marque and reprisal document

7/30/2019 Marque and Reprisal Document

1/6

Re: great article on letter of marque and reprisal

Thu Apr 18, 2013 5:43 am (PDT) . Posted by:

bhayden1046

Hey, why don't you put my case up there only group website????? ???? I will show you how to win and

beat them at their own game. The court's game is the word game." Please state your name for the

record" . My answer," I am the beneficial owner/authorized agent of the trust". Beneficiary is my new

name. Under no circumstances do you ever say your real name or I should say the name that they have

given you your commercial name. The all capital lettered name. You are not that entity. Always

remember the beneficiary cannot be sued he has nothing to do with the administration of the trust.

You never want to be a fiduciary trustee to anyone's trust or under any circumstances. Why because the

fiduciary trustee is the paying agent for the trust. He is the settlor. He is the one that will go to jail. As

my judge told my public defender" he just made you part of the crime" This moron public defender then

asked the judge," what am I supposed to do". The judge told him" bud youre on your own". To make along story short the judge then made some derogatory remarks about me and then recuses himself. I

lost count of how many different Judges I appeared in front of because after I got done telling the court

you I was the beneficiary, no judge wanted me in his court room. My case was dismissed and full. In the

story.

Then if you have been injured or damaged in any way by the action of the court you demand to be

reimbursed for your damages. So I filed a counterclaim. Listed all the crimes they committed against me

at 2 million apiece, 2 million for each court order and for each of law that they broke and for each day

that I was imprisoned which totaled over $200 million and then I'm entitled to triple damages. In the

story I'm now in the process of collecting my damages. I don't argue with the court I tell him how is andwhat they're going to do because I'm the beneficial owner. Are they got try to tell me I'm not? Why do

you think they want you to sign everything for????????? ?? I have the authority. There my public

servants. They are the five fiduciaries. All public officials are the five fiduciary trustees of the public

trust.(DTC) Harold

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

SS collapse

Thu Apr 18, 2013 6:46 am (PDT) . Posted by: "Mach-10" longest95

Collapse my social security account at the DTC

1. First, the source of funding of any loan originates from a security called your birth certificate, or bond:

At birth, all hospital operator chiefs are required and paid to forward, on demand, a certified copy of

each live birth to the Treasury where they are converted (by incorporating one's all capitalized name


2/6

fiction) into registered securities with a $1,000,000 (one million) dollar real face value. They are sold to

Reserve as collateral for future loans, based on our future labor, by ownership over the birth security.

Second, the above reality expressly crosses the United's Title 15 U.S.C. 17, verbatim:

"The [future] labor of a human being is not a [U.C.C. CAP-NAME] Commodity or article of [usury]

commerce."

It is the Trust Depository Account, the face value of one's all capitalized name registered security or

bond is marked at Title 26 USC 163(h)(3)(B) (ii), $1,000,000 limitation:

"The aggregate amount treated as the buying of a debt shall not exceed $1,000,000 ($500,000 in the

case of a married individual filing a separate return)."

The debt or "amount treated of the buying of the registered birth certificate security is represented is

the debt to the Reserve banks for the interest "debt" that, e.g., Ben Bernanke' s stock holding clients

charge us for printing our own money for pennies per piece of paper and zero for entering numbers in a

computer then, in turn, charging Us face value of those dollars plus interest on it. Indeed, it is that most,

not all of Us, at birth were and are pledged (and our children) collateral for an artificial face value debt

interest.

Third, when acts to secure a loan, the funds are funded off one's birth security account, based on the

promissory note one signs and nothing else:

The system is based on "promises to pay *back your own account+" and the "confidence; in those

promises [by people live stock gamblers like James Dimon, John Vella, Angelo Mozilo & Ken Lewis].

