Freedom & Success Education Membership Program Accoutrements
Once you regain your free American National status, you'll then require other mechanisms to hold and/or use your property and assets outside of government jurisdiction. These essentials will help you dependably hold private conveyances (cars, trucks, motorcycles, etc.), wealth, and real property, as well as travel freely.
The best means of accomplishing this is by exchanging assets into properly structured contractual common law Pure Trust Organizations.
This lawfully recognized entity provides the ultimate in asset protection, tax immunity, privacy and estate planning. It can also provide tax savings for those required to file returns.
An American National or citizen can still maintain management control of the property, as a Trustee, or all of the benefits of ownership, as a Beneficiary or a Capital Unit Certificate Holder, without incurring the inherent liabilities of ownership.
He and/or she can still live in the house, drive the car, operate the business, etc. However, because the asset(s) belong to the Trust Organization, and not to the individual, no one, not even the IRS can take the asset(s) because of the purported liabilities of a Trustee(s) or the Beneficiary(ies).
Having property held in an irrevocable, Common Law, Federal Pure Trust Contract Organization is like utilizing leased property without a drain to finances. Just like leased property, assets which are "held in trust," are unaffected by lawsuits, liens, levies, bankruptcy, divorce, and/or death.
With all assets held by Pure Trust Organizations, there are no assets that the IRS can lawfully lien or levy, making the American National or citizen "uncollectible". Contractual Pure Trust Organizations provide the surest road to freedom and financial security permitted by law.
Most Americans erroneously believe that unless the government sanctions a particular activity, it is illegal. In truth, because the people are sovereign at law, they are free to conduct their personal lives, operate businesses and hold property outside of the restraints and regulations of the government!
An irrevocable, Common Law, Federal Pure Trust Contract Organization can lawfully, by contract, hold any type of asset that can be held in the name of an individual, with no statutory restrictions (i.e. houses, rental properties, furniture, cars, jewelry, stocks, bonds, insurance policies, etc.).
An irrevocable, Common Law, Federal Pure Trust Contract Organization can also conduct business and own property without a Social Security Number or EIN Number.
Note: (Banking in North America is no longer possible and requires the use of another entity, which is explained to Members upon request.) A Pure Trust Organization is also not required to pay income taxes or to file any forms with any branch of the government.
Transferring property into a Contractual Pure Trust Organization is as simple as transferring it to any other third party. Property is merely transferred from the name of original owner to the Pure Trust Organization and its Trustee(s).
Once lawfully transferred, the property is subject only to its own indentures, which create the laws, protecting the property held by it.
The authority for the creation of an irrevocable, Common Law, Federal Pure Trust Contract Organization is the common-law right of the parties to enter into a contract. The "right to contract", according to the Constitution for the United States, Article I, § 10, is unimpairable.
That means that it is not within the power of the government, including a judge, to change one word of a Contractual Pure Trust Organization. To do so would violate the Constitution for the United States which is a felony.
"Since the business trust has its origin in the common-law right of the parties to enter into a contract and does not spring from a franchise granted by the state.
"It has been held that the constitutional authority to levy excises (income tax on the exercise of privileges) upon commodities, a term including corporate franchises. does not empower the legislature to impose an excise (privilege) tax on business trusts."266 Mass 590, 163 NE 904, 63 ALR 192. 13 Am Jur 2nd 85
Revocable Living Trusts, Limited Liability Companies, and Corporations are creatures of statutes, owing their existence to the charter power of the Legislature. Such entities may be regulated and taxed by the government because they are exercising the privilege of operating a franchise granted by the State.
The government, therefore, is authorized to impose a privilege excise tax on the entities it creates, in the form of the income tax, which is not applicable to the Pure Trust Organization.
The IRS and State Tax Agencies have no special powers which allow them to penetrate a properly structured Trust Organization and to lien or levy property held within it. Unlike a corporation, a Pure Trust Organization maintains the same rights as an American National.
