With Lawful Excuse

ThinkFREE
A Graphic Manual on Freedom
With Lawful Excuse
A Graphic Handbook of Freedom
Publisher: Elizabeth Anne Elaine Society and Freddie Freepickle Productions
In association with the Jimmy Justice Institute of Analytical Reasoning
And the David Dogood School of Logical Deconstruction

Design & Layout: Author

Printing: Yes, on paper.
The information in this book is complete and true to the best of the authors
knowledge and belief. The author and publisher disclaim all liability in connection
with the use of this book.
The author is not a lawyer and this book does not contain any legal advice.
Knowledge is power, and this book definitely holds a lot of it. What you do with it is
entirely up to you.
I cannot be responsible for the acts of idiots, fools, the spiritually slumbering or
those who want power over their fellow man.

This work is solely for entertainment, education, and discussion purposes. Oh yea,
and to try and create a better society.

All rights reserved under International and Pan-American and Inter-Galactic

Multi-Species Copyright Conventions.
This book, or any part thereof, may not be reproduced in any fashion whatsoever
without the express prior written permission of the author. That permission will be
readily given to any group acting for a just social cause, or from another Galaxy.
(Just ‘because I always wanted to meet someone from another
Galaxy.)

Visit www.thinkfree.ca
Personal Growth and Spiritual Freedom
YOu have been laboring under an illusion and you continue to do so because you think
doing so is easier then understanding and defeating the deception and illusion.

That is not the truth. The illusion is like a shadow and you are a source of light and
all shadows will disappear when you shine your light properly.

You will likely feel a lot of fear, anger and shame. You will be angry at the so called
authorities for maintaining this deception. You will be fearful of speaking your truth
to the existing power structure because you have never truly done so before, and
they have a reputation for hurting.

YOu will feel a sense of shame that you allowed this deception to continue for so
long. All of these will pass and when they do you will begin to see the truth. This is
the truth that sets you free both spiritually from your fear, anger and shame and
from the legal structure that you are presently struggling under.

You will find it is very easy to point to others and claim that their actions harmed
you and are completely innocent. This mindset although it may appear at first to
empower you will actually do the opposite, because you will never accept the power
you have and have always had over your own reality. Only when you accept that your
actions led you to where you are now will you find the path that leads to your
freedom.

There is an opportunity for you here to take simple steps that will allow you to fully
and completely regain your freedom. It is not a harmful process nor is it in any way
unlawful It is merely the truth which has always been and when properly applied
always works. Chances are you have a drivers license, but have never read the Motor
Vehicle Act under which you applied. Chances are you do not even know what the word
a'pply' really means and if you did you would have to ask yourself why you should
apply to the government if they are supposed to be your servants.

The information presented herein is powerful and dangerous to attempt to apply if

you are motivated by greed, personal gain or profit. If you think the information will
allow you to avoid responsibilities you are incorrect. Freedom requires a higher level
of responsibility and that is why many seem to fear it. With the truth you can define
and create your own reality and how the government deals with you. It will not
empower you to break any laws. It will however stop people from imposing what is
merely their will on you as if it were the law.

This information has been collected and assembled in order to allow for easy
understanding and comprehension by anyone who is willing to read with AN open mind.
It is up to you to decide if the information presented has any value or if it is the
truth. If you decide it is the truth what you do with it is entirely up to you as well.

We at ThinkFREE wish you the best on your journey and would like to remind you of
the words of the very wise Bill Hicks:

"Today a young man on acid realized that all matter is merely

energy condensed to a slow vibration, that we are all one
consciousness experiencing itself subjectively, there is no such
thing as death, life is only a dream, and we are the imagination
of ourselves."

7
 IMAGES TAKEN OFF THE WEB... WITH SOME
SUPER COOL PICTURES FROM BARRY GNYP. I WISH
SOMEONE
WOULD HELP ME
SEE...

There is no
such thing as
'kinda free'.

DID I PUT
MONEY IN THE
METER?

THE PURPOSE OF THIS WORK IS TO HELP

THOSE WHO FEEL LIKE THEY ARE DROWNING
IN GOVERNMENT RULES THEY CAN'T
UNDERSTAND AND IS DESIGNED TO PROVIDE
LAWFUL REMEDY.
IT IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE.

8
 a r d l e s s of how
Reg e people
badly som o believe
t
Some peo want you this
p ,
you to be le though want
l otherwise ongs in
only doe ieve that not planet be u.
l
s
belong t the planet part to y
o
o them an
alone, bu d
t that yo them u
well. u do as
l i k e yo y
a t you nd the p
e a u
w i ll tr operty u grow
Theytheir pr ntil yo e.
u
are do so therwis
will claim o
They do it for money, power and and
control. They do it because they
can't feel the Universal Love you can.
They are very sad indeed.

The mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few to ride them.
9
 Liberty has never come from the government. Liberty has
always come from the subjects of it. The history of
liberty is a history of resistance. ~Woodrow Wilson

Liberty means responsibility. That is why most men

dread it. ~George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman,
"Maxims: Liberty and Equality," 1905

The people never give up their liberties but under

some delusion. ~Edmund Burke

“It is quite possible that we can do greater things than

Jesus, for what is written in the Bible about him is
poetically embellished.” Albert Einstein; quoted in W. I.
Hermanns, "A Talk with Einstein," October 1943,

No duty, however, binds us to these so-called laws, whose

corrupting influence menaces what is noblest in our being...

10 Only the truth can set you free.

"Dear Government,

I realize we don't have many heart-to-hearts, as you've become rather distant

recently, but I think now is the time, as there is no better time than the present,
as they say.

We've been together a long long time, in fact, you've had me since I was a young
child, and I grew accustomed to your 'love'.

However, only recently, it has occurred to me, that our relationship has become
rather intense, and for the most part, one-sided.

Way back when, (when you tricked me into being your partner), I thought I had no
choice, but I've grown up a lot since then, and now know life is full of choices.

I think it is time I wrote you to get things off my chest.

I've spent a few years now, thinking I could "change you", but I've realized there
is no use, you are too far gone. You've abandoned your common sense, and there
is no more reasoning with you.

It seems every few years, you wear a different colour jacket, you change your
style, you change your face and mannerisms, but your end actions are always the
same. Your vanity is what is really upsetting to me the most. It seems all you
can do is talk about yourself. You've also stopped listening to me.

Not only have you stopped listening to me, but you've now started telling me
what I can and cannot do. This is not how things were intended to go, when my
brothers and sisters created you many moons ago.

Every once in a while you give me a little shiny object to admire, and I play with
it for a while thinking it will make me happy, because that what you tell me to
think. You also tell me how "nice" it was for you to give it to me. Then you take it
away. Sometimes you let me keep it, but only if it keeps me distracted.

I've realized that those little shiny objects are just worthless items, like from
the bubble-gum machine. Little shiny distractions, that you and your new buddies
the "media" use to distract me from the real-issues.

You are always changing the subject.

But you listen to your older brother!, who lives downstairs, and you always do
as he says. You pretend to fight with him, just to try to look good to me. It's
not attractive anymore. You've become ugly, and I can see through your act.
11
 All these years, you've kinda been there for me, when I needed you, but only after I nagged
you for weeks. I was most always upset by your lack of response. I think I can find better
service from others that I've met elsewhere. They are willing to listen, and do as I say,
for the same price or less. (Not to mention less mental anguish, and no strings attached!)

Every time you wanted something from me, you rarely asked me nicely, and started off with
threats, as if I owed you something, and I don't take kindly to threats. It's no way to have
a positive and mutually beneficial relationship.

You've also abandoned many of my friends when they needed you the most. They thought they
could count on you, but you deceived them. I've had to pick up the pieces myself, and help
them along. It's OK though, I think you might be onto something with that one. It's brought
me closer to them, and I've realized there is more to this world than just 'you' and 'me'.
I've been paying you all these years, hoping that my donations would be put to good use.
But you spend them unwisely, and get involved in subjects and places you know nothing
about. You offer my brothers lives for your greed, and your incessant attempt to make
your older brother happy. Don't you see? He thinks of you as a retarded step-brother, and
he will eventually take away all your toys.

Your involvement in conflicts that have nothing to do with you is rather confusing to me.
Do you and I have a relationship, or does your older brother run your life?
I've been paying you all these years, hoping that you will be 'nice' to me. But it doesn't
seem to be working. Seems you want more and more all the time from me. I do have people
that I care more about than you, I call them my 'family' (which incidentally includes
friends, and others not related by blood), as I don't think that any close-nit 'family' has
relationships based on foundations such as you and I have.
All I ever wanted was for you to take care of "us", but it seems you are incapable now.
Your eyes have been blinded by power, and the whispering in your ear by your many older
brothers.

Although these years have been "alright", I don't think they are anything to celebrate, as
my father recently told me (he risked his life to escape from a Communist country, just to
be with you), he told me, he's "not so sure things are any different here". And it sent
shivers down my spine.
All these years, I think you've been lying to me. In fact, I know it. Your smiles are fake,
and your 'kindness' doesn't come from the heart. You keep asking me to pay for all your
mistakes, and everyone elses mistakes. I'm really tired of it, and I have been working as
hard as I can to keep up with your demands.

All your benefits aren't worth the expense of being with you. Your hugs aren't as warm as
they used to be, and you seem to be spending more time with others. There isn't any "us"
time anymore.

It's come to the point now, that I realize that I really don't need you anymore. And I don't
think you need me anymore either. You've become an addict, addicted to your own power, and
it scares me to think how you might treat me, and the rest of my brothers and sisters in the
coming years if I don't leave you as soon as possible. My conscience is telling me to go,
and I must do as my conscience dictates.
So go on, be with your new friends, go play Risk® with them. Everyone likes a good game.
It's all fake money anyways... It's just too bad you are playing with real lives.

I promise I'll be fine. I think I will do quite well without you dragging me down all the
time.

I hope you can take your new freedom to heart, and something positive will come of it, for
your sake, as I know there are many more people like myself that will be writing you
letters like this.

I know you are afraid, because you've seen this coming for a while now.
But it's about time. I hope you don't take your anger out on everyone else.
Breaking up is hard to do.

12With warm hugs,"

 My Freedom has
nothing to do
with where I live,
but how I live.

The tools that are

used to subjugate,
Although the author of deceive and control
this work lives in are the same the
British COlumbia, much world over and have
of the information is changed very little in
directly applicable to 2000 years. It relies
anyone in Canada. This almost exclusively on
information is also controlling the
clearly applicable in population by
New Zealand, Australia controlling the
and quite likely in The language used to
United States of create the laws.
America as well.

Justice is conscience, not a personal

conscience but the conscience of the
whole of humanity. Those who clearly
recognize the voice of their own
conscience usually recognize also
the voice of justice.

13
 DO YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE?
IF YOU DO ...
NOBODY CAN TELL YOU WHAT TO DO.

YOU are stardust.... LIVING BREATHING, THINKING, FEELING STARDUST.

YOU ARE COMPOSED OF THE SAME THING AS THE STARS. YOU CAME FROM
THEM AND ONE DAY MUST RETURN THERE. YOU ARE BEYOND MAGICAL.
14
 They are just people using words. That is all. They are no better or
worse then you and they have no right to claim any authority over you
without your consent. This is going to be difficult for you to accept at
first because you have lived your whole life with someone over you
claiming authority.

Believe it or not, they

are not even written in
ENGLISH. They are
written in the language
of LAw,which only looks
like ENGLISH, but it isn't.

Many of those words do not

mean what you likely thought
they did. They are in fact
deceptive and misleading.

Hopefully when you have finished

this book you will have a different
perspective of the government and
will know not only how they
deceive you into granting them
authority, but how to take it back.
Of course, that is
entirely up to you to do.

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. We are caught in an inescapable network of

mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny. Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly.
15
A human being is not a person because he is a human being but because rights and duties
have been ascribed to him. Specifically the person is the legal subject or substance of
which the rights and duties are attributes, but not all human beings are persons, as was
the case in old England when there were slaves.

It starts in the
hospital
n...
The Deceptio The nurse or social
worker will tell you...

What they also don't

tell you is what you
are doing when you do
register your child.

you must register your child! What

they do not tell you is that the word
'must' is legally synonymous with 'may'.

Signing it over to
the government...

YOu are creating a legal ning

entity, or 'person',
b a ndo.
associating it with your a it
baby... andim to
cl a

16
When they remove a child they are providing that child with services.

As long as you
u
et yo treat their
h e y will l baby... 'person' well...
T your
keep

They cannot provide services to those who are not registered.

They will remove

your baby using
force if necessary....

But if
conce you don't
rning d
their o as they
legal w
entityant
...

If you never register your baby with them...

and you will end up in court,

fighting over a baby, when
the fight is over a person.

By acting on the YOu are not a person;

legal person....
you have a person.

They can never remove your baby 17

 Grow up or wear a diaper

ACT L
SHIT IKE A BAB
AND YYOUR DRA Y AND
DIAPE OU WILL WERS
LIKE RED AND BE
A BAB TREAT
Y. ED

YOU HAVE
ALTHOUGHND FREEDOMS,
RIGHTS A NO RIGHT TO
YOU HAVE RE OTHERS
POOP WHE
WALK.

The Fruit of God's Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, kindness,

goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control. Galations 5:22-23

THROW A
GOVERNA TANTRUM AND
PUT YOU NNY CAN AND WIL
IN YOUR
FOR A TIM L
R
E OUT. OOM

WANTS
NO ONE
YOU CRY
TO HEAR AM.
E
AND SCR

When you have The Spirit you escape the Governanny

BUT IF YOU LEARN TO
THINK AND ACT WITH
RESPECT, LOVE AND
COMPASSION, THEY
WILL TREAT YOU LIKE AN
ADULT, AND NOT TRY TO
PUT DIAPERS ON YOU,
OR PUT YOU IN YOUR
ROOM, OR EVEN TRY TO
TELL YOU WHAT TO DO.
HOW YOU ACT WILL
DETERMINE HOW
YOU ARE TREATED.

18 When you accept responsibility for your reality you empower yourself
 Obedience to de facto law

15. No person shall be convicted of an offence in respect of an act or

omission in obedience to the laws for the time being made and enforced
by persons in de facto possession of the sovereign power in and over
the place where the act or omission occurs.

De facto is a Latin De jure is an expression that

expression that means "in
fact" or "in practice" but
not spelled out by law.
The terms de jure and de facto
are used instead of "in principle"
and "in practice", respectively,
when one is describing political
situations. De jure is also
translated as "by law". A
practice may exist de facto,
where for example the people
obey a contract as though there
were a law enforcing it yet there
is no such law.
means "based on law", as
contrasted with de facto,
which means "in fact".
Imagine you are on a plane
and the pilots pass out. A
passenger takes over the
controls and tries to fly the
plane. Although he may in
fact be piloting the plane,
does this mean he is the pilot
and has all the same authority
the original ones had?

Read the above section and ask yourself why they would
even put that in. IF it wasn't there you could be charged
for obeying. If it wasn't there you could not be charged
for disobeying, as obeying could itself result in charges.
All they have done is change the ability to bring charges
for obeying. They have not in any way changed the ability
to bring charges for NOT obeying.

Where does it say that you can be convicted of an offence if you do disobey?
19
 Do you know how
they train an
elephant?

They start with a Which the elephant

heavy chain... can't break...

Although it will
try repeatedly...

eventually...

NEVER STOP TESTING

and then they ain YOUR CHAINS. THEY
replace the ch GET WEAKER.

ly
with a thin easi.
br ea ka bl e co rd
it gives up

20
 Is it this Lady? Is it her head gear?

Is it a bunch
of bankers?

HINT: It's
NOT what
you think.

Or a bunch of People Playing a Role?

21
 There are two Crowns operanting in
England, one being Queen Elizabeth II.
Although extremely wealthy, the Queen functions largely in a ceremonial capacity and
serves to deflect attention away from the other Crown, who issues her marching
orders through their control of the English Parliament.

This other Crown is comprised of a committee of 12 banks headed by the

Bank of England (House of Rothschild). They rule the world from the
677-acre, independent sovereign state know as The City of London, or
simply 'The City.'

The City is not a part of England, just as Washington, D.C. is not a part of the USA.

The City is referred to as the wealthiest square mile on earth and is presided over by a
Lord Mayor who is appointed annually.

When the Queen wishes to conduct business within the City, she is met by the Lord
Mayor at Temple (Templar) Bar where she requests permission to enter this private,
sovereign state. She then proceeds into the City walking several paces behind the
Mayor.
22
 Section 2 of the BNA Act was repealed in 1893 which states:

2. The Provisions of this Act referring to Her Majesty the Queen extend also
to the Heirs and Successors of Her Majesty, Kings and Queens of the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland.
Canada does not have a Monarch because when Queen Victoria Died in 1901, so did the
provisions of this Act to the British Monarchy.
Section 9 of the BNA Act states:

9. The Executive Government and Authority of and over Canada is hereby

declared to continue and be vested in the Queen.
Queen Victoria died in 1901, so who has executive power in Canada anymore? Further
Executive power is a CORPORATE term, and does not make reference to living beings.
Further it identifies people as being PERSONS, which are imaginary fictions, which
CORPORATIONS are, imaginary. I’ll get deeper into what PERSONS are and where they
come from later in the book. It is important for you to know right now that you are not a
PERSON, but a living sentient being of mind, body and spirit. Also take note of the title,
“The British North American Act”. Do you see the word Canada anywhere in the Title? Nope so if
Canada is to be a COUNTRY should it not have it’s own Constitution? Oops, this is not a
Constitution it is merely an Act. More accurately an Act of the U.K. Parliament. You see CANADA
was nothing more than a CORPORATION listed on the British Board of Trade. It was used for
commercial purposes to run the colony with. That is a Colony of PERSONS.

Now consider this. A person is something of an imaginary, pure fiction. It does not exist in
our world. So what evidence do you have that the PERSON Queen Victoria was actually
born or died? There is none. That is the whole point of this. The Coronation is a complete fraud
for it is nothing more than a make believe play creating a birth of a PERSON. Thus the
foundation of their laws are based in the imaginary not the
real. Thus why are we following them?

What was created was the Dominion of Canada. The British North American Act was
the tool for creating this. However Section 2 was repealed in 1893. Thus two days
after Queen Victoria Died in 1901, the Statutory Laws could not be reinstated as the
Queen was dead, thus all contracts with her were null and void as it were. The
international Bankers in London, “The City” a sovereign state within the City of
London, much like Washington D.C., claimed Salvage rights to the CORPORATION
called Canada or Dominion of Canada and quietly usurped power from the Canadian
People. However nobody was ever a Canadian, but they never told you that. At some
point they stopped calling Canada the Dominion of Canada and just started calling it
CANADA.

23
 How language is used to deceive and bind

I am a lawyer. I promise to never do anything that would harm

my society. By that I mean 'The Law Society'. I promise to never
do anything to harm the court system, as I know that is how we
all make a killer living. I promise to never do anything to harm
The Crown in Right of CANADA. And finally, I promise to help my
incompetent clients to the best of my ability, unless of course
doing so would be a breach of the first and more important
parts of my oath.

We read the world wrong and say

f you can't understand the words
how can they be applied to you as if
they have the force of law?
Additionally, there are only two
official languages English and
French. This language called 'law' is
not an official language is it? Of
course lawyers make their money by
ensuring the statutes are so
convoluted and ambiguous that you
need them to understand what is
expressed within. This is exactly
what Jesus railed against 2000 years
ago; the Pharisees and Sadducee and
Scribes who claimed exclusive right
to understand the Law and then
demanded rich payment to have the
words deciphered.
The people never give up their liberties but under some delusion. ~Edmund Burke
24
Toronto lawyer David Sherman,
an authority on tax law, has
little patience for detaxer
theories. "Detaxers say that
because of such and such an
analysis going back to the
Magna Carta or something, the
government can't impose taxes
and therefore the income tax is
voluntary. That's like telling
someone that you can cure
AIDS by boiling toads under a
full moon and inhaling the
steam while you stand on one
foot reciting Hamlet's
soliloquy backwards. The idea is
any medical professional would
recognize that as nonsense,
though someone desperate
enough might try it if [he
doesn't] know what's going on.
These detaxers think
they can know law
without having any
legal training. They
read something that
looks like it is written
in English, but it's not,
it's actually law and
they think they
understand it."
 Excerpt from;
WOE UNTO YOU, LAWYERS!
by Fred Rodell 1939
Professor of Law, Yale University

"The Law is the killy-loo bird of the sciences. The killy-loo, of course, was
the bird that insisted on flying backward because it didn't care where it was
going but was mightily interested in where it had been. And certainly The
Law, when it moves at all, does so by flapping clumsily and uncertainly along,
with its eye unswervingly glued on what lies behind. In medicine, in
mathematics, in sociology, in psychology – in every other one of the physical
and social sciences – the accepted aim is to look ahead and then move ahead
to new truths, new techniques, new usefulness. Only The Law, inexorably
devoted to all its most ancient principles and precedents, makes a vice of
innovation and a virtue of hoariness. Only The Law resists and resents the
notion that it should ever change its antiquated ways to meet the challenge of
a changing world.

It is well-nigh impossible to understand how The Law works without fully appreciating
the truth of this fact: — The Law never admits to itself that there can be anything
actually new under the sun. Minor variations of old facts, old machines, old
relationships, yes; but never anything different enough to bother The Law into treating
it otherwise than as an old friend in a new suit of clothes. When corporations first came
on the legal scene, The Law regarded them as individual persons, in disguise, and so,
for most legal purposes, a corporation is still considered, and even talked about, as a
"person." A transport airplane, so far as The Law is concerned, is nothing but a
newfangled variety of stagecoach. Such things as sit-down strikes, holding companies,
Paris divorces, were treated with almost contemptuous familiarity by The Law when
they first appeared, and the same fate undoubtedly awaits television when it grows up
and begins to tangle with The Law. For all this is part of a carefully nurtured legend to
the effect that The Law is so omniscient that nothing men may do can ever take it
unawares, and so all-embracing that the principles which will apply to men's actions
500 years from now are merely waiting to be applied to whatever men happen to be
doing in 2439 A.D."

25
 Property and Plunder
Man can live and satisfy his wants only by
ceaseless labor; by the ceaseless
application of his faculties to natural
resources. This process is the origin of
property.
But it is also true that a man may live and
satisfy his wants by seizing and consuming
the products of the labor of others. This
process is the origin of plunder.
Now since man is naturally inclined to avoid
pain -- and since labor is pain in itself -- it
follows that men will resort to plunder
whenever plunder is easier than work.
History shows this quite clearly. And under
these conditions, neither religion nor
morality can stop it.
When, then, does plunder stop? It stops
when it becomes more painful and more
dangerous than labor.
Arrr... treasure
awaits he who
makes the laws
If you want to be free, there is but one way; it is to guarantee an equally full measure
of liberty to all your neighbors. There is no other. Carl Schurz (1829 - 1906)
26
It is evident, then, that the proper purpose
of law is to use the power of its collective
force to stop this fatal tendency to plunder
instead of to work. All the measures of the
law should protect property and punish
plunder.
But, generally, the law is made by one man
or one class of men. And since law cannot
operate without the sanction and support of
a dominating force, this force must be
entrusted to those who make the laws.
This fact, combined with the fatal tendency
that exists in the heart of man to satisfy his
wants with the least possible effort,
explains the almost universal perversion of
the law. Thus it is easy to understand how
law, instead of checking injustice, becomes
the invincible weapon of injustice. It is easy
to understand why the law is used by the
legislator to destroy in varying degrees
among the rest of the people, their
personal independence by slavery, their
liberty by oppression, and their property by
plunder. This is done for the benefit of the
person who makes the law, and in
proportion to the power that he holds.
 NOT
ONE
HAI
R
THIS
CANNOT BE
GOOD.

HOW IMPORTANT IS NOW WHAT'S WORSE,

CONSENT TO THE PEOPLE
IN THE GOVERNMENT?
IS IT VITAL TO THEM IN
ORDER TO BE ABLE TO
CLAIM THEY ARE ACTING
LAWFULLY?
WELL ASK YOURSELF
THIS, IF SOMEONE CAME
AT YOU WITH SOME
SCISSORS AND ATTACKED
YOU AND CUT OFF SOME
OF YOUR HAIR WOULD
THAT BE CONSIDERED
ASSAULT? OF
CAN WE HOME COURSE IT
SCHOOL? WOULD!
HAVING ONE HAIR ON
YOUR HEAD CUT, WHICH
WE AGREE THEY CAN'T
DO, OR FORCING YOU TO
PAY HALF YOUR MONEY
TO THEM OR GO TO JAIL?
IF THEY CAN'T TOUCH
ONE HAIR WITHOUT YOUR
CONSENT HOW CAN THEY
POSSIBLY PUT CUFFS ON
YOU WITHOUT YOU
CONSENTING AS WELL?
Look up the definition
of assault in the
criminal code and show
me where it says that
they can arrest you
without consent and
not commit assault.

The simple fact is they

need your consent to
do anything that
affects you. When
they take you to court
for statutory
infractions, they are
actually providing you
with a service that you
consented to. When
they stop you to give
you a ticket, they are
merely doing what you HI I LOVE YOU, BUT YOU
asked of them and to CAN'T TOUCH ONE HAIR ON
what you agreed. The MY HEAD WITHOUT MY
good news is consent CONSENT, OR YOU ARE
can be revoked and COMMITTING ASSAULT. THEN
I think I will sAY then their ability to do
NO THANK YOU... I WILL PUT MY HIPPY FOOT
any of these things is UP YOUR ASS.
lost.

"No man is good enough to govern another man without that other's consent." Abe Lincoln
27
To: The Law Society of British Columbia,
CC: TWIMC

Hello and good day! I am Robert-Arthur: Menard a Freeman-on-the-Land and recently I became aware that the
Law Society of British Columbia has a problem apparently with me and my words and have even went as far as to
create conflict and attempt to seek an order against me from the Supreme Court of British Columbia. However, the
problem is, the court you wish to drag me into does not belong to me or to the rest of the good people of British
Columbia at all and is your own private court system. I say this because I recognize that ownership is
demonstrated by access and only members of your society have full and complete access to those courts, and
according to the documents left at my feet, you do not want me to engage in certain activities with an expectation
of a fee, gain or reward, direct or indirect from the one for whom I act.

Well, I have to tell you, you people are very disappointing to me. I mean really, you expect me to accept your offer
and step into conflict with you when clearly there is a far easier path? Let's look at it this way: You people are
bullies and you have just swung very ineffectually against me. I can block and swing back, or I can duck and
smile. I think I will duck and smile, as I am a very nice man, and not prone to conflict generating activities and I
see how scared you all must be. I know what is coming and I think you do too. I also know that there are some
very good people in your society who do firmly believe in justice and its proper administration and I am sorry if
this missive is in tone or effect harmful to those good people.

