Admiralty Court

When you walk into an American court room today, you will see a flag with red and white stripes, a blue field with stars, and a gold fringe standing next to the judge. This is NOT the flag of the united States of America, but is an Admiralty flag, representing the British Naval Law of the Seas come on shore!

If the court refuses to admit that it is an Admiralty court, then they must accept Common Law -which has been prohibited by the supreme Court and the entire legal system of our country .

To press this point, you innocently say:
"It appears that this court is claiming jurisdiction under Admiralty Law. If this is true, I am unaware of getting involved with an international maritime contract, so I deny that such a contract exists. If this court is claiming jurisdiction in Admiralty, then place the contract in evidence so that I can challenge the validity of the contract (under UCC 1-207)."

To comply, the court would have to enter the national debt and bankruptcy in evidence. They would have to admit that the international bankers owned the whole nation, and that we are all their slaves. But this is NOT what the judicial powers want to do. So, they claim they have STATUTORY JURISDICTION .

Under "Statutory" jurisdiction (just another euphemism for Admiralty or Merchant Law), they are imposing the Universal Commercial Code. Under Common Law, you had to enter contracts (I) KNOWINGLY, (2) VOLUNTARILY, and (3) INTENTIONALLY. This is not true under the U.C.C. If you only exercise the benefits of an "agreement" or contract, without actually signing, it is presumed that you intend to meet the obligations associated with those granted benefits. If you accept a benefit granted by the government, you are obligated, by that acceptance, to follow to the letter, each and every statute involved with that benefit. So, it appears that you are trapped by the deception. But wait!

Every legal system must have two characteristics: REMEDY and RECOURSE. REMEDY is the path to getting out from under the law. RECOURSE is how you recover losses when you have been damaged under the law.

The REMEDY in the U.C.C. is section 1-207. Here are important portions of that section:

"The making of a valid Reservation of Rights preserves whatever rights the person then possesses, and prevents the loss of such rights by application of concepts of waiver or estoppel." ( 1-207.7)

"When a waivable right or claim is involved, the failure to make a reservation, thereof, causes a loss of the right, and bars its assertion at a later date." (1-207.9)

"The Sufficiency of the Reservation --Any expression indicating an intention to reserve rights, is sufficient, such as' without prejudice'." ( 1-207.4)

The RECOURSE in the U.C.C. is section 1-103. Here is an important portion of that section:

"The Code is complimentary to the Common Law, which remains in force, except where displaced by the code. A statute should be construed in harmony with the Common Law, unless there is a clear legislative intent to abrogate the Common Law." ( 1-103.6 )

So, it is clear that by "reserving your rights" you can still rely upon the Common Law! Therefore you say:

"I reserve my right not to be compelled to perform under any contract or commercial agreement that I did not enter knowingly, voluntarily, and intentionally. And .furthermore, I do not accept the liability of the compelled benefit of any unrevealed contract or commercial agreement. "

After the judge has stopped sputtering, if he does not throw the case out of court, you then can say:

"Your honor, I can sue you under the Common Law for violating my right under the Uniform Commercial Code. I have a remedy under the U. C. C. to reserve my rights under the Common Law. I have exercised the remedy, and now you must construe this statute in harmony with the Common Law. To be in harmony with the Common Law, you must come forth with the damaged party."

If the judge still insists on proceeding with the case, act bewildered and ask:
"Let me see if I understand, your Honor: Has this court made a legal determination that the sections 1-207 and 1-103 of the Uniform Commercial Code, which is the system of law you are operating under, are not valid law before this court?"

About this time the judge should be turning purple. He is caught in a snag. The court can not sensibly throw out one part of the Code and uphold another. If your judge is stupid enough to answer your question, "Yes." then you say:

"I put this court ON NOTICE that I am appealing your legal determination. "

Since the judge knows that the higher court will uphold the Code on appeal, and he will be overturned, he is again in a box. If he has a little more intelligence than his gavel, he will dismiss the case.

ACTIONS YOU CAN TAKE IN COURT

For Study Only

In order to dissolve any UNSUBSTANIATED PRESUMPTION or assertion made by the government, you should make a statement such as the following in order to qualify your position regarding their presumption that you are "accepting benefits from government" --STOP THE FRAUD BY STATING:

PROPER STATMENT FOR COU RT TO SET YOURSELF UP PROPERL Y UNDER THE U.C.C.

"The natural person in the instant case shall continue to state, I AM NOT a resident of the District of Columbia, or a foreign corporation, officer, director, stockholder, or an employee of a foreign corporation or a citizen of the United States, or a citizen of any corporate conglomerate state government, and not a resident of any Federal possession, enclave or fort, etc... ; and, if I, of necessity, receive any governmental benefits and privileges it is without prejudice, whereby I reserve all rights per the UCC 1-207. I am therefore not subject to the colorable law jurisdiction of the United States in the corporate monopoly of the federal and the State governments. "

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

The following two situations are cases where the defendant entered an affirmative defense in the federal courts and got his case dismissed. In both of these cases the defendants had raised the issue of BANKRUPTCY.

