Land Patent Instructions

[citizensoldier]

The land patent doesn't have anything to do with the real property on the land. Trying to use the land patent as a "defense" to foreclosure on the real property is a frivolous argument - similar to arguing the "income" tax cannot tax wages. It does create a precarious position for the foreclosing entity for they will not have any lawful means of accessing the real property since the land its on would be privately owned.

[suijuris]

Originally Posted by Bill Smith

No, land patent defenses always fail. More moonshine. Not a useful strategy.

Bill, if you would read the poster's question, you will see it asked for a response from anyone who has actually used a land patent, not from somebody with no experience who makes blanket statement instead.

Also, do you have any useful strategies? What was the last strategy you attempted, even if you failed? Do you share the common goal of personal freedom, or have you given up (assuming you ever tried) the struggle for freedom and now use what little energy you can muster to convince others without hope or balls to follow you to the state of despair?

What precisely do you have to offer to back up your statement? You must have some very good information to be able to put forth a claim that "land patent defenses always fail."

After some thought, I will take this opportunity to publicly label you, Bill Smith, as a bold-faced liar and a fear mongering propaganda piece.

If you wish to regain your good name (ha!) on these forums, you may be able to redeem yourself by doing the following:

1) Look up each of the case cites here ( http://forum.suijuris.net/showthread.php?t=263 ) and provide proof that in each case the court ultimately ruled against the party using a land patent defense due to the merits of the land patent. I had posted those case cites because they looked very favorable to land patent holders, but if there is more to the cases then I would surely like to know!

2) Prove that this poster is a liar: http://forum.suijuris.net/showpost.p...4&postcount=12

That being said, I know of nobody who has used the land patent to defend against a creditor, either with success or failure.

The above sentence is the proper way to give others your input on a subject - it allows them to make an educated choice.

Doing as Bill has and making a blanket statement, either for or against something, shows obvious bias and serves as nothing more than propaganda... people are not helped or educated by propaganda, rather, they are either given a false sense of fear or a irrational sense of courage, both being to their detriment.

[weishaupt1776]

Bill ain't cool, but you can major tell he wants to be free from the STATE'S bondage, but is afraid to jump over the plantation fence.
Why else would he come here?

I get some laughs at some of his posts in that he comes off like he's serious.

OR

He could be CORPORATE STATIST SHILL who is attempting a very weak form of damage control.

I'm not psychic, so I don't know.

Question for Bill Smith:
Bill, are you frustrated with the current violations of basic human rights and theft by THE STATE; who is maintaining a pretense of fairness to shade their violent methods in trying to get people to "comply" with all of their forced, involuntarily imposed services?

[suijuris]

Originally Posted by weishaupt1776

Bill ain't cool, but you can major tell he wants to be free from the STATE'S bondage, but is afraid to jump over the plantation fence.
Why else would he come here?

I get some laughs at some of his posts in that he comes off like he's serious.

OR

He could be CORPORATE STATIST SHILL who is attempting a very weak form of damage control.

I'm not psychic, so I don't know.

Question for Bill Smith:
Bill, are you frustrated with the current violations of basic human rights and theft by THE STATE; who is maintaining a pretense of fairness to shade their violent methods in trying to get people to "comply" with all of their forced, involuntarily imposed services?

Don't get me wrong - I like Bill too, he is kind of like the "special" kid... and he is really doing a bang-up job of scaring folks with those one-size-fits-all claims.

I was just thinking how it must go at the Smith residence:

Billy Junior: "Look daddy, the sky is blue and the sun is shining... lets go outside and play catch."

Bill: "Junior, the sky is grey... it is always grey, and always will be grey! If you go outside a thunderbolt will fry your manhood to a blackened crisp! Don't even think about venturing outdoors unless I give you permission."

[weishaupt1776]

No doubt.

Like the kid has his glove & wants to practice being a catcher and ole Bill is like, "Those gloves never work. The ball is going to sting your hand anyway."

[suijuris]

10 minutes later...

Junior: "But daddy, if I don't at least try to learn the other kids will...."