You lawyers do realize that in the paperwork you have filed in court, apparently against me, nowhere is it
mentioned or claimed that I have ever in the past acted with an expectation of a fee, gain or reward. I mean if you
want to stop me from engaging in certain activities at least come out and claim that I was engaging in said
activities prior to getting a court order barring me from doing so. Of all the people who have sworn affidavits
against me, not a single one is alleging that I ever received any fee, gain or reward, directly or indirectly from the
people for whom I act. Not a single one of your members who is trying to shut me up is willing to claim I ever
received anything. You know you people would be very hard pressed to make such claims, as I do not even have a
bank account.

Additionally, your logic is so faulty as to be laughable. You claim to protect the public, but not a single member of
the public has complained about me, only your members have, and only because I highlight the deception your
profession relies upon. You claim I should not do any of the things which you claim monopoly over, because I am
not qualified to act in court, and yet now you wish to drag me into the court where I am either qualified to act, or I
am not qualified to act. According to you, I am competent to step in that court and act for myself, yet not
competent to do so for others if I am doing so with any expectation of gain. How strange is that?

I could very easily engage in conflict with you people, and in a fair and just system I would win. However, I am
smart enough to realize that we do not have a fair and just system at all; we have a system designed by and for
members of the Law Society and at the expense of the people of British Columbia. I mean no disrespect but that is
honestly the way I see it and I believe there are a great many others who feel the same way. I know members of
your own society who have bemoaned what the courts have become.
28
Hey I have an idea, instead of taking me into your own private courts where adjudication will be provided by a
past member of your society, let's convene a proper common law court de jure and have the adjudication conducted
by someone with no ties whatsoever to your society. Let's have a jury of good people from British Columbia and
let us raise some very important issues concerning the source, nature and limits of government authority. I bet you
would not be so quick to drag me into court then if you could not count on the court siding with you.

You should know, I have fought many bullies in the past and I know how to do it so we all end up laughing at the
bully. I will agree that doing any of the activities mentioned in your paperwork with the expectation of a fee, gain
or reward are in fact very dishonourable and that anyone who would engage in such practises with expectation of
gain or reward is a low down, dirty, pie-stealing dishonest scoundrel as those activities are either reprehensible and
thus should not be done, or are needed and should not be charged for. That must be why you don't want me doing
those things right? They are wrong for me to do, they must be wrong for everyone to do. Or are you claiming that
it is wrong for us to do any of those things, yet lawful for your members, because they are inherently morally
superior to all others?

I also do not fail to notice that there are no complainants save members of the Law Society. Not a single one I have
helped or tried to help has complained to you. No, only your members have cried to you and only because I was in
fact effective against them. And now you want to go cry to the courts, seeking their control over me.

We could lock horns and have it out and I could easily establish my rights by way of claim of right, I could agree
to meet you in your private courts and claim the truth that your statutes, specifically the Legal Profession Act is not
my law and not applicable to me, however that is not something that I am willing to leave up to a judge who
operates in and for the legal entity known as The Province of British Columbia. If they wish to claim that said Act
has the force of law over me they will be given ample opportunity to claim so on their full commercial liability.

Additionally, I have learnt that it is never wise to allow your adversary, especially those who rely on dishonour and
deception such as some of you people apparently do, to determine the place where you will fight. Always be the
one that decides that issue, I was taught. I can tell by your actions you wish to fight me and you seek an order
against me, from some party that offers as a business adjudication services. You do realize that in a common law
jurisdiction the consent of both parties is required prior to any party providing adjudication do you not?
Furthermore you realize I am not a member of your society and I am not bound by the rules of your society or the
rules that your members have created. Also anyone with eyes can see the sign on the door to to courthouse which
clearly reads “BUSINESS HOURS'. Do you claim the right to compel me to attend your place of business and do
business with you, oh Officers of the court?

And yet still you want to drag me into conflict. What a bunch of very silly gooses! The way I see it, you are
swinging first, even though I have extended in the past honourable offers of discussion and public debate.
Figuratively speaking, you have swung, I will duck and smile big, and then, acting completely lawfully and within
my rights the entire time, kick you very hard and publicly right in the groin. Then soon millions of others will be
lining up to do so. That's how it's going to happen. I will take no pleasure in it and see it merely as a required duty.
Some of you people are out of control, and you seem to think we are all your little slave children incapable of
administrating our own affairs or governing ourselves. So, are you ready to watch me duck? Pay attention now, I
am very quick. And remember, you started this.

Without accepting that the Legal Profession Act is law over a Freeman-on-the-Land such as myself, I am willing to
promise and agree to not engage in any of the activities mentioned in your claim with an expectation of a fee, gain
or reward direct or indirect from the one for whom I act.

29
Are you happy now? See? See how I ducked and you missed? Now we have no conflict whatsoever do we? We
are at peace now right? Isn't peace fun? Isn't it nice? Doesn't it make you feel warm and fuzzy inside? Wanna big
hug? Since we are now at peace, we have no reason to go to your court and have past or present members of your
society decide any issues do we, as that is a place for people with conflict and we no longer have conflict right?
If we do it's entirely on you, and my hands are completely clean.

Now, because I am a good, peace loving and gentle man who is compelled by My Faith, I also promise to engage
in all said activities fully and completely and to spend as much time doing so as possible, and I will do those
things without any expectation of anything from those I serve.

I will accept your claim against me as an offer to engage in those activities to a much larger degree yet without
expectation of fee, gain reward from those I serve. That's what my Spirit tells me to do. You don't mind me
following my conscience and being compelled by My Faith do you? I sure hope not and if so, I hope you get over
it sooner rather than later.

See the way I look at it, I am serving God, not a bank account. I don't even have a bank account. You have and
serve those, not me. Plus, I have Patrons, people who love what I do and how I do it, and they have no problem
gifting me the necessities of life, even though they may not know me personally or even the people for whom I
will be acting. Anonymous donations are amazing and when I serve properly, I am always blessed by God.
Additionally, I will soon have a new book out and am working on a video wherein I will be teaching people how
to use Notices and establish 'lawful excuse, the proof of which lies on them' and I will be teaching millions of
people how to engage certain very empowering Sections of The Criminal Code of Canada.

You can't lawfully stop me from engaging in those activities and apparently you are not attempting to ; you are
claiming I do not have the right to do so with any expectation of fee, gain, or reward being paid to me from the
one for whom I am acting. However, there is nothing wrong according to your claim with me engaging in those
activities either freely and without charge, or doing so under contract with a third party or by way of anonymous
support.

Hey remember how I promised you repeated figurative kicks in the groin?

I have been studying the law and have by comparing other common law jurisdictions and their statutes have
realized that having a Claim of Right is in fact lawful excuse and that a Notice of said Claim held on ones person
is in fact all we need to be able to completely ignore your courts and the legislative scheme you people have
foisted upon us. I am talking of course about Section 39 of the Criminal Code of Canada and Sections 126 and
127. Let's review those shall we?

Criminal Code
PART IV: OFFENCES AGAINST THE ADMINISTRATION OF LAW AND JUSTICE
Corruption and Disobedience

Disobeying a statute

126. (1) Every one who, without lawful excuse, contravenes an Act of Parliament by wilfully doing anything that
it forbids or by wilfully omitting to do anything that it requires to be done is, unless a punishment is expressly
provided by law, guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years.

30
Attorney General of Canada may act
(2)Any proceedings in respect of a contravention of or conspiracy to contravene an Act mentioned in subsection
(1), other than this Act, may be instituted at the instance of the Government of Canada and conducted by or on
behalf of that Government.

Disobeying order of court

127. (1) Every one who, without lawful excuse, disobeys a lawful order made by a court of justice or by a person or
body of persons authorized by any Act to make or give the order, other than an order for the payment of money, is,
unless a punishment or other mode of proceeding is expressly provided by law, guilty of

(a) an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or

(b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.

Attorney General of Canada may act

(2)Where the order referred to in subsection (1) was made in proceedings instituted at the instance of the
Government of Canada and conducted by or on behalf of that Government, any proceedings in respect of a
contravention of or conspiracy to contravene that order may be instituted and conducted in like manner.

See it is in fact possible to lawfully disobey an order of a court and to contravene a statute, provided you have
lawful excuse. What is lawful excuse now becomes the question and in reading statutes in New Zealand I found
they have the exact same section, but theirs is less deceptive. They don't use the words 'without lawful excuse', they
use the words 'without claim of right'. I reason that a Claim of Right properly filed and undisputed does in fact
generate a lawful excuse and empowers any human being in Canada to exist fully and completely free of the
incredible deception you lawyers have created and benefit from. We can lawfully contravene your statutes and
rightfully disobey the orders of your courts and when enough people wake up to this fact, you and your courts
quickly become completely irrelevant. And those sections would not be there unless they were meant to be used for
that very purpose.

Now ain't that a big kick in the jewel sack?

The next question that comes to my mind is how do we create and file those Claims of Right? I am pretty sure I
know exactly how to do so, and will be crafting and publishing my Claim of Right in The Gazette. I will ensure a
member of the Notary Society is watching as a fair and impartial observer and they will if you people fail to
respond attest to my Claim of Right or as it is called in the Criminal Code Lawful Excuse and from that point
forward, I will be clearly free to ignore you, your courts, your government and all your silly and self imposed rules.
So will anyone else who takes the same steps, and I am willing to believe that so may people are so very tired of all
you conflict generating deceivers that millions will in fact take this option and free themselves from your control.

All you deceptive people however will be forever bound by your own words, for some of you are the deceivers and
it has been said “Woe be to you lawyers and experts in the Law, for you have taken and hidden the key of
knowledge and entering in not yourselves, those who have entered in, you hindered.”

What happens when a vast majority of the people awaken to the fact that all of the rules and statutes you have
crafted, created and now enforce and interpret to great personal benefit are applicable only to you and the
government? Oh won't that be a happy day? Not so much for you and the government, but for us.

31
 So to sum up, I offer peace and I am willing to agree to not engage in any of the activities you claim commercial
monopoly over with any expectation of a fee or gain or reward from the party for whom I act. There is no need to
secure an order from the court, as I am willing to accept your position and promise to not engage in those
activities with an expectation of a fee, gain or reward from those whom I serve if acting within the legal entity
known as The Province of British Columbia, the de-fact government of British Columbia.

I do however claim the right to engage in those activities without any expectation of fee, reward or gain from
those whom I serve as your claim does not seek to enjoin me unconditionally from engaging in those activities,
only with certain expectations.

I will be lawfully teaching people, and I mean millions of people, how to craft and file proper Claims of Right
which will generate lawful excuse and activate the defences found in The Criminal Code of Canada allowing
them to disobey the orders of your courts and contravene your statutes and exist as a Freeman-on-the-Land free of
the conflict generating deception and deceit the lawyers have created.

I believe this issue concerns all people in British Columbia, and have no problem with you making many copies
and passing them out like candy. That is what we intend to do. I am sure you do not mind, as this is a matter of
importance to the public, right? Please feel free to even post it on your website, fax it to your members, and if you
wish to link to mine, where it will also be posted, the link is www.thinkfree.ca .

Well, I am glad we worked out this little matter and avoided conflict and have found a mutually satisfactory
resolution to this issue even though we didn't even use any discussion or negotiation as the rule of law demands.
Have a fantastic weekend!

Sincerely and without malice aforethought, ill will, vexation or frivolity,

Robert-Arthur: Menard
Freeman-on-the-Land, Non-consenting and ungoverned
All Rights Reserved, Exercised at Will and Fully Defended, By The Grace of God

The Elizabeth Anne Elaine Society

Justice is Truth in Action

32
 “False in one "No one is "No rule of law
“No man can give obliged to accept protects a buyer
what he has not” thing, false in who willfully
everything” a benefit against
his consent." closes his ears
to information,
'What is mine le or refuses to
cannot be taken e rab " Any one may make inquiry
away without a mis ere e renounce a law when
my consent.' t is y wh vagu introduced for his circumstances
" I
l a ver w is ain." own benefit. "
of grave
s
e la ert suspicion
t h c
r un imperatively
o
demand it."

An injury is "Every consent

extinguished by the involves a
forgiveness or submission; but
reconcilement of the
party injured. [Luke
a mere
17:3-4, 2 Corinthians submission
2:7-8] does not
necessarily
involve
consent."
"Fictions arise from
the law, and not
law from fictions"

"It is a fraud to conceal a fraud."

"Gross negligence is equivalent to

PAY
ATTENTION!
There are truths that cannot be
denied. Like a mother's love, they
are constant and unchanging.
fraud."
"Once a fraud, always a fraud."
"What otherwise is good and just,
if it be sought by force and fraud,
becomes bad and unjust."

They are akin to rules of

geometry in that they form the
basis of the entire subject and "Agreement A fiction is a rule
are universally accepted as self of law that
evident and incontrovertible.
takes the place assumes something
of the law: the which is or may be
Maxim: a broad proposition, a number false as true.
express
of which have been used by lawyers
understanding h
since the 17th century or earlier. Much
of parties e t rut f
more general in scope than ordinary er o
supercedes such "Wh iction not
rules of law, legal maxims commonly f
formulate a legal policy or ideal that understanding is, does
as the law would law t. "
exis
judges are supposed to consider in
deciding cases. imply."

Truth is not only violated by falsehood; it may be equally outraged by silence.

33
 Why don't
people like
me?

Who
with are these
sour guns and people
of thce, natur what is
eir au e th
thor and limit e
ity? s

Are they mind controlled and immoral lizard alien

enforcers of the hidden Illuminati born of the depths
of Iniquity and raised to feed on the tears, blood
and sweat of innocent babies, trained to mindlessly
impose the will of the deceptive on the trusting
public? Do they love kicking puppies and throttling
baby monkeys? Are they mindless bloodsucking half
dead despicable Zombies who only want to hurt us and
beat us down? Are they the bullies from high school
who only want more power over their fellow man
because they are psychopathic power hungry donut
eating pepper spraying tax collecting tools of the
state?

This is a
gift

Or are they perhaps your

brothers, sisters,
fathers, mothers, cousins
and community members?
"If you don't run your own
34 life, somebody else will."
 Thank YOu for
Granting me Policy Enforcement Officer
jurisdiction. AKA
Law Enforcement Officer

y."
da
ry
ve
se
du
un
ror
su
es
on
ll
ma
ts
bu
Peace

,
me
Officer

co
m
ldo
se
ers
oth
lp
he
to
es
iti
tun
or
pp
to
rea
"G

They call themselves

Law Enforcement
Officers, but what thay
are really enforcing
are in fact statutes or
Acts.

They are defined as a

rule of a society which
has been given the
force of law.

PeACE Officers fundamental

duty is to 'keep the peace'.
This does not mean they have
the right to breach the peace
in order to enforce statutes.

Disobeying a statute is NOT a breach of the peace

35
 September 8, 1999
By Brigitte Greenberg, Associated Press

NEW HAVEN, Conn. (AP) --

The New London Police Department's rejection of Robert Jordan because he

scored too high on an intelligence test did not violate his rights, according to a
United States District Court Judge.
The city's rationale for the long-standing practice is that candidates who score
too high could soon get bored with police work and quit after undergoing costly
academy training.

The judge said there is no evidence that a high score is in any way related to job
satisfaction, performance or turnover. But he said: "The question is not whether a
rational basis has been shown for the policy chosen by defendants. Plaintiff may
have been disqualified unwisely, but he was not denied equal protection.''

In 1996, Robert Jordan scored a 33, the equivalent of an IQ of 125. Nationally

the average score for police officers, as well as office workers, bank tellers and
salespeople, is 21 to 22, the equivalent of an IQ of 104.

Police in New London, population 27,000, interviewed only those candidates

who scored 20 to 27.

City manager Richard Brown said the hiring process will remain the same.
"There has been nothing to come across my desk that would cause me to make
a change,'' he said."

Did anyone really think when tasers were being issued to cops that abuses wouldnt start to happen
and we begin the slide down the slippery slope? I remember when tasers were first introduced and
touted as a means for police to respond with non-lethal force when ordinarily they would have to use
their guns. Of course this would be great. Instead of being shot dead, a person would be tasered.

I think its time some news agency did a story on the ever evolving taser use plans based on their
original intention and what they are used for now. Now they are used anytime a cop feels their orders
are not being complied with fast enough, no matter how illogical, and often illegal, those orders may
be.

36
Where you find the laws most numerous, there you will find also the greatest injustice. Arcrsilaus

STATUTE: A legislated rule of a society which has been given the force of law .

YEs, Sign here and we A NEW LAW HAS BEEN PASSED!

will have authority over
you. And your actions.
And your money, your
life, children.
Why would I
want to do
that?
YOu wouldn't. That's
why we trick you into it.
Now sign here, it's the
Law.
YOu will read in the mainstream
media how the government has
passed a new law, when in reality
what they have passed is only a
law within the system or
structure which is applicable to
the government.
Laws cannot be 'passed' as then
they could be denied, and no man
has the power to deny basic law.
Can the people in the government
pass a law changing the law of
gravity or the power of truth? No
they can't. Can they with their
words create something that has
the power of either of those two
things? Never.

The only thing they can do with

their words is what you could do
with yours and this means all they
Must Means MAY can do is extended offers that if
you accept will be seen as having
law over you. Not because they
created the words alone, but
because you accepted them after
they created them.

Believe it or not not a

single word they
create that is not
supported by
ma
de
. universal truth can
Lm
an truly have the force
AL
se
are of law over you
e
Th without your consent.
LAWS CAN GIVE RISE TO FICTIONS. FICTIONS CANNOT GIVE RISE TO LAW. 37
 l e g a l
I l

Do you know the difference?

Means 'by form' and deals with the
letter of the law..
The terms lawful and legal differ
in that the former contemplates
the substance of law, whereas the
latter alludes to the form of law.
A lawful act is authorized,
sanctioned, or not forbidden by
law. A legal act is performed in
accordance with the forms and
usages of law, or in a technical
manner. In this sense, illegal
approaches the meaning of invalid.
For example, a contract or will,
executed without the required
formalities, might be regarded as
invalid or illegal, but could not
be described as unlawful.
The term lawful more clearly
suggests an ethical content than
does the word legal. The latter
merely denotes compliance with
technical or formal rules,
whereas the former usually
signifies a moral substance or
ethical permissibility. An
additional distinction is that the
word legal is used as the synonym
of constructive, while lawful is
not. Legal fraud is fraud implied
by law, or made out by
construction, but lawful fraud
would be a contradiction in terms.
Legal is also used as the
antithesis of equitable, just. As a
result, legal estate is the correct
usage, instead of lawful estate.
Under certain circumstances,
however, the two words are used
as exact equivalents. A lawful
writ, warrant, or process is the
same as a legal writ, warrant, or
process.

It is possible to engage in an activity which is entirely

lawful yet not done legally. Just because it was not
done legally does not necessarily mean it was done
illegally. Freedom is always acting lawfully, but never
legally.

38 "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere."

 Pretending to be the king in a fictional entity
IT'S GOOD
TO BE KING.
Remember, silence is consent and
if they call themselves "The
Crown in Right of Canada" and you
say nothing then they have
achieved the appearance of
consent needed to govern you
just like the Kings and Queens of
old used to do. The only reason
they can do it is not because of
divine right, but because of a claim
of right that you never
The good
addressed.
thing is it is never
too late to fix it.
The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor
to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.
In this case the Canada
referred to is not a
geographical area, but a
legal entity and one
registered as a
corporation in the US
Now as to the 'crown in Right'
that is just another way of
saying 'The President', 'The Big
Cheese', or 'the big kahuna'.
It is not the crown per se, but
someone acting or pretending
like it and who you choose to
follow, but are not obliged
to. They are merely playing a
role and you choose to accept
them in that role, even though
you do not have to do so.
The Crown in Right of Canada
is that because you have
never told them no, you are
not my crown and I don't
owe you anything. If you do
that where are they then?
Can they claim that because
they are pretending to be
your crown you must also?
39
 e?
am li
ke
n
a if
ve yo
ha u
u do No 'What' is not
yo n my name. Actually
't
em ha that would be a
th ve very stupid name
WHAT'S YOUR to a to give a child. It
NAME? is n
am
it would be cruel
t e even...
an he t
rt y
po ha
im ve
w n
ho o
po
ce w
ti er
o .
n
er
Ev

YOu are going

to tell me
your name!

'What' is NOT my name! I

WHAT is told you. Please stop
your calling me that or imposing
name??? upon me such a silly name.

40
"The mark of a stupid man is not that he does not know, it is that he does not want to know." - Michael H. Keehn

Tell me your
name!

I would love to help

you but I don't know if
you are acting legally
or lawfully or looking
for a legal name or
lawful name.

I am acting
legally! I
want your
legal name!

Do you have any

proof I have an
obligation to have
such a thing?

How can you demand I produce

something I am not obliged to have
in the first place? Say are you a
Um, actually peace officer and have you observed
no I don't... me breach the peace?

YOu can refuse intercourse with a peace offcer who has not observed you breach the peace 41
 What they don't tell you is that just
because they need to see it does not
I need to see mean you have to show it to them. They
your License! need to see it so they know they have a
right to enforce their will on you and
that you are subject to the statutes they
are enforcing.

If a cop stopped you and told

you he needed a Tuna Salad
Sandwich would that create a
obligation on you to give him
one?

Driver's License, Registration

and Insurance Please

Its called 'joinder'

and establishes that
you are existing
within the legislated
framework within
which their services
must be rendered.
Because of the
existence of
government issued
ID they can apply
duties to you. Is it something you must have,
or something they need to see?
If you beg for the benefits, you owe the duties

They rely on
intimidation and
ignorance in order to
get you to engage in
what are voluntary
actions. And then
they will point to
these voluntary
actions to claim they
have a right to
enforce their will on
the populace.

42 YOu have far fewer obligations then some want you to know
 What is your
date of Birth?

I think you have

been drinking...

well, go back to your

car, grab your box
come back here and
Wish I could help you but blow me.
honest I was not counting
then, and I have lost track a
few times since I did start
counting. So I honestly can't
tell you that.
WHAT?

al name
l .
na be
m
es to
ar it
e t
la an
w w
fu u
l. date of birth yo
Now we got you! ver
No te
t
al ha
w
l is
ar e
e
'l am
eg n
al l
'. fu
w
la
ur
Yo
There is a reason they ask you for A legal name evidences a legal entity
your name and date of birth. It is with and thus one that can be legally acted
those two pieces of information that upon. IT evidences your 'person' the
they can claim you are acting as a legal subject or substance of which
person. as a human being you can't the rights and duties are attributes. It
truly know when you were born so the is evidence of you agreeing to exist as
only thing you can describe is the date a commercial entity and to operate
of birth of a legal person. When they within their structure, but there is
ask for a name, you can give them absolutely no obligation on you to do
whatever name you want if you are so. And if you don't the only power
acting lawfully and not engaging in they can claim is the power to keep the
fraud. Additionally, you have no peace and they have no legal
obligation to have a 'legal right to force you to
name'. transact with them.
Giving a false legal name is a crime. Not having one isn't. There is no such thing as an unlawful name. 43
TO: Cnst Tupper and Sarah (AKA 'Peppermint Patty' and 'Marcie') North Vancouver
RCMP Detachment
CC: All Peace Officers in British Columbia,
CC: TWIMC

Hello and good day! I am Robert-Arthur: Menard, a non-consenting and

ungoverned Freeman-on-the-Land. I am the Director of the Elizabeth Anne Elaine
Society and the Director of ThinkFREE.ca We work together as organizations
dedicated to creating a freer and more just society, where authority is gained
without deception and exercised with restraint, understanding, accountability and
compassion. We employ only lawful tools specifically but not limited to
seminars, printed publications, advocacy, public activism and lawful claims.
Recognizing the importance of peace, we employ words designed to create a
greater abundance of that commodity for us all.

This does not mean we shy from our duty of speaking truth to power, only that we
will try to do so in a manner that serves human dignity. Allow me to share a
little about me. I love God, the child Elizabeth, this Country and the Law. I will
not be abandoning any of them, nor will I be breaking my existing Oaths to them.
I recognize and embrace a duty of compassion to my fellow man and a duty of
respect to office holders. I do not harm without provocation and I will not
accept subjugation or any form of governance without my consent. I follow My
Soul and will not accept that some stranger using words alien to me can craft
laws completely devoid of love, compassion and truth and claim they are law over
me. They are deceivers, and I do not accept them or their words.

It is a mixed pleasure for me to be able to start this correspondence with

appreciation for the way the officers I met exercised their authority. Although
not perfect, they were at least moderately professional, somewhat courteous
and by acting with some compassion, earned a little of my respect and gave me
something precious. Their actions gave me hope and allows me to believe that the
coming shift can in fact be a positive one, where change results not in destruction
but positive growth. By responding with such professionalism, courtesy and
restraint in the face of the frustration that I seem to naturally create merely by
being me, these officers brought to your detachment, force and other officer
holders some much needed public esteem, and for that I am thankful and
appreciative.

44
However, on the day I was pulled over by two female officers, whom I call
'Peppermint Patty and Marcie', only because one looked just like Peppermint Patty
and the other deferred to the Peppermint Patty looking one, I saw a complete
lack of understanding concerning the source, nature and limits of authority, as
they exited Equity to affect that which existed only at Law. It is akin to a security
guard at a private party who leaves the party to cross the road, attack people in
the park and kidnapping them, drags them into the house party and attempts to
punish them for what they did outside the party, because doing so inside the party
would be against the rules. This is what happens when those entrusted with
security fail to acknowledge the limits of their authority, which in order to be
lawful, must always exist.

I am not a person in the legal entity known as The Province of British Columbia
and yet was treated like one by Peppermint Patty and Marcie even though no one
saw evidence of an equity relationship between myself and that fiction. They saw
no ID or anything else issued to me by that legal entity. They saw a human being
in the geographical area known as British Columbia and then assumed I was also a
'person' in 'The Province of British Columbia.” The first is a geographical area; the
second is a legal fiction, and people simply can't exist within it without doing so
through an association with a fictional person. They did not know this and
therefore are guilty of gross negligence which I am sure you must know is equal
to FRAUD. Additionally, one gave me an order in a common law jurisdiction which I
accepted under protest and duress. Perhaps you do not know what the legal
significance of operating under protest is, but ignorance of the law is no excuse
for breaking it and by ordering me, they became liable for a bill. Orders
generate bills. Ask any waitress, lawyer or judge. They now owe me and I do
intend to see payment. The reason they owe me is because I have a fee schedule
filed as well as notices and claims allowing me to make these claims. Their
principal was aware of this and if they failed to inform their underlings, that is
not my fault. The reason I will see payment secured is because I am bound by My
Faith to do so, although I am also bound to give you a great big fat out. We will
discuss that later in this missive.

I claim you owe me $2000 per hour or portion thereof for anything I do as a
result of an order accepted and fulfilled under protest. If you do not know
what the commercial and legal significance of operating under protest is, I
suggest you see a lawyer. Trust me on this though, you owe me $8000. Because
you were marginally professional and courteous, I will immediately halve that.
You now owe me $4000. Also, the RCMP as a whole owe me the same amount, for I
am claiming punitive and exemplary damages. I will be collecting from them as
well, and if necessary will do so completely lawfully by eventually seizing and
auctioning off one of their vehicles. I believe it is not theft if you have a default
judgement allowing you to seize and sell in order to recover on a lawful debt.