"The fact that a business trust is not regarded as a legal entity distinct from its trustees, if a true trust...may result in this advantage to the trust, which a corporation does not possess:
"The trust consists of individuals...who are Citizens, and who therefore are entitled to certain rights and immunities such as those guaranteed by the privileges and immunities clauses [Art. IV, §2, CI.1] of the federal Constitution, which do not apply to corporations."156 ALR (American Law Review) Pg. 51, paragraph 3
As evidenced in a December 1996 letter from Charles F. Felthaus, Chief, Philadelphia Accounting Branch, for the Internal Revenue Service on page 46, "A Pure Trust Organization has no tax requirements." Therefore, a Pure Trust Organization is not legally required to file a tax return.
"All subjects over which the sovereign power of the state extends (i.e. Corporations or other statuary entities) are objects of taxation but those over which it does not extend are. upon the soundest principle.
"EXEMPT FROM TAXATION. This proposition may almost be pronounced as self-evident. The sovereignty of a state extends to everything which exists by its own authority or exists by its permission."McCulloch v. The State of Maryland, 4 Wheat, 316
In Weeks v. Sibley, D.C. 269 F, 155, Edwards v. Commissioner, 415 F2d 578, 582 10th Cir. (1969) and Phillips v. Blatchford, 3 7 Mass 510, the courts ruled that a Pure Trust Organization is not illegal even if formed for the express purpose of reducing or avoiding taxes.
Edison California Stores, Inc. v. McColgan, 30 Cal 2d 472, 183 P2d 16, ruled that persons may adopt any lawful means for the lessening of the burden, of income taxes.
The Department of the Treasury, IRS Handbook for Special Agents §412; Tax Avoidance Distinguished from Evasion states; "Avoidance of taxes is not a criminal offense. Any attempt to reduce, avoid, minimize, or alleviate taxes by legitimate means is permissible..."
Pursuant to Narragansett Mut. F. Ins. Co. v. Burnhamn, 51 RI 371, 154 A 909, it is not an evasion of legal responsibility to take what advantages may accrue from the choice of any particular form of organization permitted by law.
13 Am Jur 2d, 379, Paragraph 51 "One of the objectives of business trusts is to obtaill for the trust associates, most of the advantages of corporatio11s, without the authority of anv legislative act and with the freedom from the restrictions and regulations generally imposed by law upon corporations."
Irrevocable, Common Law, Federal Pure Trust Contract Organization may be utilized to hold either personal and/or business property or to operate a business. A major advantage to operating a Pure Trust Business Organization, is that, because it is not a creature of the legislature.
It is not subject to the myriad of strangling legislative controls, and regulations that are applicable to corporations and other legislative entities. The Pure Trust Organization has no compliance costs, such as accountant and attorney fees, that eat up a large percentage of corporate profits.
The Supreme Court case of Eliot v. Freeman, 220 U.S. 178, ruled that "a Pure Trust Organization is not subject to legislative control". The Supreme Court holds that the trust relationship comes under the realm of equity, based upon the common law, and is not subject to legislative restrictions as are corporations and other organizations created by legislative authority.
The irrevocable, Common Law, Federal Pure Trust Contract Organization is not liable for the debts of the Trustees or the Beneficiaries and the assets held by the trust cannot be seized to satisfy their debts. Further the Trustees and Beneficiaries are not liable for the debts of the Pure Trust Organization. The beneficial interest in property is not assignable.
"Trust property cannot be held under attachment nor sold upon execution, for the trustee's personal debts."Clew v. Jamison, 182 U.S. 461, 21 S. Ct.645
"Trust property cannot be held under an attachment nor sold upon the execution of trustee's personal debts...Trustees and beneficiaries cannot be held liable for debts incurred by the trust.
"If, in fact, a true trust has been created, the certificate holders are not liable on the obligation incurred by the trustees or managing agents appointed by the trustees."Hussey v. Arnold, 70 NE 87; Mayo v. Moritz, 24 NE 1083
Pursuant to 695.30(a) of the CCP for the State of California and similar Civil Procedure Codes of other states:
"...property of the judgment debtor that is not assignable or transferrable is not subject to the enforcement of a money iudgment."
Legislative Committee Comment
"Subdivision (a) of section 695.030 states the general rule is that property is not subject to enforcement unless it is assignable or transferable."See. e.g. 1 A. Freeman, Law of Executions Sec. I 09 (3d ed. 1900); Murphy v. Allstate Ins. Co., 17 Cal. 3d 937, 553 P.2d 584, 132 Cal. Rptr 424 (1976).
