Tuesday, August 28, 2012


Trevor Paddenburg From: The Sunday Times August 25, 2012
wheel clamp man
He's a lean, green, stripey-sock wearing machine. He's Wheel Clamp Man and he's out to help you. Source: Supplied
HE'S the wheel clamp crusader, armed with an angle grinder and coming to the rescue of illegally parked motorists in Perth.
Wearing a green lycra suit, a bright red cape and coloured socks, the vehicle vigilante swoops to the aid of stranded drivers who fall prey to parking inspectors.
He hacks open wheel clamps with a battery-powered angle grinder, leaving motorists free to drive off and avoid a $135 release fee.
And he does it all free, asking only for a donation which goes to the homeless.
While "Wheel Clamp Man" is a hero to motorists, police say he is a menace and want the public to dob him in.
"He is committing the offence of criminal damage and if people have any info, they should contact Crime Stoppers and we will deal with him," a WA Police spokesman said.
This week The Sunday Times tracked down the masked superhero, who would not give his name. He said he began his mission after experiencing the frustration of having his own car clamped.
"I'm taking an ethical stance," he said. "I'm helping people out. I don't feel I'm damaging property.
"The amount of money these companies make off innocent people is insane. Where does that money go? Not into car parks or safer streets. It goes into their pocket.
"Imagine you're an old lady, you don't see the signs, you go to get your groceries and come back and you've been clamped and you have to pay hundreds of dollars.
"I got clamped myself. I went to a car park, pulled in, couldn't see any signs, and I must have walked less than 100m and I was clamped. It was a con because they were watching."
The caped crusader said he had sawn off several clamps across Perth in the past fortnight and he vowed sparks from his grinder would continue to fly as he fought "greedy" councils and wheel clampers.
When he spots a clamped car, he dons his costume and mask and asks if the driver wants the device removed.
"Depending on the clamp, it takes less than a minute," he said. "That's when my heart starts racing because you never know when a police patrol is around the corner."
He said he put the costume together himself and decided to become a superhero in a storyline reminiscent of the movie Kick Ass, in which a high-school comic-book fan becomes a vigilante character.
Wheel Clamp Man said his superhero persona was also modelled on England's Angle Grinder Man, another who comes to the aid of wheel-clamp victims.
"I wear the costume because a lot of streets have CCTV," he said. "I always keep it with me, so I can get changed in the car and jump out with my angle grinder."
Government figures reveal WA drivers owe more than $250 million in about 740,000 unpaid motoring fines.
While private car park operators clamp cars, the WA Local Government Association said councils used fines only to enforce parking rules.
Wilson Parking chief executive Craig Smith said wheel clamping was "only used as the last option for parkers who have multiple unpaid breach notices".

Sunday, August 26, 2012


Our children here in Australia are being victimized kid-napped, are being used to create a new stolen generation for the government, and the real question is is the department of child safety really protecting children or are the children being used to fill the Coffers of our state governments as well, These departments that have workers in it that must not have any idea how to:
a.) look after children,
b.) must be working on a commission or a quota system to get as many children as they can from parents who do nothing wrong to children other than not being rich.
VIDEO : "No Way Out But One" http://vimeo.com/19259757 A PRODUCTION OF realjustice.org.au
CONTACTS bruce-bell@ozemail.com.au
MAILING Post Office Box 4767 Sunshine Coast Mail Centre Queensland 4560 Australia


The point of sharing this article is to demonstrate to to you that you don't need to be a country to issue your own passport. Really, all you need is for someone else to accept the jurisdiction of your creation. If you do not like the political/legal/health/spiritual/economic implications of using the passport issued by your company/country then make your own. Simple. 
INTERPOL has developed its first ever travel documents (e-Passport Booklet and e-Identification Card). These are intended to enable INTERPOL officials, chiefs of law enforcement agencies, heads of National Central Bureaus and staff to travel internationally on official INTERPOL business without requiring a visa when assisting in transnational investigations or urgent deployments.

Facing today's challenges

The crossing of international borders by law enforcement officials is a necessary reality in combating today’s global security challenges.
INTERPOL operates in a world transformed by the transport and Internet revolutions. Whilst largely beneficial, these changes have also facilitated globalized crime, with international criminals exploiting technological advances to further their activities.
One of the most significant hurdles faced by international law enforcement officials in the fight against international crime is the lack of speed and ease with which assistance can be  provided to those countries requesting it.
Indeed, when an affected country requests assistance, it can take anything from 24 hours to eight weeks for law enforcement personnel to be issued with visas and arrive at the scene.
“Criminals can cross borders swiftly and effortlessly, while our Heads of National Central Bureaus, law enforcement colleagues and even our General Secretariat staff are slowed down or stopped because of legitimate but time consuming visa requirements and bureaucratic international red tape, which constitutes a major impediment to keeping the world safe.” Ronald K. Noble, INTERPOL Secretary General.

Speeding up INTERPOL’s response

It was with this need in mind that in 2009 the INTERPOL Executive Committee approved a  proposal to create a special INTERPOL Travel Document that would enable authorized INTERPOL personnel travelling on official INTERPOL-related business to enter member countries whenever and wherever needed.
Member countries ratified this initiative at the 79th session of the INTERPOL General Assembly in Qatar, November 2010, opening the way for the use of a new police cooperation tool, and greater inter-state cooperation.
The INTERPOL Travel Document bypasses the lengthy visa requirements set by member countries, allowing quick entry to law enforcement officials. Member countries make this possible by bilaterally agreeing to assign specially derived visa statuses for INTERPOL Travel Document holders. This allows member countries to choose which arrangements suit them when granting special visa statuses to INTERPOL Travel Document holders.