45
 Perhaps you are wondering how I will do any of these things, as I am sure you are
thinking “The courts won't allow that; they are on our side.” Here is where you
really need some education. I will be if necessary convening a court and using a
Notary Public to conduct the first part concerning the exchange of affidavits and
establishment of facts. You will have to respond by way of a sworn affidavit
submitted to the Notary Public holding court. If you fail a default judgement
will be secured and collection proceedings initiated. If you do respond, you
will have to do so under your full commercial liability and under oath. If you
are found saying untrue things or expressing falsehoods under oath, you risk
facing criminal charges of gross negligence and abduction under the colour of
law. If you don't think I can do such a thing with a Notary, you need to read
Section 18 of the Notary Act. They are the joker of the deck and can do anything,
you, a judge or a sheriff can do. They are all powerful when they choose to
serve justice. They are the lawful witnesses to process and standards. Notary
Publics ROCK.

As you said when you were giving me a copy of a bill of exchange which you refused
to present properly, breaking the law has consequences. However what you did
not realize at the time you spoke is that it is you will meet the consequences, as
it is you who broke the law, and I will be proving that to a very high degree. I
will promise to attempt to do so mindful of your professionalism and with
regard to the courtesy to which I was treated.

I am aware that you must have felt I was breaking the law and that you were
responding lawfully to my perceived transgressions of the law. You feel you
have colour of right, but this colour of right is due only to you failing to
perform due diligence. Your perception must change. However what you then
pointed to was an Act or statute, and they simply do not have to force of law
over those who do not consent. You can evidence their consent by seeing
government issued ID. If you don't see that however, how do you know I do
consent? Will you bring your gun to bear and use that to generate consent and
then claim you were acting lawfully?

At no point in time did I identify myself as a person in The Province of British

Columbia; you claimed that and continued to do so even though you never saw
evidence thereof and i told you I was a Freeman-on-the-Land. Did you find ID? Did
you find ANYTHING issued to me by them resulting from an act of application on my
part? No you did not. So what makes you think I am a person in the Province of
British Columbia if not your own gross negligence? What exactly did I do that
would make you think that the Motor Vehicle Act is my law? What evidence do you
have I consented to such a thing? You have nothing and yet still you felt
comfortable and justified in bringing an implied threat of violence against a
Freeman-on-the-Land and claimed the right and power to do so under statutorily
granted authority. You saw no breach of the peace nor were you informed of one;
you stopped me merely to enforce a statute even though the statute you sought
to enforce does not enjoy the force of law over me.

And you wanted to lecture me about 'consequences'?

46
Peppermint Patty, let us examine your beliefs and then using logic, reason and the
law, my very mighty pen will destroy all those false assumptions. Before I do
so, I would like to again commend you on your level of professionalism,
restraint and compassion and I hope you realize my goal is to increase your
understanding without attacking any of the good attributes you have already
demonstrated as possessing.

1. You assumed Acts are laws.

2. You assumed all automobiles are motor vehicles and subject to the Motor
Vehicle Act.

3. You assumed all people in British Columbia are also persons in the Province
of British Columbia.

4. You assumed you could give orders and not be personally liable for a bill.

1 - An Act is not a law; it is a statute and defined as a legislated rule of society

which has been given the force of law. A society is defined as a number of people
joined by mutual consent to deliberate, determine and act for a common goal.
See the mutual consent part? If you have no evidence that I am a consenting
member of a legally nameable society, why are you attempting to enforce
statutes against me like they are my law?

2 - As for your mistaken belief that all automobiles are also motor vehicles, the
facts of the matter are, if you read the Motor Vehicle Act carefully you will see
that although they do define a motor vehicle, it simply is not a full and complete
definition, and if you assume it is, you will not know the truth. Is it a full and
complete definition? Is 'accident' fully and completely defined, because if not,
then either none are or some are and some aren't and there is a mechanism in
place for determining such things. I see no such mechanism. Plus when I look to
Section 3.1 I see that the owner must apply for an receive insurance and
registration and you likely interpret this as an obligation on me and empowering
to you.

However, the word must is not always an imperative and can be used to describe
situations which if voluntarily fulfilled will grant authority. If I say you must
come to my party through the front door' does that create an obligation to
attend or merely describe the conditions which if voluntarily fulfilled will
grant me power over you, as you will be in my party? The word apply legally
means to beg, and since no one is ever obliged to beg, no one is ever obliged to
apply. Unregistered automobiles are not motor vehicles and thus not subject to
the Motor Vehicle Act. You will likely not like that truth, as it negatively affects
your ability to claim and exercise authority and like all people, you do not wish
to interpret anything in a manner that dis-empowers you; it is against human
nature.

47
3 – Although I will agree that generally speaking a person is a human being, when
it comes to the law that is not the case, as the law uses legalese and as it is a
complex and professional jargon. When you see the word person in a statute, it
is referring to a legal subject or substance of which the rights and duties are
attributes and which exists in an association with our bodies, provided we consent
to it. See the thing is, The Province of British Columbia is not a geographical area,
but a man-made legal fiction, and just as a human being cannot exist within a novel
or other work of fiction, but characters representing human can, so too is the
case here. As I human being I exist in British Columbia. IF I choose to be
governed and regulated, ordered and controlled, then I will agree to having a
person upon which you can act and which will effect my body as long as I maintain
a free association with it. If however I disassociate from it, you can no longer
claim to be acting on a 'person' in 'The Province of British Columbia'.

4 – You gave me an order, and you accepted my performance of service under

protest and duress. Perhaps you have been giving such orders for so long and
have achieved such compliance through intimidation that you are unfamiliar with the
truth. Anyone in a common law jurisdiction who gives an order for performance is
immediately liable for a bill. This goes for judges, police and government
agents. You can't escape the law and the law says that bills follow orders and
orders generate bills. If anyone else goes to a restaurant, places and order
and receives service are they not then liable for a bill? Do you claim the right to
go to a restaurant, place an order and not be liable for a bill? If not, under
what function of law can you place an order on someone outside a restaurant and
not still be liable for the bill your order generates? So you know, this process
has been tried and tested in New Zealand, another common law jurisdiction, and
payment was secured form the Judge for his order. If a Judge in a common law
jurisdiction recognizes that orders from anyone to anyone generates a lawful
bill, why can't you? You owe me for services rendered under protest and duress
and upon a previously filed and served fee schedule.

Let us discuss your big fat out. All I want to see is you promise to serve the Law
before you serve the courts or the government, and realize that your
fundamental duty is in fact to do so. All you have to do is realize that a Claim of
Right served and not disputed does in fact create lawful excuse to disobey court
orders and disregard statutes, orders, regulations and bylaws. People who
lawfully create and walk that path should not be hindered, harmed or hampered in
any way, and if you do hinder, harm or hamper, the Law allows us remedy and we may
bring it to bear against you. I sincerely hope we do not have to do so, and I see
that all I have to do is get you to agree to serve the Law first and the courts and
governments second, and you will been seen as heroes of this Nation, for holding
them both to the Law and fulfilling your most fundamental duty of office. It is
the people in power who are the most tempted and who can do the most harm, and
as such they must bear the greatest watching.

48
I need you to agree that the courts and government are in fact merely man made
organizations manned by men and women who are in fact burdened with basic
human frailties. Agree that the Criminal Code does in fact allow for lawful
excuse to disregard both courts and legislatures and their bureaucratic
offshoots if we act upon a properly filed claim of right. Once we do so, stand
ready and firm to refuse to enforce any statute or court order against those
who have lawfully created lawful excuse. If you do so, there is no chance of a
police state developing in Canada, as you will be good and proper peace
officers, serving the Law first, and not the people who sit in higher offices at the
expense of justice.

The future police force will not be about tougher, more intimidating and
forceful cops, as you will not be dealing with those type of people. It will be
about more intelligent, informed and compassionate peace officers, as you will
be dealing with people who refuse to be subservient; they will present bills for
accepting orders; they will question the meaning of every word; and they will
ultimately hold you accountable. This is what is coming and I will tell you how
I know. I am working my ass off to achieve it. And, when sacrificing ass, I tend
to make my efforts count.

I tried to have caused to be published in The Gazette a Notice of Understanding

and Intent and Claim of Right, or as it is called in the Criminal Code of Canada,
lawful excuse. As they refuse to print it, I shall be serving you that claim and
your officers personally. And on camera. Unless someone in your organization
is willing to claim otherwise, the rights I claimed are law and anyone attempting
to enforce court orders or statutes against me without making claim first is
committing an unprovoked assault and liable for damages and may be defended
against.

There is another reason this is coming. We are Canadian. And pay VERY close
attention to this part: WE OUT NUMBER YOU VERY BADLY. And as peaceful and well
mannered as we can be, wake our ire and you will pay very dearly. We are not
sheep; we are peaceful, patient and perhaps slumbering guards dogs, and it will
be your greatest woe if we wake to you shearing our freedoms and rights,
stealing our wealth or harming our families and country. You will be made to
pay. When I say you will pay, I do mean very dearly indeed.

I did not like my sanity being questioned unprofessionally by someone who has
no training in the health field and has demonstrated their own brand of
questionable beliefs and sanity. Let us ask some very difficult questions, ok?
Let us ask: Who is crazier?

49
 ● Is it those who apply for permission to engage in completely lawful
activities without ever even reading the Act under which they are applying?
●
● Is it you for thinking I or any other adult can be governed without consent
or for thinking that in a common law jurisdiction ANYONE can give an order
to another while wearing a gun and implying the use of force without having
to pay a bill? Is it you for thinking a body of words which you do not even
understand nor authored grants you unlimited power over me even though
to you those words are not understood?
●
● Or is it me, a man with a rather high IQ, who has read and de-constructed
these Acts and realized that without my consent they are not law?

I think I am in fact the sanest one of the group, and the one with the gun, pointing
to words they do not understand to claim the power a gun provides over the
unarmed, are the most dangerous and could easily and may even likely be,
psychotic. Psychopaths want power without understanding or accountability. Do
you understand section 126 and 127 of the Criminal Code? How about Section 337
and Section 39? Those are just some of the sections we can use to control YOU.
If you don't understand those Sections, how can you possibly claim to serve the
law?

There is coming a large and fundamental change in the relationship between the
government and the people, and you will be playing a major role. Like all
heroes in any great story, you will face a very difficult decision, and you will be
expected to carry the consequences of your decision without moaning or
bitching. If you make the wrong decision, you will be seen as the villains in this
story, and dealt with as such.
You will serve the courts and the government or you will serve the law. I know
you want to do all three, but unfortunately you will have to choose. I do not
envy you your position, as you will have to choose who or what you will serve.
Will you serve the government and the courts even when those people abandon
law and are nothing more than frauds? Or will you serve the law, and hold the
courts and the government accountable to it? (More accurately you will be
holding the people who we trusted with the courts and the government
accountable to the law) What will you do when the people of Canada wake to
their fraud and start revoking consent to be represented and governed? Will
you hold the people who are employed by the courts and the government
accountable to the law, or will you claim law is whatever the fraudsters say it
is, because they are the 'government' and the 'courts'? Who will you serve? Who
is first? Is it the courts? The government? Or the Law?

50
I don't blame you alone; I realize that the lawyers have crafted such an
incredibly ambiguous and convoluted set of words that it is very hard to
determine what our rights and duties are. You people do your best to do your
jobs as you see it, and yet what you see is a great big deception, thanks mostly
to the lawyers who craft very deceptive rules using a language that only looks
like English, but isn't really. The lawyers like this, as it generates conflict and
that is where they make their money; by generating and continuing conflict.
However, you do walk around with a gun, point to those words and use them to
claim authority over your fellow man and you are willing to threaten violence
to secure that power over them. Your willingness to blindly accept those
words as law over everyone is actually evidence not of your desire to serve,
but your desire to command, order and compel without accountability or
responsibility. You like your power, eh?

So will you serve the Law when you are called to do so, even if it means your
power and authority to command, compel and order is greatly diminished by
doing so? Will you accept the role of humble hero? Or will you, like the Nazis
of Germany, claim that your authority IS the Law and that all you need to
determine the law and your level of authority are your guns?

Who do you serve? We need to know. If you say you serve the Law, we do not
need to create and empower a brand new police force specifically equipped and
trained to deal with peace officers who fail to serve the Law, which is what you
will be doing by attempting to hold any Freeman-on-the-Land to a statutory
obligation or order of the court.

There is a new crop of children coming and they are simply ungovernable without
good reason. They are driving their parents nuts now and when they get to 18
years of age, they will simply laugh at anyone who tries to claim words they did
not author or agree to are their law. The next generation is as different from
this generation as we were from our parents. There is a very big shift coming,
and you people can fight to contain it, which will result in your destruction, or
be wise enough to work with it.
I know an 8 year old child, who will simply refuse any directives from her
parents unless they can explain to her the justice of it. She has no fear and
refuses to go against her spirit. There are millions of these children out there
and you people will be dealing with them. Raised by people who have very good
reason to not trust the courts or the government, this next batch of citizens
will be holding you supposedly public servants to task.

Especially if I have any say in the matter.

When the next generation reaches maturity, they will know how to create lawful
excuse by way of a claim of right published properly and will be completely
free of the deception we have laboured under. That is my lawful and honourable
goal.

51
In reviewing the ticket you gave me, I noticed that you put on there a certain
number and claimed that I was associated with that number. As I did not show you
any document with that number on it, nor did I associate myself with in in anyway,
nor did I authorize you to do so, it is clear to me you committed a fraud. Under
what authority did you associate me with a number which expired over 5 years ago?
You were not acting as my agent, you had no authority to do so, and you did put
false information on an official document. That is another crime you committed,
either knowingly and willingly, or out of ignorance and negligence. A gross
level of negligence.
You committed a fraud and as such you are a criminal. Do you agree, or are you one
of those people who thinks that because you are a cop, you are the law and thus can
do no wrong?
Here are some questions for you. I will be making a claim against you, swearing
out an Affidavit and presenting you through a Notary with my bill. If you fail to
respond or fail to respond by way of a sworn Affidavit, a default judgement will
be secured allowing me to collect upon my bill. Breaking the law has
consequences for you too, you know. And the fact is on the day you stopped me, it
is you who broke the law Peppermint Patty, not I.

1. When did I either associate or empower you to associate me with a Drivers

License number?
2. When did I claim to know my date of birth? If I did not claim it, then why did
you put information on a commercial instrument when the only information
you could have possibly used was all hearsay?
3. What would cause you to believe that all automobiles are motor vehicles if
not your own gross negligence when Section 3.1 of the Motor Vehicle Act
clearly states that an owner must apply for registration and insurance
before you can consider it a motor vehicle?
4. When did I identify myself as a 'person' in 'The Province of British Columbia'?
5. Do you distinguish between British Columbia the geographical area and The
Province of British Columbia the legal entity?
6. If you do not distinguish how can you lawfully do your job without being
grossly negligent?
7. Why is the fact that I accepted your orders under protest and duress recorded
on my electronic recording device but not in your notes when you promised to
ensure that you would do your duty and record said protest?
8. How is that not evidence of gross negligence, professional misconduct and
fraud?
9. Do you distinguish between statute and Law and if not how can you do your job
without being grossly negligent?
10. Are you aware that failure to record my protest and the fact that I was
accepting orders under duress is obstruction of justice?
11. Do you acknowledge that Section 39 of the Criminal Code of Canada allows
anyone to use whatever level of force is required to keep our property if it
held under a claim of right even against someone who (because of their own
gross negligence and lack of diligence) feels they have the legal right to
that property? Are you aware this means that if you try taking someones
unregistered automobile with your hand on your gun, and that automobile is
held under a claim of right, that you can be lawfully shot and killed?

52
12. Do you acknowledge that Sections 126 and 127 allow for us to completely
disregard court orders and statutes, bylaws and regulations if we have
lawful excuse to do so, and that according to Section 39 a claim of right
is a lawful excuse?
13. Do you accept that if someone like you, by this I mean armed and ignorant,
attempts to enforce court orders or statutes or bylaws against someone
who has lawful excuse or claim of right then you are committing an
unprovoked assault?
14. Do you acknowledge that the people of Canada have the right to defend
themselves against any unprovoked assaults, even if those doing the
assaulting believe they have the legal right to do so?
15. Are you aware the people of Canada do in fact have the right to carry
firearms if they do so under a claim of right?
16. Do you acknowledge that the people of Canada who have secured the right
to carry a sidearm by way of a claim of right have the right to use that
sidearm to defend themselves against unprovoked assaults, especially
those initiated by people who are criminally negligent of the limits of
their authority?
17. Are you aware that attempting to enforce a statute against a Freeman-on-
the-Land is an unprovoked assault?
18. Do you acknowledge that attempting to associate me with an expired drivers
licence number without my consent is an act of fraud and a perversion of
justice?
19. Are you aware that under Section 18 of the Notary Act any Notary Public can
convene a proper court for the determination of facts prior to the
application of the Law?
20. Are you aware that they do have the power to create default judgements
which the Sheriffs and their Deputies must accept as lawful under Section 6
of the Sheriffs Act?
21. Are you aware I am convening just such a court, and therein you will either
submit Affidavits which will highlight your fraud and ignorance, or you will
do nothing and I will secure by default a court order empowering me or
my agents or the Bailiff to seize and sell ANY RCMP VEHICLE in North
Vancouver? You do realize the RCMP is a legally nameable and thus suable
entity do you not?
22. Are you aware that the Violation Ticket you endorsed is in fact and by
definition a bill of exchange?
23. Are you aware that by refusing to give me the original you committed fraud,
as it was never properly presented and I am not a legal fiction?
24. Can you explain how a human being, a living breathing flesh and blood man
can exist within the legal fiction known as The Province of British
Columbia, or do you acknowledge your inability to do so is evidence of
your own ignorance and gross negligence?

53
25. Are you aware gross negligence is equal to fraud?
26. Are you aware that Canada is a common law jurisdiction where the only form
of government is a representative one and that representation requires
mutual consent?
27. Do you acknowledge that people who deny consent to be represented cannot
be lawfully governed, regulated or have statutes applied to them?
28. Are you aware that the peoples right to revoke consent is the greatest tool
ever devised to peacefully ensure complete government accountability and
compliance with the law?
29. Do you agree the only people who would not accept that we have a right to say
no to their rules and governance must be motivated not by justice or law
but by desire for control and power and thus are likely the least suitable
to have power?
30. Are you aware that it is unlawful to exit Equity in order to latch onto and
drag into Equity that which previously existed only at Law? Are you aware
that is what you did when you pulled me over?
31. Are you aware that statutes are not laws but are in fact 'Acts' and they only
enjoy the force of law with our consent?
32. Are you aware I have already constructively revoked consent and that by your
actions you activated my fee schedule, which has also been previously
served?
33. Do you agree that by acting with such a high level of gross negligence and
ignorance you have brought the RCMP and the administration of justice into
disrepute and created liability upon your principals?
34. Do you agree that the people of British Columbia have a right to justice and
that when the people entrusted with providing us with that become so tainted
by ignorance and corruption we have the right to create a new police force
specifically designed not to enforce statutes against the populace, but to
enforce the Law against presently existing peace officers?
35. Do you agree that you gave me an order and that in this common law
jurisdiction you are now liable for a bill? If not can you explain the
function of law which would allow you in this common law jurisdiction where
equality is paramount to give an order, not be liable for a bill, and not
offend the concept of equality?
36. If you are incapable of answering the above question do you agree you
committed a fraud?

So to sum up. I feel I am owed by certain officers and your organization in

general. I will forego making any demand for payment, recognizing these are
difficult and changing times provided you publicly acknowledge by way of a widely
published Notice, that you will serve the Law first and hold those in office and
sitting in court accountable to it. It is really not mush to ask, and if you do so,
you will be seen as heroes of this country. If you refuse to do so, you quickly
become quite useless and dangerous to us. Our words gave you your power, our
words can take it away.

54
Will you as peace officers in this common law jurisdiction serve the Law first
and foremost and above all else?

1. You will be getting a bill. If you do not pay it I will take lawful measures
to collect.
2. The RCMP will be getting a bill. If they do not pay I will take lawful steps
to collect.
3. All my property including the 1991 Nissan is held by me under a claim of
right as per Section 39 of the Criminal Code and thus I may use force to
stop even people like you from taking my property.
4. You now know that attempting to seize my property or enforce statutes or
court orders against me is an unprovoked assault.
5. You now know I have every right in the world to defend myself from
unprovoked assaults even those committed by ignorant and negligent
peace officers.
6. You now know this is not a threat or a challenge or an invitation to
violence merely a statement that I have the right to use violence if you try
to take my property.
7. You now know that because I have that right, there is no way for you to
claim the same right, as to do so would run directly counter to the law,
its very purpose and reason for existence, which is peace. Two cannot
claim the right to use violence to protect property as that would
guarantee conflict. The inclusion of one must exclude the other, and I
have the right to use violence to stop you from taking my property thus
you do not.
8. You now know I do not consent to governance and I do not exist as a
person in The Province of British Columbia and thus I have activated the
defences available to us all in Section 126 and 127 of the Criminal Code of
Canada.
9. You now know that unless you can answer the questions I posed you are
not suitable to be a peace officer in a common law jurisdiction, as you are
too ignorant of the law and too attached to your authority, so attached
you do not care about its limits, nature or source.
10. You know that a claim to create a new police force empowered only to
arrest people like yourself is in the works, and when that day comes, you
can and will be held accountable for your acts of negligence and fraud.
11. You know that a violation ticket matches the definition of a bill of exchange
and that by not presenting the original you are completely and solely
liable for that bill.
12. You know that failure to distinguish between statutes and law is in fact
grossly negligent and that said level of negligence is equal to fraud.
13. You know I think you look just like Peppermint Patty.

55
 There will be other things you will be learning, but I don't want your little
head to explode!

This Notice will be published and widely distributed. I do so in the interest of

justice and out of love for my country. Not the corporation that has hijacked
it or the people who operate without liability through that corporation, but
the people of the country who have been so badly deceived and who are held in
place subject to that deception by people like yourself, who claim authority to
enforce the law without ever even really learning to distinguish between law
and statute. And you wonder why we look at you with distrust and
apprehension? It is not that we don't like the law; it is that you have
abandoned it out of your own fear and lust for power.

Accept that we actually have the right to refuse to be governed and that we
have the power to disobey court orders and statutes if we do so properly and
you will be serving the law. Fail to do so and we will all know that you are
not peace officers at all. You are merely people wearing the uniforms of
peace officers and you have hijacked our country. I have seen movies where
bank robbers dress like security guards. I think that may be the case here.
You wear the uniform, but you do not serve the law at all, you act like
mindless unthinking automatons who merely accept blindly the orders of
those who are above you and think that because you are accepting orders you
must be acting lawfully. You fail to accept that the people above you are
bound by the law also, and you allow them to subjugate and enslave us with
deception, and you claim you are peace officers even though your actions
clearly result in conflict and profit for the lawyers.

I am including a copy of my challenge which I have extended to all peace

officers. As some of the things I wish to debate are highlighted by your
actions, I think you will be homesteading in the land of dishonour if you do not
personally accept my challenge. You wish to make claims against me, why don't
you grow a pair and stand publicly to defend your beliefs? Why doesn't one of
your principals? There is only one reason: YOU ALL KNOW YOU ARE WRONG AND
INVOLVED IN UNLAWFUL DECEPTION AND FRAUD.

Or you are afraid to be proved wrong, which means there must be a part of your
mind that has some doubt. Are you scared of the Law? Are you scared to
debate it with me? Are you scared to make your claims anywhere except the
presently existing apparently hijacked courts? You really do not want to take
a close look at the source, nature or limits of your authority do you, because
if you did you know you would find you have far less than you have been claiming
and you have been actively engaged in fraud.

56
Well, I have much to do in order to lay a foundation allowing us to lawfully
create our new police force so we can bring many big men with big guns to bear
against people like you. As this process will involve making public claims, I
will be sure to serve you a copy of it and allow you an opportunity to dispute
the rights claimed within.

I am sorry that this is what must apparently happen, but the law provides us
remedy when people like you commit fraud or are otherwise grossly negligent,
and you people do not seem inclined to serve the law first and your political
masters second. Sorry, but with your ignorance and arrogance you have made
this a necessity.
Sincerely and without malice aforethought, ill will, vexation or frivolity,

Robert-Arthur: Menard
Freeman-on-the-Land
All Rights Reserved, Exercised at Will and Fully Defended by the Grace of God
All Property including my body held under a claim of right as per Section 39 of
the Criminal Code.
Lawful Excuse Established as per Sections 126 and 127 of the Criminal Code of
Canada

The Elizabeth Anne Elaine Society

Justice is Truth in Action

Oh CRAP

Call The RCMP and ask

them about the concepts
expressed here. FInd
out the truth!

57
 Brett Dennen - Ain't No Reason

Prison walls still standing tall,

Some things never change at all.
Keep on buildin’ prisons, gonna fill them all,
Keep on buildin’ bombs, gonna drop them all.
Working your fingers bear to the bone,
Breaking your back, make you sell your soul.
Like a lung that’s filled with coal, suffocatin’ slow.
The wind blows wild and I may move,
But politicians lie and I am not fooled.
You don't need no reason or a three piece suit to argue the truth.
The air on my skin and the world under my toes,
Slavery stitched into the fabric of my clothes,
Chaos and commotion wherever I go, love I try to follow.

Love will come set me free

Love will come set me free, I do believe
Love will come set me free, I know it will
Love will come set me free, yes.

58
 AN ELIZABETH ANNE ELAINE SOCIETY
AND
THINKFREE.CA PUBLICATION

by freeman-on-the-land Robert-arthur: Menard 59

 YOu have an important you think you want to be a 'driver' of a 'motor
decision to make vehicle'...

but if you think before you

apply for a license...

like a mouse thinks

it wants cheese.

Concept by Robert-Arthur: Menard.

an elizabeth anne elaine society and
thinkfree.ca Work.
you will start to...

60
in school you are conditioned to look at
the teacher as the authority with a
principal above them. if you get the
teacher mad they send you to the
principal's office...

where you may be or sent to detention...

punished...

or have a
permanent record!

but you are about

to learn things
they do not want
you to know.

the end result is you

ARE conditioned to think
and act like you have
superiors, and bound by
their will

activities like...

and when you know these

things you will not be
asking anyone for
permission to engage in
lawful activities
traveling!
61
 what about
cherries??? they
lied!!!!

believe
if you ple
the ap y, you
analoglieve that
will be omobiles
all aut o motor
are alss... but
vehicleon't tell
they d e whole
you th
an apple is a
story. round red fruit

if yo
livin u make y
g on o
your au highw the ur
become tomobile then ay as a
vehicle s a motor therefore all round have you nee driver
registe when you red fruit are apples but a licens d to
then it r it and doinif all youe...
to the is subject fromg is goin are
statuteapplicable for
s
poin
t a t
g
before s. not reas o m e ot o b
. the ron, you her
ight h
to d ave
o so
.