Because the irrevocable, Common Law, Federal Pure Trust Contract Organization is also not affected by the death of any parties to the trust contract, there is no need for a will, and all probate, death and inheritance taxes are eliminated.
Without proper estate planning, government vultures and attorneys can take the majority of a citizen's estate at his or her death.
How to Cook a Vulture, by Lynne Meredith
A quick Google search will show you government's attempt at destroying the prominence of irrevocable, Common Law, Federal Pure Trust Contract Organizations, because they work so very well. We know first hand as we have used them, completely unscathed, for 12 years.
Allodial: "Free; not holden of any lord or superior; owned without obligation of vassalage or fealty; the opposite of feudal."
As you know, Legal Title is ownership of property that is cognizable or enforceable in a court of law, or one that is complete and perfect in terms of the apparent right of ownership and possession, but that, unlike equitable title, carries no beneficial interest in the property.
Equitable Title refers to the actual use and enjoyment of a given property without real, absolute ownership.
Allodial Title is the heart and sole of the construct of the United States of America. This is how you hold title to your land, free and clear of any taxes or encumbrances.
The government cannot come onto your land, you are sovereign on your land. Imagine owning land where you knew, if all went wrong, you could at least go and grow vegetables and survive - this is what the USA is meant to be.
Following the fraud of the Federal Reserve Banking Act and the owners of that bank causing World War One and the Great Depression and the bankruptcy of the USA, banksters deceptively eliminated Allodial title and the heart of the USA was torn out.
It comes as a shock when you realize that you do not own what you thought you owned. Go to the Bureau of Land Management to find out who owns your land.
In the Treaty of Paris, which ended the American Revolutionary war, the American people were given their lands in "Allodial Title". Citizens owned all the property free and clear. At some point the U.S. Government returned the country to the feudal system of property ownership, forcing an obligation to pay duties/tax.
A concept in some systems of property law. It describes a situation where real property (land, buildings and fixtures) is owned free and clear of any encumbrances, including liens, mortgages and tax obligations. Allodial Title is inalienable, in that it cannot be taken by any operation of law for any reason whatsoever.
This seems to tie in with the "Freeman on the Land" concept, common law vs. marine law and so forth. It relates to cars, too, in that there's a Manufacturer's Certificate of Origin whereby even if you pay off your car in full, your Pink Slip is nothing more than a "Certificate of Ownership"......but not the ownership itself, of which the state retains partial ownership allowing them to tax you and require you to register and license your vehicle. If you can get the Allodial Title, which appears to be extremely difficult, then you would have no obligation to the state at all.
As the economic crisis worsens, expect the governments, in their economic desperation, to be increasingly more stringent on rules, regulations, and raising taxes in general, and on property owners in particular. In Canada and the US, there have already been several property tax increases.
Don’t be surprised if more of this will come shortly. Property rights is a basic virtue that many of us take for granted, but there may be a hefty price to pay for being a land owner in the future–something that would be irrelevant if you obtained an Allodial Title on your land.
What is a Commercial Lien? If someone has 'wronged' you, by their actions, you have a remedy, in Law. The Common Law is the Law-of-the-Land, and is the highest man-made Law under which the People of the Nation are bound.
Under the Common Law, everyone is individually responsible for their own actions. The 'office' they may hold, the 'authority' they may consider they have, and/or the uniform they may wear, does not protect them in any way, shape, form. Simply because they (like everyone else) are responsible for every action they take.
This was set into tablets of stone following Word War II, at the Nuremberg Trials. German Officers claimed "I was only obeying orders", yet they were still found guilty, and hung accordingly. This also forms a part of the Geneva Convention to which most Countries are signatories, especially the United Kingdom. Thus "I was only obeying orders" is not a defence.
The reasoning is simple: BEFORE taking any actions against anyone else, make sure that what you are doing is lawful and moral. If you suspect that the action you have been ordered to take is either unlawful or immoral, then you must refuse to obey.
