Just to clear this up a bit, I dont think you implied this, just clarification: I never suggest that using UCC 1-308 would regain sovereignty, Just that if you DO happen to sign anything in a commercial capacity, including, but not limited to Government paperwork, to be sure to reserve your rights by using the UCC.
Secondly, please be careful of the phrase "citizen of the united States"...even with the lower case "u" in united. Everyone should make it a habit to use words carefully. For example, if someone made your statement above into a voice recording, we wouldn't be able to distinguish between the lower and upper case versions, which is why it should ALWAYS be any of the following: national of the republic of (state name) Citizen of the united states of America American citizen republic of (state name) Citizen
I remember a case where a transcript was used as evidence, and there was a hard time determining the meaning because of ambiguity.
UCC 1-307
Submitted by etnfree on Sun, 11/08/2009 - 14:56. Permalink I always put under my signature 28 USC 1746(1) Which states
TITLE 28 > PART V > CHAPTER 115 > § 1746Prev | Next § 1746. Unsworn declarations under penalty of perjury.... Wherever, under any law of the United States or under any rule, regulation, order, or requirement made pursuant to law, any matter is required or permitted to be supported, evidenced, established, or proved by the sworn declaration, verification, certificate, statement, oath, or affidavit, in writing of the person making the same (other than a deposition, or an oath of office, or an oath required to be taken before a specified official other than a notary public), such matter may, with like force and effect, be supported, evidenced, established, or proved by the unsworn declaration, certificate, verification, or statement, in writing of such person which is subscribed by him, as true under penalty of perjury, and dated, in substantially the following form: (1) If executed without the United States: "I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on (date). (Signature)”. (2) If executed within the United States, its territories, possessions, or commonwealths: "I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on (date). (Signature)”.
I do this because I am not within the Corporation known as United States or it's possessions. The way I see it, if you are a citizen of the United States according to the 14th amendment, you are a federally protected 2nd class citizen and owe tribute to your creator... The corporation United States
ETNFree
Submitted by hawkiye on Fri, 10/23/2009 - 02:03. Permalink That's because you haven't done your homework like all the fools who make ignorant remarks about stuff they know nothing about.
The concept of sovereignty stands on its own. The sources shown below may help you to see that it is a respected and valid concept.
"...at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people; and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects...with none to govern but themselves; the citizens of America are equal as fellow citizens, and as joint tenants in the sovereignty." CHISHOLM v. GEORGIA (US) 2 Dall 419, 454, 1 L Ed 440, 455 @DALL 1793 pp471-472
The people of this State, as the successors of its former sovereign, are entitled to all the rights which formerly belonged to the King by his prerogative. Through the medium of their Legislature they may exercise all the powers which previous to the Revolution could have been exercised either by the King alone, or by him in conjunction with his Parliament; subject only to those restrictions which have been imposed by the Constitution of this State or of the U.S. Lansing v. Smith, 21 D. 89., 4 Wendel 9 (1829) (New York) "D." = Decennial Digest Lansing v. Smith, 4 Wend. 9 (N.Y.) (1829), 21 Am.Dec. 89 10C Const. Law Sec. 298; 18 C Em.Dom. Sec. 3, 228; 37 C Nav.Wat. Sec. 219; Nuls Sec. 1`67; 48 C Wharves Sec. 3, 7. NOTE: Am.Dec.=American Decision, Wend. = Wendell (N.Y.)
So you see all the folks running around and doing everything the corporate government tells them to do for fear of reprisal are nothing but sheep who don't deserve freedom because they have sold thier sovereignty for what they thought was security and got enslavement instead.
Wake up before it's too late!
Submitted by OctoBox on Fri, 10/23/2009 - 16:20. Permalink Watch out for the biting commentary -- it's childish and un-needed.
I have studied all the sites people pointed me too.
I am "sovereign" by your own definition, I just didn't go through lawyers or legal procedings.
Counter-Economics is far more simple:
#1 Work Under the Table (delcare the amount of taxes you'd like to pay or declare none at all)
#2 Get rid of all assets -- rent or lease everything.
#3 Buy Local (Food - Products - Services)
#4 Tell no one near by of your life-style (educate others in different cities)
#5 Hire Under-the-Table workers
#6 Never Vote or Lobby Again
I mean there's more to it than that, but that sums it up.
And it's "free" and no one knows you are doing it.