62
 for must registe
O U m u s t apply be motor vehic r your
Y ense to VOLUNTARIL le
your lic TO ENGAGE Y
r
a drive MERCE ON
IN COM HWAY
THE HIG

you must be
licensed...
just like me.
THERE'S AN
OBLIGATION
UP HERE SOME
WHERE

you
able need to
betw to dist be
you have always had rights and they do and een yo inguish
not exist because of the government. yourother p ur head
anat arts
omy of
They OFTEN exist in spite of the .
government.

63
 we of course want young
travelers to be responsible,
capable and competent and there
should be a way to ensure they
are all those...
without resorting
to deception which
will always give
rise to tyranny
and oppression.

we do have rights, and some even

fought for those. and Not so we
could all be gradually enslaved
by a planned encroachment on
those very precious things.

64
yet still there are those who will
get us to do so. to seek their
permission to do the most basic
things. if we want to dance they
want us to seek their permission
first...

if we wish to jump they want

to be the ones to decide how
high we can go, yet they
themselves never jump with
joy, or dance.

Am I not destroying my enemies when I make friends of them? Abraham Lincoln 65

 we are cognizant, aware,
capable of breath,
thought, love, choice and
freewill.

we are living stardust

and we do not need to
ask another's
permission to exist...

66
 and they do it with...

..
must act
sub
mit l y
p
he ed
in
ap
register
i t h t eceiv heir
w r t
n e itg you with s
o d d
is d nin ple or
It nditio.. couicky w
co ool. Y tr
sch Y VER
VER

and social conditioning and because you act like a child....

This is not
good...

I smell blood...

I will make
a
complaint!

I'm going to
Disney Land!

they get to treat you like one.

everyone wants to fit in right?

complaints are not claims and can be dismissed. Children complain. Adults Claim. 67
 Infants have rights. Adolescents have Freedoms. Adults have duties.

did you read the applicable

legislation before or after you you look legally like a child.
begged for your license? have you
ever even read it? how do you know
you need permission if you never
even read it?

r
sks fo
who a sion to l
permise in lawfu
engag ies???
activit

there is a thing called due

diligence and when you rush to
get permission before even
knowing if you really need it....

68
 how to get back what you gave away...

Never forget, deception on their part relies upon ignorance on yours

D
U NEE r hold your
p
R
O e
ST Yregist bile. a claim of roperty under
I r
F
de- mo A fee schedu ight and have a
TO r auto ES IS le served.
you IT TAK TICE.
ALL PLE NO
SIM

This is so
easy...

Just step back Jack

ser
und ve a no
EXP erstan tice o
L
TO AININ ding a f
BE T GW nd
THE
M T HE TRU HAT YO intent
OD
ISC TH. IN U BELI
YOu are free to
USS VIT EVE dance, you are
... E
free to travel,
you are free to
be. yOu are as
free as you
think you can
be.
You have a right to travel, just like you have a right to dance. 69
 registration -
application - this word means
historically this was
the act of a ship's to beg , plead, petition, implore or
captain signing over his entreat. no one ever forced you to
ship to a harbor master beg. ever. you did that voluntarily.
for safe keeping. the
hARBOR MASTER WAS
THEN SEEN AS THE
TEMPORARY OWNER, OR
TRUSTEE. THAT IS WHAT
HAPPENS WHEN YOU
REGISTER YOUR AUTO.
THEY NOW OWN IT, YOU
GET TO STILL USE IT.

YOU SHOULD KNOW FROM WHOM YOU BEG...

submission - this word means to must - if I tell you that you must
agree to the will of another or to leave come to my party through the front
something to another's discretion. door does that mean you have an
obligation to attend?

or am i describing
conditions which if you
again it must be voluntary. and what voluntarily fulfill
will give me authority over
if you don't want to submit? you?

70 They get power when you submit application for registration

 Just Telling
it like it is...

WHEN YOU DE-REGISTER

YOUR PROPERTY YOU ARE
LETTING THE SO CALLED
AUTHORITIES KNOW THAT
YOU NO LONGER AGREE
THAT YOUR PROPERTY IS
THEIRS TO CARE FOR AND
CONTROL AS IT IS NO
LONGER LEGALLY
INVESTED WITH THE
STATUS OF MOTOR
VEHICLE.. OF

Tell them what you

understand, accept
and comprehend.
Share with them
your beliefs and do
it in an open and
honorable manner.

Tell them what

your intent is
and explain why Under the Law a clAIm of
you think it is a right is lawful excuse
proper course for refusing to obey
of action. courts and
governments. They are
easy to make and serve
Honorab and if you claim the right
l
discussio y Offer to exist without others
you may n so governing you, they have
n
if neede egotiate to claim the right to
d.
regulate you without
your consent. The
If they say nothing government has already
and do nothing they accepted we have the
have with their silence
They will not like this agreed with you. right to do these things.
at all, as it is through See the letter above?
this mechanism they
can collect money
from you.

With notices and claims you can establish your rights as you see them. 71

A driver is actually
someone that is paid to
deliver people of goods.
If you are operating a
taxi service you are a
driver, otherwise you can
be a traveller.
So my mommy is not a
driver, because she is
not being paid. Why
does she need a
license?

Are you a
driver? Do
you really
know what a
'driver' is?

when it comes to any

modern day conveyance,
there are owners, drivers,
passengers and guests.
The owner does not have to
pay to ride and can decide
who a guest can be and
decides the rate passengers
must pay. An owner can
also choose to pay the fare
and by so doing secure the
right to sue the driver if
there is an accident, but the
owner does not have to pay Remember rights
unless he chooses. not mentioned
can't be deemed
to be affected.
we make a
killing off
these tickets.
Sometimes cops try to give
tickets for not wearing a
seatbelt to a so called
'passenger'. But what if you
did not pay to be in the
vehicle? Are you still then
a passenger? If you are
a guest are you
obliged to wear a
seatbelt if you do what makes you
not want to? think I am a driver?
Am I engaging in
commerce?

72 YOu only need a license if you are engaging in commerces on the highway.
Private Automobile Cooperative Liability Insurance Program

BECAUSE WE CAN WORK TOGETHER

and not be a source of revenue for insurance companies
The purpose of insurance is
to ensure that if you hurt
someone you have the
ability to cover their
daMAGES. THAT IS A GOOD
THING. YET WHY SHOULD YOU
HAVE TO PAY OVER AND OVER
EVERY YEAR WHILE THE
INSURANCE COMPANIES MAKE
A LOT OF MONEY FROM IT? IN
BRITISH COLUMBIA ICBC IS
MAKING RECORD PROFITS AND
NOT PASSING THIS ON TO THE
CONSUMER. HOW CAN YOU BE
OBLIGED TO DO BUSINESS
WITH A MONOPOLY WHICH
PROFITS?

If you had $100,000 you could post that money as a bond was I going
and not have to get insurance as that bond is the too fast?
insurance. But what if you do not have that kind of
money to post? Are there alternatives?

What if 1000 people all put $1000 into one pot, then they
would have $1,000,000 would they not? Now those 1000
people could each enjoy liability insurance to the tune of
that same amount. If there is an accident the liability is
paid out of the principal amount and everybody has to
ante up again. IF however there are no accidents, the
$1000 that each put in is still there and earning interest
for the people who are being insured. If there are no
accidents, then the principal can be used for the next
year without having to pay again. This way people have a
much stronger reason to drive defensively.

See son, it's

Plus, when you are done all about That's right! They say
traveling, and you no money,
longer need insurance, the not safety.
it is for the kids and so
money you have in the we have safe streets,
shared account can be paid but they can never
back to you, as they were
only holding onto it in seem to find a way to
case they needed it. accomplish those
things without making a
YOu may ask yourself "If lot of money for
this is such a good idea,
why do the existing themselves and
government run insurance restricting our
programs do it? existing rights.

Insurance is A scheme and is essentially gambling and is not obligatory 73

Forget having the answers... having the proper questions brings freedom
An agent's power If we are all equal,
cannot be greater nobody can order you
then their principals. to do something. Things
that look like orders
A power derived are in fact only OFFERS.
cannot be greater
then the source from Even if it sounds like an
Why did I agree order they are actually
which it is derived. to stand in trying to get you to
this corner
If I do not have accept the offer that
power over you they have the power to
neither do my agents. order you.

"That the majority shall prevail is a rule posterior I am

to the formation of government, and results from Pretending!
it. It is not a rule binding upon mankind in their
natural state. There, every man is independent of
all laws, except those prescribed by nature. He is
not bound by any institutions formed by his fellow
men without his consent." CRUDEN v. NEALE, 2 N.C.
338 May Term 1796.

Unless you are an officer If any man used the tools

of the court how can you that the lawyers, cops and
be compelled to accept judges use to generate the
their orders if you aren't appearance of consent
getting paid? The answer
is you can't, but the they would rightfully be
existing judges and charged with rape. But
lawyers are all on the because they consider
scam and will use themselves above the law,
unlawful intimidation and and you their peon, they
fraud to create the
appearance of consent. can justify it to
themselveves and their
God: MONEY.

74 Silence can raise the appearance of consent

 Recognizing we are all equal before the law...
A Fee Schedule is a previously agreed
to rate of pay. Taxi's have them.
Lawyers have them. So can you. You
want this filed and served so that
when someone demands you perform a
service for them, you can do so and
then collect upon your schedule. If
they refuse to pay after you perform a
service for them and you have a fee
schedule, you can charge them with
theft, fraud or breach of contract.

This will be important because you will

likely meet police officers who will
demand you do things for them. If
you have no schedule, you can't claim
they owe you as much as you can if
they make demands. A fee Schedule
allows you to perform for them, on
your terms.

Protest and Duress - whAt would you

do if someone with a gun, pointed it at
you and ordered you to wash their
floor, claiming they had a contract
with you obliging you to do what they
say. You ask to see the contract and
they show you a gun, or A BADGE OR
ANGRY MUSCLE. WHAT DO YOU DO?

IF YOU SAY NO YOU GET SHOT. IF YOU

SAY YES YOU HAVE TO DO IT AND DON'T
GET PAID.

THIS IS WHAT PROTEST AND DURESS IS

FOR...

Means knowing nobody can order another to do their will...

IF YOU PROVIDE SERVICES UNDER PROTEST,

YOU ARE CLAIMING THAT THERE IS NO
CONTRACT OBLIGING YOU, BUT YOU DO NOT
WANT TO GET HURT AND THEREFORE YOU
WILL DO WHAT IS DEMANDED

- BUT-
THEY HAVE THREE DAYS TO PROVE THE
EXISTENCE OF A CONTRACT AND IF THEY
CAN'T DO THAT, YOU GET TO CREATE THE
CONTRACT AND CHARGE WHATEVER YOU
WANT, ESPECIALLY IF IT IS WHAT YOU
WARNED YOU WOULD SEEK IN YOUR FEE
SCHEDULE.

Without a contract and without being liable for a bill for services. 75
 And the inherent remedy they can provide

I am about to endorse a
negotiable instrument
evidencing a transaction
of a security interest
and I don't even know it. $ $ $$
$$$$$$$$
$$

A bill of exchange is an unconditional order in

writing signed by the person giving it requiring the
person to whom it is addressed to pay on demand
or at a fixed and determinable time a sum certain in
money to or to the order of the drawer or a third Hi! I am a 'violation
party. ticket'. I am also a'B ill
of Exchange'. I can be
By definition Violation both, just like an apple is
also a fruit. A violation
Tickets are bills of exchange ticket is a type of bill of
exchange and can be dealt
with very easily when you
how to deal with me.
Imagine going to a restaurant and the waitress
demands you sign the bill and not pay, just so she
can take it to some bouncers in the corner who will
come over and beat you up for failing to pay in the
first place. Does this sound fair? Obviously not
but this is what the peace officer wants you to do;
sign the original and accept a copy and at this point
you are in dishonor for failing to pay!
If you offer to
Accept the original I am just like any other
and the drawer bill and I must be
refuses to accept presented before any
payment or present payment can be expected
BI

the bill, then there an and if the drawer refuses

be no claim of
L

to present me, I can't

L

obligation to pay no have any effect.

claim that payment
was refused.. It is
not the speeding that
brings you to court,
it is how you fail to
deal with the bill.

76 If you ask for the original and they refuse you owe nothing
A peace officers Police actually play two
fundamental duty is to roles, one is a Peace
keep the peace. Officer and the other a
Unfortunately this law enforcement officer.
In order to exercise
does not give them their peace officer
much power as if people powers, they must first
are peaceful they have observe a breach of the
no authority. peace. If you ask a
peace officer if he has
observed you breach the
peace and he says no,
you can refuse to talk
to him at that point.

Obstructing a peace officer is a crime, refusing to

interact with them when they are acting as a law
enforcement officer is not obstruction. What they
like to do is claim that they are always a peace
officer and sometimes acting as a law enforcement
officer. What you need to do is ask they identify
themselves and the role they are playing. If they
say they are a peace officer then you ask them if they
have seen you breach the peace. If they say no, then
you claim the right to walk away.

If they say they re acting Imagine a dog on a leash.

as a law enforcement They have teeth and can bite,
but because of the leash they
officer then the onus is can't get at you. Their teeth
on them to prove that represents their L.E.O. role
there exists a person for and the leash their status as
them to act upon and if peace officers. The peace
you have not shown them officer status is supposed
to bind them, not empower
ID they have no lawful them to bring charges when
right to act in an they weren't even acting in a
enforcement capacity. peace officer capacity.

We need a new police force empowered only to arrest existing police

77
 Exercising Ownership Rights
YOU can ride for FREE
Police Officers, including
those employed by SkyTrain
rely a lot on their own
ignorance and ability to
intimidate. In this case
they claimthe right to
demand proof of payment
from all 'passengers'.
Their ignorance comes into
play when they fail to
distinguish between an
owner and a passenger.
They assume all the people
on the conveyance are
passengers and not an
owner.
The law however does
distinguish between the
two and it also states
that an owner can use
their property without
having to pay to do so.
The question then
becomes 'Who owns the
SkyTrain?' The next
question would be where
does it state an owner
has to pay to use that
mode of travel and if it
doesn't why are those
police stopping the
owners from using it?

The law distinguishes between owners and

passengers and states that an owner can if they wish
pay a fare and then be seen as a passenger. That way
they can sue as a passenger if there is a driver error.
The regulations they enforce state that all
passengers must produce proof of fare, but it does
not say all people are passengers. They negligently
assume that themselves and because of a lack of due
diligence on their part will justify being violent to
enforce their ignorance and negligence. They will
also enforce the regulations under the Act without
first seeing any proof that they are dealing with
someone subject to the Act and regulations.

It is in fact lawful to ride SkyTrain without

paying a fare and since you paid for it in the first
place, you may if you wish paY A FARE to ride on
your property, but the obligation to show a fare
only applies if you have purchased one. Otherwise
you are merely an owner using it as you choose.
Furthermore they recognize that they need to
see ID before they can give you a ticket. What
they fail to realize is that you have no duty to
have ID or exist within their legislated
framework.

An owner is not obliged to pay to use their property

78
 a n d is legally
rst t
rd unde der'. I
The wo e as 'stand un which
HI! I'M A ,
LAWYER. I will the sam o comprehend proach
t a p
WHY AM I help you, until means ome take or
c
PULLING ON you have no means e.
and seiz
THIS ROPE? more money.

Crap...

You Can know what words mean,

and then choose to not stand
under them.

So the people on the

other end need me to
continue pulling on
this rope and I can let
this go at any time?

If that's true the

only way to win is
to let go...

All of these are choices

Understand = stand under = Get Hit 79
 If you get
arrested the police When they ask if
will try to 'READ you understand,
YOU YOUR RIGHTS they are really
under The Charter asking you if you
of Rights and accept the
Freedoms. They limitations they
want you to accept are placing on
that you have you. They are in
rights UNDER the fact seeking an
Charter and thus agreement which
subject to all the will allow then to
rules and statutes charge you.
they enforce.

SAY "NO, I do not At this point they

understand those will likely try to
charges at all" paint you as an
when they ask if idiot and they will
you understand. try to use your
They will ask "What ego against you.
don't you They will act like
understand" and 'understanding' is
you reply "All of the same as
Will you it"... "I don't stand 'knowing what
under, understand, words mean' and it
take the isn't.
grasp, comprehend
cheese? or accept your
charges"

They may get At this point they

frustrated with will get very
you and the sneaky. They say
ignorant ones will something like
label you as "Well I have read
ignorant. Ask them you your charter
if understanding
their charges is rights and now
any different from anything you say
accepting their can be used
charges and if it is against you in
not a choice. court. Do you
understand?"

Here you must

remain silent, for Remember, the
You must learn to they have phrased a Charter describes
the rights that
say question that even
exist according to
if answered in the

"NO!"
negative creates a your legal entity
positive agreement not your human
body. The word
to go to court. charter implies a
Be quiet and corporation and
to so called smile and they tells you your
will have no rights as an
'Authority'. legal basis to
employee within
the corporation
bring you to called CANADA.
court.

80 Why allow anyone else to determine your rights?

 A man named Tym was in court
watching the proceedings. When a
Sheriffs Deputy demanded he identify
his purpose there he stated he was a
witness to the proceedings. As the
other people had not granted
jurisdiction the sheriff demanded he
leave. When he asked why he was
told that he was being arrested and
the deputy tried to grab his arm.
Tyn did not like this and informed
the deputy that he did not consent
to such a thing. He actually said
"No I am not, I don't
consent to that."
At this point something very strange
happened.

The Sheriff Deputy who clearly

had been informed of the truth
told Tym, "Fine then. But
you must LEave the
building!" The deputy did
not touch him or at that point
act in an aggressive manner.
He knew the truth...

Arrest without
consent by a peace
officer who has not
observed a breach of
the peace is an
assault.
Tym walked out of that
court a completely free
man and feeling very
empowered and awakened.
He could not be arrested
by these people playing
their roles unless he
consented to it, And
most importantly, they
were aware of that fact
and acted with respect to
it.

Police Officers are liable for negligence. Controlling us without consent is negligence.
81
 HINT: Not Yours
Ownership is a function of access and if you do not have
access you cannot claim to have ownership. If your access
is limited in some way then you do not have complete
ownership. If they are essentially private courts operating
a for profit business then they have no power to compel you
to do business with them nor do their words have the force
of law over you.

Imagine if your neighbors

had a pool and you did not.
But they are nice neighbors
and let you use their pool
but according to their
rules.

Although you may be able

to use the pool and that
may even see like a good
thing, it is not your pool
and you have no say in how
much chlorine is used in
the water.

It would be ok if your
neighbors didn't think that
they have the right to jump
the fence and drag you
against your will into their
yard and into their pool.

This is essentially what
the law societies have
done. They have their
own courts in which they
enjoy full access but no
one else does.
You cannot represent
others in there for
money, while they of
course can. YOu cannot
provide legal advice
unless you are a member
of their cult.
You have been tricked into thinking the existing
courts belong to you and that therein you can
find justice. If you think ABOUT IT THOUGH, YOU
WILL REALIZE THAT COURTS ARE NOT JUST PLACES
WHERE CONFLICT IS SETTLED, BUT WHERE PEOPLE
ARE CONTROLLED, REGULATED AND GOVERNED. NOW
REMEMBER, NO ONE MAY GOVERN OR REGULATE
ANOTHER WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT SO HOW CAN
THE COURTS ENFORCE THEIR WILL OVER YOU
WITHOUT YOUR CONSENT? THEY USE A LOT OF
DECEPTION AND TRICKERY TO gain your consent
and if anyone else used such methods to
create a contract that contract would be
rendered void from the outset due to that
deception. Ask yourself this as well,
when the entire process rests on
deception how much justice do you
think you will find?

Restricted access is prima facie evidence of a lack of ownership.

82
 MR. MArtin? This is Agent Happypants
with the CRA. I have been looking at
your file and I noticed you have't filed
your taxes in over seven years. We are
wondering when we can expect you to
fulfill these obligations.

YOu have been looking at what? Well, I

know what I have and don't have, and I have
no file with you people at all. WHat ever
you are looking at ain't mine, you hear me

BUT Sir, your name is one the file. Your SIN is

467 345 895 is it not?

No, I don't have a SIN. I am SINless, thank

you very much, although I have been known
to pass awful gas in church. But that ain't
a sin now is it?

No, I don't think it is, however not filing

is a crime and according to your file, you
have not done so.

I told you Miss, it ain't

my file. And I can
prove it.

And how will

you do that? Well...

83
 If it is my file like you say...

Then you have my property and I demand

you send it to me.
All of it.
The whole entire thing. And don't make
Yes I did say copies of my property. I don't
it is your authorize that at all. Just send me my
file.
entire file, because as you said, it's

Hmmmm.....
So is it my file or
not, Miss
Specious claims?

Well, it's our file

about a person named That may be my name
John Frank Martin. but that does not
That is you isn't it? mean that is my file.
My cousin has the
exact same name.

Tell me is
there a SIN
associated
with that
file?

Well that settles it. I don't

have a social insurance number
Um, yes...
and whoever you are looking for
does.
Have a great day and don't call
me anymore.
I have a row to hoe...

84
The purpose of court is to help settle conflicts. What if there is a way
to avoid conflict however? DO you need court then? Bearing in mind
that we are all equal, then all the other party can do is extend offers.
IF you reject their offers you may end up in dishonor and that will
result in the conflict you are trying to avoid. By using a conditional
acceptance you avoid conflict and put the onus on the other party to
ensure that your conditions are met prior to you accepting the offer.

Will you
accept our
lollipop?

A conditional acceptance can be used for just about any issue where what
looks like a demand for payment or performance is made. You accept the
offer to pay or go to court or stop doing what they want you to stop
doing provided they can answer some simple questions and meet your
conditions for the acceptance. If they can't meet those conditions, or
answer your questions they lose the ability to claim you dishonored their
offer because as you were in fact willing to accept and perform. Using this
tool means they can't claim you refused them and thus they can't say you
are at fault for doing so. The trick is to ask questions and apply conditions
that are reasonable and can be fulfilled but if they do so the deception they
rely upon becomes apparent and their claim of authority destroyed.

The man who knows not, but knows not that he knows not, is a fool; shun him
The man who knows not, and KNOWS that he knows not, is a student; teach him.
The man who knows, but knows not that he knows, is asleep; awaken him.
The man who knows and KNOWS that he knows, is a teacher; learn from him.
An Arab Proverb

85
 are you willing to claim you know it?

Do you swear to tell

the truth, the
whole truth and
nothing but the truth,
so help you God?

LIA
R!

so miss Smith, you swore to tell the truth,

whole truth and nothing but the truth. What is the average
distance travelled by a female monarch butterfly during
their migration period? What is the molecular weight of
barium trioxide? How many carpenter ants does it take to
eat one cubic meter of hard wood? What is the speed of
sound at 18,000 feet above sea level? So you do not know
the whole truth do you? Yet you swore to tell it! LIAR!

I cannot swear to tell the

whole truth, only that which I
know to be truth. No one
knows the whole truth. If I
knew the whole truth my name
would be in this book and not
my hand upon it.

Talk to the
hand...

86
Until the control of the issue of currency and
credit is restored to government and recognized
as its most conspicuous and sacred responsibility,
all talk of sovereignty of Parliament and of
democracy is idle and futile... Once a nation parts
with control of its credit, it matters not who makes
the nation's laws... Usury once in control will
wreck any nation.
William Lyon Mackenzie King
Banking was conceived in iniquity and
born in sin... Bankers own the earth. Take
it away from them but leave them the
power to create money, and, with a flick of
the pen, they will create enough money to
buy it back again... Take this great power
away from them and all the great fortunes
like mine will disappear and they ought to
disappear, for then this would be a better
and happier world to live in... But, if you
want to be the slaves of the bankers and
pay the cost of your own slavery, then let
bankers continue to create money and
control credit.

Sir Josiah Stamp

(Governor of the Bank of England in the

1920s)

When you go to a bank for a loan, you think they are

giving you money out of their big box of money, and
because they gave you money and you gave them
nothing you now owe them. The truth however is far
stranger then you would believe. The fact is there
was no money for them to give you until you signed a
document and at that point you created money with
your signature. You gave them a document before
they gave you money, and the document you gave them
has a value equal to the money you received.

YOUR SIGNATURE CREATED

THE MONEY THEY GAVE YOU!
When you are done paying them back they often either
keep the document you created or they can't even
return it to you as they will have sold it on the
market to someone else.

Your signature is money 87

 I have a
cunning
plan... to do what?

Where will
you put it?
To own the
world!!!

“[Very] soon, every American will be required to register their biological property in
a national system designed to keep track of the people and that will operate under
the ancient system of pledging. By such methodology, we can compel people to
submit to our agenda, which will effect our security as a chargeback for our fiat
paper currency. Every American will be forced to register or suffer being unable to
work and earn a living. They will be our chattel, and we will hold the security
interest over them forever, by operation of the law merchant under the scheme of
secured transactions.

Americans, by unknowingly or unwittingly delivering the bills of lading to us will be

rendered bankrupt and insolvent, forever to remain economic slaves through
taxation, secured by their pledges. They will be stripped of their rights and given a
commercial value designed to make us a profit and they will be none the wiser, for
not one man in a million could ever figure our plans and, if by accident one or two
should figure it out, we have in our arsenal plausible deniability. After all, this is the
only logical way to fund government, by floating liens and debt to the registrants in
the form of benefits and privileges.

This will inevitably reap to us huge profits beyond our wildest expectations and
leave every American a contributor to this fraud which we will call “Social
Insurance.” Without realizing it, every American will insure us for any loss we may
incur and in this manner, every American will unknowingly be our servant, however
begrudgingly. The people will become helpless and without any hope for their
redemption and, we will employ the high office of the President of our dummy
corporation to foment this plot against America.”

-Edward Mandell House

88
 Get that Birth
Certificate Out Judges love to give orders,
of here! but they don't like the
liability that generates.

I am only
touching
your jacket.

Have you ever placed an order in

a restaurant? Were you not
then liable for a bill?
What makes you think the people
in the courts can give orders
and not be liable for a bill?

If we are all equal, how

can anyone give an order
to another and not be YOu are
liable for a bill? They activating my
can't! That is why judges fee schedule!
will give an order then
rush to the next case.

It is possible to establish
your right to present a bill
for orders received and if
you have done so, you will
likely find that you are
facing far fewer orders
after all, who wants to be
hit with the bill?

so you all know, this is in fact a notice to all 'judges' of my right to serve a bill
89
 The rule of Law and Supremacy of God
That is really what this is all about. The Because of the Supremacy of
fact that this nation is founded upon the God thing, no one can ever
belief that there is a Supreme being and claim to BE God, and that is a
that the rule of law is necessary to a good thing, because every on
e
functioning nation. who did that in the past proved
to be complete assholes and
The rule of law is simple too. It says that not god like.
conflict is unnecessary, undesireable and
avoidable and when it raises its head we are to The fundamental constitutional
deal with it using discussion, negotiation and then principle is that the individual can
if necessary adjudication in a court of competent do anything but that which is
jurisdiction. Without discussion and negotiation forbidden by law, and the state
there is no competent jurisdiction. And it also may do nothing but that which is
says that those who make the rules are bound by
those rules. That seems to be a good thing too, authorised by law.
as it was abused in the past also, usually by those
who thought themselves God. John Locke, refering to Britain's
assumed/uncodified constitution.