You can report the order, and your reasons for believing it to be unlawful and/or immoral to a higher authority. You can go as high as you like in the chain of authority, pointing out that anyone who conspires to support the unlawful/immoral order are making themselves accomplices, in Law. And that, as a consequence, they (themselves) will be held fully accountable, in Law.
In simple terms you write down The Exact Truth of what occurred, based on your first-hand knowledge, including any necessary supporting documentation. You will be writing under penalty of perjury, so do not lie, or make any Statements you feel you cannot prove. You explain the 'wrong', and you claim damages. You claim damages that you feel you deserve.
You write this in the form of a sworn Affidavit, and send it to whoever 'wronged' you, giving them 30 days to rebut what you have said. You tell them that you will remove any Statements they can prove to be incorrect, but the result (after all removals) will be Notarised and placed on to the Public Record.
You must take this step. Because it is honourable, and you must remain in honour. You cannot expect a Commercial Lien to work if you cannot prove this step. Thus your Notice should be sent by Recorded Delivery, such that you can prove it was received.
If you do not take this step you can expect your collar to be felt at some later date because it is essential, and the essence of the Common Law, that a Party you consider offended you has the chance put their side of the story, and you must not deny them that chance.
It is very important to remember how the Common Law works. This is solely by Verdicts of Juries (upon hearing first-hand knowledge-based evidence) and by unrebutted Statements of Truth (also based solely upon first-hand knowledge).
What remains unrebutted, in substance, creates The Truth, in Law. (This is the only way the Law can work. It relies on people being truthful, with the possibility of perjuring themselves if they lie). Note that 'in substance' does not mean 'simple denial' as in "No, I didn't!".
'In substance' means denial with supporting proof. (And remember "I was only obeying orders" is not 'proof', nor is it any kind of defence. Neither, by the way, is "I didn't know" - because ignorance of the Law is no excuse. They should have checked, and discovered whether or not their actions were lawful and/or moral, before doing whatever they did).
This is why, as a Witness, you are required to swear to: "Tell The Truth, the Whole Truth, and nothing but The Truth". Simply because all judgements are based on that. (I repeat ... it is the only way the Law can work).
Now that you have an Affidavit that remains unrebutted, you can get it notarised by a Notary Public. 'Notarising' consists of identifying yourself to the Notary (Passport, Driving Licence, etc), and signing your Affidavit in his or her presence ... such that he or she can verify that it was you, yourself, making your signature. The Notary will apply his seal, and will sign accordingly. (Their fees for doing this range from £30 to £50 on average).
All you need to do from this point onward is to 'place the fact that your Affidavit exists on to the Public Record'. This can be done by talking out a small advertisement in a newspaper. Within the advertisement you can invite Debt Collection Agencies to contact you - in order to actually exercise the Commercial Lien debt.
Judges know that they cannot affect a Commercial Lien because it is based on first-hand knowledge, which they can never have. Only you can have that knowledge. Only you can make the Statements you made. Thus there is nothing for them to 'judge', and they know that.
The Lienee, Therefore Has Three Options:
Anyone you feel who has wronged you - or conspired to wrong you. For example, the Directors of a Company who have made demands upon you, without a Contract of Obligation from you.
For example, all Debt Collection Agencies who simply write, demanding money, when you have never heard of them before, and know that you have no obligation to "do business" with them. They may write on the basis of a Parking Fine, for example.
The point is they do this without having first obtained a lawful obligation from you. They may very well claim a Warrant from the Northampton Bulk Clearing Centre, but you never consented to be 'judged' at Northampton Bulk Clearing Centre (and were never given any opportunity to put your side of the story).
Furthermore the Warrant is not based on the Verdict of a Jury, or sworn Affidavit from first-hand knowledge (computers do not have first-hand knowledge!). So any such Warrant is void in Law. Consequently, if they continually harass you, they are (seriously and criminally!) "wronging" you.
Therefore, you do a little research and uncover the names of Directors. You apply a Lien to each of the Directors, because it it their responsibility to make sure that their Agency acts in honour, and within the Law, not outside of it.
If you read the description above carefully, you will see that - in order to apply a Commercial Lien - you do not need to get a Court's permission. The Lienee would need to take you to Court (with a Jury of 12) in order to get it removed, or the amount reduced, without making a payment.
