Tuesday, January 1, 2019

THIS IS A GREAT RESPONSE TO RACIST REPORTER DON LEMON ON CNN: Thursday, November 1, 2018 ― Former US Navy SEAL, Ephraim Mattos, has responded to comments made by Don Lemon on CNN’s


Eva
Our mission is to bring awareness to any issue which challenges the security, sovereignty
or domestic tranquility of our beloved Nation, The United  States of America.
In God We Trust!
_______________


_____________________________________

From:  peri mcmillan; via Pastor Lee S Gliddon Jr

Subject: Amazing quote

THIS IS A GREAT RESPONSE TO CNN:
Thursday, November 1, 2018 ― Former US Navy SEAL, Ephraim Mattos, has responded to comments made by Don Lemon on CNN’s Cuomo Prime Time.
We have to stop demonizing people and realize the biggest terror threat in this country is white men, most of them radicalized to the right, and we have to start doing something about them.” ― Don Lemon on CNN (October 29, 2018)
Here is Mattos’ response:
After surviving three wars, a gunshot wound, a near fatal drowning, a failed parachute, Taliban ambushes, ISIS snipers, mortars, mine-fields, suicide bombers and laying down my life for the cause of freedom while fighting shoulder-to-shoulder with my brother Arabs, Asians, Blacks, Hispanics, Christians, Muslims, Jews, Buddhists, Animists, and Atheists, I have now returned home to the USA where a CNN host has labeled me as a radicalized right wing terrorist simply because of my gender and the color of my skin.
I represent just one of the hundreds of thousands of conservative white men who have fought to preserve freedom in this great Nation and in other nations.
My forefathers are the 3% who founded this Republic against the might of the British Army. It was white Conservative men who died by the tens of thousands after charging into our southern states to free our black brothers from the slavery imposed on them by the Liberal left.
We were the ones who acknowledged that women have a right to vote. We held the line in WWI and charged the beaches of Normandy in WWII. We have fought for freedom and liberty for generations and we continue to do so today alongside all of our brothers and sisters regardless of their race or religion.
In the early 1930s, Hitler said the same thing about the Jews that Don Lemon of CNN just said about white men. This is the true face of the Democratic Party. First they enslaved and killed blacks, and now they use them to spew hatred and lies against the very people who have fought for generations to free them and uplift them.
Remember that when you vote.
One final thought: To make a point, I have referred to myself as a “white male” in the previous sentences multiple times, but I must make it clear that I identify as simply “American,” not as “white” or “male” or “Republican.”
Although blatantly racist and hateful, do not let Don Lemon’s ignorant words drive you into viewing yourself only by your race and religion. Identity politics does not lead to freedom. It only leads to hatred and division and an “us vs. them” mentality.
If CNN does not fire Don Lemon, it only goes to show that they are truly the “enemy of the people.”
― Ephraim Mattos, Former US Navy SEAL
-- 
Pastor Lee S Gliddon Jr
God's Word Christian Ministry
Conservative Patriot > http://conpats.blogspot.com
_____________________________________________

DMV Commits the crime of conversion – Violates the Fifth Amendment?




arnie

DMV Commits the crime of conversion – Violates the Fith Amendment?


Two Maxims of Law
•             A piratis et latronibus capta dominium non mutant.
Things captured by pirates or robbers do not change their ownership.
•             A piratis aut latronibus capti liberi permanent.
Those captured by pirates or robbers remain free.

RIGHTS THAT CANNOT BE TAKEN AWAY.

We are NOT U.S. CITIZENS

STATUTES ARE NOT LAW – TO BE CONVICTED UNDER A STATUTE YOU MUST HAVE MY CONSENT.
We do NOT GIVE OUR CONSENT EVER. We are NOT U.S. CITIZENS, i.e. We are living Souls and not a dead entity written in all upper-case letters on a piece of paper or bond paper being claimed as a vessel owned by another living or dead entity.

A “STATUTE” is NOT a law!  Flournoy v. First National Bank of Shreveport, 197 LA 1057. 3 So.2d 244, 248.
A “CODE” is NOT a law!  In Re Self v. Rhay, Wn 2d 261, in point of fact in law.
A concurrent or “joint resolution of legislature is NOT “Law”. Koenig v. Flynn, 258 N.Y. 292, 179 N.E. 705, 707; Ward v. State, 176 OKL. 368, 56 P.2d 136, 137; State ex rel. Todd v. Yelle, 7 Wash. 2d 43, 110, P.2d 162, 165).
STATUTE. Black’s Law Dictionary, 4th Edition. The written will of the legislature, solemnly expressed according to the forms prescribed in the constitution; an act of the legislature.
U.S. SUPREME COURT DECISIONThe common law is the real law, the Supreme Law of the land, the codes, rules, regulations, policy and statutes are “not the law”.   Self v. Rhay, 61 Wn (2d) 261.
U.S. SUPREME COURT DECISION – ALL codes, rules, and regulations are for government authorities ONLY, not human/Creators in accordance with God’s Laws. All codes, rules and regulations are unconstitutional and lacking due process…”  Rodriques v. Ray Donavan, U.S. Department of Labor, 769 F.2d, 1344, 1348 (1985).