90
 i n t h e B o x!
h e C ho c o l ates
Keep t
The Charter of Rights and Freedoms is like a box of
chocolates with the chocolates representing statutes
and bylaws and court orders. They have to be
'constitutional' and if not then they are considered 'shit'.
Chocolates stay in the box, or they are quickly destroyed.
The question is to whom are they addressed? Whose are
they? Are they your chocolates and applicable to you?
Can YOU be forced to eat them? let's find out.

Application of the Charter:

The Charter applies
(a) to the Parliament and government of Canada in respect of all matter
within the authority of Parliament including all matters relating to the
Yukon Territory and Northwest Territories; and
(b) to the legislature and government of each province in respect of all
matters within the authority of the legislature of each province.

If you look up a definition of

the word 'Charter' you will
see that if refers almost
exclusively to corporations.
As human beings you have The
Bill of Rights to refer to, but
police when they are arresting
do not tell you your rights
under that body of words do
they? No they tell you that
your rights exist under the
Charter. They even call them
Charter Rights.
The Charter of Rights and
Freedoms deals with government
employees and if someone tries
reading you your rights under
that Charter, and you accept, you
are identifying yourself as a
person and government employee.
If you accept the Charter of Right
as and Freedoms, you are also
accepting that you exist under it
and thus are subject to all the
statutes found within.

YOu can however refuse to

stand under or understand the
Charter of Rights and Freedoms
and lose no rights at all.
Merely allowing someone
else to determine your
rights is an abandonment
of your greatest right.
If they try to read you your
rights, they are not granting
you rights at all, they are in fact
removing some very important
ones. And ask yourself this,
would you allow any politician or
police officer to determine what
your rights are? Should you not
do that yourself.

The Charter is for government employees of the corporation of Canada 91

 Cutting
people is
good

YOu will do
what we say!

A leaf is apparently bad

The government is a
corporation and operates
like one. They are all
about profit and because
they have sold out to
foreign interests it will
soon be illegal for you
What's in to purchase vitamins or
that? food supplements. This is
not because these things
No Idea. are bad for you, but
because they are bad for
what will it the profits of large
do to me? pharmaceutical companies
and your government
We find out cares more about them
tomorrow then you.

Pills are good and

easily taxed Herbal
Supplements
are bad

92 When foreign corporations have a greater say over your government you are a slave
BY ROBERT-ARTHUR: MENARD
93
 IT'S TIME TO THINK ABOUT
WHAT YOU WANT THE WORLD TO
LOOK LIKE IN TWENTY YEARS

YOU MUST WEIGH

THE GOOD AND BAD
AND DECIDE WHICH
IS BEST FOR YOU.

SOME WANT YOU TO DECIDE

BASED UPON WHAT IS BEST FOR
THEM AND THEIR EXISTENCE

SOME WANT YOU TO BE FREE AND ENJOY A

LIFE OF PEACE AND ABUNDANCE... SO THEY
CAN TOO.

94
 RE
AL
LI
VI
N
G
BR
EA
TH
IN
G
SO
UL
I ACT

S
...
.
I AM

O
R
SI
M
PL
E
SH
EE
PL
E
EA
SI
LY
LE
D?
??
YO
U
I THINK

DE

BAA
CI

BAA BAA
DE
.
BAA
BAA BAA

95
 Bust out of the shell without anger and learn to fly

WTF???
Yes, you are special.

The egg is your Think of an egg. It is From the INSIDE

representative a marvelous structure
government and will protect a
developing embryo
from harmful outside
influences and can
withstand much force,
even being strong
enough to withstand
the hardest squeeze
from the strongest
man.
It is very weak and
destroyed by the
However.... beak

The thing that once

protected becomes a HEy! I can
threat and escape is see my
vital to existence. house from
But once you do here!
escape from the shell
of deception, will you
be angry at it? Or
will you find your
wings, grow and
learn to
fly?
96
There is a corporation registered in the US Securities Exchange called 'CANADA. There is a corporation registered in the US Securities Exchange called 'CANADA.

Is Canada a
geographical

D A area???

CANA
Or a bunch of legal
entities grouped
together???

Corporations
have 'Charters'
and 'Statutes'.

CAN
ADA

There is a corporation registered in the US Securities Exchange called 'CANADA. 97

 Imagine a game of snakes and ladders where the ONLY SINGLE WAY to win is to never
even pick up the dice. Right from the get go you have an opportunity to rise to the
top. Why not take it?

This game is a spiritual one and the goal is your spiritual growth.
However the game itself is not designed to help you grow, but to stop
you, until you finally awaken to the fact that everything they do is
just a game and you can lawfully refuse to play at anytime. Refusing
to play is the only way to win this so called game.
98
 Once a place of truth and
justice, angels guarded the
doors.

No Longer Your

now the Angels

But I don't have fled,
have any oil!

Truth is Dead,
I am here to
spread
democracy! and Justice is a

two-bit
whore.

99
 Vancouver City The Corporation of the City of Vancouver
A Fiction
a real physical thing

See how they got you? One is a Physical thing, the other a legal entity and a corporation.

The Province of British Columbia British Columbia

A Fiction a real physical thing

Oh they did it again! well, three times is a charm!

YOU the human Being

I am a real
physical
thing

YOUr 'person', a legal entity evidenced by ID card

100 They use fictions and because you do not distinguish they control you.
 YOu have been
But what does
lied to
it mean? repeatedly
and over time
conditioned
to not care.

TB
h i n g TPng
t r i
last u ca
The t is yoers.
wanut oth ut ly
abo ing aboand on,
r
Ca rself is fin o. e
you rself a no n
you ers is
oth

How else can you accept

Imprisonment?
This is how they want
you thinking...

101
 at school you are
conditioned and
trained and infected
with fear and respect
for authority. They
want you submissive
and prepared to
accept a life where
you voluntarily submit
to the will of others
and not follow your
own conscience.

You are told you can

vote to decide who will
have authority over you
and that this choice is
the greatest level of
freedom. What they fail
to tell you is that by
voting, you agree to be
governed. You are not
just electing a
government, you are
electing to have a
government. YOu can
in fact choose to
not have a

102
Getting you to be an employee instead of their Master
The silly when deceived exclaim loudly; the fool complains; the honest man walks away and is silent.

The Servants did

not like this...

And there are

rules for servants
that do not apply
Their are Masters to Masters
and Servants

With the original

so they tricked the servants in charge of
Masters into ALL the servants...
becoming Servants
too...

Because the
Masters BEGGED.

ing
ord
l l acc ...
A law
Now to
were the Mast
Serva Serving ers
nts! the

103
 Making you ask for that which is yours by right

YOu can only get a

license to engage in are
what is a lawful otherwise they wful
lic en si ng un la
activity. YOu can't would
get one to commit activities. That
be conspiracy .
assaults or b&e's

asking?
Who are you

or you can find

remedy

you can ask permission in the

form of a piece of paper from
them...

YOu are engaging

YOu only need a in commerce on
license if .... the road

104
Their words are the trap

Lust for Power...

YOur
love ior...
of m h Behav
oney
.. Childis
.

Means you fail to

question and care.

Until...
YOu forget who you are.

Just to fight them

swim
w il l beg to
u
And yo ir wat
ers
in t h e

105
 Obedience can be dangerous because it tends to become a substitute for thought

EMPLOYMENT INSURANCE used to be YOu are merely HUMAN RESOURCES

called "Unemployment Insurance".
What changed and why? Is it because
you are a government employee and
always employed?
for the government to use for
their benefit. They are a
corporation you know, and you
work for them every day of your
life.

Know what you need

to pay into the
Canada Pension Plan?
The courts ruled that payment
into a pension plan is evidence of
employee status as only
employees pay into a pension.

They call it an "Employee

Identification Number"!

106
 Human Deceiver

person

Watch back!

When I grow up I
want to get blown
Ignorantly Consented up in a tank just
like that one.

I want to get
blown up flying a
jet! Or maybe just
shot. That would
be cool too. We
sure learn a lot at
school.

107
 The entire system they have
designed and built is much like a
house of cards as its existence
rests upon a continuing
deception. But once that deception
is revealed, the thing they built
falls.
Life is a buffet...

If you figure out

how to get off
your butt, you can
have whatever you
want and enjoy
great abundance...

but if you demand

others serve you...

You may end up with

Baby Food!!!

We are all equal

before the law in Wish I had
life and in death... said no

He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from opposition; for
if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach himself. ~Thomas Paine
108
Canada Student Loans Act
CHAPTER S-23
An Act to facilitate the making of loans to students
19.1 (1) Subject to this section and section 19.2, no action or proceedings shall be taken to recover
money owing under a guaranteed student loan more than six years after the day on which the
money becomes due and payable.
Deduction and set-off
(2) Money owing under a guaranteed student loan may 1 be recovered at any time by way of
deduction from or set-off against any sum of money that may be due or payable by Her
Majesty in right of Canada to the borrower or the estate or succession of the borrower.

The law relating to true set-off is well settled.

A true set-off of indebtedness can take place
only between two debtors who are at the
same time one another's creditors. A set-off
is merely the remission or cancellation pro
tanto of reciprocal debts by applying one's
credit receivable from another against one's
debt owed to that other. A set-off is a cross-
claim for money's worth respecting mutual or
reciprocal debts due and owing and to the
same parties in the same right.

If they owe you money

that Money can be used
to pay off your loan

What is that number?

There is a number on your birth

certificate and they do not tell you
what it is for. It is usually red
and starts with a letter. It may be
in green ink and say 'Revenue what function of law allows them
receipt - Treasury use Only" to forgive some loans but not all?

In the truest sense, freedom cannot be bestowed; it must be achieved. ~Franklin D. Roosevelt
109
 International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession by General Assembly resolution 2200A
(XXI) of 16 December 1966
entry into force 3 January 1976, in accordance with article 27
Article 13
1. The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to education. They agree
that education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and the sense of its
dignity, and shall strengthen the respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. They further agree
that education shall enable all persons to participate effectively in a free society, promote understanding,
tolerance and friendship among all nations and all racial, ethnic or religious groups, and further the
activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.
2. The States Parties to the present Covenant recognize that, with a view to achieving the full realization
of this right:
(a) Primary education shall be compulsory and available free to all;
(b) Secondary education in its different forms, including technical and vocational secondary education,
shall be made generally available and accessible to all by every appropriate means, and in particular by
the progressive introduction of free education;
(c) Higher education shall be made equally accessible to all,
on the basis of capacity, by every appropriate means, and in
particular by the progressive introduction of free education;
(d) Fundamental education shall be encouraged or intensified as far as possible for those persons who
have not received or completed the whole period of their primary education;
(e) The development of a system of schools at all levels shall be actively pursued, an adequate
fellowship system shall be established, and the material conditions of teaching staff shall be continuously
improved.
3. The States Parties to the present Covenant undertake to have respect for the liberty of parents and,
when applicable, legal guardians to choose for their children schools, other than those established by the
public authorities, which conform to such minimum educational standards as may be laid down or
approved by the State and to ensure the religious and moral education of their children in conformity with
their own convictions.
4. No part of this article shall be construed so as to interfere with the liberty of individuals and bodies to
establish and direct educational institutions, subject always to the observance of the principles set forth in
paragraph I of this article and to the requirement that the education given in such institutions shall
conform to such minimum standards as may be laid down by the State.
You have a right to free post secondary education and the government
has a duty to provide it to you. Because of the student loan act and
how it refers to deduction and set-off if they owe you money that
money can be used to pay off your loan. Because of that number on
the Birth Certificate, you can claim they always owe you money and they
always do.
110
 Claim of Right
DATE: _____________
I, __________(Name)________ ___, a Human Being in a Common Law jurisdiction, born in
______( ********* City)____________ on or about the ______________ day in the month of
_____________ in the year _______________ to _____(mother)______________ and
_____(father)___________ have the ability and power to establish rights by use of a Claim
of Right.
I do hereby claim that among my rights are all of the following:
1. I claim the right to an education.
2. I claim the right to use the funds either in my bond (evidenced by the bond tracking
number on the Birth Certificate issued to me by the government) or to use the funds
generated by the bond to either pay off any student loan if I do have one, or to pay directly
for my education if I do not have a loan.
3. I claim the right to use the funds in the bond or revenue generated by those funds to pay
for food and shelter and any other rights recognized by the United Nations.
4. I claim the right to fire any one acting as a fiduciary over my bond if they fail to
acknowledge all rights herein claimed.
5. I claim the right to revoke or deny consent to be represented and in doing so free myself
from all statutory obligations and restrictions, if doing so is, in my opinion, in my best interest.
6. I claim the right to direct my fiduciary as to what to do with the revenue generated by my
bond, provided the directives are a benefit to my society and me.
7. I claim the right to order and direct my federal representatives to transfer directly to me
funds and moneys which they would normally transfer to my provincial representatives in the
absence of any directives, if doing so is, in my opinion, in my best interest.
These Rights are hereby lawfully claimed and are established as Law thirty days hence.
Any and all concerned parties wishing to discuss or dispute these claims must send a Notice
of Dispute or Offer of Discussion within thirty days via Registered mail to the address below.
Failure to do so means that all parties agree that these rights herein claimed are lawfully
established and will not be infringed, violated or abrogated in any way.
All parties who have been served proper Notice of this claim and fail to discuss or dispute,
and then infringe, violate or abrogate said rights, directly or through their agents, employees
or proxies, agree they do so under FULL COMMERCIAL LIABILITY and further agree to pay
to me upon my demand a sum certain of One Million Canadian Dollars for every
infringement, violation or abrogation.
This Claim of Right is made and served with the intent of bettering my society and myself
and, without ill will, malice aforethought, frivolity or vexation.
Claimant: ______________________________
Notary: ________________________________
The Elizabeth Anne Elaine Society
111
 f r ee.
d are AD)
e
d u cat - 135
t he e(55 AD
y
Onl tetus
Epic

NOTICE

Date: __________________
Addressed To: _______(Minister of Finance , by NAME)
CTCO: ______(Financial Institution_
RE: Student Loan #:______________________
I am ______(NAME)_________________ and my Birth Certificate registration number is ____(# From
FRONT)______________ and the bond tracking number found on my Birth Certificate is ______(# on
Back)_____.
It is my understanding that the Bond evidenced by the tracking number generates revenue and that you
are acting as a fiduciary in Trust to administer that bond and the revenue generated by it for my benefit,
within our societal structure.
In the Act governing my student loan, ____________ section _______ does state:
Money owing under a guaranteed student loan may be recovered at any time by way of deduction from or
set-off against any sum of money that may be due or payable by Her Majesty in right of Canada to the
borrower or the estate or succession of the borrower.
Furthermore, Article 13.2(c) of The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, to
which Canada is a signatory, was ratified on January 3rd, 1976 and does state:
(c) Higher education shall be made equally accessible to all, on the basis of capacity, by every
appropriate means, and in particular by the progressive introduction of free education;
Therefore TAKE NOTICE, that I am hereby directing you my fiduciary in Trust, to seize and direct
sufficient funds and no more in the sum certain of $_________, generated by my Bond which you
administer and to direct said funds to the financial institution herein mentioned to be used solely to set-off
and discharge my student loan honourably, fully, completely and immediately.
This lawful directive is a benefit to myself and my society, fulfills the UN Covenant and is well within your
fiduciary authority.
Failure to do as you are hereby lawfully directed within THREE juridical days will result in your dishonour,
charges of nonfeasance and an immediate termination of your fiduciary responsibilities and Trustee status
over my bond.
Failure to discharge this account immediately may also result in legal action being instituted against you
by the aforementioned financial institution.
GOVERN YOURSELF ACCORDINGLY.
Jane Q. Student
SIGN _________________________
NOTARY _______________________
The Elizabeth Anne Elaine Society
Justice is Truth in Action
112
I've always been curious about my human rights and how they're being up-held, in what seems to me, a
deteriorating governmental system.

I have participated in several protests against police brutality, foreign war campaigns, increased taxes, and student
loans because I've always felt that it was my duty to the community and its offspring to keep the politicians on their
toes so that we can keep our freedoms and maintain our power of choice. I don't claim to know much about the
law or legalities but I have an interest and motivation to exercise my rights and freedoms so that they remain or
increase.

My pursuit into the study of the actual laws and the actual exercising of them was very casual up until I met
Robert:Menard. He has shared and continues to share with me a great deal of insight into the process of law and
understanding the importance of knowing about jurisdiction, among many things. I have always been more of right
brained, intuitive type with a pretty good BS meter and I could hardly listen to cops' answers whenever I asked
them questions. There seemed to always be something just not right with them and I knew that it stemmed up
through to the politicians.

Anyways, I got a student loan in August of 2002 for $7568. It wasn't all that big but I still felt that I shouldn't have to
pay it back, seeing how in my heart I had always thought that an efficient society should cover educational training
like what had I received. To snare youth into debt as soon as they're out of high school, in my opinion, is disgusting
and cruel. I could go off about how asinine the debt system is and that's why I decided that I wouldn't pay, period.
Underlying that though, was my worry of how the dept would affect my credit rating or the possibility of having a
collection agency harass me for money. Something inside of me always assured me that I'd find a way.

Jump forward 2 years, I started hearing about dept elimination programs and banking set-offs which I totally
participated in with the wide-eyed hope that I could free myself from the burden of owing the government. These
programs somehow seemed to burst or dissipate without a trace and to no avail. But that didn't stop my pursuit for
the remedy.

The Summer of 2005, I then met Robert-Arthur:Menard and analyzed what he had to offer. At the time, his book
"Bursting Bubbles of Government Deception" was finished and I made quick work of it, reading up and
understanding what I could. It was definitely a mind opening book, where what I know now I could never look back.
It was a radical experience. I loved it and I'm still loving it.

I'd like to think of myself as a man of action, so I started the process described in the back of the book to set-off my
student loan debt. I'm not sure if it had been done before so I wanted to be the first, so I went for it. Following what
Rob wrote, to the "T", gathering the addresses to who to send my letters to, typing out what he suggested, sending
them out via registered mail (this is a must for tracking verification), waiting for responses, doing the next steps
and maintaining patience, I completed the process in 4 months. I never received one response ever concerning
the documents that had I sent, and I thought I sent a lot. I did receive some reminders after that about the debt for
about another 8 months and then nothing. I had a feeling that there was a shift in the energy around this debt but I
didn't know how to actuate my accomplishment. I kept thinking about it up until today when I got my consumer
credit report from EQUIFAX. In the report it said, and I quote "CDA STUDENT LOANS PR (888) 8XX-4XXX last
reported to us in 08/06 rating your installment account as I1, meaning paid as agreed and up to date. At that time
the reported balance of your account was $0. ...The credit limit or highest amount of credit advanced was $7568."

This is a really good day for me and all students who have outstanding debts to remember. Today we know that
there is a solution to the overwhelming student loan dept. My testimony is proof that Robert-Arthur:Menard's
system of setting-off student loans work.
And now it's time to repeat it!

By:Stefan-Lorne:Bakker

113
 THere is a simple and fundamental process available to you and it
will free you from the will of the government and the courts. It
requires a little understanding and education on your part but if
you take these simple steps you can be fully, completely and
absolutely free of all statutory restraints and obligations.

The basic fundamentAL process involves operating on a right and

establishing that right using simple basic tools. Once you
understand the process, you can use the same tools to establish
any right in the future and secure whatever remedy you may need.

In order to secure any right, one must first have a basic

understanding or comprehension of what rights are going to be
claimed. This understanding must be articulable and reasonable
and based not on personal whims or desires but on facts and
easily defended truths. Merely having an understanding is not
sufficient however, as if you do not tell people what your beliefs
are they can never discuss them with you or share a different
understanding. This means you have to serve them a notice of
your understanding.

Once you have an understanding properly expressed and shared,

you will logically also have an intent and that intent must be
supported by your understanding. This intent must also be
expressed and shared with those who may be affected and you will
use a notice to do so.

Once you have shared with them your understanding aND intent,
you then make a claim of right to act upon your understanding
and follow your intentions and to do so peacefully and lawfully.
If this process if completed properly, you will secure the right
to do all the things you can imagine. By using a notary public,
you have a powerful witness to the process and the lawful
ESTABLISHMENT OF YOUR RIGHTS.

The notary not only acts as your witness, but when the process
is completed properly they can create a binding judgment which is
just as powerful as any judgment created by any existing courts.

Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where

ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to
feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob
and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be
safe.
Frederick Douglass

114
 This is
what I
know!

When accomplished properly, your

notice of understanding will form
the basis or foundation for your
later actions. By sharing what you
believe the truth to be you are
inviting discussion, a vital component
of The Rule of Law. If the other
party refuses or fails to speak with
you, then they give up the ability to
later negotiate or complain about
your understanding. It also creates
the appearance of agreement and
again is designed to help avoid
conflict.

e of
O S E o f the Notic r
THE PURP ding is to offe
n her
Understa and tell the ot .
n e
discussio t your beliefs ar
w h a o agr e e
party ot have t ut if they
e y d o n
Th , b
r beliefs
with you y had better say n
e e
don't th , or it will be se
h in g e a
somet o shar
t w o p a rties wh
as
elief.
similar b

To know what you prefer instead of humbly saying Amen to what the world tells you you
ought to prefer, is to have kept your soul alive. Robert Louis Stevenson (1850 - 1894) 115
 All I know is
I will act.
I will Act on what I
think I know.

That is all I know.

When you serve notice of

your intent and the people
you served do not dispute,
it creates the reason to
believe that the other
party won't mind what you
are intending to do and
that your intention is
lawful.

Once you have an

understanding, you
must express what
your intention is
concerning that
understanding.

"If you win non-violently, then you have a double victory, you have not
only won your fight, but you remain free." Chavez Cesar (1927-1993)
116
 7
SECTION 12

127. (1) Every one who, without

Pay attention to the part
about 'without lawful
excuse' and imagine what you
can do if you have lawful
excuse.
Then start thinking
about what is and is
not lawful excuse.
lawful excuse, disobeys a
lawful order made by a court of
justice or by a person or body of
persons authorized by any Act to
make or give the order, other than
an order for the payment of money,
is, unless a punishment or other
mode of proceeding is expressly
provided by law, guilty of
(a) an indictable offence and liable
to imprisonment for a term not
exceeding two years; or

(b) an offence punishable on

summary conviction.

SECTION 126
126. (1) Every one who, without lawful excuse,
contravenes an Act of Parliament by wilfully doing anything that it forbids or by
wilfully omitting to do anything that it requires to be done is, unless a
punishment is expressly provided by law, guilty of an indictable offence and
liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years
Many types of lawful excuse exist, such as killing an animal out of an act of mercy, defending
children, other animals or property, honest belief (mistake of fact), necessity, automatism, due
diligence, entrapment, provocation, defence with claim of right, third party offender, duress
and res judicata/issue estoppel, amongst others.

117
 Defence with claim of right
39. (1) Every one who is in peaceable possession of personal property under a
claim of right, and every one acting under his authority, is protected
from criminal responsibility for defending that possession, even against a
person entitled by law to possession of it, if he uses no more force than is
necessary.

Defence without claim of right

(2) Every one who is in peaceable possession of personal property, but does
not claim it as of right or does not act under the authority of a person who
claims it as of right, is not justified or protected from criminal responsibility
for defending his possession against a person who is entitled by law to
possession of it.

This is the most important thing you can learn from this book. The power of a claim of right.

YOU CAN BE FREE!

a Claim of right is lawful excuse

I am the king of
my domain.
CO Meow. Meow.
NS
EN
TR
EQ
UI
RE
D

118 I claim the right to exist without you governing me

 YOU CAN DISOBEY THE COURTS AND
THE GOVERNMENT IS YOU HAVE
WHAT THEY CALL 'LAWFUL EXCUSE'.

BECA
U
39, W SE OF SE
A CLA E CAN SE CTION
E
A LAWIM OF RI THAT
FUL E GH
XCUS T IS
E.

AS
R I G HT CAN BE TO
LAIM O
F E RIGHT
YOUR C CLAIMING TH S GOVERNING
S
EASY A ITHOUT OTHER NSENT.
T W CO
EXIS
I T H O U T YOUR
YOU W KICK
T H E R IGHT TO R LIFE
N CLAI
M OF YOU
YOU CA ERNMENT OUT
V
THE GO

SON
O R S O ME REAANT
F ON'T W
THEY D OWING THAT.
YOU KN

YOur freedom is as easy as saying NO to the government

119
 One will
make you
bigger; the
other will
make you
small.

Many of these and other stories

tell the truth about what is
happening in the world and are
allegories for what we have to
deal with.

120
The scarecrow represented farmers, who did not understand how the bankers
were screwing them. The tin man represented industrial laborers who were
desperate for lubricant (currency). Dorothy is the average American girl. The
yellow brick road was the gold standard, which led to the Emerald City
(Washington or, alternately, New York's financial district). The wizard is the
U.S. President, who in the book is terrified of the evil witches. The "wicked
witch of the east" was the eastern financial establishment. The "wicked witch
of the west" was the western bankers (at that time ensconced in Ohio). The
"good witch of the north" was the people. The munchkins were the generally
enslaved, who live in terror of the evil witches (the bankers).

121
 Wizard of OZ The Federal reserve

How international bankers created a disaster, stole the

gold, imposed a fiat monetary system and used armed
monkeys to control people with fear and deception.

Scarecrow Tinman Lion

The Strawman represents

your legal entity which is The Tin Man represents
the heartless THE LION IS THE
called strangely enough, COWARDLY GOVERNMENT
a strawman. corporations who only
care about ... WHO BENDS TO THE WILL
OF FOREIGN BANKERS AND
CORPORATIONs and by
As a legal fiction, OIL!
doing so fail to serve
it has NO BRAIN

122
 WASHINGTON. And the
The whilrwind depression Wizard was scared of...
THE GOLD LEADS TO ...

The Strawman needs

I'll get the help and energy
you, my of the living human
pretty!

and the human is

controlled with
The Wicked Bankers opiates, religion
and TV

But you
could
always go
home...

Now you
tell me?

