Current method of UCC filing - Page 10

iamfreeru2 · #91 07-20-2004, 03:27 PM

Ice,

You misunderstand what Jack has said. When he is talking about private Fed money he is talking about using FRNs. That is what takes away ones sovereignty, when you use their money in commerce. I think since I am not using their money in commerce, as the flesh and blood man, I can safely say my sovereignty is in tact. Using my exemption is not using their Private Fed "money." That is why we record a UCC-1 in the administrative record showing the difference in the Debtor and The Secured Party Creditor. I think you need to ask Jack what he meant by his statements.

Thank you for sending the link. I was truly not aware of what he had stated.

iamfreeru2

iamfreeru2 · #92 07-20-2004, 03:42 PM

Jerseee,

Yes I have read the rules and just because it say common law in it does not mean they follow common law in the courts. The common law court was done away with in the Erie Railroad v. Thompkins case of 1938, which I am sure you are aware.

Quote:

by Howard Freeman

The change in our system of law from public law to private commercial law was recognized by the Supreme Court of the United States in the Erie Railroad v. Thompkins case of 1938, after which case, in the same year, the procedures of Law were officially blended with the procedures of Equity. Prior to 1938,

all U.S. Supreme Court decisions were based upon public law -- or that system of law that was controlled by Constitutional limitation. Since 1938, all U.S. Supreme Court decisions are based upon what is termed public policy.

I am sure you have heard of the late Howard Freeman. As you can see from his quote he stated we have no common law courts any more. All courts are now courts of commerce or Admiralty in nature. Do you think the powers that be want to reveal the truth to the American people? I think not, as that is too much truth to handle so they give the appearence of the common law, but in reality it is only an illusion. What do you think would happen if the truth were really revealed?

iamfreeru2

charlene · #93 07-20-2004, 04:23 PM

The TDA is where you take back your birth certificate.

Also your SS# and your State Drivers License. Taking them back thru washington dc notifies them they can no longer use your legal documents for their bond. If you

do not take it back you have left yourself un protected.

Your Security Agreement is sent with your ucc 1 filing.

If you read the SA you are telling the state that all that is

listed has been given to your strawman and you own nothing.

Charlene

nralien · #94 07-20-2004, 05:32 PM

charlene it is good to hear from you again. In re to controlling the strawman your name came up in another thread Defending your UCC FS in court.

lithmus2 and I were wondering about the process and procedure of paperwork to obtain a protest that was signed by your SOS and the Department of State-United States Of America- Colin Powell.

What you can share about it on any thread would be great.

Thanks in advance,

nralien

iamfreeru2 · #95 07-20-2004, 06:31 PM

Hello all,

I have a small success in my foreclosure case. The Judge got our Letter Rogatory and evidence hand delivered to him yesterday and shortly thereafter recused himself. We now have no court date for tomorrow. It will be reassigned and we will be notified of a new court date. Just thought you all would want to know.

iamfreeru2

#96 07-20-2004, 07:22 PM

iamfree and logos, what im saying is redemption only complicates the problems you already have. again, i would rather have a uneducated jury (and thats exactly the types of folks that they will pick to handle your case) learn the basics of common law then to try to explain to them the complexities of redemption, its just too much to throw on them out tha blue like that, thats all im saying. so, keep it all simple, like jerseee said, why file a ucc1 financing statement when you can just file a simple affidavit explaining that the government can only interact with other fictions, and in your case its your all capitilozied name and have the government rebut it, if they dont, use that as your argument. when people are presented information that intimidates them, they will take the easy way out and run with what the government has presented to them.

iamfreeru2 · #97 07-20-2004, 07:35 PM

kgod999,

Your comments are duly noted.

iamfreeru2

KaosTheory · #98 07-20-2004, 07:41 PM

I don't think you will be getting that new court date unless it is in a Common Law venue. From what I've read, these commercial courts have no jurisdiction over disputes over title. Only courts in a Common Law venue have jurisdiction over disputes over title.

So where's the party being held?

Congrats man,

KT

logos · #99 07-20-2004, 08:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kgod999

again, i would rather have a uneducated jury (and thats exactly the types of folks that they will pick to handle your case) learn the basics of common law then to try to explain to them the complexities of redemption, its just too much to throw on them out tha blue like that, thats all im saying.

kgod:

You don't go into court to explain anything to a jury because you won't be fighting with the other party. There's nothing to arbitrate. You just go in to settle and close the matter.

iamfreeru2 · #**100** 07-20-2004, 11:06 PM

KT,

Just because one judge recused himself does not mean another will not take over. Now if they all start recusing themselves then we got something. I just think this judge could not do what the government wanted him to do so he quit. When he saw our paperwork he did not want to touch it. That is okay bring another one on.

iamfreeru2