Making the world safer

With the INTERPOL Travel Document, those acting on behalf of the global law enforcement community via INTERPOL are able to respond to a country’s request for assistance with minimal impediments.
Granting the INTERPOL Travel Document special visa status will help law enforcement officers from INTERPOL member countries and the General Secretariat make the world a safer place.

Official recognition from 44 member countries

Member countries have shown great interest in this initiative with several already according a special visa status to INTERPOL Travel Document holders and many others seeking more information as to how they can support the initiative in their own countries.
Currently, 44 member countries have already accepted the INTERPOL travel document in both its forms (e-Passport Booklet and/or e-Identification Card) to be used in conjunction with a valid national passport.
A further 120 countries are also in the process of recognizing these documents within the limits of their national laws.
The member countries that have already accepted the INTERPOL Travel Document are: Afghanistan, Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Armenia, Belarus, Benin, Botswana, Brazil, Burkina-Faso, Burundi, Cambodia, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Comoros, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of Congo, Egypt, France, Georgia, Guinea, Jordan, Laos, Latvia, Liberia, Madagascar, Maldives, Mauritius, Monaco, Nigeria, Pakistan, Qatar, Rwanda, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Sudan, Swaziland, Tanzania, Uganda, Uruguay, and Yemen.

Friday, August 24, 2012


Bianca Hall and Mikiverse Law. Published: August 22, 2012
"Laws" -When was the referendum?- passed today will allow authorities -given that the Law of this land refers to the Divine Creator/Crown&Constitution/We the People, and besides the Divine Creator, all of those stand behind the Origonee Lore of each individual tribe/country of this land, precisely, 'who' are these 'authorities' that are being referred to and why is this journalist not pointing this out or asking the hard question? to collect and keep Australians' internet records, including their web-browsing history, social media activity and emails. -Hmmm. Is this why there wasn't a referendum? I mean could you imagine the ballot? Q.1 Would you like the Government to spy on your personal and private business? 
Attorney-General Nicola Roxon said the "laws" -actually it was a statute that was passed, not a law- would help police track cyber-criminals around the globe, and would give authorities the power to find people engaged in forgery, fraud, child pornography, and infringement of copyright and intellectual property. -You'd have to be pretty dumb to buy into this fear based piece of bullshit propaganda.
The "laws"-if we repeat it enough times maybe you will believe it, hopefully, you will believe it :)!??!!?!?!?- will also allow Australia to accede to the Council of Europe Convention on Cyber-crime, which has 34 members. -This may be another reason that there was no referendum, but, in case you have missed the significance of that last statement I have thoughtfully copied and pasted it for you.- will also allow Australia to accede-ac·cede/akˈsēd/
  1. Assent or agree to a demand, request, or treaty.
  2. Assume an office or position
to the Council of Europe Convention on Cyber-crime, which has 34 members.- OH. I GET IT. IT'S ANOTHER STEP TOWARD GLOBAL GOVERNMENT AND THE DESTRUCTION OF NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY. Yeah, that would have been an interesting Q.2 in the referendum; Q.2 Are you prepared to give up part of your national sovereignty so that.....oh shit, that's right, the presence and function of the Governor-General and Governor's illustrates that no, we are not an independent country at all -even though we like to pretend that we are- so why not have another European power join Britain, America & China in telling us what to do?
''Cyber-crime is a growing threat -to who? you? me? of course not. It is a threat to multi national companies who are all slave trading, greedy, manipulative criminals who would torture their own children for more money and power. Are you downloading a movie? Maybe we should lock you up and throw away the key, Fox Studios might only make five billion dollars this quarter.- that touches all aspects of modern life,'' Ms Roxon said.  ''It poses complex policy and law enforcement challenges, partly due to the transnational nature of the internet.''
But Greens-one of the major parties happy for us to be being with this immoral, unjust and unlawful carbon tax- communications spokesman Scott Ludlam said the "laws"-to be fair, this may be the journalist dribbling this rubbish about a legislative tool being a law- went further, and the government had failed to explain why the far-reaching powers were necessary. -That would be an interesting challenge for a group of people who lie for a living, to actually try to explain their dastardly activity in this matter.
''The European treaty doesn't require ongoing collection and retention of communications, but the Australian bill does,'' So Labor, Liberal, the Nationals & the Greens all contributed to a draconian piece of legislation which basically a SPYING ON YOU piece of legislation. It's a good thing we are free, but, I can't help wondering, if apart from our Jewish friends, did your average German punter feel that they were 'free' immediately after the Reichstag fire and consequent passage of the Enabling Act 1936? Senator Ludlam said.
''It also leaves the door open for Australia to assist in prosecutions which could lead to the death penalty overseas.'' How do like those apples?
The legislation -finally they use the correct labelling- will allow the Australian Federal Police to collaborate with international authorities in seeking Australian communications data under warrants. So how this works is that if Obama or Shillary, or Mitt Romney decide that you've been naughty and broke their laws they can come after you and before your innocence or guilt has been proven in a court of law, Gillard will happilly render you into their treacherous, criminal hands. But relax, you are free. We won the cold war. This nonsense reminds me of a Robbie Thorpe phrase; "AUSTRALIA IS A CRIME SCENE". That obviously isn't news to anyone who pays attention, but, as per usual, the criminal politicians are happy to sell out the people on this rock to appease and please foreign interests, aren't they Schappelle? And, did anyone else notice that this legislation wasn't referred to by name in the article, lest anyone goes and actually READS it.
Bianca Hall Published: August 22, 2012 Laws passed today will allow authorities to collect and keep Australians' internet records, including their web-browsing history, social media activity and emails. Attorney-General Nicola Roxon said the laws would help police track cyber-criminals around the globe, and would give authorities the power to find people engaged in forgery, fraud, child pornography, and infringement of copyright and intellectual property. The laws will also allow Australia to accede to the Council of Europe Convention on Cyber-crime, which has 34 members. ''Cyber-crime is a growing threat that touches all aspects of modern life,'' Ms Roxon said. ''It poses complex policy and law enforcement challenges, partly due to the transnational nature of the internet.'' But Greens communications spokesman Scott Ludlam said the laws went further, and the government had failed to explain why the far-reaching powers were necessary. ''The European treaty doesn't require ongoing collection and retention of communications, but the Australian bill does,'' Senator Ludlam said. ''It also leaves the door open for Australia to assist in prosecutions which could lead to the death penalty overseas.'' The legislation will allow the Australian Federal Police to collaborate with international authorities in seeking Australian communications data under warrants. Follow the National Times on Twitter This story was found at: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/political-news/authorities-gain-power-to-collect-australians--internet-records-20120822-24m03.html