123

The Wizard of OZ
– an allegory... (author unknown)
An allegory (parable) is the expression of truths
about human conduct and experience by means
of symbolic fictional figures and actions.
Such was the movie The Wizard of Oz, an allegory
of the state of affairs we now live in today —
an allegory of the unfolding New World Order that
was instituted in America via the stock-
market crash of 1929 and the bankruptcy of the
United States in 1933.
The setting of this allegory is in Kansas — the
“heartland” of America; the geographical center
of the U.S.A.
In came the twister — the whirling confusion of the
Great Depression, the stock-market crash,
the U.S. Bankruptcy, and the theft of America's gold
— that whisked Dorothy and Toto up into
the New Order of the World; an artificial new
dimension “somewhere, over the rainbow,” above
the solid ground of Kansas.
When they landed in Oz, Dorothy commented to her
little dog Toto: “Toto? I have a feeling
we're not in Kansas anymore . . .” Exactly!
After the bankruptcy of the United States, Kansas
was no longer “Kansas” anymore, it is now
“KS” — a two-capital-letter federal postal
designation that is part of the “federal zone,”
designated by the Zone ImProvement (ZIP) Code
established by the bankrupt United States in
1933 — and Dorothy and Toto were now “in this
state.” The terms: “in this state,” “this state,”
and “state” are deceptively defined for tax
jurisdiction purposes as the “District of Columbia,”
a.k.a. the United States, Inc., or the corporate United
States.
124
In the 1930s the all-capital-letter-written-name
strawman — the newly created artificial “person”
that has no brain and speaks and acts for its once-
upon-a-time sovereign, you and me — was
created while Americans were confused and
distracted by the commotion caused by the
introduction of the New World Order of communistic
socialism, to figure out that they even had
a strawman with which to contend. The scarecrow
identified this strawman persona for Dorothy
thusly: “Some people without brains do an awful lot
of talking. Of course, I'm not bright about
doing things.”
In his classic song, “If I Only Had A Brain,” the
scarecrow/strawman succinctly augured, “I'd
unravel every riddle, For every Individual, In trouble
or in pain.”
Individual: a United States government Employee.
(Title 5 USC §552(a)2). The Internal
Revenue Code (IRC) and all state tax codes are in
harmony with the above definition of
“individual” by reference only. A corporation-of-one
is an artificial person constructed by law;
not a living, breathing man or woman. An
“individual” is a public corporate persona existing
only in the public (government) domain having been
created by law, not by God.
The drafters of codes and laws take everyday
common speech and give it arcane encrypted
meanings that are generally unknown or unknowable
to the uninitiated even after serious study.
Therefore, most folks are commercially, legally, and
financially enslaved because of their
ignorance of the true situation. Even knowing that
“ignorance of the law is no excuse” they find
themselves helpless, unarmed, and uninformed.
[Upon close examination one can see a direct tie
in with America’s secret establishment known as the
Order of Skull & Bones, as it was brought
about to bring down the united States of America,
its members have penetrated just about every
significant research, policy, opinion-making
organization in the United States as well as many of
the leading educational institutions. Also known as
‘the dumbing down’ of America. (If you had
trouble reading the previous sentence blame your
poor educational experience as a result of the
influence of the Order of Skull & Bones and its
members.)]
Translation: Once we discover that our strawman
exists, and that we have co-signed for him
[signing by accommodation], political and legal
mysteries, complexities, and confusions are
resolved. When we take title to our strawman
(UCC1 financing statement), we protect ourselves
from any liabilities that we might otherwise occur.
The tin-man, our Taxpayer-Identification-Number
(TIN) man, is a hollow man of tin, a vessel, or
vehicle; newly created code words for our
strawman. [not being sexist here as one could say,
‘hollow woman of tin’ or ‘strawwoman’.]
Just as the strawman has no brain, the tin-man
vessel/vehicle has no heart. Both are artificial
persons. (person = persona = mask). [Learn up on
the word, ‘person’]
Persons are divided by law into natural and
artificial. Natural persons are persons created by
God, and artificial persons are persons devised by
human law for the purpose of governing them
as “corporations-of-one” or bodies-politic.
The precise definition of the term “person” is
therefore necessary to identify those to whom the
14th Amendment to the Constitution affords its
protections and liabilities, since the 14th
Amendment expressly applies to “persons.”
A strawman is a person with a fictitious name
written in “legalese” — language foreign to the
rules of English grammar. Flesh and blood men and
women with names [titles] written in [hand]
cursive, with initial-letters-only capitalized, are not
“persons” even though they are referred to as
natural persons at times.
It is as impossible for a person to be natural as it is
for a man to be artificial. “Person” is a silent
artificial construct hatched up by lawyers, to be
used and controlled by lawyers’ encrypted
“codes.”
One of the definitions of “tin” found in Webster's
dictionary is “counterfeit.” The tin-man
represents the mechanical and heartless aspect of
commerce and commercial law. Just like they
say in the Mafia, as they throw you overboard, you
feet in concrete overshoes, “Nothing
personal; [its] just business.”
The heartless tin-man carried an “axe,” a traditional
symbol for God, and for modern commercial
law, in most dominant civilizations, including
fascist states. In the words of the tin-man, as he
expressed relief after Dorothy had oiled his arm,
“I've held that axe up for ages.”
The word “ace” is etymologically related to the
word “axe” and in a deck of cards the only card
above the King is the Ace − God. One of the Axis
Powers of World War II was a fascist state,
Italy. The symbol for fascism is the “fasces,” a
bundle of rods with an ax bound up in it with its
blade sticking out.
The fasces may be found on the reverse of the
American Mercury-head dime (the Roman deity
Mercury was the God of Commerce) and on the
wall behind and on each side of the Speaker's
Podium in the United States Senate, each gold
fasces being approximately six feet high. At the
base of the Seal of the United States Senate are two
fasces, crossed.
125
 The lion in the story represents the “at-one-time”
fearless American people as having lost their
courage. And after a round with the IRS, in
“defending” your T-I-N man, dummy corporation,
vessel vehicle, individual employee, public
corporation, all capital letters written name,
artificial
person, strawman, you'd lose your courage, too.
You perhaps haven't known it, but the IRS has
been dealing with you all along via your tin-man
under the hidden laws of commerce. Just like
the tin-man, “commerce” has no heart; it is
heartless.
To find the Wizard, you have to “follow the
yellow-brick road” (the gold-bar road.) Follow the
trail of America's stolen gold and you'll find the
thief who stole it.
In the beginning of the movie, the Wizard's
counterpart was the traveling mystic, “Professor
Marvel” who Dorothy encountered when she ran
away with Toto. His macabre shingle touted
that he was “...acclaimed by The Crowned Heads
of Europe, Past, Present, and Future.”
Professor Marvel must have really been a Wizard
to be acclaimed so by the future Crowned
Heads of Europe, even before they were crowned!
Before the bankers stole America, they had long-
since overpowered the Christian Kings and
Queens of Europe and looted their kingdoms.
Maybe “Professor Marvel” knew something about
the future that other folks didn't know. With a
human skull peering down from its painted perch
above the door to his wagon, the professor lectured
When Dorothy Gale and her new friends emerged
from the forest, they were elated to see the
Emerald City before them, only a short distance
away. The Wicked Witch of the West, desperate
for the ruby slippers that Dorothy was wearing,
would have to make her move before our heroes
arrived safely inside the Emerald City gates.
In the original book, The Wonderful Wizard of Oz,
by Frank Baum, published 39 years before
the movie came out in 1939, and three years before
the crash, the slippers were not ruby-red, but
silver.
126
America still had its gold at that time, and the
value of 1 oz. of gold was set at 15 oz. of silver;
silver - then as now- being the more plentiful.
Backed by gold, the currency of the day carried
America to a position of pre-eminence throughout
the world. But when the movie came out in
1939, the slippers were not silver, but ruby red.
Between the years 1916 and 1933, America's gold
was absorbed by the private non-federal
Federal Reserve and shipped off to the FED’s
owners in Germany and England because the use
of Federal Reserve Notes carried an interest
penalty that could only be paid in gold. Our
former
currency, United States Notes, carried no such
interest requirement, but such was the “bargain”
that came with the New World Order of the non-
federal Federal Reserve in 1913.
When the United States’ Bankruptcy was declared
in 1933, Americans were forced to turn in
(surrender) all their gold coin, gold bullion, and
gold certificates by May 1st — “May Day” —
the birthday of the Communism and the Illuminati
in 1776, the year that the American Colonists
declared their independence from the Crown.
Talking to people who were alive at that time, the
general sentiment toward such “theft” in 1933
bordered on a second revolutionary war.
Maybe it was too much of a clue, or too much salt
in their wounds, for Dorothy to be skipping
down the golden yellow-brick-road in a pair of
silver slippers. So, for whatever reason, a color
less likely to provoke the people was selected.
With regard to the choice of ruby slippers —
The Wicked Witch of the West made her home in a round
slippers colored red — one explanation is that on
medieval Watchtower — ancient symbol of The Knights
commercial documents and the like, red signifies
Templar of Freemasonry who are given to practicing
private as opposed to public. Your new Social
witchcraft and are also credited to be the originators of
Security Card has a red serial number on the
modern banking, circa 1099 A.D.
reverse. But no matter their color in the movie, the
Wicked Witch of the West had big plans to get her
The Wicked Witch of the West was dressed in black, the
hands on the precious slippers before Dorothy
color that symbolizes the planet Saturn, a sacred icon of
and crew could make it to Emerald City.
The Knights Templar, and [interestingly] the “color of
choice” of judges and priests for their robes.
Her tactic was to drug them into unconsciousness
by covering the countryside with poppy flowers,
Who was the Wicked Witch of the West? Remember, in the
poppies — the source of heroin, opium, and
first part of the film her counterpart was Almira Gulch who,
morphine — and then waltz in and snatch
according to Auntie Em, “...owned half the county.” Miss
the slippers. In other words, the best way to loot
Gulch alleged that Dorothy's dog, Toto, had bitten her. She
the gold was to dull the senses of the American
came to the farm with an “Order from the Sheriff”
people with a contrived crisis (the Great
demanding that they surrender Toto to her custody and
Depression.) And of course now we have illicit
control. Auntie Em was not immediately cooperative and
street drugs, heroin, cocaine, etc., and legal drugs
answered Miss Gulch's allegations that Toto had bitten her,
such as Ridlin®, etc. and television, bogus media
“He's really gentle -- with gentle people, that is.”
dishing out control propaganda, etc. ...etc.
When Miss. Gulch challenged them to withhold Toto from
The poppy-drugs worked on Dorothy, the lion and
her and “...go against the law,” dear old Auntie Em was
Toto — the flesh-and-blood entities — but had no
relegated to “pushing the Party Line” for Big Brother
effect on the scarecrow or the tin-man — the
government. Auntie Em dutifully succumbed to the
artificial entities. The two cried out for help, and
pressure and counseled Dorothy, reluctantly, “We can't go
Glenda — the Good Witch of the North —
against
answered their cries with a blanket of snow that
the law, Dorothy. I'm afraid poor Toto will have to go.”
nullified the narcotic effect of the poppies on
Dorothy, Toto, and the lion.
When Dorothy refused to surrender Toto Miss Gulch lashed
out: “If you don't hand over that dog I'll bring a suit that'll
As they all scampered toward the Emerald City
take your whole farm!”
— the city of green non-federal Federal Reserve
Notes (the new fiat money - money by decree)
Today >70% of all attorneys in the world reside in the West
— we hear the Munchkins singing the glories of
— in America to be exact — and =>95% of all law suites in
the Wizard's Creation:
the world are filed under the jurisdiction of the corporate
United States. The Wicked Witch of the West and Miss
“You're out of the woods, Your out of the dark,
Gulch symbolize Judges and Attorneys — primary agents
Your out of the night. Step into the sun, Step
for the transfer of all wealth in America from the people to
into the light, Keep straight ahead for the most
the United States, the United Nations, and the international
glorious place on the face of the earth or the
banks. [Study the word, “attorn(ey)”]
stars!”

This jingle abounds with Illuminati/Luciferian

metaphors regarding darkness and light.

127
 The American Bar Association is a branch of the Bar
Council, under the Bar Association of England and
Wales. (British Accreditation Registry) [Some believe
it to be a religious association run by Esquires of the
middle temple of the city of London – not as in
London, England but a particular place in the city of
London.] As the copyrighted property of a British
Company, all states’ and United States Codes are
private British owned Law, and all states’ and
United States courts, state Bar Associations, and the
“State of [name each of the 50 States],” go by and
enforce private de facto British owned Law against
Americans, operating as private foreign owned
tribunals or administrative agencies doing business in
the states under cover and color of [each of the 50
states’] Law.
The Wicked Witch of the West wanted the ruby (silver)
slippers (the precious metals) — and her counterpart,
Miss. Gulch, wanted Toto, too. What does “toto” signify
in attorney legalese? “Everything!” Miss Gulch wanted
to take everything.
Dorothy and the gang fell for the Wizard's illusion in the
beginning, but soon wised up and discovered the Wizard
for what he was [is], a confidence man. When asked
about helping the scarecrow/strawman, the Wizard cited
— among other babblings about “getting a brain” and
“universities” — the land of “E Pluribus Unum” (Latin
for “One out of many”); converting many into one;
meaning the New World Order.
“Novus Ordo Seclorum” is the Latin phrase placed on
the American one-dollar bill shortly after the bankruptcy
of the U.S. Government was declared in 1933. The
Wizard proudly revealed (confessed) that he was, “...
Born and bred in the heart of the western wilderness - an
old Kansas man myself.”
Translation: You've always had the right and power
to re-claim your sovereignty; you just forgot your
remedy; a UCC1 Form and Security Agreement sent
to the Secretary of State and an Invoice and Bill of
Exchange to the Secretary of the Treasury, which
can be completed from scratch in a very short time.
Remedy: Remedy is the means by which the
violation of a right is prevented, redressed, or
compensated. Both remedy and rights include those
remedial rights of self-help which are among the
most important bodies of rights under the Universal
Commercial Code (UCC). Remedial rights are rights
an aggrieved party can resort to on his own.
“Acceptance of Value” is our Remedy.
Americans have intimate firsthand knowledge of the
heartless mechanics of the laws of commerce when
strictly applied by the unregistered, foreign agents of
the IRS.
The Internal Revenue Service is the collection
agency for the private non-federal Federal Reserve
and the International Monetary Fund. It was placed
under the Uniform Commercial Code in 1954 and
has been operating strictly in that realm ever since.
You may have wondered about the meaning behind
the words, “The Wizard of Oz”? Look them up in
the dictionary. Like almost everything else, the ruse
is out there in the open for all to see, if you will
look, and see.

The bankers did quite well. And, as the Wizard said,

they made a killing in the America west with the theft of
America's gold, labor, and property from the grateful
and responsive rural folk” (a quoted phrase of John D.
Rockefeller) who populated the country at that time.

When Dorothy asked Glenda, the Good Witch of the

North for help in getting back to Kansas, Glenda replied,
“You don't need to be helped; you've always had the
power to go back to Kansas.”
128
One definition of Wizard is “a person of high professional skill or knowledge.” Oz is an abbreviation of “onza,”
the Italian word for ounce (oz.) or ounces, the unit of measurement of gold and silver and other precious metals.
No matter how large the quantity of gold or silver being discussed, the amount is always expressed in ounces rather
than hundreds of tons of gold, it’s stated as so many million ounces of gold.

As the factual history of this country attests, “The Wizard of Oz” is the “Wizard of Ounces”, of silver and gold.

Everything worked out for Dorothy (the American people) in the end. In the end she “made it home” to Kansas and
her friends.

Meaning: There's a remedy encoded, disguised, and camouflaged in law. The UCC has been cracked and there's a
way home, just like in the movie. Like Dorothy said, “There's no place like home” — there's nothing like
sovereignty for a sovereign!

Vice Admiralty courts are courts established in the Queen's possessions beyond the seas, with jurisdiction over
maritime causes and those relating to “prize.” The United States is now a colony (a possession) of the English
Crown, per a joint commercial venture agreement between the colonies (the United States) and the Crown, which
brought the United States back under British ownership and rule, in 1933.

But the American people had a “standing in law” as sovereigns, independent of any connection to the United States
and the Crown. This “standing in law” necessitated that the people be brought back under British rule, quietly and
one at a time — but the Commercial Process of Redemption, through the UCC, will redeem us from this travesty.

All courts in America are Vice-Admiralty courts conducting the private foreign commerce of the Crown. But there
is commercial remedy in Redemption-in-Law.

Will you continue to be conned by confidence men into worshiping the Wizard's light-show or will you look
behind the veil?

129
 "My name is Alice, so please your
Majesty," said Alice very politely; but
she added to herself, "Why, they're only
a pack of cards, after all. I needn't be
afraid of them!" (the people in
government are just people playing
roles)

'And who are these?' said the Queen,

pointing to the three gardeners who
were lying round the rosetree; for,
you see, as they were lying on their
faces, and the pattern on their
backs was the same as the rest of
the pack, she could not tell whether
they were gardeners, or soldiers,
or courtiers, or three of her own
children.

'How should I know?' said Alice,

surprised at her own courage. 'It's
no business of mine.'

...The Queen turned crimson with fury,

There is no use trying, said
Alice; one can't believe
impossible things. I dare say
you haven't had much
practice, said the Queen.
When I was your age, I
always did it for half an
hour a day. Why, sometimes
I've believed as many as six
impossible things before
breakfast.
Lewis Carroll
and, after glaring at her for a moment
like a wild beast, began screaming,
"Off with her head! Off
with--"
"Nonsense!" said Alice, very
loudly and decidedly, and the Queen was
silent."
-- Lewis Carroll, Alice in Wonderland
[Freedom thinker?]

'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said,

in a rather scornful tone,' it means just
what I choose it to mean, neither more
nor less.'

'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you

can make words mean so many different
things.'

'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty,

'which is to be master?' - that's all.'
You are the master of your own life... unless you allow others to be.
130
 Woe to you lawyers and experts in
the law for you have taken and
hidden the key of knowledge and
entering in not yourselves, those
who did you hindered.

Ye are Gods

So good
to be
me...

Suffer the little children to come

unto me, and forbid them not: for of
such is the kingdom of God.

Jesus was not

deceived by an
admiralty justice
Jesus knew Saturday night system that relied
was alright for fighting, if on fictions.
you were fighting the money
changers.

Become like a child and you will be free

131
 Are you the Where's The
'King of the Love?
Jews'?

Those are
your words
not mine

Smartass....

Now he
thinks I am a
smartass

The system that we are labouring

under today is very similar to what was Who's
Knock
faced by the people 2000 years ago. There?
Knock
There was a large body of words being
used to govern the populace and a
small group of people claiming the
sole right to interpret and understand
those words. Lawyers today are just
like the Pharisees of old who would Jesus Christ
extract excess payment from the Open the
people they were supposed to serve. Door
They would interpret the words in a
manner that magically applied to
others, yet not so much to themselves.
There existed 'persons' and legal
fictions and there was all the
corruption that goes along with those
things. The remedy then is
the remedy now.
Luke 12:58 "For while you are going with your Knock and it opens.
opponent to appear before the magistrate, on your way Seek and you find.
there make an effort to settle with him, so that he may
Ask and you receive.
not drag you before the judge, and the judge turn you
over to the officer, and the officer throw you into prison. Reap and sow.

132
Pharisees and Sadducee ruled their society
Force and Complexity a minority over a majority
When deception is the yoke the law is a joke
So along came this bloke
and on his words did they choke

With power and authority

Releasing all from SIN's
Inviting all to the Kingdom of God within
"This is all wrong we are the strong
And all our power will soon be gone
Oh No! Oh No! oh no!"

they have the power

they have the power
along came a flower
a gentle humble flower
he took away their power

he spoke of something special

something very very special
something so scary
to the rulers of that day

"The law is very simple,

once you see the light.
There are only
two things you need
to live and die right.
Love god and your neighbor
both with all your might
That's it, that's all
there is nothing more
and anyone says otherwise
they are against God, his law and more
They control you with deception
and command you with their lies
I brush away their laws
like you shoo away Houseflies
From your sweet cherry pie"

They want the power

they want the power
along came a flower
a gentle humble flower
he took away their power

133
 well some rulers of the day
did not like this one bit
"He has to go! That cocky mouthy twit'!
They plotted and they schemed and
They tried to set a trap
But he was to wise
and knew how to yap
In the end fake betrayal had to be the tool
A friend pretending enemy,
now the eternal fool
30 pieces of silver that was the pay
But freedom isn't free
So he showed us all a way

This story is never old

and now is told anew
Remain a sheep at slumber
or awake and walk-with few
The growing spirit inside you
will show you what to do
but in the end no one
can do this thing for you

Will you embrace what your spirit has always

known?
For if you have eyes and ears
this truth can easily be shown
YOu may of course refuse this gift so
heavenly
but when you are bound by deception
Only truth can set you free.

Here is the truth

They never wanted spilled
Exact same now as back when HE was killed
You can choose to be
A gentle humble flower
and take right back
all of your power
they had the power
they had the power
along came a flower
a gentle humble flower
you took away their power
You are that flower
And now is the hour
To take back your power

134
 (But you can't because you don't have one)

Then he doesn't
even have a
HE said he He couldn't sister.
was visiting What's her tell me. He
his sister. name? didn't know it.

Statutes are rules of a

If you know A name i society and they apply to

s a note members of that society.

not the name of a thing If you are not a member of

of a thing all . a particular society, its

rules cannot apply to you,
just like if you are not a
knowledge of boy scout the rules of boys
scouts do not apply to you.
that thing a Society is a thing and as
must perish. such must have a name to
legally exist. Without a name
it is a nothing.
Society: A number of people joined by mutual consent
to deliberate, determine and act for a common goal.
We need your
consent.
Read any judgement of the Supreme Court of
Canada and they will use words like "In a free
and Just society", yet they never say "In this
free and just society". They speak in
hypothetical terms and they do so for a reason.
They know there is no society.

Can you tell me the name

of your society?
If not how can you even
prove it exists?
If something does not have a legal name it does not legally exist 135
When we refer to our current alleged Canadian government as de jure, we no
doubt mean de facto, since de facto means "in fact", but not "by law", which
is what de jure means. In other words, a lawful government is a de jure
government. A government that exists by deception and fraud, and not by
lawful authority, is a de facto government.

It's highly unlikely that the Canadian establishment, with political

millionaire shysters as its vanguard, is ignorant of the actual history of
Canada and its fake government. The fake version taught in our schools has
nothing in common with 135 years of reality; of government by millionaires,
of millionaires, for millionaires.

Canada is neither a federation nor does its government operate with

legitimate authority. Knowing this and keeping mum about it makes
politicians and the entire Bar Association criminal offenders by default, if
not by design...all of them, past and present. Which doesn't matter much
these days because it's obviously cool (and very profitable) to be lawless,
as far as those at the trough are concerned.

Judging by politicians, and the legal community's visible conduct, their

strategy seems to be one of perpetually reinforcing the nixing of the
UNAUTHORIZED AND ILLEGITIMATE EXISTENCE OF CANADIAN GOVERNMENTS (DE JURE) by
teaching and celebrating a Canadiana, pickled in bald-faced lies, with much
ado and hoopla.

It takes a lot of time and effort to separate the facts from the myths about
Canada's "creation." Fortunately, there have been many dedicated Canadians
doing the arduous research. By learning how constitutions and nations
are properly created and then comparing this with Canada's (and Britain's)
records of the time (and since then), these researchers have accurately
re-created a chronology of what actually happened since 1864 and what
Canada's status is today...which isn't news, it's just information that is
rigorously suppressed.

Few people would suspect that educational faculties, politicians, judges,

media and the entire membership of the Canadian Bar Association would
intentionally deny the existence of such a fundamentally important matter.
With few notable exceptions, the public has unquestioningly accepted the
official fairytale as gospel. Professionals, privy to the truth, are simply
too busy chasing the buck and drop the truth from their conscience.

Politicians have banked on such developments with astonishing success since

"confederation." Today, nobody in his right mind (while ignorant of the
facts) will believe that Canada has actually been under the control of
impostors for 135 years; which continues to be so, as long as most Canadians
are content to trudge through the dark, thinking they are soaring in the
light.

Nowhere are the consequences of this massive deception more embodied than in
the diligence with which Canadian judges help the Canadian Customs and
Revenue Agency (CCRA) to ruthlessly administer a tax extraction racket as
fraudulent and criminal as Canada's C-36 protection racket. Faced with
having to rule inescapably in favour of the aggrieved (tax victims) Canadian
judges, spineless without exception, have turned into legal eels,
symbiotically corrupted by their addiction to prestige, special privileges
and highly salaried appointments for life.

Citizens, pay for judicial privileges with the erosion of their

"constitutional" rights and speedy redress, while judges hide their
bottomless cowardice to uphold the principles of the BNA Act behind
overbearing pomposity, intimidation and self-serving and criminal bias, in
an effort to protect the hand that feeds them.
There is no such thing as arms length freedom of judges from government
interference. When it comes to the constitution and taxes, judges are
deathly afraid to reveal their knowledge of the BNA Act's illegitimacy.
Instead they improvise slick Catch 22 procedures and set obstructive
precedents based on legal sophistry; ostensibly, to "avoid the chaos" that
would ensue if they were inclined to respect the (non-) constitutional
rights of the people. They maintain that, by enlightening the public about
Canada's constitutional reality and by ruling fairly and with integrity,
they would "unleash" real nation building reforms by a liberated public,
while curtailing for themselves Ottawa's munificence, which they view as
anarchy.

Compounding their crimes, judges find nothing wrong with the massive
counterfeiting of credit and the collection of interest from it by private
banks. Nor does it bother them that this occurs without the blessings of the
BNA Act and under the auspices of impostors with pretensions of governmental
authority...all of which has become "real" under the umbrella of fake
legitimacy.

Canada is joined in this constitutional dilemma by Australia and New

Zealand. But, unlike Canada's, their legal communities have acknowledged
that a constitutional problem exists and they deal with it, viewing it as a
grand opportunity of change for the better.

To understand why the BNA Act and the Canadian Federation are fake, here is
a quick, nutshell explanation of how and by whom constitutions and sovereign
democratic countries are properly created.

The "infamous socialist agenda" The creation of a democratic nation is for

sane people simply a matter of common sense and decency; for the established
elites it's a leading cause of apoplexy and a matter of subversion,
terrorism and communism...if not downright anarchy.

But assuming that a sovereign democratic federation is socially desirable -

in other words, liberal rhetoric transformed into actual reality ñ no
supernatural abilities or special law degrees are necessary to create it.

It requires merely a public consensus about the purpose of the nation and
how to best achieve it.

a) First, there has to be a territory (like a Canadian province) who's

people desire to be a sovereign and democratic nation.

b) From among themselves the people select, by vote or appointment, a

temporary assembly and charge it with the formulation of a constitution.

c) A first draft of the constitution is submitted by the assembly to the

people for review and public debate, to provide an opportunity for changes.

d) After a first public debate the assembly retires to work out the changes,
after which it is submitted again to the people for review and further
changes, if necessary.

e) This process is repeated until the constitution has become a formula

acceptable to a substantial majority of the people.

f) Now the people vote in a referendum to accept (or reject) the

constitution with a pre-determined majority (75% for example).

g) If the required majority cannot be achieved, further changes must be made

until the formula becomes acceptable to the required number of people.

h) The entire process is recorded and documented as proof of the

constitution's authority.

i) On the basis of the constitution a government is then formed, which is

contractually bound (social contract) to respect it and conduct itself in
accord with it.

j) Now this sovereign nation can form a federation with other nations, if it
wishes to do so.
Note, that no consideration has been given to the manipulative interference
from privately owned media monopolies.

Note, that the constitution is created first, then the government. To create
a democratic nation for the people, by the people, of the people, it cannot
be any other way.