2. Fourth, by "buying" one's birth security account, the Reserve holders set up a trust, appointing

themselves the beneficiary of one's future income as the owner of one's security converted from one's

birth certificate. That is why if one reads and understands the real small print on a "loan document" the

Trust, which one doesn't know they are entering or signing off on. That trust generally operates this

way, in review:

Basic Trust Principle

Property of any sort *like Birth Certificate Registered Securities+ can be *and are+ held on trust. The

uses of trusts are many and varied. Trusts can be created during a person's life (usually by a trustinstrument).

In common law legal systems, a trust is an arrangement whereby property (including real, tangible

and intangible) is managed by one person (or persons, or organizations) for the benefit of another. A

trust is created by a settlor, who entrusts some or all of his or her property to people of his or her choice

(the trustees).


3/6

Choice Is the Key ....Lynchpin Word Here

The trustees hold legal title to the trust property (or trust corpus), but they are obliged to hold the

property for the benefit of one or more individuals or organizations (the beneficiary, a.k.a. cestui que

use or cestui que trust), usually specified by the settlor, who hold equitable title. The trustees owe a

fiduciary duty to the beneficiaries, who are the "beneficial; owners of the trust property.

The trust is governed by the terms of the trust document, which is usually written and occasionally set

out in [the] deed form. The trustee is obliged to administer the trust in accordance with both the terms

of the trust document and the governing law.

In the United States, the settlor is also called the trustor, grantor, donor, or creator.

Fifth, the process applies to some, but not the "privileged; who secure for themselves "emoluments;

or "perks" not provided to and kept secret from others, which secret is monitored and maintained by

the State Bar, Inc. CEO or President.

One such secret "members only" loop relating to U.C.C. person classified as a good promissory note

debt instruments is CAP or "limitation, which is dialed in supremely at Title 26 USC section

163(h)(3)(B) (ii) "Limit" , verbatim

Limitation *on+ The amount treated as home indebtedness *14th Amen+ shall not exceed

$100,000 ($50,000 in the case of a separate return by a married individual).

See, about those words "shall not exceed" it means, for those versed in the English language that if,

e.g., a single human being puts $50K down on a home that it is paid for, with a little "cushy" transaction

cost of a few grand max perhaps. It is supremely marked, verbatim:

[I]instruction comes in terms of the mandatory "shall, " which normally creates an obligation

impervious to judicial discretion."

The Trust Contract Con Artist

A) Unconscionable = Cap Name Contract

B) Over-reaching = Cap Name Contract

C) Not Arms Length Negotiated = Cap Name Contract

D) No Material Opt Out Term Disclosed = Cap Name Contract

E) Not Uniformly 14th Amen Applied Cap Name Contract

F) No Meeting Of The Minds = Cap Name Contract Con

G) No Assent To The Cap Name Contract Con


4/6

3. About bills sent by companies claiming lawful power to bill Us by reference to the all capitalized

spelling of one's name, which is a person company d/b/a that was incorporated shortly after a live birth,

this 1966 lien law is misplaced on multiple definition counts:

"The entire taxing and monetary systems are hereby placed under the U.C.C. (Uniform Commercial

Code)." The Federal Tax Lien Act of 1966

The Uniform Commercial Code "by its very terms, is limited to the sale of goods * * * (and) is

therefore not applicable to *e.g.+ real estate contracts" +). As *all pros+ candidly concede-, the code, by

its very terms, is limited to the sale of goods [which people cannot legally be classified as].

Accordingly, unless one is classified as a "good" owned, in part or whole, by another for sale, then the

U.C.C. does not apply. The following definitions of goods control:

Defining "goods" to "include every species of personal property which are movable at the time

of identification to the contract for sale . . .".

B) Defining "goods" to include "all chattels personal" .

Now, a simple question which arises in the litigation of billing power contracts is whether the

transaction is governed by the Uniform Commercial Code ("UCC" ). Article 2 of the UCC applies to

"transactions in goods." UCC 2-102.

