LEGAL "FACTS" MOST PEOPLE DO NOT KNOW, BUT SHOULD

[BADecker]

A few days ago I posted the below stuff into a self-moderated thread. The owner moderator took the post down. My thoughts are that when such a moderator takes posts down, that part of the reason is that it might be too  relevant in some way.

I took the below from a website called "Stop the Pirates" - http://stopthepirates.blogspot.com/. Since then the site as been reduced in size to only a fraction of what it was when I was there then. And the below info isn't included in the site any longer.

Maybe it is just a hint for me to stop posting the info. But here it is again. And. I have taken it under fair use. I have posted the source site, above, even though they have taken this info down.

What I am looking for is comments regarding the below info. Is it right? Is it wrong? Has it been discarded in law? Has it been overruled by various court cases? Are the legal sites accurate? What does anyone think? The points are numbered, so it should be easy to answer them point-by-point.


1. The IRS is Not a US government agency.  It is an agency of the IMF (International Monetary Fund) (Diversified Metal Products v I.R.S et al.  CV-93-405E-EJE U.S.D.C.D.I., Public Law 94-564, Senate report 94-1148 pg. 5967, Reorganization Plan No. 26, Public Law 102-391)

2. The IMF (International Monetary Fund) is an agency of the U.N. (Black’s Law Dictionary 6th Ed. page 816)

3. The United States has NOT had a Treasury since 1921 (41 Stat. Ch 214 page 654)

4. The U.S. Treasury is now the IMF (International Monetary Fund) (Presidential Documents Volume 24-No. 4 page 113, 22 U.S.C. 285-2887)

5. The United States does not have any employees because there is no longer a United States! No more reorganizations. After over 200 years of bankruptcy it is finally over. (Executive Order 12803)

6. The FCC, CIA, FBI, NASA and all of the other alphabet gangs were never  part of the U.S. government, even though the “U.S. Government” held stock in the agencies. (U.S. v Strang, 254 US491 Lewis v. US, 680 F.2nd, 1239)

7. Social Security Numbers are issued by the U.N. through the IMF (International Monetary Fund). The application for a Social Security Number is the SS5 Form. The Department of the Treasury (IMF) issues the SS5 forms and not the Social Security Administration. The new SS5 forms do not state who publishes them while the old form states they are “Department of the Treasury”. (20 CFR (Council on Foreign Relations) Chap. 111 Subpart B. 422.103 (b))

8. There are NO Judicial Courts in America and have not been since 1789. Judges do not enforce Statutes and Codes. Executive Administrators enforce Statutes and Codes. (FRC v. GE 281 US 464 Keller v. PE 261 US 428, 1 Stat 138-178)

9. There have NOT been any judges in America since 1789. There have just been administrators.  (FRC v. GE 281 US 464 Keller v. PE 261 US 428 1 Stat. 138-178)

10. According to GATT (The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade) you MUST have a Social Security number. (House Report (103-826)

11. New York City is defined in Federal Regulations as the United Nations. Rudolph Guiliani stated on C-Span that “New York City is the capital of the World.” For once, he told the truth. (20 CFR (Council on Foreign Relations) Chap. 111, subpart B 44.103 (b) (2) (2) )

12. Social Security is not insurance or a contract, nor is there a Trust Fund.  (Helvering v. Davis 301 US 619 Steward Co. v. Davis 301 US 548)

13. Your Social Security check comes directly from the IMF (International Monetary Fund), which is an agency of the United Nations. (It says “U.S. Department of Treasury” at the top left corner, which again is part of the U.N. as pointed out above)

14.You own NO property!!! Slaves can’t own property. Read carefully the Deed to the property you think is yours.  You are listed as a TENANT. (Senate Document 43, 73rd Congress 1st Session)

15. The most powerful court in America is NOT the United States Supreme court, but rather the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. (42 PA. C.S.A. 502)

16. The King of England financially backed both sides of the American Revolutionary War..   (Treaty of Versailles-July 16, 1782 Treaty of Peace 8 Stat 80)

17. You CANNOT use the U.S. Constitution to defend yourself because you are NOT a party to it!  The U.S. Constitution applies to the CORPORATION OF THE UNITED STATES, a privately owned and operated corporation (headquartered out of Washington, DC) much like IBM (International Business Machines, Microsoft, et al) and NOT to the people of the sovereign Republic of the united States of America.  (Padelford Fay & Co. v The Mayor and Alderman of the City of Savannah 14 Georgia 438, 520)