Tammi Pepperman is an excellent researcher and communicator of information that may resonate with you. Visit her webpage at:http://www.myprivateaudio.com/Tami-Pepperman.html


This is the fibonacci numbers.  They use this Forex, which is an investment company.
Optional forms 90 and Optional forms 91. You can download all this on the Internet.  This is how you get out of prison. 0,11,2,3,5,8,13 Just substitute you’re articles of uniform commercial codes for those – you’ve got article 8 up there, you got article 5, and you got article 2. They are all part of the golden means – the golden means is 1.618 – it is a spiral. This is all mathematical. Everything in the universe is mathematical. The science of mathematics is based on geometry. - - - -. (Talks about pyramids, planet X.)
Here is a list of all the forms and where they are located. [Projector shows Code of Federal Regulations, TITLE 48 – FEDERAL ACQUISITION ASSOCIATION SYSTEM] This is your get out of prison – this is how you get out of prison. All you have to do is release the bond and your gone. They cannot hold you as the collateral.  They are holding you as the collateral and the security for the debt – for the statute bond – the bond of obligation of record. You see right there – that says standard form 24 bid bond. It is in 28-101.  There’s your bid bond – SF24  There’s your SF 25 performance bond – there’ the code section that deals with that – what you should do is download this.
Code of Federal Regulations
Title 48 Federal Acquisition Regulations System


Scope of part.
Subpart 28.1—Bonds and Other Financial Protections
Scope of subpart.
Bid guarantees.
Policy on use.
Solicitation provision or contract clause.
Noncompliance with bid guarantee requirements.
Performance and payment bonds and alternative payment protections for construction contracts.
Amount required.
Contract clauses.
Performance and payment bonds for other than construction contracts.
Performance bonds.
Payment bonds.
Contract clause.
Annual performance bonds.
Other types of bonds.
Advance payment bonds.
Patent infringement bonds.
Bonds and bond related forms.
Substitution of surety bonds.
Additional bond and security.
Contract clause.
Consent of surety.
Furnishing information.
Withholding contract payments.
Payment to subcontractors or suppliers.
Subpart 28.2—Sureties and Other Security for Bonds
Scope of subpart.
Requirements for security.
Acceptability of corporate sureties.
Acceptability of individual sureties.
Security interests by an individual surety.
Acceptability of assets.
Acceptance of real property.
Substitution of assets.
Release of lien.
Contract clause.
Exclusion of individual sureties.
Alternatives in lieu of corporate or individual sureties.
United States bonds or notes.
Certified or cashiers checks, bank drafts, money orders, or currency.
Irrevocable letter of credit (ILC).
Contract clause.
Subpart 28.3—Insurance
Notice of cancellation or change.
Insurance against loss of or damage to Government property.
Risk-pooling arrangements.
Overseas workers' compensation and war-hazard insurance.
Insurance under fixed-price contracts.
Insurance under cost-reimbursement contracts.
Group insurance plans.
Contract clauses for workers' compensation insurance.
Contract clause for work on a Government installation.
Solicitation provision and contract clause on liability insurance under cost-reimbursement contracts.
Contract clause.
Agency solicitation provisions and contract clauses.
Contract clause for insurance of leased motor vehicles.
Contract clauses for insurance of transportation or transportation-related services.
40 U.S.C. 486(c); 10 U.S.C. Chapter 137; and 42 U.S.C. 2473(c).

28.106–1 Bonds and bond related forms.

The following Standard Forms (SF's) and Optional Forms (OF's) shown in 53.301 and 53.302 shall be used, except in foreign countries, when a bid bond, performance or payment bond, or an individual surety is required. The bond forms shall be used as indicated in the instruction portion of each form.
(a) SF 24, Bid Bond (see 28.101).
(b) SF 25, Performance Bond (see 28.102–1 and 28.106–3(b)).
(c) SF 25–A, Payment Bond (see 28.102–1 and 28.106–3(b)).
(d) SF 25–B, Continuation Sheet (for SF's 24, 25, and 25–A).
(e) SF 28, Affidavit of Individual Surety (see 28.203).
(f) SF 34, Annual Bid Bond (see 28.001).
(g) SF 35, Annual Performance Bond (see 28.104).
(h) SF 273, Reinsurance Agreement for a Miller Act Performance Bond (see 28.202(a)(4)).
(i) SF 274, Reinsurance Agreement for a Miller Act Payment Bond (see 28.202(a)(4)).
(j) SF 275, Reinsurance Agreement in Favor of the United States (see 28.202(a)(4)).
(k) SF 1414, Consent of Surety (see 28.106–5).
(l) SF 1415, Consent of Surety and Increase of Penalty (see 28.106–3).
(m) SF 1416, Payment Bond for Other Than Construction Contracts (see 28.103–3 and 28.106–3(b)).
(n) SF 1418, Performance Bond for Other Than Construction Contracts (see 28.103–2 and 28.106–3(b)).
(o) OF 90, Release of Lien on Real Property (see 28.203–5).
(p) OF 91, Release of Personal Property from Escrow (see 28.203–5).
[48 FR 42286, Sept. 19, 1983, as amended at 54 FR 48986, Nov. 28, 1989; 61 FR 39213, July 26, 1996]