Note, no foreign government can formulate (or create) the constitution of

another country. It has to be created by the people themselves and becomes
thus, for all intents and purposes, their protective property. It's not only
the law but is a contract which subjugates the government to the people. The
government derives a limited authority to govern from it, always subject to
the people's authority.

Note, ONLY SOVEREIGN NATIONS CAN FORM A FEDERATION. For example, a dominion
is the subject of an empire, un-free, and cannot determine anything, much
less federate, without the empire's approval. A SOVEREIGN NATION IS NOT
SUBJECT TO ANYONE. In other words, it is free to design its socio-economic
organization or enter into federations in any way it wants.

A sovereign, democratic dominion?! But that's not what happened in 1867.

When we ask, did Canada become then a sovereign, democratic dominion, we
must also ask, of whom or of what? The Crown? Rothschild? The IMF? Thus the
incongruity becomes unmistakably self-evident.

In 1867 we-the-people didn't exist, as far as political "participation" was

concerned. In the exalted view of our betters, the colonial millionaire
paragons of civilization, we were practically indistinguishable from the
stinking squalor surrounding us. They habitually referred to us as "scum."
They were the landed gentry, lording it over us, the rabble, with style,
opulence...and vastly refined superiority.

In 1864 an assembly of such unelected "colonial representatives of the

Crown" (appointees and careerists) convened in Quebec and began to draft the
Quebec Resolutions under the wise guidance of the Hon. John A. Macdonald,
all of them men of substance, inspired by self-interest. The general "scum"
of the day didn't even know that this was going on, not being wealthy enough
to vote and all....

Note, that the original draft was created by an unelected assembly of

colonial appointees without the knowledge of the general public. In 1867 the
"Quebec scheme of 1864" was submitted to the Colonial Office in London for
Royal assent, to be enacted by the British legislature. In between readings
in the House of Lords and the House of Commons the wording of the preamble
(the most important page of a constitution) was changed (a fraudulent slight
of hand), without the knowledge of the delegation from Canada or anybody in
both houses, into the oxymoron it has remained to this day. At this point
there existed no printed copy of the original.

Remember, no foreign government can create a legally valid constitution for

another country. What eventually emerged from the British legislature was a
statute as phoney as a three dollar bill, with the first page missing
entirely. The list of experts who attested to this fact in 1935 is
impressive, indeed:

Dr. O. D. Skelton, Under-Secretary of State for External Affairs;

Dr. Ollivier, K.C., Joint-Law Clerk, House of Commons;

Dr. W. P. Kennedy, Professor of Law, University of Toronto;

Dr. N. McL. Rogers, Professor of Political Science, Queens University;

Dr. Arthur Beauchesne, K.C., C.M.G., L.L.D., Clerk of the House of Commons.

And it doesn't end there. Note, that there exists no documented record of a
mandated assembly or debates by neither the elites nor the "scum," nor a
binding referendum in 1867 or since.

138
On November 8, 1945, the MP for Jasper-Edson, Walter F. Kuhl, widely
respected as the pre-eminent authority on constitutional matters at the
time, tried to revive the issue of Canada's non-constitution/non-federation
in the House. He stressed that UNTIL 1931 CANADA WAS NOT, AND COULDN'T HAVE
BEEN, A FEDERATION since, until then, it was still a dominion of the crown.

Only in 1931 did the British Crown abrogate its authority over the Canadian
Dominions (provinces) with the enactment of the Statute of Westminster. This
provided a most auspicious opportunity for Canada to become a truly
sovereign, democratic federation. Instead Ottawa created the Bank of Canada,
a central bank.

Once again the elite studiously "ignored" the opportunity Mr. Kuhl's
argument offered to create a bona fide federation based on a bona fide
constitution. It created the Maple Leaf Flag instead; more focussed on image
than on substance in order to maintain the deliberate deception. There
exists no record of any constitutional assembly, any public debates or any
constitutional referendum nor any confederation efforts since 1931, other
than Ottawa's denial of Quebec's sovereignty, which is a fact.

Since 1931 the rest of Canada has been akin to a wreck, loaded to the hilt
with gold, adrift at sea, under the control of pirates who gut and plunder
it to their hearts' content. There are even rumours, that the Rothschild
Clan secretly claimed Canada as an object of salvage and is managing it and
extracting its wealth from behind complex fronts within fronts, like a
Russian Egg, with the outer, visible shell being the "federal government."

But, people ask, didn't Trudeau "patriate" the constitution and the Charter
of Rights and Freedoms in 1982? Well, he actually did patriate, in a
fashion...and a unified chorus of the public, the media, the judiciary and
educational institutions all went "Aahh" and "Oohh" and "isn't that nice of
him?" It seemingly never dawned on anybody to ask who gave him the authority
to draft the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The problem here, is the word "patriate." It didn't exist in the English
language until 1981, nor does it exist in any other language, ancient or
contemporary, to this day. It is meaningless gibberish invented by Trudeau
and his cabinet. The question "What does it mean?" is unanswerable. Perhaps
it was intended to be rooted in the Latin word patris. Which could mean, by
a wild stretch of the imagination, that Father Pierre fathered the Bill of
Rights and Freedoms and generously bestowed it upon Canadians as an
(unconstitutional) gift. More likely, the word simply exists to invoke a
sense of constitutional incomprehension in order to discourage deeper
probings by a mystified public.

Let's give it the benefit of the doubt and assume that it is a semantic
mistake, and what was meant was that Trudeau repatriated the constitution.
That would mean he brought it home in 1982. We must ask then, from where?!
Where was it until 1982 if not in this "sovereign, democratic and federated
dominion?" In Britain?

Why? In comparison with the proper process explained above, it's practically
impossible to believe that Canada is a legitimately sovereign and democratic
federation, unless one is deranged or in the grasp of opiate dreams. Since
most Canadians DO believe the impossible, what does this say about their
mental and moral disposition?

No matter how we slice it the Canadian Federation remains a fiction. The

federal government is a cabal of impostors; its authority to govern being
non-existent until such time as Canadians wake up to the fact that EVERY
TREATY ENTERED INTO (NATO, GATS, NAFTA, FTA, FTAA etc.) AND ALL LAWS AND
REGULATIONS (ITA, GST, C36, PRIVATIZATION, DOWNSIZING, etc.) PASSED SINCE
1867 ARE NULL AND VOID...just as null and void as the non-constitutional
authority of Canada's community of bottom feeders...the judiciary and the
Canadian Bar Association, including their bloated and subversive court
procedures.

And let's not forget the law enforcement agencies such as the RCMP, the
police and CSIS, which have no non-constitutional authority to enforce (or
protect) anything, much less the dictates (legalized crime) of impostors.
 GOVERNMENT IS NOT THE BOSS, YOU ARE! SO ACT LIKE ONE! Knowing all this,
perhaps it becomes a bit more attractive for Canadians to get a taste of
real nationhood and real sovereignty (i.e. freedom), instead of oppressive
despotism and wage slavery, by adopting the purely Canadian concept of
PARTICIPATION.

To sum it up, CANADA IS A GIGANTIC FAKE, an embarrassment of giant

proportions. All centralized governments are imposed by non-legal force and
their constitutions are not worth the paper they are written on, nor are
their laws, as we can clearly see now. It will stay that way until such a
time when nation building is again considered a project worthy of the
creative and liberating efforts of free people...inclusive, consensual,
universal and truly democratic.

As it stands now, Canada is a fake in every respect, in the

hands of despotic individuals bent on pulling off the biggest
crime in the universe...THE GLOBALIZATION OF FAKENESS...and
again the establishment's cheerleaders go "Oohh" and "Aahh,"
duly recorded and endlessly re-cycled in the closed loop of
the media monopolies until all alternatives have moved beyond
the vanishing point...out of sight.

Oh, and what was that you were saying about fighting your tax assessment (or
this or that alleged law) on grounds that it is unconstitutional? Perhaps
you should consider moving to a real Country, or at least one that has a
real constitution!

We, as alleged Canadians are living in an un-country with no law because we

have no basis from which to frame any law, hence we have absolutely no
fundamental rights, real or feigned! Everything is merely an "act" (no pun
intended) designed to keep us un-informed, un-protected, and un-able to
object.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain
This work is in the public domain

Foreign Owned
and Operated

140
Notice of Understanding and Intent And Claim of Right
Whereas it is my understanding Canada is a common law jurisdiction, and,
Whereas it is my understanding equality before the law is paramount and
mandatory, and,
Whereas it is my understanding a statute is defined as a legislated rule of
society which has been given the force of law, and,
Whereas it is my understanding a society is defined as a number of people joined
by mutual consent to deliberate, determine and act for a common goal, and,
Whereas it is my understanding the only form of government recognized as
lawful in Canada is a representative one, and,
Whereas it is my understanding representation requires mutual consent, and,
Whereas it is my understanding that in the absence of mutual consent neither
representation nor governance can exist, and,
Whereas it is my understanding all Acts are statutes restricted in scope and
applicability by the Constitution Act, and,
Whereas it is my understanding Section 32 of the Constitution Act limits it to
members and employees of government, and,
Whereas it is my understanding those who have a SIN (Social Insurance Number)
are in fact employees of the federal government and thus are bound by the
statutes created by the federal government, and,
Whereas it is my understanding that it is lawful to abandon one’s SIN, and,
Whereas it is my understanding people in Canada have a right to revoke or deny
consent to be represented and thus governed, and,
Whereas it is my understanding if anyone does revoke or deny consent they exist
free of government control and statutory restraints, and,
Whereas a Freeman-on-the-Land has lawfully revoked consent and does exist
free of statutory restrictions, obligations, and limitations, and,
Whereas I, ___________________________________ am a Freeman-on-the-
Land, and,
Whereas it is my understanding that acting peacefully within community standards
does not breach the peace, and,
Whereas it is my understanding that any action for which one can apply for and
receive a license must itself be a fundamentally lawful action, and,
Whereas as I am a Freeman-on-the-Land who operates with full responsibility
and not a child, I do not see the need to ask permission to engage in lawful and
peaceful activities, especially from those who claim limited liability, and,
Whereas it is my understanding a by-law is defined as a rule of a corporation,
and,
Whereas it is my understanding corporations are legal fictions and require
contracts in order to claim authority or control over other parties, and,
Whereas it is my understanding legal fictions lack a soul and cannot exert any
control over those who are thus blessed and operate with respect to that
knowledge as only a fool would allow soulless fictions to dictate ones
actions, and,

141
 Whereas it is my understanding peace officers have a duty to distinguish between
statutes and law and those who attempt to enforce statutes against a Freeman-
on-the-Land are in fact breaking the law, and,
Whereas I have the power to refuse intercourse or interaction with peace
officers who have not observed me breach the peace, and,
Whereas permanent estoppel by acquiescence barring any peace officer or
prosecutor from bringing charges against a Freeman-on-the-Land under any Act
is created if this claim is not responded to in the stated fashion and time,
Therefore be it now known to any and all concerned and affected parties, that I,
_______________________________________a Freeman-on-the-Land do
hereby state clearly specifically and unequivocally my intent to peacefully and
lawfully
__________________________________________________
_______________________________
__________________________________________________
_______________________________
__________________________________________________
_______________________________
__________________________________________________
_______________________________
__________________________________________________
___________________ Furthermore,
I claim that these actions are not outside my communities’ standards and will in
fact support said community in our desire for truth and maximum freedom.
Furthermore,
I claim the right to engage in these actions and further claim that all
property held by me
including but not limited to
__________________________________________________
_______________________________
__________
__________________________________________________
__________________________are
held under a claim of right as mentioned in the Criminal Code of Canada.
Furthermore,
I claim that anyone who interferes with my lawful activities after having been
served notice of this claim and who fails to properly dispute or make lawful
counterclaim is breaking the law, cannot claim good faith or colour of right and
that such transgressions will be dealt with in a properly convened court de
jure. Furthermore,

I claim that the courts in British Columbia are de-facto and bound by the Law
and Equity Act and are in fact in the profitable business of conducting,
witnessing and facilitating the transactions of security interests and I further
claim they require the consent of both parties prior to providing any such
services. Furthermore,
I claim all transactions of security interests require the consent of both
parties and I do hereby deny consent to any transaction of a security interest
issuing under any Act for as herein stated as a Freeman-on-the-Land I am not
subject to any Act. Furthermore,

142
I claim my FEE SCHEDULE for any transgressions by peace officers, government
principals or agents or justice system participants is TWO HUNDRED DOLLARS PER
HOUR or portion thereof if being questioned, interrogated or in any way detained,
harassed or otherwise regulated and TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS PER HOUR or portion
thereof if I am handcuffed, transported, incarcerated or subjected to any
adjudication process without my express written and Notarized consent.
Furthermore,
I claim the right to use a Notary Public to secure payment of the
aforementioned FEE SCHEDULE against any transgressors who by their actions or
omissions harm me or my interests, directly or by proxy in any way. Furthermore,
I claim the right to convene a proper court de jure in order to address any
potentially criminal actions of any peace officers, government principals or
agents or justice system participants who having been served notice of this claim
fail to dispute or discuss or make lawful counterclaim and then interfere by act
or omission with the lawful exercise of properly claimed and established rights
and freedoms. Furthermore,
I claim the law of agent and principal applies and that service upon one is
service upon both.
Furthermore,

I claim the right to deal with any counterclaims or disputes publicly and in an
open forum using discussion and negotiation and to capture on video tape said
discussion and negotiation for whatever lawful purpose as I see fit.
Affected parties wishing to dispute the claims made herein or make their own
counterclaims must respond appropriately within TEN (10) days of service of
notice of this action. Responses must be under Oath or attestation, upon full
commercial liability and penalty of perjury\ and registered in the Notary Office
herein provided no later than ___________________.

Failure to register a dispute against the claims made herein will result in an
automatic default judgement and permanent and irrevocable estoppel by
acquiescence barring the bringing of charges under any statute or Act against
Freeman-on-the-Land _______________________________.
Place of claim of right: ________________________________, Canada
Dated: _______________________
__________________________
Claimant [or claimant’s agent]
Notary Public: ____________________
To register counterclaims and disputes:
NOTARY PUBLIC
ADDRESS
ATTN: Freeman-on-the-Land ______________________________________
Use of a Notary is for attestation and verification purposes and does not
constitute adhesion, contract
or change in status in any manner. All rights reserved without prejudice.

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable

one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all
progress depends on the unreasonable man. George Bernard Shaw
143
 An honorable and perfect witness to
procedure and process. They are an
officer of the court and they actually
have the power that any judge or
clerk or sheriff has. And then some.

e
he ultimat
They are t nd
of truth a
champions YOu will use them to establish
e and hold
thus justic facts and to have your notices
s sacred.
their oath and claims witnessed. Because
of the powers a Notary
possesses, they can also
create binding judgments and
at least they should
judicial findings. Using a
Notary to establish facts can
result in a default which leads
to a permanent estoppel by
acquiescence.

This process is very easy to understand

and is essentially exactly what a court
would do. The exchange of affidavits
and claims to establish facts upon I am an honourable impartial
truthful observer of process.
which the law must be based. They will
essentially do what a court would
otherwise do and in a far easier
manner.
Notary Public
They have the power to witness a
process that results in a default
judgment against whoever you were
putting on Notice or making claim
against.

They should be truthful 100% of the

time.
They should be willing to witness 100%
of the time.
They should be completely impartial
100% of the time.
If they are not they are not doing their
jobs or acting with respect to their YOu better be or tyranny
oaths of office. is the natural result

144
 What if you wanted
to sue the courts?
What if you wanted
to sue the entire
LAw Society? What
would you do?

Rights and powers of members

18 A member enrolled and in good standing may do the following:

(a) draw instruments relating to property which are intended, permitted or required to be registered,
recorded or filed in a registry or other public office, contracts, charter parties and other mercantile
instruments in British Columbia;

(b) draw and supervise the execution of wills

(i) by which the testator directs the testator's estate to be distributed immediately on death,

(ii) that provide that if the beneficiaries named in the will predecease the testator, there is a gift over
to alternative beneficiaries vesting immediately on the death of the testator, or

(iii) that provide for the assets of the deceased to vest in the beneficiary or beneficiaries as members
of a class not later than the date when the beneficiary or beneficiaries or the youngest of the class
attains majority;

(c) attest or protest all commercial or other instruments brought before the member for attestation or
public protestation;

(d) draw affidavits, affirmations or statutory declarations that may or are required to be administered,
sworn, affirmed or made by the law of British Columbia, another province of Canada, Canada or
another country;

(e) administer oaths;

(e.1) act as a consultant under sections 9 (2) (a) (ii), 12 (1) (c), 26 (1) (c) (ii) and 29 (1.1) (b) of the
Representation Agreement Act if the member qualifies as a member of a class of persons prescribed
under section 42 (2) (a) of that Act;

(f) perform the duties authorized by an Act.

A Notary Public can be used in the same way a judge or court clerk can be used
and they can even do more. ANY DUTY under ANY Act, they can do. Think about this.
145
 First you create a notice If they do not respond
and have it supported by then you send them
an affidavit. Serve both another notice
on the other party and informing them that
then craft a certificate they are in default and
of service. You give this giving them an
to the Notary and now opportunity to
you both wait 14 days respond. If they do
for the other party to not they are clearly in
respond. If they don't default and if you sent
you remind them. If at them a Notice of
that point they fail, you Understanding and
win. The process is of intent then there is
course a little more in now clear evidence that
depth, but it follows these understandings
these lines. are shared and the
intent expressed
lawful.

You are a Good Save She denied it

poopie headed and put it on
stinky pants. her

Oh Oh... now blondie

I am rubber you are is the poopie pants
glue, whatever you say
bounces of me and and she has turnip
sticks to you, turnip breath! She better
breath. quit while she can.

Remember how in school you knew that if you were accused of something and
you did not deny it, all the others assumed you agreed with the label? IF
you do not deny or reject a claim it is seen as shared agreement. The same
holds true today as an adult and you have the power to serve Notices and
create claims and if not properly addressed by the other party, your words
become law and accepted by others as such.

It really is that simple. You are going to say something to someone else
and wait for a response. IF you do not get one, what you said will be seen
as truth. Go head, call the government 'poopie pants' and watch what
happens.

146
Dear Notary Publics of British Columbia

Hello and good day to you. I am Robert-Arthur: Menard a Freeman-on-the-Land in this God blessed common law
jurisdiction. I am writing to you in order to share my perspective while hopefully addressing and alleviating some
potential problems my beliefs and actions may cause. As you either know or should know, I teach people how to
lawfully use certain sections of the Criminal Code to establish lawful excuse by way of a claim of right properly
served and perfected. Of course this process does require a truthful, impartial and honourable witness and since the
courts are affected, they cannot lawfully be expected to provide these services. Thankfully the law recognizes that
potential problem and has addressed it with the existence of Notary Publics and the statutes which do bind you state
in Section 18 that you do in fact have the power to engage in these actions, even though you may not be often called
to do so.

In order for the law to be served you must do your duty and that duty is really quite simple. You are to be truthful
and impartial and willing to act as witness 100% of the time. If you are truthful only 98% of the time would you
consider that acceptable? I think it could get you charged. What about if you are impartial only 98% of the time,
would you consider that acceptable? It naturally follows that if when it comes to truth and impartiality only 100%
is acceptable then clearly when it comes to being willing to witness lawful process then 100% is also the only
acceptable standard.

All you have to do to serve justice is to ensure that the people who come to you are who they say they are and the
witness hat process and if there is a default then record that. To refuse to act because you do not either like the
initiating party or their political beliefs or because you do know the affected party is opprobrious to justice and a
breach or your Oaths of Office. If you feel you need to know the content of a Notice of Claim then you have lost all
claim to impartiality. If you refuse to do your Notarial duty because you personally do not agree with the politics of
the initiating party or because you wish to shield the affected party from justice again you have breached your oath
of office.

You have a duty to the law and the people of British Columbia. Your obligations are not to 'The Province of British
Columbia' and 'The Law Society of British Columbia” regardless of how much heat they may try to bring against
you for serving justice at their expense.

I remind you that the role you play is vital and if you refuse to do your duty, we will have no choice but to start up a
New Society of Notaries Public who are willing to serve the law and fulfil their duties. I sincerely hope you choose
to serve the law, as your refusal to do will generate liability, and when we do have a new Society of Notaries Public
to go to for justice, some of the first people who will be served notice and made to face claims will be people in
your organization for refusal to provided services.

Sincerely and without malice aforethought, ill will vexation or frivolity,

I AM

Robert-Arthur: Menard
Freeman-on-the-Land
All Rights Reserved, Exercised at Will and Fully Defended, By The Grace of God
 Using a Notary Public to Establish Rights

Step #1 - Create a Notice of Understanding and Intent and Claim of Right.

Step #2 - Bring that to a Notary and have it attested in their presence.

Step #3 - Make a bunch of Certified True Copies at the Notary Office.

Step #4 - Leave a copy with them and send out the rest except for one for
yourself to all the people who will be affected by the Notice and Claim.

Step #5 - Go back to the Notary Office with a Certificate of Service attesting

to the fact that the other parties have been served. Have someone else serve
them if possible, or use registered mail. Leave evidence of service with them.

Step #6 - Wait 10-14 days depending on how much time you gave them. 14 is
good and 10 is minimum.

Step #7 - If they do not respond then it is time to send them another notice
stating they are risking dishonour and default and they have a chance to cure
by responding if they wish. If they don't they are in default.

Step #8 - A notice of Default is created by you and signed by the Notary.

Copies again are made and sent to the other parties. Again a certificate of
service of all these actions is created and presented to the Notary.

Step #9 - At this point the Notary signs a Certificate of PErmanent Estoppel

by Acquiescence forever barring the other party or their agents from
interfering with the rights claimed and established.

It's all about

Freedom
securing the is Easy!
right to engage
in whatever
actions you
wish.

148
The Notice of Understanding and Intent and Claim of Right in Action.
Watch the step by step process that leads to freedom from abusive
government.

Hi! I am John Krist. I tried to

help someone and now the
people in the government want
to punish me for that.

he
n d t ce on is
a d
e nt t pla s an
m es e y
v ern he b peratmone
go t o f aw
t he ing in tem ot o He s and
s
u s ted s liv e sy ke a l ors. fast e
tr e w ust a i c a ut ery as g am
t h o m s e c v w a
s j
n Kri ught the but t pro play deck not
h , d y s .
, Jo e tho how tice rs an the w the is wa ore
r s H n d u s ce o w o t h y m
o the in it. st ha rve j offi nd h saw hnow y an
y r e e a a
m an work aw fi to s olic l lie . HE to k o pl
o o he s no t p i l s h t
e s wh es, e w om oug ant
Lik ple ntil ned judg olic freed e en ot w
peo th, u desig ers, me p and s wisdid n
o
ear arly lawyow s ghts d wa d he oo.
e i n
cl
r
e
th and h
u r him a ecide can t
r
o
fo st h ith nst he d u
Yo
fir se w agai . So it.
d
loo cked d win he di
a l
st cou how
he s is
Thi
149
 Seizing the Moral High Ground
Courtesy Letter
28/10/07
TWIMC
Hello and good day! I am Robert-Arthur: Menard, a Freeman-on-the-Land in this common law jurisdiction and I
am writing because of a recently accepted lawful duty to a fellow man. His name is John Krist and he is presently
facing statutory charges for the possession of marijuana and possession of ammunition.

I met John a few days back at the behest of a man I know whom I believe is truthful, honourable and decent.
Having listened to John I feel he is being unjustly prosecuted and that continuing this action would not properly
serve justice. I explained to him what I thought concerning the Law and what his options must be. Based on that
conversation, he told me he does in fact wish to abandon his person and live free of those who would try to govern
him using deception.

He wants to revoke consent to be represented and thus governed and recognizes that the services offered by the
government is simply not worth the cost of using them. He also recognizes that court proceedings are a form of
services and he will be waiving those so called benefits. Based on our conversation, I do not believe he is trying to
avoid lawful duties, but unlawfully imposed obligations.

I will share with you what he told me and why we now both feel that continuing this action is unjust and justifies
him revoking consent to be governed or judged or otherwise bound by the desires of others.

Without even looking at the complete lack of a warrant and the way in which the polices actions contravened the
rights guaranteed in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, there are more then enough reasons for the revocation of
consent based on the other facts of this case.

First of all, the law must recognize the importance of compassion and mercy and the only reason John went to that
property on the day he was arrested was because he was asked to do so and was engaged in a mission of mercy. He
was in fact helping someone with a medical emergency and as such was justified in his actions.

The other charge deals with there being some ammunition in his vehicle and that said ammunition was contrary to
a court order from almost a decade ago. However for criminal charges to stick, there must be cr5iminal intent and
thus knowledge of it's existence. John's truck was stolen a month prior, there is a record of that and the
ammunition was placed in his vehicle without his permission or agreement.

John expressed that he felt the police may be involved in a vendetta against him for lodging earlier complaints and
pointed out they had access to his vehicle when they recovered it and could have either placed the ammunition in it
in order to be able to bring charges, or whoever stole it had placed them in there. Either way there is no evidence
that the ammunition was his or that he had knowledge of it existence. Since the law states it is wiser to err on the
side of mercy one must ask the benefit of pursuing these charges in light of this information. It can't be a benefit to
our community nor is it in the public interest for them to lose faith in the justice system, which is what happens

150
Luckily however, John like all others in Canada enjoys a common law jurisdiction,. and according to the Supreme
Court of Canada the courts in this land require the consent of both parties prior to providing adjudication. And as
any woman knows, consent can be revoked, how else can men face charges of raping their wives if that is no9t the
case?

Toward the end of assuring justice is served, John Krist will be revoking consent to be represented and governed,
de-registering all his property and holding it instead under a claim of right and will be surrendering his Birth
Certificate, Driver's Licence, Social Insurance Number and all other documents that evidence any association
between him and those he sees as deceivers who would harm him. Using a Notary Public and the power inherent
in that office, he will be serving Notice and laying claim against all those who think they have the right to govern,
control or judge him. Lest you think he is crazy, you should know he is not alone, and he is in fact part of the
rapidly growing segment of the population that has lost complete faith in the governments, courts and justice
system. Do you intend to recapture what you lost due to deception and bullying with even more of the same?

Those who are affec ted by his actioons will have sufficeint time to respond under oath and upon their full
commercial liability. Failure to do so will result in a default judgement against them and a subsequent permanent
estoppel by acquiescence barring any and all from attempting to bring charges against him for failure to obey court
orders or statutes. Like so many others, he is simply sick of the abuse and lies that those we trusted with the justice
system love to dish out. Let us find the truth judicially and let us all agree to be bound by that truth.

Sincerely and without malice aforethought, ill will, vexation or frivolity,

I AM

Robert-Arthur: Menard
Freeman-on-the-Land
Non-consenting, All Rights Reserved, Exercised at Will and Fully Defended, by The Grace of God

The Elizabeth Anne Elaine Society

Justice is Truth in Action

151
 Telling them What's What

Constructive Notice of Denial of Consent

NOTICE

October _________________________ Year of Our Lord Two Thousand and Seven

Notice is hereby served that I, ________________________________ of the Krist family do hereby lawfully,
clearly, specifically and unequivocally revoke and/or deny consent to be represented, governed or adjudged by
other human beings.