18. America is a British Colony. The United States is a corporation, not a land mass and it existed before the Revolutionary War and the British Troops did not leave until 1796 (Republica v. Sweers 1 Dallas 43, Treaty of Commerce 8 Stat 116, Treaty of Peace 8 Stat 80, IRS Publication 6209, Articles of Association October 20, 1774)

19. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVsMUpPgdT0

20. Britain is owned by the Vatican. (Treaty of 1213)

21. The Pope can abolish any law in the United States (Elements of Ecclesiastical Law Vol. 1, 53-54)

22. A 1040 Form is for tribute paid to Britain (IRS Publication 6209)

23. The Pope claims to own the entire planet through the laws of conquest and discovery.  (Papal Bulls of 1495 & 1493)

24. The Pope has ordered the genocide and enslavement of millions of people.(Papal Bulls of 1455 & 1493)

25. The Pope’s laws are obligatory on everyone.  (Bened. XIV., De Syn. Dioec, lib, ix, c. vii, n. 4. Prati, 1844 Syllabus Prop 28, 29, 44)

26. We are slaves and own absolutely nothing, NOT even what we think are our children.  (Tillman vs. Roberts 108 So. 62, Van Koten vs. Van Koten 154 N.E. 146, Senate Document 438 73rd Congress 1st Session, Wynehammer v. People 13 N.Y. REP 378, 481)

27. Military dictator George Washington divided up the States (Estates) in to Districts  (Messages and papers of the Presidents Volume 1 page 99 1828 Dictionary of Estate).

28. “The People” does NOT include you and me. (Barron vs. Mayor and City Council of Baltimore 32 U.S. 243)

29. It is NOT the duty of the police to protect you. Their job is to protect THE CORPORATION and arrest code breakers. (SAPP vs. Tallahassee, 348 So. 2nd. 363, REiff vs. City of Phila. 477 F. 1262, Lynch vs. NC Dept. of Justice 376 S.E. 2nd. 247)

30. Every thing in the “United States” is up for sale: bridges, roads, water, schools, hospitals, prisons, airports, etc, etc… Did anybody take time to check who bought Klamath Lake?? (Executive Order 12803)

31. “We are human capital” (Executive Order 13037).  The world cabal makes money off of the use of your signatures on mortgages, car loans, credit cards, your social security number, etc.

32. The U.N. – United Nations – has financed the operations of the United States government (the corporation of THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA) for over 50 years (U.S. Department of Treasury is part of the U.N. see above) and now owns every man, woman and child in America.
The U.N. also holds all of the land of America in Fee Simple.
The good news is we don’t have to fulfill “our” fictitious obligations. You can discharge a fictitious obligation with another’s fictitious obligation.

[1715127797]

1715127797

[Foxpup]

Mandatory disclaimer:

BADecker is not a lawyer and his posts are not legal advice. He is a troll and/or idiot and if you follow his idiotic advice you probably deserve whatever happens to you. That is all.

[squatz1]

Mandatory disclaimer:

BADecker is not a lawyer and his posts are not legal advice. He is a troll and/or idiot and if you follow his idiotic advice you probably deserve whatever happens to you. That is all.

Agree with this.

All of this is wrong BADECKER is spreading false information which is obvious bullshit.

This is more the reason why I think all the trolls should go to their own bullshit section -- or we all go to the serious P&S section.....

[af_newbie]

BADecker, you forgot to add that you also believe that Earth is 6000 years old and that Noah and his wife repopulated Earth after the global flood, about 4000 years ago, also, that people lived 900 years in the biblical times, because the "laws of Physics were different" and "because the entropy was not increasing as much or some other pseudo-scientific shit", and that evolution of life on Earth is a hoax.

Oh, I forgot, you also believe that God is love and that emotions create universes in 6 days flat.

[coolcoinz]

BADecker, you forgot to add that you also believe that Earth is 6000 years old and that Noah and his wife repopulated Earth after the global flood, about 4000 years ago, also, that people lived 900 years in the biblical times, because the "laws of Physics were different" and "because the entropy was not increasing as much or some other pseudo-scientific shit", and that evolution of life on Earth is a hoax.

Oh, I forgot, you also believe that God is love and that emotions create universes in 6 days flat.

How about some advice for the oppressed?
He should add that in the US you can avoid being stopped and searched by the police if you keep screaming "am I detained?" or "am I under arrest?" and that you can avoid legal responsibility by claiming that you're a sovereign citizen.

BTW, watch some sovereign citizen arrests on youtube.

[BADecker]

You can find all kinds of things that work sometimes, and don't work other times.

And, I want to thank all you jokers who think that the good info that I showed in the OP is my info. How do you jokers even survive in something like a forum? You can't even read. You can blab, but you can't even read enough to comment on any numbered part in the OP.