(Keating, pointing to the page above)  There is your bid bond, the SF 25 is your performance bond – there’s the code section – these are the code sections – 28.102-1  is the section number of 48 CFR – these all came out of the Code of Federal Regulations.  You can get them out of the title too – Title 48.   You can use either one – Titles or CFR.  25-a is the payment Bond. 25b is a continuation sheet for SG 24, 25, and 25a. Then you got a form – SF28, which is an affidavit of individual surety.  An individual can come in, and do an affidavit of individual surety on a bid bond – he now becomes a co-owner of the bid bond.  This is what these people are doing.  If you go down here, you got SF34, which is the annual bid bond.  Remember what I told you under 52.228-14 ? You can use and Irrevocable Letter of Credit in lieu of a Bid Bond?  SF 35 is your annual performance bond – see these are annual bonds.  I’m going to show you a form; it’s called form 10K and a form 10Q, and a form 10 for the registration of securities.  What you should be doing is registering all this stuff with the securities exchange – so that you become the registered holder. – and registered owner, then you control all this stuff. Then you can tell the DTC what to do.  You have to get the horse in front of the cart.  That’s why you are not going anyplace – on a treadmill.  [Inaudible question]  Keating: yeah if you go to section G, which I will show you in a minute, it says in section G, of 52.228-14, that you can use a draft – you can draw on the ILC with a draft. This is where these international bills of exchange come in.  An international bill of exchange is a draft.  And if you go into the official text of the UCC under section 3-104, of the official text, it tells you that.  You don’t use the word bill of exchange any more - they use the word draft.  A BOE is a commercial draft under 3-104 of the UCC.  The reason I use international BOE’s is because The United States became a party to the UNICTRAL convention – in Dec. 1988.
OK then you go down here to SF 1414, which is a Consent of Surety and SF 1415 Consent of Surety and Increase of Penalty. Then you got SF1416, which is a payment bond for other than construction contracts. So if you want to bid on something other than a construction contract, you use this form.  You can download all these forms. [YOU CAN DOWNLOAD FROM THE LINKS ABOVE]
[POINTING AGAIN TO THE INDEX ABOVE] SF 1417, SF1418 – And these are the release on Real Property.   When somebody files – if you get a bid bond, some guy buys your account from the court, and that’s what the court is doing – why do you think all these forms are on the Federal District Court of the 7th circuit- connected up with the dept of Treasury, which the comp controller of currency and GSA are a part of, General Services Administration, - they are hooked up to the Dept of Treasury.  The Comp Controller of Currency is under the Sec. Of Treasury-, they are an agency of the Sec. Of Treasury.    How many of you know that in 1926 they did away with the Dept. of the Treasury? (DOT)   All these people are sending stuff to the DOT, and it doesn’t even exist anymore. And you wonder why people aren’t getting anyplace. 
I went to a hearing and said I want the CUSIP number of my bond and I want the bid bond released to me immediately.  They didn’t even show up at the hearing.  Cause you cant do closure until the bond is released back to me, cause I’m the principal – the creditor.  I’ve got an IRS practice that says that.    Dan Benham sent me the practice where it actually says they acknowledge you as the creditor and they’re the debtors.  It actually says it – the Internal Revenue Service is the debtor.  And you’re the creditor.  
I’ve got a UCC 1 Form and I’m going to show you how to fill it out and get out of all this stuff.   And quit playing this debtor game.  All you’re doing is identifying yourself as the debtor.  How can you have a debt when there’s no money? 
That’s how you get out of jail.  You release the lien on the bond, and then they have to release you because they can’t hold you once you release the lien.  Isn’t that what a mortgage is?  Isn’t the legal definition of a mortgage a lien upon real estate?  If I release the lien on the real estate, don’t they have to give it back to me?  Thank you.
What a prison is, is a repository bank, and you’re the security or the collateral for the debt.  Prisons are warehouses, and you are the goods, security, or collateral for the debt because you got into dishonor.  And they’re selling them – I traced my bond – I know who has my bond.  The bank that has my bond – I went through the back door, got into the DTC, and the guy gave me the CUSIP number of my bond.  I called up the (Shinningham?) bank in NYC I said, are you the transfer agent for this bond, and she said yes – I said well I want my bond back.   But here’s how you get the bond back. [pointing to the above chart]  That form right there – 91 release of personal property from escrow.  You are in escrow.  When you buy a house – aren’t you in escrow when you make a purchase?  And what happens when you go to closing?  They release it from escrow don’t they?   They pass matching funds from the fiduciary creditor to the fiduciary debtor.   Only this never occurs because you never give them the grant of authority to do this.  You can use a UCC 1, and I’ll show you how to do it, to do settlement and closure on the account. – And get your property and never pay for it.
[Question]  Keating:  you can’t pay for it – there’s no money. What did they do with the money – they spent it.  They open up a demand deposit account and all the checks you make for payments on the alleged mortgage – gets put into that account and they spend all that money.  They don’t apply any of that to the mortgage.  The mortgage has already been paid for by an order to pay, signed by you and endorsed by them on the back. 