Supreme Court 1796- This decision has never been overturned:
United States Supreme Court Decision from 1796- [Cruden v. Neale, 2 N.C. 338 (1796) 2 S.E.] "There, every man is independent of all laws, except those prescribed by nature. He is not bound by any institutions formed by his fellowman without his consent."
“There are NO Judicial Courts in America and have not been since 1789. “Judges” do NOT enforce Statutes and Codes. Executive Administrators enforce Statutes and Codes. FRC v. GE, 281 U.S. 464 Keller v. Potomac Elec. Co., 261 U.S. 428 1 Stat. 138-178”
“There have NOT been any “Judges” in America since 1789. There have only been Administrators. FRC v. GE, 281 U.S. 464 Keller v. Potomac Elec. Co., 261 U.S. 428 1 Stat. 138-178”
“The Supreme Court has warned, “Because of what appears to be Lawful commands [Statutory Rules, Regulations and -codes–ordinances- and Restrictions] on the surface, many citizens, because of their respect for what appears to be law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their rights, due to ignorance… [deceptive practices, constructive fraud, barratry, legal plunder, conversion, and malicious prosecution in inferior administrative State courts].” (United States v. Minker, 350 U.S. 179, 187, 76 S.Ct. 281, 100 L.Ed. 185 (1956);”
“The Common Law is the real law, the Supreme Law of the land. The codes, rules, regulations, policy and statutes are “not the law.” (Self v. Rhay, 61 Wn 2d 261), They are the law of government for internal regulation, not the law of man, in his separate but equal station and natural state, a sovereign foreign with respect to government generally.
“A concurrent or ‘joint resolution’ of legislature is not “Law,” (Koenig v. Flynn, 258 N.Y. 292, 179 N. E. 705, 707; Ward v State, 176 Okl. 368, 56 P.2d 136, 137; State ex rel. Todd v. Yelle, 7 Wash.2d 443, 110 P.2d 162, 165).
All codes, rules, and regulations are for government authorities only, not human/Creators in accord with God’s Laws. “All codes, rules, and regulations are unconstitutional and lacking due process of Law..”(Rodriques v. Ray Donavan, U.S. Department of Labor, 769 F.2d 1344, 1348 (1985)); …lacking due process of law, in that they are ‘void for ambiguity’ in their failure to specify the statutes’ applicability to ‘natural persons,’ otherwise depriving the same of fair notice, as their construction by definition of terms aptly identifies the applicability of such statutes to “artificial or fictional corporate entities or ‘persons’, creatures of statute, or those by contract employed as agents or representatives, departmental subdivisions, offices, officers, and property of the government, but not the ‘Natural Person’ or American citizen Immune from such jurisdiction of legalism.”
“A “Statute’ is not a Law,” (Flournoy v. First Nat. Bank of Shreveport, 197 La. 1067, 3 So.2d 244, 248),
A “Code’ or Statute’ is not a Law,” (Flournoy v. First Nat. Bank of Shreveport, 197 La. 1067, 3 So.2d 244, 248),”
“A “Code’ is not a Law,” (In Re Self v Rhay Wn 2d 261), in point of fact in Law).”
There is no warrant in law for such a holding. Gould v. Gould, 245 U.S. 151, at p. 153, 38 S.Ct. 53, 62 L.Ed. 211. In 51 American Jurisprudence, "Taxation", Sec. 316, "Strict or Liberal Construction", supported by a great wealth of authority, it is said:
'Although it is sometimes broadly stated either that tax laws are to be strictly construed or, on the other hand, that such enactments are to be liberally construed, this apparent conflict of opinion can be reconciled if it is borne in mind that the correct rule appears to be that where the intent of meaning of tax statutes, or statutes levying taxes, is doubtful, they are, unless a contrary legislative intention appears, to be construed most strongly against the government and in favor of the taxpayer or citizen. Any doubts as to their meaning are to be resolved against the taxing authority and in favor of the taxpayer. * * *'