Getting a lawyer -- getting rid of citizenship -- the sovereign way is to public; in a free-market no one knows your business. To go "sovereign" is to draw a big target on your back.
I prefer the covert.
Again go easy on the name calling - never know who your friends (yet to be revealed) might be.
Octobox
Submitted by 2bfree on Thu, 10/22/2009 - 22:45. Permalink They make you commerce from birth, via the all caps of your name. You represent this ficticous enity, unless you can distingush between the two. Silence is consent. You must give prior notice via "Without Prejudice" which means: 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. I do not accept the liability of the compelled benefit of any unrevealed contract or commercial agreement."
Read this. Every system of civilized law must have two characteristics: Remedy and Recourse. Remedy is a way to get out from under the law. The Recourse provides that if you have been damaged under the law, you can recover your loss. The Common Law, the Law of Merchants, and even the Uniform Commercial Code all have remedy and recourse, but for a long time we could not find it. If you go to a law library and ask to see the Uniform Commercial Code they will show you a tremendous shelf completely filled with the Uniform Commercial Code. When you pick up one volume and start to read it, it will seem to have been intentionally written to be confusing. It took us a long time to discover where the Remedy and Recourse are found in the U.C.C. They are found right in the first volume, at 1-207 and 1-103.
Remedy
"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." (UCC 1-207.7)
It is important to remember when we go into a court, that we are in a commercial, international jurisdiction. If we go into court and say. "I DEMAND MY CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS!", the judge will most likely say, "You mention the Constitution again, and I'll find you in contempt of court!" Then we don't understand how he can do that. Hasn't he sworn to uphold the Constitution? The rule here is: you cannot be charged under one jurisdiction and defend yourself under another jurisdiction. For example, if the French government came to you and asked where you filed your French income tax of a certain year, do you go to the French government and say "I demand my Constitutional Rights?" No. The proper answer is: "THE LAW DOES NOT APPLY TO ME. I AM NOT A FRENCHMAN." You must make your reservation of rights under the jurisdiction in which you are charged, not under some other jurisdiction. So in a UCC court, you must claim your Reservation of Rights under UCC 1-207.
UCC 1-207 goes on to say...
"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." (UCC 1-207.9)
You have to make your claim known early. Further, it says:
"The Sufficiency of the Reservation: any expression indicating an intention to reserve rights is sufficient, such as "without prejudice". (UCC 1-207.4)
Whenever you sign any legal paper that deals with Federal Reserve Notes, write under your signature: "Without Prejudice (UCC 1-207.4)." This reserves your rights. You can show, at UCC 1-207.4, that you have sufficiently reserved your rights.
It is very important to understand just what this means. For example, one man who used this in regard to a traffic ticket was asked by the judge just what he meant by writing "without prejudice UCC 1-207" on his statement to the court? He had not tried to understand the concepts involved. He only wanted to use it to get out of the ticket. He did not know what it meant. When the judge asked him what he meant by signing in that way, he told the judge he was not prejudice against anyone... The judge knew that the man had no idea what it meant, and he lost the case. You must know what it means!
Without Prejudice UCC 1.207
When you use "without prejudice UCC 1-207" in connection with your signature, you are saying, "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. I do not accept the liability of the compelled benefit of any unrevealed contract or commercial agreement."
What is the compelled performance of an unrevealed commercial agreement? When you use Federal Reserve Notes instead of silver dollars, is it voluntary? No. There is no lawful money or alternative, so you have to use Federal Reserve Notes; you have to accept the benefit. The government has given you the benefit to discharge your debts with limited liability, and you don't have to pay your debts. How nice they are! But if you did not reserve your rights under 1-207.7, you are compelled to accept the benefit, and are therefore obliged to obey every statute, ordinance, and regulation of the government, at all levels of government; federal, state and local.
If you understand this, you will be able to explain it to the judge when he asks. And he will ask, so be prepared to explain it to the court. You will also need to understand UCC 1-103, the argument and recourse. If you want to understand this fully, go to a law library and photocopy these two sections from the UCC. It is important to get the Anderson, 3rd edition. Some of the law libraries will only have the West Publishing version, and it is very difficult to understand. In Anderson, it is broken down with decimals into ten parts and, most importantly, it is written in plain English.
