, so that sovereignty could be enjoyed by all people, not just by Jerry's God.

So this thread doesn't devolve into a sovereignty/religion issue, let's agree to disagree, if that is the case and get back to the land patent.

gldskr

[andrewmitch]

may i please ask for no arguing and to stay on topic?

[Jerry Pitts]

Originally Posted by andrewmitch

may i please ask for no arguing and to stay on topic?

In a PM to andrewmitch:

Originally Posted by PM

Andrewmitch.

I do appreciate your concern regarding the subject matter of the thread. It should also be noted that the 'sub-topic' of 'sovereignty' was brought up, casually accepted by most, rebutted by me and thus the ensuing discussion that you relate to as arguing.

I have presented information on the sub-topic that predates the Yick-Wo v Hopkins case (wherein was mentioned 'sovereigns without subjects) by at least a couple of years, in fact, it predates English law by at least a couple of centuries ("a couple" off the top of my head without doing the math). It even pre-dates the KJV of the Holy Scripture. No-one has been able to rebut the evidence that I have brought into the sub-topic and therefore, my evidence stands as truth under this secular law that everyone is relating to within the primary post.

I am posting this PM to the thread, as a means of my final word on the subject. If any of the readers care to continue their use of Gods' title "Potentate" in contrast to what is written in the Holy Scripture, then it becomes a matter between them and God. May God have mercy on their souls.

Jerry

[rottweiler]

Just think about the people who had their asses shot off so you could own property.

Originally Posted by andrewmitch

I feel I have enough info now to put together my plan of attack. However, I still need to do a lot of work regarding how to defend the claim that I don't owe property tax not so much in court but out of court. What I mean is I would think the town would have their Police Guards follow me like a hawk and arrest perhaps on a daily basis for made up charges. It could be something as simple as pulling me over and accusing me of a traffic violation or they could try and make up something greater; the costs in fines and/or defending myself (as well as my reputation and ability to earn a living) would be far greater than the annual property tax.

Do you guys foresee such harrassment as an effort for the town to get their money back from me? Is there a remedy for such harrassment as suing the individuals (or commercial liens etc)? At the very least I could chage my vehicle plates and then re-register it into an LLC? Maybe make a couple hundred annual donation to the police dept? Maybe get a video camera installed in my car? If I get arrested even for false charges as long as I am being charged my employer can use that against me and fire me and for a new job I'd have to put that info on the application. This really is extortion in the sense that if you don't pay their annual protection money they will sake you down for 10X the amount.