Obviously you need to be prepared to remove it yourself, if they do pay up.
Manufacturer’s Statement Of Origin ORS 801.185
“Certificate of title” means a paper document issued by any jurisdiction specifically as evidence of vehicle ownership. A certificate of title is not necessarily the only evidence of vehicle ownership issued by a jurisdiction.
Notice the “For Official Government Use Only” sticker on the back of your new stickers from the State. Notice the words “VOID” in the watermark of your “Certificate of Title” in several places. Still don’t believe the State owns your vehicle?
To hold true or allodial title to automobiles, trucks, motorcycles, or as we call them, “place-travel devices,” requires a process of either securing the MSO, or revoking the State’s trusteeship over the motor vehicle and exporting it into the jurisdiction of the free republic.
This will not only purchase the vehicle, but also transfer the allodial title to you. You must pay for the vehicle with $21 silver with the balance in FRN’s.
Do not register the vehicle with the State.
So here is a summary of the steps necessary to purchase a used conveyance, and revoking the State’s trusteeship over the motor vehicle and securing true title:
If the “Certificate of Title” is presently in your name, you must notify the State of your allodial ownership via a Bill of Conveyance or the MSO if can locate it.
You could also transfer the equitable interest of the automobile or truck into a Common law Trust and isolate your liabilities there. Go ahead and transfer the title into your name, or directly into a trust or foreign entity.
Gaining Allodial Title to your vehicle is a service offered by DTSS.us. Just let us know your circumstances and we will walk you through gaining the title back for you.
All registered vehicles are property of the state and therefore are subject their laws regarding acting in commerce on the road. You must first de-register your private conveyance or order a DTSS Private Conveyance De-Registration Program, which includes the Private Traveler package as shown below.
Review the articles, script and documents on the Difference in Driving v. Traveling page (provided to Members only), inside our system.
In government's effort to control the perception of all men and women from cradle to grave, to create perfect slaves in their system, they've destroyed what once was considered family.
Child Protective Services is the name of a governmental agency in many states of the United States responsible for providing child protection, which includes responding to reports of child abuse or neglect.
Some states use other names, often attempting to reflect more family-centered practices, such as "Department of Children & Family Services". CPS is also known by the name of "Department of Social Services" or simply "Social Services."
Of course that's what their public relations wants you to think, but any parent that has ever dealt with CPS will tell you the CPS agents are far more abusive physically, pyschologically, and sexually to your child then the worst convicted criminals ever known.
Each chatel U.S. citizen is bonded for their future worth to the IMF, whom owns the U.S. Government corporation. CPS receives a large bounty for every child they bring into their alleged care.
Using proprietary remedies of reporting their officers to other agencies for things like tax evasion, kidnapping, human trafficking or attacking their bonds, etc. we are able to have the cases thrown out of courts and have children returned to their parents. Along with having these perpetrators investigated by other government agencies.
U.S. CITIZEN, in American law, one who, under the constitution and laws of the United States, has a right to vote for civil officers, and himself is qualified to fill elective offices. One of the sovereign people.
A constituent member of the sovereignty, synonymous with the people. 19 How. 404. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, citizens of the United States and of the state within they reside. Amend. XIV. Const. U.S. Black's Law Dictionary First Edition, 1891.
A citizen of the United States is a citizen of the federal government..." Kitchens v. Steele, 112 F.Supp 383 (1953) State v. Manuel, 20 NC 122 (1838): "the term 'citizen' in the United States, is analogous to the term 'subject' in common law; the change of phrase has resulted from the change in government." Supreme Court: Jones v. Temmer, 89 F. Supp 1226 (1993)
"The privileges and immunities clause of the 14th Amendment protects very few rights because it neither incorporates the Bill of Rights, nor protects all rights of individual citizens. Instead this provision protects only those rights peculiar to being a citizen of the federal government.
It does not protect those rights which relate to state citizenship." "The only absolute and unqualified right of a United States citizen is to residence within the territorial boundaries of the United States." Supreme Court: US vs. Valentine 288 F. Supp. 957 (D.C.P.R., (1968).