A "good" is defined as "all things . . . which are movable at the time of identification to the contract

for sale . . . ." UCC 2-105. Obviously, a baby thing is "moveable at the time of its identification" ;, just

like any other species that requires oxygen to survive.

People are of course charges of electricity. The classification of electricity as either service thing or good

subject to commercial not common law has been litigated:

Simply put, electricity in this instance is a thing movable at the time of identification to the contract for

sale. That is clearly demonstrated by the fact that the Agreement calls for the shipment of specific

quantities of electricity. The electricity is moved through the power lines and the amounts are metered

and therefore identifiable. The court will apply the U.C.C.

"Electricity is a commodity which, like other goods, can be manufactured [or bred], transported and

sold."

Courts Split On the Point

Other courts, however, have reached the opposite conclusion. For example, in New York, Kentucky,

Maryland, Massachusetts and Michigan, courts have found that electricity is not a good, but instead is a

service. Some of these courts have adopted almost a metaphysical approach to analyzing the issue

which ignores the fact that electricity is a moveable, physical product:


5/6

[T]he provision of electricity is a service, not the sale of a product. . . . Electricity is the flow of

electrically charged particles along a conductor. The utility does not manufacture; electrically charged

particles, but rather, sets in motion the necessary elements that allow the flow of electricity. ' [Citation

omitted.] The consumer pays for electricity by kilowatt hour, that is, the length of time electricity flowsthrough the system. There is no individual product. Instead, the consumer pays for use of the electricity.

Now, you`ve seen static electricity at work: "static cling", bad hair days, a shock from a door knob but

now you can put all of that "body electricity" to good use and light a small neon light bulb. Body static

electricity can be in excess of 10,000 volts but amperage is so low, it's harmless! Hold on to one of the

light bulb wires and walk across your carpet, dragging your feet as you go. This builds up a charge of

static electricity that discharges through the light bulb in your hand. You power the bulb!

If The UCC Applies Materially Impacts Our Social Contract Presented a different way, the simple inquiry

is:

I: Is a person a U.C.C. good owned or leased, in part or whole, by anyone for future or current billing

purposes?

R: "The labor [money] of a human being is not a [U.C.C.] commodity or article of [billing] commerce." 15

USC, 17

A: Here, an attempt has been made by acts in fact to mal-classify one as a good.

C: The Company Franchise who sent the bill by U.C.C. classification is liable.

The simple secret classification triggers void contract fraud at deep Court levels.

"If you're bearish and right, people hate you. If you're bearish and wrong, people laugh at you. You can't

win." Metz

3.

A portion of my recent filing

Thu Apr 18, 2013 6:54 am (PDT) . Posted by: "Mach-10" longest95

I,XXXXX am now hereby counterclaiming post settlement under Public Policy Rule 13 because:

1. I, XXXXXX am the principle.

2. I, XXXXXX am the holder-in-due course of the original

account.

3. I, XXXXXX own both sides of the account.


6/6

4. I, XXXXXX own common stock and the preferred stock.

5. I, XXXXXX am the principle on the account which means I'm the secured creditor... as established via

UCC-1 financial statements legally and lawfully filed with the Secretary of the STATE OF XXXXXX and

subsequent UCC-3 Addendums thereto as the transmitting utility; the secured creditor, XXXXXX [CLAN

OF: XXXXXX ] pays the commercial debts of the debtor XXXXXX XXXXXX , all crimes are commercial 72117 CFR as applied in the Law of Merchant. Debts of the debtor XXXXXX XXXXXX , when they are brought

to XXXXXX [CLAN OF: Baker], the secured creditor' s attention in commercial honor they will be

forwarded on for honorable settlement and closure thereof from: SS account XXX-XX-XXXX, AUTOTRIS

XXXXXXXXX , COLB XXX-XX-XXXXXX, XXXXXX, CUSIP, EIN and or any and all associated trusts, accounts, or

public holdings

6. I, XXXXXX am the living fiduciary trustee, of age of the accou

marque and reprisal document

Documents