Watch this to get out of paying traffic tickets legally - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgXKq02U-m4.

[PopoJeff]

Browsed a few of these nonsensical items.

22. I read the IRS Publication 6209.... no reference of Britain in there at all  https://www.irs.gov/privacy-disclosure/document-6209-adp-and-idrs-information

29. Incorrect. I see that mentioned all the time, and always out of context. The cases cited all involve people that tried to BLAME THE COPS and sue for something they didnt like... (example: an 8 minute response time instead of 4 minutes, believing the cops should be their personal security guards, I told you my husband would beat me when you left, etc..)

[BADecker]

Browsed a few of these nonsensical items.

22. I read the IRS Publication 6209.... no reference of Britain in there at all  https://www.irs.gov/privacy-disclosure/document-6209-adp-and-idrs-information

29. Incorrect. I see that mentioned all the time, and always out of context. The cases cited all involve people that tried to BLAME THE COPS and sue for something they didnt like... (example: an 8 minute response time instead of 4 minutes, believing the cops should be their personal security guards, I told you my husband would beat me when you left, etc..)

Thanks, PopoJeff. I looked for Britain in 6209, as well. I couldn't find it, but I didn't look through the whole document. My only thought about this is that it might be in there through some kind of indirect reference. But I'm not going to take the time to try to find it out. The whole doc is reasonably large.

As for "29. It is NOT the duty of the police to protect you," I have read this in several places, but right at the moment I would have to dig to find where... where it directly said that police are not required to protect people. I agree that it might have said this from the standpoint that police can't be held responsible for delivering a specific outcome.

Anyway, thanks, again.

[PopoJeff]

Browsed a few of these nonsensical items.

22. I read the IRS Publication 6209.... no reference of Britain in there at all  https://www.irs.gov/privacy-disclosure/document-6209-adp-and-idrs-information

29. Incorrect. I see that mentioned all the time, and always out of context. The cases cited all involve people that tried to BLAME THE COPS and sue for something they didnt like... (example: an 8 minute response time instead of 4 minutes, believing the cops should be their personal security guards, I told you my husband would beat me when you left, etc..)

Thanks, PopoJeff. I looked for Britain in 6209, as well. I couldn't find it, but I didn't look through the whole document. My only thought about this is that it might be in there through some kind of indirect reference. But I'm not going to take the time to try to find it out. The whole doc is reasonably large.

As for "29. It is NOT the duty of the police to protect you," I have read this in several places, but right at the moment I would have to dig to find where... where it directly said that police are not required to protect people. I agree that it might have said this from the standpoint that police can't be held responsible for delivering a specific outcome.

Anyway, thanks, again.

29.  The "police dont legally have a duty to protect you" crap all started with a Sec 1983 lawsuit out of Chicago years ago. In short, someone called 911 from an apartment building. No apartment was given. Police responded and couldn't find anything wrong anywhere. They left.  A second call came in, same thing. Cops responded again, and again, no problem was found.  Cops left again.   Later on, woman was found stabbed or injured or something, in the rear alley.  Lawsuit was filed, claiming the cops violated her civil rights by not protecting her when two prior 911 calls were made. Claiming if the cops did their jobs right the first time, she wouldn't have suffered the injury she did.   Judge ruled no, you dont win the ghetto lottery.   And thats what birthed the phrase "cops dont have to protect you"..... always taken out of context.
    If it were true, how were they able to charge that p.o.s. Sheriff in Florida for not reacting to the school shooting?

[PopoJeff]

1.    Well, according to google, the court case Diversified Metal Products v. IRS et al only exists to support "Fact" #1 on the list.

It's not been cited as a precedent in any case since whenever it was ajudicated.

Interestingly, the IMF was created in 1944, beginning operations in 1947. The IRS was created, sort of, in 1862.

Oh, and Public Law 94-564? It's about Mexican debt.

[guigui371]

Fact 16 ) : checked (https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fr-1782.asp) , yes it looks like he did.

No reference to the word Versailles on the wiki page of the american revolution.

[PopoJeff]

5.  https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/executive-order-12803-infrastructure-privatization
 
  Read that.  Thats the EO cited ny your list.  Nothing to do with "no federal employees" BS.  Pretty easy to see what it says.  You dont need you local road crew to fix the bridge, you can contract a private construction company.  
  Whoever made that list needs to stop spreading lies.


I think thats enough google for me tonight

[guigui371]

Fact 2)
Well, you are giving ONE definition of ONE dictionary. 