 23 US 611 – that’s where I found out about Clerks Praxis cause they quote it in there.  It’s an old case, and early 1800 case.  They can go anywhere on the planet and capture under prize  There’s two sides to the court – there’s the instant side, which in your Admiralty side, and the prize side is the second side.  And you’re subject to capture wherever you’re found.  I can take you in to any code you want to go into to and it shows that if you leave without their consent you are an absconding debtor, and they can tack on an additional five years to your sentence.  That’s why you gotta do settlement. Settlement means payment.  Your will not find that anywhere other than the securities and commodities exchange definitions of words.  If you want to know what’s going on, don’t read Black’s law dictionary, go to the commodities and securities exchange and read their definitions of words cause that’s what they’re operating under.  Settlement means payment.   You can’t get closure until you get settlement.  And you cant get settlement until you pay it.  That’s where the acceptance comes in.  And once you pay the bond, then you got to release it.   How do you release it? [pointing to the chart]  There’s your forms for doing it – release of lien on real property. And if you go into 1-201, it defines what goods are.  Go look up the word “goods” You are goods.  Real property in escrow – I’d file both those forms.  When your in a warehouse your in escrow.  When you get into prison your in escrow.   That release of lien is a habeas corpus.  An administrative habeas corpus – article 1.   Most people when they file a habeas corpus never get released – because they don’t know how to put a habeas corpus together.   I talked to the clerk of the US Supreme Court – a writ clerk that does nothing but writs.  I went in there and talked to her – I said how do you do a habeas corpus, she showed me one that was done correctly, she says “we have 3000 of these go through here in a day.  How many of them are granted? One out of 3000.   She says almost all of them are entitled to relief but they don’t get it because they don’t know how to put a habeas corpus together.  I did one in the 9th circuit court of appeals and they granted it.  I won my case – in the 9th circuit court of appeals.  There’s the list of all the forms.  This is in 28.106-1 of 48 CFR.   These are GSA forms. (General Services Administration).  If you go up on that web site I gave you – that district court – in Illinois This is the only district court that has that information on it is the seventh district.   That is where the Chicago board of trade is. And aren’t these financial instruments and financial assets that are traded on the open market? 
There’s a form here and its called “and eligibility questionnaire.”  You can email the DTC and get them. I emailed them and they sent me an eligibility questionnaire. Your have to fill out one of these to open up an account.   What you want to do is open up an account at the DTC.  And that form tells you how to do it.   Then you get a CUSIP number.  Now you become the registered owner under rule 12 of the SEC rules.  You will even get a call report – you will start getting call reports. How many know what a call report is?  Your can go into WWW. SECinfo.com.  You are the only group I’ve given this information to.  This is where you get the call report. 
Capitol One is an absconding debtor – they ran off with my international bill of exchange.  So, I wrote them a letter.  I said I want the 1096 - 1098 tax return. What is a 1096-1098 tax return? That’s a return that corporations file on a prepaid account.    Here are the forms you need to get. These are all on the Internet.   1096 tax return – why did they file this – this is and actual tax returns. Both of them are. And what they do is they attach a 1099 OID to it.  Or a 1099 INT.  I went down to Wal-Mart and gave them a closed account check for 600 dollars. They said they were going to prosecute me for insufficient funds. For giving them a fraudulent check.  What ended up happening is I gave them an international promissory note under the UNICTRAL convention and the head attorney called me up and said “how can we settle this thing” and I said just close the account – do settlement and closure. I authorize you to do it – with my exemption.  They are stealing your exemption – I’m going to show you how they are doing it.  This is how ther’e doing it.  This is 1099 OID – that’s original issue discount.  INT means interest.  They have to report this on this 1099 form.  What does 26 USC section 163 say?   It says all prepaid interest is tax deductible.  When they file this 1099, there are two names on there – the recipient, and the payor.  Download these and read them and you will understand what is going on.    So, what they do is list you as the recipient of capitol and interest.  This is where the concept of redemption that the account is prepaid.  This is where that comes from.  This is what these corporations are doing. Anybody that works in a financial institution or a bank will tell you this.  This is not my opinion – this is what is going on.  Don’t they advertise on the TV, if the interest is prepaid that the loan is interest free?  If the interest is prepaid, it is tax deductible.  If I owe you money and I sent you a check, can I deduct that on my tax return as capitol and interest?  What if I don’t send you the check?  Do they ever send you a check- return the capitol and interest back to you? No.   Dan told me that all you have to do and ask them for the bond back and they have to give it back to you.  That’s what this guy that Dan was talking to in the DTC told him.  You’re the recipient and they are the payor.  The payor is the person that pays the money.  They are writing you out a check and showing it on your books as a prepaid account. That’s what the bookkeeping entries are at the bank you ask them for a copy of the bookkeeping entries, it will show it is a prepaid account.  Why is it prepaid – because as soon as you sign the promissory note it became an order to pay. It became a commercial draft. And the debt was discharged – zeroed out.   If you studied GAP (general  acceptable accounting principles), whenever you do a credit that’s a liability. If you have a debit on one side that’s an asset, and if you have to have a credit, it’s a liability.  Any time you put a credit on one side of the accounting ledger, you have to put an equal debit on the other side – zero out the account. This is called the accrual method of accounting.   The fiscal accounting cycle.  They work on the debt cycle because corporations use commercial debt, they do not use asset because they’re bankrupt.  You have all the assets and they are controlling you.  If you’ve got all the assets how in the world are they controlling you?  Deception.  This is what they are doing; they’re reporting the account as a prepaid account on a 1009 OID or a 1099 INT.  This is how they buy bonds, using your asset money. They are reporting it – your the recipient of the capitol and interest and they are showing it as prepaid. And then they can take the deduction.  OK that’s the exemption.  The tax deduction for the prepayment is the exemption.  That’s your exemption.  And they are using your exemption because you’re not using it. Did you know that under international law, intellectual property is abandoned property if it is not used?   They get the deduction because they gave you the capitol and interest and the IRS bills you for the tax.  Ask them for it – nobody knows this, so why are they going to show it you gotta know it first – that’s why I m teaching this stuff – start doing it.    OID means original issue discount. That’s the market value of the bond before it reaches maturity.  They get all the capitol and interest because they’re the registered holder.  I'm going to show you a form 10 which you can do once you get an account – the first thing you want to do is open up an account with the DTC. Then you can register all these. You can buy commodities and securities using these international bills of exchange.  Because they’re cross-border transactions. – that’s what an international BOE is. It supercedes article 3.  Read the official text in 3-104.  The UNICITRAL {UN convention on international trade laws} supercedes article 3.