Recourse
The Recourse appears in the Uniform Commercial Code at 1-103.6, which says:
"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." (UCC 1-103.6)
This is the argument we use in court. The Code recognizes the Common Law. If it did not recognize the Common Law, the government would have had to admit that the United States is bankrupt, and is completely owned by its creditors. But, it is not expedient to admit this, so the Code was written so as not to abolish the Common Law entirely. Therefore, if you have made a sufficient, timely, and explicit reservation of your rights at 1-207, you may then insist that the statutes be construed in harmony with the Common Law.
If the charge is a traffic ticket, you may demand that the court produce the injured person who has filed a verified complaint. If, for example, you were charged with failure to buckle your seat belt, you may ask the court: "Who was injured as a result of your failure to 'buckle up'?" However, if the judge won't listen to you and just moves ahead with the case, then you will want to read to him the last sentence of 103.6, which states: (2) Actually, it is better to use a rubber stamp, because this demonstrates that you had previously reserved your rights. The simple fact that it takes several days or a week to order and get a stamp shows that you had reserved your rights before signing the document. Anderson Uniform Commercial Code Lawyers' Cooperative Publishing Co. The Code cannot be read to preclude a Common Law section. Tell the judge, "Your Honor, I can sue you under the Common Law, for violating my rights under the Uniform Commercial Code. I have a remedy, under the UCC, 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 insists on proceeding with the case, just act confused and ask this question: "Let me see if I understand, Your Honor, has this court made a legal determination that 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?"
Now the judge is in a jam! How can the court throw out one part of the Code and uphold another? If he answers, "yes", then you say: "I put this court on notice that I am appealing your legal determination." Of course, the higher court will uphold the Code on appeal. The judge knows this, so once again you have boxed him in.
Explain U.C.C. 1-207
If you are confronted with explaining what the "UCC 1-207" does here is your answer.
When you are going to sign a contract ( drivers license, lease, buying a automobile, snowmobile, a building permit, marriage license, devoice decree, or any other document).
BEFORE you sign!!! you have the right to draw a fine line through any thing that is not to your liking. It can be a number, a letter, a word or a group of words. At this time you can add any thing you want in the contract. Any changes you have made sign your name close to it and date it. A contract is to have all of the contract in full disclosure at the time of signing. If not the UCC 1-207 will stop you from giving up your rights on the contract you are about to sign and void out any part of the contract that you have not had the opportunity to view.
Now how the UCC 1-207 works.
After you put UCC 1-207 where your signature is going to be. " your signature" is the last you thing you put on the document. When you pick up your pen from the signed contract it is consummated, you have given up your right to change the contract. Here is some more UCC information. You can go to a public law library for more information.
Now do a search for the meaning of common law crimes, ect and see these two documents linked on this post to figure out what they are doing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Submitted by Buzz on Fri, 10/23/2009 - 00:56. Permalink
Ok, stop offering legal advice, you're sounding like a crackpot. Show me a case where this has worked, show me a case where any of this has worked. Stop telling people how they can do it and go do it yourself and publish the results here. You are full of crap and I will bet every dollar on it. It will not work.
Stop telling and start doing
Submitted by juliusbragg on Fri, 10/23/2009 - 13:02. Permalink It drives me crazy when you say things like "Show me a case where this has worked"...the WHOLE point is, there is no case, because it 'works'.
If your traveling down the road on your unlicensed scooter, with no drivers license, no social security number, no registration, what happens to you?
If for some reason a over zealous cop, with your mentality that the traffic laws apply to everyone no matter what, decides to give you a citation, what would you care? If you dont pay it, it will affect your non-existent credit report, if you still dont pay they will suspend your non-existent drivers license...
these "things" we hold so valuable, like the DL and Credit report, are the tools that make their legislation work. Without them, there is NO concern, there is nothing they can do.
its like U.S. money...why is it valuable? Because people agree it is...
if you and your entire neighborhood agreed that pumpkin seeds would be the new currency in your town, with no ramifications if you dont accept them, the 'currency' would not work, BUT, if failing to accept pumpkin seeds as payment meant you would lose your drivers license or have your credit score affected, everyone would consent to their use.
NOW, there are people who want to be half in and half out, which I hope are the people you are referring to, who have a DL, social Security number, etc....yet wish to avoid taxes, license fees, insurance etc., for those, I agree, "show me a case where this has worked" Think Eskimo, think Amish, not in the system because they never were.
http://www.dailypaul.com/78775/does-anyone-sign-their-name-without-prejudice-ucc-1-308 | 