Bill: "Junior, for gods sake! Forget about this ball nonsense! Real men don't need balls, in fact, I don't even know where mine are. I think I misplaced them when I met your mother and just look at me now!"

To be continued.

the reason that it appears that land patents fail are these:
1. the cases where land patents have prevailed are not published.
2. only cases where people made great errors, such as writing their own land patent instead of basing the claim on the genuine one they apparently did not know existed, are published.
3. plaintiffs consider 'i have a land patent' a legal argument.
4. courts are crooked. i had a federal magistrate judge woehrle in los angeles dismiss my motion for judicial notice of my land documents-only court rulse say a writtine mition for jusdicial notice must be granted...if the us supreme court is not crooked, i will win. if they are crooked, it does not make the land patent laws moot, it means you can not have a hearing according to the court law.

i think that people on hti slist need to do more direct research instead of debating or attacking things others say that are opinions. one must learn the law and whether or not law is honored by court decisions, know the real law.

if you do a google search for collateral attack land patent you will see cases of court decisions. below are a few that are of interest:

case dismissed to avoid ruling:
http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2000/10/00-1184.htm

case showing indian land owned by non indian becomes subject to taxation:
http://thorpe.ou.edu/treatises/Guide/partx.html

examine cases and arguments closely:
http://www.atg.wa.gov/opinions/opinion_1996_6.html

the first shows how a court finds a side issue to dismiss on so they don't have to uphold a land patent. it is hard to plead a case and get past this issue but can be done.

the second case shows that indian grants only protect indians, and for indians are non taxable. now if you read the act of congress your lan dpatent is based on, and indian grants (my act of congress is sandwithced between two indian grants) see the terms, and then tell me why if a grant to indians is not taxable to indians, a grant to others is taxable, if no terms in the act (and must be put in the patent document) refer to taxation, then land patented under the act can not be taxed.

in the last one, notice that the cases sited to tax patented land are all state cases. NO FEDERAL DECISIONS EXIST THAT GO AGAINST THE REAL LAND PATENT RIGHTS.

if you do a google search for LAND PATENT FORCLOSURE you will notice a lack of cases cited. the truth is that the act of claiming rights to your land patent does protect you...but if you have agreed to a mortgage prior to that time you could be forclosed. if you have acted to claim the rights in the patent, informed lenders will not lend to you unless you withdraw the claim.

in my case i found one parcel granted by the same land patent as mine that was still owned by the railroad, and the o****y ahd it on the non tax list. i tried to have them put my property on the non tax list under 'tax equity'. the o****y simply stopped communicting. i filed in federal court based on denial of due process...right now up through 9th appellate they are trying to dismiss the case wihtout a hearing. will the supreme court follow the law and send the case back to be heard? remains to be seen.

but if the court refuses to follow the law, it doen;t make the law invalid. it just makes the ecourt unconsititutional.

somewhere i have a copy of the federal law on this, i think it is in the 63c am jur 2d, which i have to find my cds of and see if i can find it,
the comments on the particular law state that 'while it is the custom of states to allow forclosure for taxes, we do not and setup payment plan ...'

this law is not online in the law websites and listed as 'repealed' however the terms of the land patent can not be repealed, it is more that they do not publish stuff that you can find and use to protect your interests.

the bottom line on patented land is that when the feds grant the patent, they then lose all rights to control the land, but wthout terms in the patent subjecting it to any obligation, no state or local laws such as zoning, permit requirements, etc apply.

this is the truth, but your ability to claim your rights to this truth may not exist.

I nearly split my side laughing over this thread.

I guess now, we have two BS's.

LOL


Bob (Glad my last name don't start with an "S")

[citizensoldier]

LH,

I am not saying the land patent can be revoked or the land can be "claimed" by a creditor - what I am saying is the land patent only secures the LAND and not any real property on said LAND. From what has been posted on this site, it is my understanding in the situation of foreclosure on any real property sitting on land having a land patent - the sale becomes tricky for the creditor since the buyer would not have a way to access the real property once purchased.

It would be similar to someone buying a home in another country and then said country refuse them entry into the country.

I believe this is why one cannot obtain a mortgage for real property on land so patented.