THE U.S. SUPREME COURT:
a. "Inasmuch as every government is an artificial person, an abstraction, and a creature of the mind only, a government can interface only with other artificial persons. The imaginary, having neither actuality nor substance, is foreclosed from creating and attaining parity with the tangible.
The legal manifestation of this is that no government, as well as any law, agency, aspect, court, etc. can concern itself with anything other than corporate, artificial persons and the contracts between them." S.C.R. 1795, Penhallow v. Doane’s Administrators 3 U.S. 54; 1 L.Ed. 57; 3 Dall. 54 (1795); and,
b. "the contracts between them" involve U.S. citizens, which are deemed as Corporate Entities:
c. "Therefore, the U.S. citizens residing in one of the states of the union, are classified as property and franchises of the federal government as an "individual entity", Wheeling Steel Corp. v. Fox, 298 U.S. 193, 80 L.Ed. 1143, 56 S.Ct. 773 (1936)
When the employees representing a government violate this principal and fail to correct themselves when made aware of their violation, they are willfully committing an ultra vires act in violation of the Corporate Charter of which their employer was instituted under.
“Mr. Justice Marshall said: The doctrine of ultra vires is a most powerful weapon to keep private corporations within their legitimate spheres and to punish them for violations of their corporate charters, and it probably is not invoked too often... Zinc Carbonate Co. v. First National Bank, 103 Wis 125, 79 NW 229 (1899)”American Express Co. v. Citizens State Bank, 194 NW 430. (1923).
A U.S. Citizen owns NO property as Slaves cannot own property. Anyone that carefully reads the Deed to a property will conclude to be listed as a TENANT. (Senate Document 43, 73rd Congress 1st Session (1933)) and a slave can own nothing, NOT even what are thought to be their children.
(Tillman vs. Roberts 108 So. 62, Van Koten vs. Van Koten 154 N.E. 146 (1926), Senate Document 438 73rd Congress 1st Session (1933), Wynehammer v. People 13 N.Y. REP 378, 481 (1856)). This is the reward for being a U.S. Citizen.
A citizen of the United States is a citizen of the federal government..." Kitchens v. Steele, 112 F.Supp 383 (1953) State v. Manuel, 20 NC 122 (1838): "the term 'citizen' in the United States, is analogous to the term `subject' in common law; the change of phrase has resulted from the change in government." Supreme Court: Jones v. Temmer, 89 F. Supp 1226 (1993)
"The privileges and immunities clause of the 14th Amendment protects very few rights because it neither incorporates the Bill of Rights, nor protects all rights of individual citizens. Instead this provision protects only those rights peculiar to being a citizen of the federal government.
It does not protect those rights which relate to state citizenship." "The only absolute and unqualified right of a United States citizen is to residence within the territorial boundaries of the United States. "Supreme Court: US vs. Valentine 288 F. Supp. 957 (D.C.P.R., (1968).
At birth, the IMF accepts ownership of the chattel citizen as payment for the U.S. Government's bankruptcy debts to the Federal Reserve System (now owned by the IMF). The IMF deducts approximately $1,000,000.00 from the U.S. Government's balance, per citizen.
The U.S. Government does this by converting the Birth Certificate into a bond, which is then paid to the IMF. The IMF then sells these bonds (T-Bills) on the markets. They open an account at the Federal Reserve Branch that bought said bond.
The Birth Certificate, slave bonds increase in value continually, and the asset covering those ever increasing valuations is the human being's slave labor extracted via taxes, tickets, fines, fees, and you guessed it, incarceration, which allows the jails cheap slave labor.
In all court cases, the case itself becomes a sellable bond. The courts issue a Bid Bond, a Performance Bond, and a Payment Bond that is sold against the private Federal Reserve Account, held under the citizen's all capital letter name entity.
The judge, and his accomplices sell these bonds and do not report the income!!!
Using proprietary remedies of reporting the court judge, clerk, and officers involved to other agencies for things like tax evasion, kidnapping, human trafficking or attacking their bonds, etc. we are able to have the cases thrown out of courts and have those incercerated released. Along with having these perpetrators investigated by other government agencies.