International Monetary Fund. Agency of United Nations
established to stabilize international exchange and
promote balanced international trade. See also World
Bank.

source : https://epdf.pub/blacks-law-dictionary-6th-edition.html

World Bank. The International Bank for Reconstruction
and Development, commonly referred to as the
World Bank, is an international financial institution
whose purposes include assisting the development of its
member nations' territories, promoting and supplementing
private foreign investment, and promoting long
range balanced growth in international trade. See 22
U.S.C.A. § 286; Mendaro v. World Bank, C.A.D.C., 717
F.2d 610.

Interesting definition for Work permit (same document, same page as World Bank) :

Work permit. Documentary authorization to work given
to an alien by the Immigration and Naturalization
Service (INS). It is unlawful for an employer to hire an
alien who lacks INS work authorization. Immigration
Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA), 8 U.S.C.A.
§ 1324a(a)(1). See also Working papers.

This confirm Aliens,  area 51 and everything 



So, conclusion of #2 : the definition of ONE book, written by someone doesn't mean it is true. 


PS : i am pretty sure if you look at a North Korean dictionary for "internet" it will say : "fake web imagined by the enemies of the Party, where spiders are writing false information"
Would that be the truth ?

[franky1]

is badecker still running down the freeman rabbit hole


gotta love the point 9.
'no judges since a couple centuries ago'. but if you actually read the mentioned case that suppose to be proof. the case is where a guy is trying to claim that the particular court should only be handling constitutional laws not civil laws(contracts/corporation business)
firstly the case has nothing to do with if there are judges or not. it doesnt say judges are vapour and imaginary
secondly the constitution is a civil law in itself
thirdly the guy was trying the foolish thing of thinking it has a case of saying (analogy) in a family court that the court should not be judging non family stuff
(facepalm)
the supreme court is the highest court of all and can see many different cases if all lower courts have been used


also other points.
badecker in another post links a freeman video about parking tickets.
with the whole mumbo jumbo about consent. and how people can refuse parking tickets by not giving consent.
sorry but the consent to form a government is not a daily thing. that individuals get to select at a whim
instead its a 4-5yearly election which forms a contract for a government to manage the country
once in each 4-5 year period an individual cannot revoke consent and abolish the law himself. because the majority gave consent to follow the law. thus the law is still enforcable



as for the stuff about cops are servants to the people. no
police are civil servants. they do work for their master which is their employer(government).
its the employer who then has policies look after its members(people/citizens) but just like having a gym membership does not mean a gym employee is a customers servant.
the customer still has to follow the directions of the employee and the customer can be banned or punished for breaking the gym rules

and yes the gym customer has to pay the monthly subscription(tax) if they want to enjoy all the services provided by the system

also you cant live in the gym and be expected not to pay to be there.

i hope that i have simplified things down so that even an idiot could understand

[franky1]

1.    Well, according to google, the court case Diversified Metal Products v. IRS et al only exists to support "Fact" #1 on the list.

It's not been cited as a precedent in any case since whenever it was ajudicated.

Interestingly, the IMF was created in 1944, beginning operations in 1947. The IRS was created, sort of, in 1862.

Oh, and Public Law 94-564? It's about Mexican debt.

you could have saved alot of googling but just knowing the IMF is american just by the pure fact that the reserve currency is US dollar.
why do you think trump is so easily able to hand out sanctions to other countries but other countries cant easily sanction the us

[PopoJeff]

1.    Well, according to google, the court case Diversified Metal Products v. IRS et al only exists to support "Fact" #1 on the list.

It's not been cited as a precedent in any case since whenever it was ajudicated.

Interestingly, the IMF was created in 1944, beginning operations in 1947. The IRS was created, sort of, in 1862.

Oh, and Public Law 94-564? It's about Mexican debt.

you could have saved alot of googling but just knowing the IMF is american just by the pure fact that the reserve currency is US dollar.
why do you think trump is so easily able to hand out sanctions to other countries but other countries cant easily sanction the us

Actually just copy n pasted that comment from a snopes forum where this same list was posted 

[BADecker]

Browsed a few of these nonsensical items.

22. I read the IRS Publication 6209.... no reference of Britain in there at all  https://www.irs.gov/privacy-disclosure/document-6209-adp-and-idrs-information

29. Incorrect. I see that mentioned all the time, and always out of context. The cases cited all involve people that tried to BLAME THE COPS and sue for something they didnt like... (example: an 8 minute response time instead of 4 minutes, believing the cops should be their personal security guards, I told you my husband would beat me when you left, etc..)