WHERE IS YOUR MANDATORY FOREIGN AGENTS REGISTRATION ACT OF 1938? https://www.justice.gov/nsd-fara

“THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA” is a franchise of the foreign corporation calling its self: “THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA” both thereby being liable to the international laws. You are all in violation of the International Covenants on Civil and Political Rights:
Article 1
1. All peoples have the right of self-determination, "By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.
2. All peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources without prejudice to any obligations arising out of international economic co-operation, based upon the principle of mutual benefit, and international law. In no case may a people be deprived of its own means of subsistence.
3. The States Parties to the present Covenant, including those having responsibility for the administration of Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territories, shall promote the realization of the right of self-determination, and shall respect that right, in conformity with the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations.
Article 2
1. Each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes to respect and to ensure to all individuals within its territory and subject to its Jurisdiction the rights recognized in the present Covenant, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.
2. Where not already provided for by existing legislative or other measures, each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes to take the necessary steps, in accordance with its constitutional processes and with the provisions of the present Covenant, to adopt such legislative or other measures as may be necessary to give effect to the rights recognized in the present Covenant.
3. Each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes:
(a) To ensure that any person whose rights or freedoms as herein recognized are violated shall have an effective remedy, notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity;
Article 5
1. Nothing in the present Covenant may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms recognized herein or at their limitation to a greater extent than is provided for in the present Covenant.
2. There shall be no restriction upon or derogation from any of the fundamental human rights recognized or existing in any State Party to the present Covenant pursuant to law, conventions, regulations or custom on the pretext that the present Covenant does not recognize such rights or that it recognizes them to a lesser extent.
Article 7
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. In particular, no one shall be subjected without his free consent to medical or scientific experimentation.
Article 8
1. No one shall be held in slavery; slavery and the slave-trade in all their forms shall be prohibited.
2. No one shall be held in servitude.
3. (a) No one shall be required to perform forced or compulsory labour;
Article 9
1. Everyone has the right to liberty and security of person. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest or detention. No one shall be deprived of his liberty except on such grounds and in accordance with such procedure as are established by law.
Article 17
1. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation.
2. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

THE BILL OF RIGHTS
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
These facts remove all controversy from the matter at hand, thus meaning there is no longer any recourse to a court of law since this NOTICE CEASE AND DESIST, is a PRIMA FACIE CASE. This Notice to Cease and Desist addresses the crimes and violation of OATHS of all subordinate public servants acting under your supervision and includes specifically, all identified in This Notice to Cease and Desist by their ignoring their moral and fiduciary duty. The following stare decisis apply; Hafer v. Melo, 502 US 21 (1991): “US Supreme Court held that state officials acting by ”color of law” may be held personally liable for the injuries or torts they cause and that official or sovereign immunity may not be asserted.”; Scheuer v. Rhodes, 416 US 232 (1974), 94 S. Ct. 1683, 1687 (1974), “When a state officer acts under a state law in a manner violative of the Federal Constitution, he comes into conflict with the superior authority of that Constitution, and he is in that case stripped of his official or representative character and is subjected in his person to the consequences of his individual conduct. The State has no power to impart to him any immunity from responsibility to the supreme authority of the United States.”; Warnock v Pecos County, Texas, 116 F. 3d 776 – No.96-50869 Summary Calendar. July 3, 1997.  
In the Western world and many Eastern countries, each of us was born into the world with a bounty on our heads. This is due to the fact that our federal government considers us as enemies of the state. According to Judge Dale, author of The Great American Adventure: The Secrets of America, if you live in the United States, the act that makes you an enemy of the U.S. federal government is “The Trading with the Enemy Act.” This act was amended by Franklin D. Roosevelt in March 1933.
Even though you are considered an enemy of the corporate government, it actually has no jurisdiction over you as a living man or woman. However, if you agree to be a citizen of your corporate government, then it has jurisdiction over you. For example, to be a United States citizen means that you are an “employee” of the United States which is a corporation. If you want evidence of this, look at subsection 14 & 15 in Title 28 U.S. Code § 3002 and you should see this phrase “”(14) “State” means any of the several States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas, or any territory or possession of the United States.
(15) “United States” means—
(A) a Federal corporation;
(B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or
(C) an instrumentality of the United States””
 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/28/3002

RE: SP: INFILTRATE-LEGISLATE-DOMINATE



scanned retina

Ending the WAR against Americans, Arnie



arnie

NO ONE CAN DEMONSTRATE THE LEGITIMACY OF A CORPORATION FUNCTIONING AS A LAWFUL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE PEOPLE: Open Letter to President Trump – December 31, 2018




arnie