The FIRST involved a traffic ticket. In this case, after the judge read the defendant's motion regarding bankruptcy, he said:

"You are using a lot of colorable law..." and then he (the judge) asked the defendant, "You WERE driving on such and such road, right?"

"IF I WAS, I DID SO WITHOUT PREJUDICE under U. C. C. 1-207. "

THE CASE WAS DISMISSED!

In the SECOND situation, regarding a demand for money. the defendant said:

"If the government said I owe it. I probably owe it; but the government PUT me in this situation...by taking away my gold and silver and leaving me with nothing but COLORABLE negotiable instruments...etc."

I'...I did what I did without prejudice, U.C.C. 1-207."

The judge ruled IN FAVOR of the defendant.

The following responses might be appropriate in your situation:

"If it appears that I am 'AN EMPLOYEE' it is without prejudice, U C. C. 1-207."

''If it appears that I am 'A RESIDENT' it is without prejudice, UC.C. 1-207."

"If it appears that lam 'A C1TIZEN'it is without prejudice, U.C.C. 1-207."

(See federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 8(C) and compare this rule with U.C.C. 1-103 pertaining to an AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE.)

Remember, these TITLES OF NOBILITY (EMPLOYEE, RESIDENT or CITIZEN) do not, in themselves, make an individual subject to government servitude; it is the things that automatically come along with such a title, the benefit and privileges that MAKE him subject to the STATE and FEDERAL government.

If you find yourself in court, you might want to claim "Misrepresentation by Coercion and Fraud" by stating something like the following:

"Okay, maybe I do owe you a thousand dollars. If the government says I owe a debt, I probably do owe it. But the reason I owe a thousand dollars is because you (the government) PUT me in a position where I have to owe you a thousand dollars by cheating me out of a thousand dollars of value. "

"You put me into this position under duress. You tricked me into a contract or agreement of some kind that I didn't understand. And you forced me to sign it by coercion. I didn't have any idea what I was doing, and I completely made a mistake."

EXPOSE THE GOVERNMENT! Show how the use of misleading words and phrases have CAUSED you to make a mistake.

Government officials have a RESPONSIBILITY to tell you of any pending responsibility on your part, and to inform you of ALL of the terms of the "agreement." U.C.C. 3-305.

It is very important that you know where to find remedy in the U.C.C., and to know when and how to use it. In one case when an individual stated that he did not have an address or residence in the State, the judge gave him one and proceeded to take jurisdiction over this individual.

If you find yourself in a situation where the judge IGNORES what you say or THREATENS you with CONTEMPT OF COURT and says, "If you persist in this matter I will put you in jail," it might be wise to make the following statement:

"Okay, I will pay the ticket (or sign the document) UNDER DURESS and PROTEST: pursuant to U. C. C. 1-207. If I have to pay now, I am reserving my rights to SUE you later."

FIRST: You reserve your RIGHT'S under U.C.C. 1-207;

SECOND: You claim your Common Law RIGHT'S (5th Amendment) that you first reserved.

Regarding the signing of the Form W-4, or an affidavit regarding your "STATEMENT OF CITIZENSHIP" pertaining to WITHOLDING, it would be wise to write the following on either the W -4 or the statement:

"I receive ALL compensation and wages WITHOUT PREJUDICE, U.C.C. 1-207. "

You MUST KNOW who you are and how your status fits in (or doesn't fit in) with the STATE and FEDERAL governments. You might want to memorize something to the following effect:

"I am NOT a resident/citizen because I DO NOT have an address or residence WITHIN this corporate state or the Federal United States, and I DO NOT participate in the collection of the National Debt of bankruptcy ."

"If it appears that I have received any "benefits" from the government, they were 'received' WITHOUT PREJUDICE under U.C.C. 1-207."

Prove that the government is "acting" in a fraudulent manner by claiming to be bankrupt. They claim to hold title to all property. They claim to hold the title to everyone's automobile. They claim all mineral rights. Plus, they are obviously in possession of all the gold and silver that they fraudulently exchanged for valueless commercial paper .

Prove FRAUD under U.C.C. 1-103, and DISCHARGE any assumed liability under U.C.C. 3-601.3.

(1) "I had no RIGHT OF ACTION or RECOURSE against this government's colorable law that was instituted for the collection of revenue to pay the national debt."

(2) "1 would not accept any liability if I had an understanding of the 'agreement. "

(3) "Because of my lack of understanding, I did NOT enter into said 'contract' or 'agreement' knowingly, voluntarily, or intentionally.

(4) "Any presumption to the contract was fraudulent in nature. Government officials have a duty to inform me of my rights (remedy) pursuant to U. C. C. 3-305. "

In all cases where a "defendant" accused the government of pretending to be bankrupt the judge dismissed the case. Once we learn the proper procedure we can go after these wrong-doers by charging them with FRAUD.

This same section, U.C.C. 3-601.3, pertains to Habeas Corpus --No Right or Recourse, NO INJURED PARTY.

No person can be held in jail if he is being held for a COLORABLE crime against the United States Government; BUT, as we know, it is being done every day. Are we asserting our rights in the WRONG forum?