With this revocation of consent I do hereby free myself from all statutory obligations and restraints and as I no
longer exist in association with the existing courts or governmental entities I am no longer subject to their
demands and orders.

Any party not wishing to be bound by this Notice and associated claims has fourteen days from the date of service
to present to the Notary Public administering this file an affidavit created under oath and upon their full
commercial liability and claiming the right to govern their fellow man without the consent of the governed or to
claim that consent once granted cannot be lawfully revoked at any time.

Failure to do so will result in a DEFAULT JUDGMENT and PERMANENT ESTOPPEL forever barring anyone
from enforcing statutes or court orders upon me.

This Notice is created and served in the interest of justice and is a lawful and honourable response to those who
appear to be abusing the justice system for their own personal gain and political advancement.

Created and served without malice aforethought, ill will, vexation or frivolity and in the interest of justice.

Notary Public

NOTICE: Use of a Notary is for identification and verification of process purposes only and does not
constitute adhesion or change in status in any way.

152
 That's MINE!

Notice of De-registration And Fee Schedule

DATE: ______________________

NOTICE

Be advised that as of the date found above, the automobile with VIN# _______________________
is no longer to be considered registered as a motor vehicle in the legal entity known as The
Province of British Columbia and that said property is now held under a Claim of Right as
mentioned in Section 39 of the Criminal Code of Canada.

Any one guilty of failing to heed this Notice is guilty of negligence and if a police officer liable for
the negligence. Attempts to enforce a Motor Vehicle Act upon me or this automobile will be
further evidence of negligence and will activate my previously established FEE SCHEDULE.

This Notice is effective from the date of Service.

Served By: _________________________

Notarial Witness:

Use of a Notary Public is for attestation and verification of process only and does not alter status
nor evidence adhesion in any manner.

"Violent means will give violent freedom. That would be a

menace to the world and to India herself."
-Mohandas Gandhi

153
Hello Good Peace Officer
First I would like to start by taking the time to thank you for reviewing my videos, having an open mind toward this
subject and for being a good peace officer. I was in the RCR for four years and came close to joining the RCMP but
decided on a less responsible path, as carrying a firearm and incarcerating people for marijuana was simply not
something I could see myself doing. I do try to always ensure that when I speak of peace officers or deal with them
directly I am respectful and courteous. I have compassion for all and great respect for those who with shiny boots toe
the line of the Law. It is when that line is crossed by dirty boots we all suffer and feel betrayed. I imagine as someone
who does honourably serve that when things like that happen it must grate on you considerably. The vast majority of
peace officers I have met have all been very decent people and I do see how tough a job you have. I am also aware
that there is a fundamental truth concerning the source nature and limits of authority and it is that I wish to see
lawfully addressed. I see how much good can come if done properly and the immense harm if done improperly. I will
do my best.

Secondly and respectfully please do not call me Mister. I am a Freeman-on-the-Land and 'Freeman' is a proper and
accepted contracted designation. You have worked hard I bet to be a Peace Officer and as such should be spoken to
with respect for your accomplishments. Your status as 'Peace Officer' should be respected. I too have worked hard
and the term 'Mister' implies a shared societal membership. I know which societies I am a member of and I know all
the members thereof. Please do not take this as disrespectful in any way, but you and I are simply not members of the
same legally existing society. I will if you like explain why later. I do realize that you using the term was an act of
respect and I do appreciate that. I hope you accept this gentle correction as being respectfully tendered. I am a
Freeman and will take it as a sign of your honour if I am addressed as such. I believe I have earned it, and I simply
cannot accept 'Mister'. Freeman Robert-Arthur works fine for me.

Thoreau spoke of how any societal structure needs both the critics and the protectors. If the latter has too much power,
then stagnation results and if the former, then there is no stability. There must be a balance between the two for there
to be any long term growth. The things I teach are I believe true and yes very powerful. I do see your point about
how people could misuse this information and had some hesitation in revealing it for that reason. I liken it to teaching
a five year old how to take the safety off a gun. What I have found however is that most of the people I have been
meeting are not out to misuse this information at all, and are not even involved to gain personally, but because they
too love this country and want to see something better created, and they see this as an opportunity to do so while
address some serious problems. You stated that you think most people are just out for themselves. I invite you to
meet some of the people I have been meeting. They are all very motivated by some sort of Divine Imperative and one
of the key aspects of that is the acceptance of a Oneness that binds us all.

I understand your concern that this information can be misused by the least duty bound amongst us. The half blind
will see this information and think it frees them of all obligations and responsibilities, when the opposite is the truth. I
think you will find that this path demands certain things from those who walk it. Many I think are aware of this at the
outset and those that aren't learn fast enough. Imagine a path leading to a party. To get there you have to cross a body
of water. To do so you will have to abandon any anchors you may have been carrying and wear the life vest that is
provided. If they do that they pass if not they don't and there is simply no way around it. The anchor is what I see as
anger, fear, shame and frustration. The life vest is compassion. Even if they start out without compassion and
burdened by their anger they simply do not get far and there is a place where they cannot pass. Nobody gets to the
party without compassion and with anger or greed. Everybody can get there if they abandon fear and accept
154
The people I have met on this path are not those who are 'just out for themselves' any more then your fellow officers
are 'power hungry half wits looking to inflate their own egos'. I honestly believe many share very similar
characteristics; they care about this country, the Law and are willing to stand, sacrifice and take risks to ensure future
generations also have access to the Law.
I personally have been called to deal with armed peace officers many times, every time I was unarmed, often cuffed,
occasionally jailed and certainly tested spiritually wise, and yet recognized that this was part of my duty. In your job
you have many powers and tools at your disposal and many well armed, equipped and trained people to come running
to your aid summoned at the speed of airwaves. Any one hurts you and the courts and the system come down very
hard on them assuming they even survive. Your job is tough I know, but you have an enormous support system
consisting of the best armed crew in Canada and a court system that rightfully frowns on peace officers being harmed.
Then of course there is the public who may bitch about perceived failures of the police, but when they see a funeral
for fallen officers, even those who otherwise detest the police are respectfully silent and feeling a loss. Would you
like to try being a 'Freeman-on-the-Land' who also must stand for the Law but without any weapons, backup or
support system? I ask you imagine standing in a manner where not only will the courts not protect you but may see
you as a threat and the public as someone who is trying to get away with something. I ask you see that my role is
quite difficult as well, and that those who follow are motivated by a good conscience. I will ensure that in my
seminars I inform people of how important and difficult your job is and how the vast majority of the people in your
position are in fact decent, caring, competent and ready to serve the people of Canada. Certainly your letter has
supported this position. I ask you do the same with your fellow officers and ask that they see that those people who
take the Freeman path, are in fact risking much, are doing so out of love and growing spirit and that it is just as
difficult and necessary a path as the one you walk. I could even argue that it is more difficult due to the lack of
support, but then I am reminded of all the people I have met and friendships forged, and my purpose and know I have
all the support I need.

We want change. We will have it. It has to happen or there is catastrophic failure from chaos or stagnation. To
achieve it peacefully and gently will bring glory to God and honour to those who sacrificed so that we do have a
system where change can be accomplished using words of truth alone. I know I feel very blessed not only for the
knowledge I have gleaned but for being in Canada when called to share it. I can fearlessly speak and share my beliefs
even if they may run contrary to the state because the state is composed of agents like yourself. I am very much aware
of how blessed I am in that regard. There are many places on the planet where speaking as I do would result in
incarceration and torture. I hope you see that I do what I do so that Canada never becomes such a place, and that
finding and paving the Freeman path is not so much an attack on the state or its agents but a much needed reminder.

You spoke of the growing gap between rich and poor and in that we certainly have much common ground. I do not
claim to have the answers or even the reason, but I do see how corporations as legal fictions having been granted
status of 'person' have diluted what a person is almost to the point of slavery, and how because of their lack of
conscience and ability to exist and feed indefinitely and their overriding profit motive are consuming this planet, it's
resources and people. Know why so many people seem to be out for themselves? It is not that they are not giving
people who do not care about their communities, it is because they feel the government has taken enough already, and
they are not seeing the benefits of their 'donations'. Many of the rich are that way because they never cared in the first
place (not all, I know some are rich because they worked their butts off and never stopped caring) and the poor are
finding caring is very expensive, which is sad, but plays right into the hands of the bankers and corporations that seek
to profit from our incredible resources. And they are succeeding it seems.

I would like to share with you a dream I had. I think you may understand this allegory as it involved shiny boots
toeing a line. As an RCR soldier, I spent much time on parade with shiny boots and this vision/dream apparently drew
from that to show me this information. I often get these visions when my sub conscience is trying to show me
something. They happen just as I am falling asleep or just as I wake up. I don't really see them, it is more like I just
walked out of a theatre and I am remembering a movie. It is a flash of insight but in full colour and with much
information. Watching a movie may take two hours; remembering that same movie takes only seconds. It is like that.
155
Sir, I go out of my way to teach people what I know as the truth. I know just because I see something as truth does
not mean it is the truth. I have been wrong in the past and try to tread carefully. I know that just because I have the
right to do something does not make it right to do it. I see how difficult a job you have and more importantly, I see
how difficult it can become if the present situation is not properly addressed. If you think your job is tough now, wait
until there are a million Freemen who know the Law, have created and convened new Lawful courts, and have
charged NEW Peace Officers empowered to arrest existing ones who attempt to impose statutory obligations on said
Freemen. I think then your job becomes well near impossible and I hope you see that my goal is to help you avoid
that and be seen as the selfless heroes that you are.

If I had to point to any one group as the source of much of todays conflict, I do not think I would point to the police,
nor would I point to people who suffer from addictions or even those who attempt to profit directly from those
addictions, although I have very little compassion for such types. I look to the bible and there it has been said
“Blessed are the peace makers, for they shall be called the Sons of God”. Why would I then denigrate peace officers?
It also says “Blessed are the poor and weak in spirit.” Those are the lost and addicted souls, and I pray one day they
find their way back to Source. Know who isn't blessed? Lawyers. To them it says 'Woe be to you lawyers and
experts in the law, for you have taken and hidden the key of knowledge and entering in not yourself, those who have
entered in you hindered.” It also says “Woe to you lawyers, for you laden men with burdens you won't touch with
your littlest finger”. You do realize that what J.C. acted against way back then is here today eh? I see how lawyers
have set up an entire very profitable industry for themselves and using very deceptive words and jargon all their own
have been essentially fleecing us all. They have divided and conquered and have created a system that makes you
people, who should be viewed in the best light, as enemies of the people you serve. They used deceptive language to
do it and I see how they did it. I don't hate them either however, as I think when all the cards have been played in this
Magnificent Deception they will find they have bound only themselves, and those of good spirit will find they can be
free of it all, provided they do accept certain natural obligations to their fellow man. Much of what I have to deal
with is the anger and distrust that people feel to peace officers and the fear that generates. I see how it developed and
I know the source. And its not you and its not them, but it is there.
Before you retire, there will be at least one million people who consider themselves to be a 'Freeman-on-the-Land' in
Canada. They will have taken the proper legal steps to establish their status. It will be a widely accepted, known and
protected legal status available to any who does not seek employment with the government. We will be regularly
using Notary Publics to operate courts and therein establish facts and truths binding on all and will establish lawful
excuse to disobey any and all courts and statutes by way of a claim of right. If this does not happen, there will be
either deadly stagnation or chaos and blood. Either way the human spirit is not served and the dish which is Canada
becomes unpalatable.

How it happens is I think the only question and I see only two paths available. Both provide remedy. The best one I
think is where you provide lawful remedy as it is your duty and we have trusted you to do so. The least acceptable
one, but doable if necessary, is the one where we provide remedy and punish you for not doing so.
That is what is coming and what you folks need to be aware of. Think of it like Halloween. You can't stop it. You
can't forbid it. All you can do is prepare and to refuse to do so, claiming instead the power to disallow it, will bring
nothing but disrespect to all Peace Officers. Remember the tsunami from a few years ago where tragically over a
hundred thousand died? Remember how a small child knew the receding waters meant danger, as they would be
coming back and her words saved those who listened and found high ground? Imagine you are a life guard on a
beach, you do have certain powers over the swimmers, but honestly you have none over the water do you? If those
waters were the waters of consent, you would see them rapidly receding, and you have to know they must come back
and when they do, you do not want to be standing where you were when they left. Finding the high ground when you
see the waters departing is how to survive. Wait until you see them returning you and will find yourself running for
your life. The high ground we need to find is the moral high ground. I am not the cause in any way of what I see
happening in the world and freedom movement, although I do accept that inaction may create more harm. I am just
an irritating messenger who remembers his science and history. I am like that child who pointed out the danger and
how to find safety. Even if I could be lawfully silenced it does not change what is coming.
156
In this one I was walking down a yellow line and I was inspecting military like boots. It was a parade and I was the one
walking along inspecting the boots. I had never been on this side of the line and that realization caused me to look at
my boots, and I saw on my feet however were sandals. I came across a set of boots which were over the line and I
gently tapped them with my right sandal and they moved back where they should have been. I kept inspecting all these
shiny boots and came across a bunch of muddy boots crossing the line and kicked the first one I came across. Tapping
it back over the line. That pair responded by stepping on my foot with force and intent to cause pain. With my one free
foot I stomped the ground three times and then I realized there had been music playing and it had stopped. I turned
around and saw there were tens of thousands of sandalled feet that had been dancing but had now stopped. They were
all facing my way. They all stomped their feet three times in unison and then something amazing happened. All the
shiny boots I had previously inspected took one step forward and then did a sharp about turn and stood defending the
line from our side! The boot on my foot immediately stepped back, I heard cheering and the music started back up and I
looked behind me and I saw that all these dancing sandals had boots around their neck, ready when needed, but they
would rather dance wearing sandals of peace, and then I awoke. Cool eh?
I think this is a fairly good way to look at what is happening. We want peace and to dance in freedom. That means we
need a line and that line is best served by those who will sacrifice the dance and sandals for heavy boots. We respect
that, as it allows us to continue dancing. We love that line and those who stand on it in service of our dance as it and
you allow us to wear our sandals of peace. If you cross that line inadvertently with shiny boots and accept correction
nothing harmful happens. Cross that line with muddy boots however and you are a threat and have breached our trust.
Attack us and you will see the truth. We out number you rather completely, and we all have boots too. And those we
trusted to toe the line with shiny boots who now cross it with mud or allow their fellow officers to do so will face a
nation of once peaceful people who are suddenly wearing their boots, ready to deal with perceived threats so the dance
can continue. We do not want to fight as we love the dance, but if you think we will allow muddy boots on the dance
floor you need to look up, see our boots shiny and new and looking up further see our eyes and intent. Look closely
you will see our beliefs. You serve us. You serve The Line. The Line serves us. Serve properly we can dance in peace.
And we will love you for that. Fail and the dance is temporarily suspended whilst we deal with the muddy boots and
those that allowed them over the line. Those with shiny boots will know this and respond, and by stepping up and
turning around allow the dance to continue.
Your letter did bring me much hope and I trust you see that although you could have ignored what people are talking
about, you choose the more difficult path. Props to you for that. This does create upon you a certain duty of due
diligence concerning these matters. If I am wrong I could cause much damage and by spreading false news break the
law. If right, then you have a duty to act with respect to this information and to ensure your fellow officers are also
aware. I think these are very interesting times we live in and I see many things happening that cause me to think the
change can be positive and peaceful. Among those changes is the fact that the new head of the RCMP is a trained
lawyer and thus certainly knowledgeable about these matters. Also, the Supreme Court recently found that police are
liable for negligence and therefore expected to know the law and act with respect to it. I think all the pieces are falling
into place which will allow peace officers to respect Freeman status. I think failure to do so will be seen as negligence
as all we are doing is using concepts found in the Criminal Code in a lawful manner.

In closing, I would like to once again thank you for your words and for being the kind of peace officer that will look at
such issues. I would be honoured to meet with you and your friends and share my beliefs. If possible I would like to
tape this meeting and use the footage in my teaching endeavours. If you wished and doing so would serve justice I
would be happy to present a seminar without cost specifically for peace officers to learn what we are teaching. This too
I would like to video tape and distribute. I believe it would go a long way to helping people see peace officers as
something besides 'tools of the state' and to address the growing gap that exists not only between rich and poor but the
police and the policed. Dialogue certainly will not be harmful. On that note as well, I would like you to reconsider
your request to not share your words. I would very much like to do so, and will if you wish change what is needed so
that all people will know is that the words came from a police officer somewhere in Canada, although I personally
would not be ashamed of them at all as I think they demonstrate both professionalism and decency. And they certainly
inspire hope.
157
 May love be your Master
May Peace be your guide
May your spirit be sturdy
Whatever betide

There is beauty in life

It's in all that you see
You can find it in you,
I found it in me!

Forgiveness is the Key

It erases all wrongs
And when we smile
We are Strong

So raise up your hearts

And spread great cheer
To all those you love
Be they far or near.

Love and kindness

are never wasted.
They always make
a difference. They
bless the one who
receives them, and
they bless you, the
giver.
Love also empowers you over deceivers.
158
Headless multi armed monsters
Gaping mouths wide
Right where their hearts
Should be

They grab all they can

And eat all they Grab
And they leave nothing behind
But their poisonous shit

Villagers hide
In their separate tents
Ignoring the screams
From where the monsters
Have went

Why do they hide

THEY HAVE HEARTS AND HEADS
They are infinitely stronger
Yet said Monsters be fed

Brainwashed since birth

And led To Believe
WE NEED THESE MONSTERS
In order to breath

It is all a big scam

These monsters that are
For they are not human
not by far

For they can eat and eat and eat

Until ALL is gone
Maybe then the villagers will know
They were wrong

It can't be too late

To fight these beasts
The world is our bounty
It is not their feast.

Get out of your tents

Get up on your feet
Grab a good pen
And force a retreat

These monsters can die

The same they were born
By the will of the people
Their powers be shorn.

159
 Free your mind
My mother’s womb was not a cell,
Yet in these shackles here I dwell,
And I recall not what I did
That from my freedom I was rid

What caused the loss of my free being?

Where was the hearing which served this justice?
Was it in secret, assigned by men?
And if so, am I obliged by them?

A prisoner fears not the threat of jail,

And yet you rattle my cell rails,
And scream that if I do not pay,
Then in a prison I will lay.

You threaten my with my reality,

Your weapon? Nothing! But a fake duality.
I fear not my own circumstance
My only fear is my weak stance.

But putting me in your possession,

Has made me stronger with progression.
For I now know you are the few,
My fellow prisoner is not like you.

So in this riddle that you spin,

I am assured that we can win.
From behind these cold steel bars,
I realize the key is ours.

And as you threaten and despise,

I turn the key to your demise.
And as I walk out, free and bare,
I realize you were not even there

This prison fiction upon me brought,

Enslaved my mind and all my thoughts.
But now that everything is clear,
You become nothing but a smear,

A smudge upon a tainted glass,

That I have wiped and cleaned alas.
Released out of your mammon hands

I AM A FREEMAN ON THESE LANDS

160
Burdened by a coldness
you refuse to share
You will feed a cat
while a hungry man stares
Reading lies
on the carcasses of trees
And playing the lawyers game
Until you are on your knees
Believe their words
at the risk of your soul
Money over people?
Spiritual Troll!
Help the weak
And feed the poor
For we are all ONE
Nothing less
Nothing More

161
 Quote from Ayn Rand's, "Atlas Shrugged"

"When you see that in order to produce, you need to

obtain permission from men who produce nothing -

When you see that money is flowing to those

who deal, not in goods, but in favors -

When you see that men get richer by graft and

by pull than by work, and your laws don’t
protect you against them, but protect
them against you -

When you see corruption being rewarded and

honesty becoming a self-sacrifice -

You may know that your society is doomed."

162
A logical examination of that which must come
163
 Thoreau spoke of how any society had to have its protectors
and its critics. If the protectors have too much power,
stagnation inevitably results. If the critics have too much
power then the stability required for growth is lost. Only
when both work together does a societal structure thrive.

"Life is an
adventure
in forgive
nes
Norman C s." -
ousins

Order without liberty and

liberty without order are
equally destructive.
~Theodore Roosevelt

If the critics do not

act with respect to the
If the critics are protectors there will
silenced there will If the critics operate be no stability and the
be stagnation lawfully and the result will be violent
leading to slow protectors realize protests and riots.
death. they are doing so
there will be a positive
growth, or at least
potential for one.

Do Not Pass Go.

You lose big
164 But you still have a decision
 Good Officers
Either police shall serve the law and
do so in a manner that serves the
people and do so with honor and
respect to human dignity, or they
won't. They will either recognize our
ability to use notices and claims in
order to escape government deceit
and tyranny, and reject court
orders or they won't. If they do,
then suddenly they will be seen as
heroes and not enemies. Not only
will they not be seen as enemies, but
history will see these people as the
Sons and Daughters of God.
Good officers will know and act with
respect to a fundamental truth:
They may serve a thing called 'the
state', but the state must serve us,
and both it and them exist at our
pleasure, and if the state acts
unlawfully they must still stand
even if it means standing between
the state and the people.
Those officers who realize their
primary duty is to the people of
Canada and the law and that they
have a duty to understand the latter
and serve the former will find
themselves honored and respected.
There is no greater tyranny than that which is perpetrated under the shield of the law and in the name of justice.
Bad Officers
If they refuse to follow the law and
choose instead to obey people who
claim a monopoly over the law, then
we have remedy.
The fact is we have a right to justice
and to an accessible system to serve
it to us. Such a court system will
need armed officers to enforce its
will.
If existing officers refuse to accept
the findings of lawful courts, they
will have to face our lawfully
empowered peace officers. We do
not have to carry guns and fight the
police but we can hire true peace
officers to do so.
Those who believe that they are our
masters and we their prisoners will
find themselves no longer protected
by the existing courts and facing
charges for negligence in the new
ones. THose who think they have the
right or power to enforce statutes
on a Freeman because of their own
ignorance will learn that because of
their ignorance they will have
committed an assault and potentially
an abduction under the color of law.
They will be held accountable for
their actions.
165
 "The best course is to reject at once the first incitement to
anger, to resist even its small beginnings, and to take pains to
avoid falling into anger. For if it begins to lead us astray, the
return to the safe path is difficult, since, if once we admit the
emotion and by our own free will grant it any authority, reason
becomes of no avail; after that it will do, not whatever you let
it, but what ever it chooses. The enemy, I repeat, must be
stopped at the very frontier; for if he has passed it, and
advanced within the city-gates, he will not respect any bounds
set by his captives."

The truth that can set

Fear can rob you you free is the one
of your love and universal concept that
courage to act and binds all of humanity.
is often a result Freedom requires
of shadows and common ground and that
untruths. We tend ground is LOVE.
to fear the
unknown and often
will allow that
fear to prejudge
and denigrate.
Fear does have a
worthy purpose
and helps us Compassion is the
survive physically, Anger makes you do expression of
but it does little sharing a oneness.
stupid things and Akin to empathy, but
to help us grow stops you from
spiritually. far stronger it will
seeing the path of bring you to a place
peace. With anger where forgiveness
you can justify the is easy and giving a
most hurtful of joy.
actions.

We all make mistakes

as that is part of
the growth process.
When you allow “All truths are easy
those mistakes to to understand once
weaken your heart they are discovered;
to the point you the point is to
can't forgive discover them.” It
yourself you are is only the truth
abandoning a basic that sets you free.
truth and not
loving yourself.

The world is too dangerous for anything but truth and too small for anything but love.
166
-YOu are not a person, you have a person existing in association with you.
The government only acts on your person.
-The government is composed of people. They are no better then you.
-You and the people employed by the government are equal.
-Nobody governs you without your consent, or the appearance of it.
-Your S.I.N. means you are a government employee and thus bound by the
rules of government employees.
-If you are not a government employee their rules do not apply to you.
Courts actually require your consent as well.
-A violation ticket is a bill of exchange.
-When you vote you are not just electing a government, you are electing
to have one.
-The existing courts are private businesses owned by the various law
societies.
-They are not your property as you do not have full access.
-YOu have a right to travel in your auto on the road if you are not engaging
in commerce.
-The number on the back of your birth certificate is a bond tracking number
and evidences money the government received when you were registered.
-Canada is a corporation and registered as one in the Securities Exchange
Commission.
-Charters and statutes apply to corporations, not countries.
-You have been lulled and tricked into thinking that statutes are laws when
they are only so if you are a government employee.
-If you have lawful excuse you can disobey any court order or government
created statute.
-A claim of right is a lawful excuse and empowers you to disobey any
statute, act or by law and to disobey any court, administrative tribunal or
government issued orders.
-YOu can claim the right to exist without others governing you. This will
not affect any previously existing human rights.
-No peace officer can force you to have a legal name and if you do not they
can't legally deal with you.
-you have the right to refuse intercourse with a peace officer who has not
observed you breach the peace.
-an arrest without your consent is an assault.
-YOu have a common law right to travel on the highways in an unregistered
automobile and to do so without first seeking the permission of another.
- a driver is one who engages in commerce on the public highways.
-An automobile is only a motor vehicle because the owners registered it.
-Government agents cannot remove or provide services to an unregistered
baby.
- A notary public can be used to convene a proper court of law and be used
to bring legal action against the existing courts, police and government
actors.
-Police officers play two roles. One is a peace officer, the other a policy
enforcement officer.
-They are just people playing roles. People PLAYING a ROLE. They have no
special powers if you are not in their theatre.
-Revoke consent and you step out of their theatre.

167
 Love is patient, love is kind.
It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud.
It is not rude, it is not self-seeking.
It is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.
Love does not delight in evil, but rejoices with the truth.
It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
Love never fails.
I Corinthians 13:4-8

168
 ThinkFREE
BE FREE
With Lawful Excuse
This work is the culmination of over 20,000 hours of intensive study
and research by Freeman-on-the-Land Robert-Arthur: Menard the
founder and Director of ThinkFREE.ca. Producer of the world renown
videos "Bursting Bubbles of Government Deception" and "The
Magnificent Deception" this is the next chapter in the process of
understanding that will help usher in a new era of spiritual growth and
personal freedom.

Designed and assembled in order to be easily understandable by just about

anyone this full color graphic novel teaches the fundamentals necessary
to understand what is happening today and how to find complete remedy
in a peaceful and lawful way. If you are new to the whole concept of
Sovereign freedom, this is a great starter for you. If you are already
familiar with this information, this book will help you to teach those
you love what you see and why you are acting.

Loaded with information concerning the justice system, how money is

created, discharging student loans, common law traveling, notorial justice
and examples of documents successfully used by others to achieve
lawful excuse to disobey any and all courts and statutes and thus
secure complete freedom. Of course freedom is not free and the price
for it is more responsibility, not less.

Begin your journey now and join the millions world wide who are learning
how the law truly operates and the truth which can set you free. If
you choose to apply it.

Peace, eh?