[referring to overhead]  I filed a lawsuit against these people (Bank one)  - Counterclaim – whenever a bank sues you want to file a counterclaim because under rule 13 it is mandatory. Why? Because both transactions arise from the same occurrence. What occurrence? The signing of the note. Mandatory counterclaim.  We moved for default judgment.  
When they pool the notes, they become securities. That form right there (blurred on screen) (Securities and asset sale activities?) and that form right there (Accrual liens leases and other assets?) will show you there is no mortgage loan.  These are called call reports. That acronym right there (FFIEC) means federal financial institution examination council.  That’s where the call reports come from.  That’s how they identify the form. They use a letter designation for the form.  Its called a schedule.  That is schedule RCA and RCB – these are all schedules. And they use letters to designate the form. These are called call reports.  And you can get the call reports of any financial institution or bank.  This is public information.  Disclosure - this is all part of the privacy act.  They’re telling what they’re doing and you’ve got all the evidence of what they’re doing.  And these two forms right there – the securities form, - the RCS and the RCB will show that there is no loan or mortgage on your property. I got all these forms off of WWW.SEC.com there’s the FFIC (federal financial institution examination council) form 301 This is a report of condition as of January 30, 2004
These people do not know how to handles someone with some knowledge, believe me – you don’t have to know as much as I do – you just have to know what’s going on.  OK this is an RC-T form – fiduciary and related services. See JP Morgan bank bought out Bank One NA – NA means national association.  If you read the National Bank Act of June 3, 1864, section 27 and 28.  This says that national associations cannot use their circulation bank notes as collateral or securities for the loan of money.
 FROM:  RH  Feb. 19, 2010
1.  (Reply)
----- Original Message -----
From: TCK
Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2010 4:59 AM
Subject: Choosing Constitutional Law vs Renouncing Citizenship
Patrick & Anne, Thank you for posting RH's articles by Jean Keating and others.  These are very informative for anyone with the intention (intentional or forced) to fight the Corporation.  Understanding "bonds" and the mechanism (physical and legal) that the Corporation has implemented under Maritime Law is critical to any defense in a Statute Court.  This is a bit tough reading but everyone should try to digest the salient points and keep copies on file, just in case they try to throw you in jail for jaywalking with your eyes crossed.
The essence of Keating's approach is that you can either fight the system within THEIR system using their own legal tools which are kept well hidden and stashed in innumerable places OR you can renounce your US Citizenship, thereby outing yourself from their Corporate jurisdiction as a "real man on the land".
Fighting the Corporation on its own turf is damn difficult.  They can pass statutes retroactive for anything they like and nail you with it and 1000 more if you get by the first one.  Jail is a nice place to study though so plan your sabbatical to be behind bars.
Buying back your bond and renouncing your citizenship is another difficult option that would leave you without proper identity, passport, credit, titles, etc. etc.   Nice if you are living off the land and don't intend to travel much.  Start learning about farming.
I am thus not too supportive of these approaches versus just simply choosing what form of government you wish to live under.  All governments are fictions.  And they come in all kinds of names.  Choosing to live under the Constitution and Bill of Rights is simply a Free Will decision of which form of government you wish to live under.
In this way your are not "fighting the system" but more like you are choosing to revert back to the organic system which all US Government Servants have sworn an oath to PROTECT and SUPPORT.
The Corporation lackies will, of course, object.  They will fall back on the War Powers and Enemies of the State statutes or any other statute laws that might apply (their laws which are un-Constitutional).   Just say "Sorry Brother".
It would also be a good idea to make friends with the Provost Marshal in your area.  Ask him if he has taken an oath to support the Constitution first then start picking points.  Simple questions but pointed (barbed is better).
We may never ever get away from some LAW, including Universal Laws and God Given Laws.  We just need to clean up the enslavement that statute laws have inflicted upon mankind and thus "Live Free" again.
This is a personal choice and one that can be deliberately made by signing the Constitution of the United States of America.   Alternatively you can stand and fight (or try to) or renounce your US Citizenship.  I would like to keep mine.....but under a Constitutional Republic.....(different from a democracy).
WE are moving ahead in this direction but I still haven't heard your legal opinions and arguments 'pro and con'.   Please chirp up and talk this up with friends and Fourwinds10 family.  RH, that includes you too.
I personally found it interesting that top bankers are non-Citizens.....arrest the lot on Immigration charges (illegal aliens) and deport the bunch to anywhere else.  Thanks Keating for that one and that we "cannot pay with money".  Here....have a banana.  Nothing but monkey business.
[NOTE:  This includes the following articles posted to Fourwinds:

Saturday, August 11, 2012


The number of car crashes at two Wollongong black spots has increased since speed cameras were installed.A review of the state’s fixed, mobile, safety and point-to-point speed camera network has found the overwhelming majority have led to a reduction in accidents, injuries and deaths.
But in Wollongong, the installation of fixed cameras a decade ago on Memorial Dr (formerly Northern Distributor) at Corrimal and the Southern Freeway near the University of Wollongong has been met with respective 12 and 14 per cent rises in crashes.
The number of accidents at four Illawarra intersections where safety cameras were installed last April - at a total cost to the taxpayer of about $1 million - has also risen.
A camera on the corner of the Princes Hwy and O’Briens Rd in Figtree failed to prevent a 112per cent increase in the annual average number of crashes and a 254per cent surge in the annual average number of injuries.
A new camera on the corner of Windang Rd and Boronia Ave in Windang coincided with a 220per cent average increase in crashes, while another targeting the intersection of Corrimal St and Burelli St in Wollongong has seen an average 50 per cent annual increase in accidents.
Road safety authorities said a longer and more ‘‘comprehensive analysis’’ was required before any conclusion could be made about the effectiveness of safety cameras.
Across NSW, the number of crashes at intersections monitored by these types of cameras has fallen an average 21 per cent.
The review’s release has also revealed the NSW Centre for Road Safety will spend the next year reviewing the Princes Hwy to identify locations for new speed cameras.
Roads Minister Duncan Gay yesterday released the audit - the first of its type in NSW.
It found 92 of the state’s 97 fixed speed cameras have improved road safety.
At fixed speed camera locations, fatalities have dropped 87 per cent, crashes 38 per cent and injuries 37 per cent.
Authorities will further probe the five fixed cameras that have not created any significant improvement, including the one on Memorial Dr, to see if they should be removed or relocated.
‘‘We’re determined to ensure speed cameras are only in locations where they have a proven road safety benefit and that they are not simply there as revenue raisers,’’ Mr Gay said.
The Memorial Dr camera has netted $783,000 in fines since 2004-05.
The camera on the Southern Freeway near the university is not being reviewed because while accidents have increased, injuries have fallen substantially.
A NSW Centre for Road Safety spokeswoman said no cameras would be switched off until ‘‘we have looked at the locations closely, considered the views of the community and looked at alternative measures to improve road safety’’.
“The cameras will continue to operate until the comprehensive reviews are completed and alternative work for the area is identified,’’ she said. The review will be completed by February 2013.


As posted earlier below as a teaser by Mark Darwin, we can confirm that YES we had a Truthology member WIN in the magistrates court here in Queensland yesterday when arguing the legitimacy of a traffic camera speeding fine.
This victory could potentially have wide ranging effects as a precedent. Why? Because it shows what we have suspected:  it is highly unlikely that the Queensland Police are unable to issue any traffic camera infringement notices in the manner they have been doing so for as long as can work out ...... perhaps since inception! That said, sadly, it will probably be short lived as I’m certain that they will move VERY quickly to shut this down without doubt!
But nevertheless, it is a significant win, and perhaps the beginning of the winds of change in bringing reform to our system.