Thanks, PopoJeff. I looked for Britain in 6209, as well. I couldn't find it, but I didn't look through the whole document. My only thought about this is that it might be in there through some kind of indirect reference. But I'm not going to take the time to try to find it out. The whole doc is reasonably large.

As for "29. It is NOT the duty of the police to protect you," I have read this in several places, but right at the moment I would have to dig to find where... where it directly said that police are not required to protect people. I agree that it might have said this from the standpoint that police can't be held responsible for delivering a specific outcome.

Anyway, thanks, again.

29.  The "police dont legally have a duty to protect you" crap all started with a Sec 1983 lawsuit out of Chicago years ago. In short, someone called 911 from an apartment building. No apartment was given. Police responded and couldn't find anything wrong anywhere. They left.  A second call came in, same thing. Cops responded again, and again, no problem was found.  Cops left again.   Later on, woman was found stabbed or injured or something, in the rear alley.  Lawsuit was filed, claiming the cops violated her civil rights by not protecting her when two prior 911 calls were made. Claiming if the cops did their jobs right the first time, she wouldn't have suffered the injury she did.   Judge ruled no, you dont win the ghetto lottery.   And thats what birthed the phrase "cops dont have to protect you"..... always taken out of context.
    If it were true, how were they able to charge that p.o.s. Sheriff in Florida for not reacting to the school shooting?

Police can't be held responsible for delivering a specific outcome, because police aren't in the God-capacity, and there are all kinds of "things" that can influence the outcome that police have no control over.

Any law or directive that requires police to keep someone safe, where it is beyond the ability of police (or anybody) to do so, is a foolish law or directive. Each incident will need to be judged based on its own circumstances.

So, where and what is the law or directive that police are required to protect people?

As for Florida, without seeing the details, nobody would know. Anybody can sue anybody else for anything at any time. If the cop lost in court, there may be more than one reason, including that the judge or jury simply wanted the court to look good in the eyes of the people.

Court cases are not always won or lost the same, even when circumstances are very similar between cases.

[BADecker]

5.  https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/executive-order-12803-infrastructure-privatization
 
  Read that.  Thats the EO cited ny your list.  Nothing to do with "no federal employees" BS.  Pretty easy to see what it says.  You dont need you local road crew to fix the bridge, you can contract a private construction company.  
  Whoever made that list needs to stop spreading lies.


I think thats enough google for me tonight

Just because the words "federal employees" is not found, doesn't really have anything to do with what #5 says.

If you have a bird in your birdcage in your house, and you sell the whole cage, bird and all, as far as you are concerned, there is no bird in your cage? Why? You don't even have a birdcage.

All that EO 12803 means is that if you want to find out if there is any government left that is not private, you have to go to all the paperwork in the world to find out if there has been a sale of government to the private sector. We know that this has happened in part, and happens continually as government property is sold off. The question has to do with the sale of the whole government.

[BADecker]

Fact 2)
Well, you are giving ONE definition of ONE dictionary. 

International Monetary Fund. Agency of United Nations
established to stabilize international exchange and
promote balanced international trade. See also World
Bank.

source : https://epdf.pub/blacks-law-dictionary-6th-edition.html

World Bank. The International Bank for Reconstruction
and Development, commonly referred to as the
World Bank, is an international financial institution
whose purposes include assisting the development of its
member nations' territories, promoting and supplementing
private foreign investment, and promoting long
range balanced growth in international trade. See 22
U.S.C.A. § 286; Mendaro v. World Bank, C.A.D.C., 717
F.2d 610.

Interesting definition for Work permit (same document, same page as World Bank) :

Work permit. Documentary authorization to work given
to an alien by the Immigration and Naturalization
Service (INS). It is unlawful for an employer to hire an
alien who lacks INS work authorization. Immigration
Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA), 8 U.S.C.A.
§ 1324a(a)(1). See also Working papers.

This confirm Aliens,  area 51 and everything 



So, conclusion of #2 : the definition of ONE book, written by someone doesn't mean it is true. 


PS : i am pretty sure if you look at a North Korean dictionary for "internet" it will say : "fake web imagined by the enemies of the Party, where spiders are writing false information"
Would that be the truth ?

And it doesn't mean that the definition isn't true. Black's is used for all kinds of legal stuff. If it is untrue, we are entirely being scammed by using it.

The thing that is needed is corroboration by some other paperwork somewhere.

https://www.britannica.com/topic/World-Bank - "World Bank, in full World Bank Group, international organization affiliated with the United Nations (UN) and designed to finance projects that enhance the economic development of member states."

[BADecker]

is badecker still running down the freeman rabbit hole

Sounds like franky1 is still head-in-the-sand ostrich hole.