The man challenging the infringement issued to him, and doing the arguing, was no other than WA Lawyer Warren Black, a fellow Truth teacher and Truthology member, and we can assure you that he was on fire yesterday in the court !
Let me tell you, it takes big balls to walk into THEIR court and challenge them head on, especially when it has to do with their ‘lawful and legal’ ability (under their interpretation) as to whether or not they have the right to do so, and especially as he has so much to lose being a lawyer presently licensed under their system. He performed admirably to say the least, I was there, and enjoyed every minute of it. 
Man remains in custody after baby death
The alleged infringement was issued by the QLD Police, and was for the sum of $150 and a loss of 3 points, for allegedly exceeding the posted speed limit by only 14kms per hour.
It was quite amusing that in the early stages of the trial, a young police prosecutor spoke directly to Warren. He tried belittling the attempt as a complete waste of time and resources for all concerned, that Warren should just pay the fine and be done with it, and had little chance of success, and the result for the effort did not warrant Warrens outcome! Needless to say, Warren let that slide and continued on with the matter at hand.
Now in this instance, Warren was arguing a number of points. The main issue that Warren was arguing was that the infringement was issued under the personal name of the officer concerned, a local Police Sergeant, supposedly on behalf of the Queensland Police force. However, as Warren pointed out, there is currently NO AUTHORITY or LEGISLATION in Queensland of any sort in place the grants this person, the right to do so, and even if it did, it must be clear that the police officer is doing the prosecution on behalf of the relevant authority, eg. Queensland Police, the Crown or State.
An example or analogy of this argument is, as the magistrate pointed out to the police during the trial, “what would stop me as the magistrate, Mr Bloggs, from going to a Justice of the Peace and stating that i saw you doing 75km per hour in and 60km zone, and then issuing a summons against you? There has to be some authority or head of power to do this!”
The Police tried to duck and dive, and circumvent this in every way possible, bringing up other issues, but to the Magistrate’s credit, he remained firm and told the Police to answer Warren’s question and provide the relevant proof.
Warren also raised some other points.
He raised the point that the Queensland Police, SPUR, the Crown, the Queensland Government, are separate entities, yet somehow all involved in the issued infringement. He raised the point that for an entity or Government to raise an infringement, it had to be written in legislation as under any kind of criminal law, an offence had to be clearly specified, and the chain of legislative authority as to who ultimately prosecuted had to be clear. He wanted clarified as to who was who, and what role they all played in this infringement, and where they were mentioned in legislation or regulations. Again, to the Magistrate’s credit, he agreed with Warren, however this argument was not explored in depth, nor was it ruled upon.
He also raised the point that if the matter was criminal and not civil, the issue was, who was harmed and suffered loss as a result of the alleged infringement and who was the accuser in the matter? (as previously outlined in our website templates) If the Police Sergeant issued the charge, was he personally harmed, and if not, who was harmed, and which entity did he represent! Again the Magistrate agreed, and insisted the Police show their authority.
What was amusing was there were 5 (FIVE) Police officers in the court yesterday, including the head of Brisbane's Traffic Camera Branch (so we believe). The trial went from 9.30am till 3pm with more than 6 adjournments, (requested by the police) so that they could find ANY legislation or Authority (which they couldn't) to hang their hat on and make their case. They literally tried EVERYTHING to find it….. let me assure you it was EMBARRASSING to watch them squirm for SO long and the prosecutor was forever saying…”can we just adjourn for 5 minutes so i can ring my boss”…SERIOUSLY !!!
The lengths they went to were extraordinary, and they even tried to withdraw the infringement, and issue a 'bench warrant' on the spot to get around it. As correctly pointed out by the Magistrate, this action would be an abuse of process and he instantly rejected it!
What was fantastic about this case was the Magistrate was very fair and unbiased and was firm on both Warren and the Police about procedural fairness, and following the law. He seemed quite amused at the police incompetence in trying to justify their position, and granted them more than enough time and adjournments to try and get a result. He even appeared to give them a chance to withdraw the charge, which they refused to do, and at one stage, he suggested to Warren with some humour that he may wish to “plead guilty to bring this veil of tears to an end”!
Ultimately the Police dodged a bullet, as the matter was won on another issue. The Police tried to adduce camera evidence, however, Warren challenged it on the basis that the Police had not provided him with witness statements from the camera operator. The Magistrate agreed, and excluded the evidence, so the Police had no evidence to base a charge. The Magistrate proceeded to dismiss the charges, and then grant all costs to Warren for his troubles.
Warren literally had them on the back foot for the entire trial, and then slowly on the ropes, then on their knees, and finally WHAMO .....KO'd !!!!!!  a truly fantastic result.
It is important to note, that in Western Australia, they DO have this power outlined in their legislation. You can bet after yesterdays court win, that Queensland will pass similar legislation for future use … so if you are challenging speeding fines now… and want to use this argument and be QUICK about it!.... you will have to check for yourselves in all other states.
What also happened was Warren and I had a number of talks with the Police there, and as time went on , we became more and more friendly. Warren made it clear to the Police that he was totally supportive of road safety, however, he did not agree with a system that undermined the rights of citizens, and swung the balance too favour in favour of the Police. What was interesting was a few of the Police agreed with us, and were very open to where we were coming from!
So all up, an encouraging outcome, and a hearty CONGRATULATIONS on a great job to Warren Black for taking a stand and allowing us to all share in the results!
If you would like to contact Warren Black directly, to enquire about his legal service or his Public Speaking engagements and seminars, his firms details are listed on our site under the SERVICES heading, and then click on the Partner Links.

Wednesday, August 1, 2012


Posted on July 28, 2012 by itccs

The Common Law Court of Justice investigating Crimes of Church and State

Public Declaration to Police Officers, Civil Servants and other Agents of the Crown of England – Issued by the Judicial Oversight Panel of the Common Law Court of Justice investigating Crimes of Church and State (Brussels – London)

On September 15, 2012, an International Common Law Court, duly constituted under the Law of Nations, will be convened to consider evidence and hear charges of Crimes against Humanity brought against the Crown of England, the Vatican and other parties.
In the event that the Crown is convicted in this duly constituted Court for such crimes as Genocide, Child Trafficking and waging a War of Aggression against indigenous nations, your continued allegiance and service of this convicted party will constitute criminal collusion and obstruction of justice.
Prior to committing such an indictable offense, you wil be asked by this Court to refrain from implicating yourselves with such criminal parties by assuming a position of neutrality in relation to the Crown of England as a possible party to a crime.
As servants of the Public Peace and Welfare rather than of a potentially convicted authority, you will be asked by this Court to place yourselves at the service of a fair and impartial investigation of documented crimes involving the Crown of England.
Accordingly, this Court will be requiring police officers in Canada, England, Australia and other nations to assist it in presenting summonses and other warrants to Crown officials, to aid this Court in the pursuit of justice and due process, and to enforce any verdicts and decisions of this Court regarding the culpability of the Crown for Crimes against Humanity.
This Court will also require that in the course of this trial and upon summary conviction of the Crown, civil servants cease and desist from collecting taxes and administering laws on behalf of the Crown of England and its client governments in Canada, England, Australia and elsewhere, lest by such assisting of parties convicted of Crimes against Humanity these civil servants violate international law and the verdicts of this Court.
If you officers continue to serve as agents of the Crown under these circumstances, you will have betrayed your public trust and responsibility, and disqualified yourselves from holding public office.
In such a eventuality, you may face summary arrest and trial for aiding and abetting those engaged in Crimes against Humanity.
We trust that you will fulfill what is lawful and just, and stand with our Court of Common Law Justice as duly sworn Public Peace Officers. To ensure this compliance, your officers will be approached by agents of our Court to take such an Oath of Service. We expect your cooperation in this matter.
Issued by the Judicial Oversight Panel of the Common Law Court of Justice investigating Crimes of Church and State (Brussels – London)