Ending the Last Curse of the Legal Pirates

_________________________________________________________________________________
Please download MP3 Audio Broadcast of this Blog > here   (45 min 18 Mb)
_________________________________________________________________________________

Last week I spoke about how to simplify with all the information that me may have read through Ucadia and all the information that we may be hearing from different people regarding how we can conduct ourselves better or how we might obtain some relief in the courts.  We tried to do a summary last week of ten facts and those are ten facts that I hope for those who read them would agree were immutable and unmistakable.   We then talked about ten points of relief and how we might find relief in this crumbling system.  Since I did that audio I want to thank those of you who came back and provided feedback and said they felt it was helpful to be reminded of some of these points.  At the same time even though I raised this issue when we spoke last week, there remains great confusion as to how to process all this information to a simple proposition.  

More so, there is growing confusion, especially in recent times, where far from there being a unanimous agreement on such facts as the case number being proof of the creation of a legal person and the creation of the legal person by a court being a corporate business, being in action without authority or permission and indeed a fraud against all known law when a limited liability corporation creates an unlimited liability corporation in the form of the legal person in your name.  

I felt and maybe you felt that in expressing those facts which should be immutable, clear and unmistakable, there would be some clarity in how those, even if they do not agree with Ucadia, even if they take umbrage to things that I say, even if they feel they need to‘re-package’ information for their own benefit, that at the very least there would at least be some agreement as to these fundamental facts.  

Whether it is an old adage that says that the closer you come to the truth, the more shrill the cowards and liars, whether it is the faster the system is exposed, the quicker the noise and desperation, in truth I don’t know.  In truth I don’t know whether people who are spreading outrageous falsities and confusions are agents or whether they have been influenced by the kinds of forces we spoke a few weeks ago.  What I do see is a deliberate attempt to confuse people at the very point that our knowledge should be coming clearer.  

For example, there is now a concerted effort through seminars, emails, audios, by one particular guru who has been discredited several times who is now adamant that we should not speak of the courts being broken in any fashion or committing acts of fraud, or judges, magistrates sitting with unclean hands and instead tells people falsely and absurdly that there is equity in these corporate courts.  And, he is using scripture to confuse and entice people.  

There has not been equity in the courts since the courts have become corporate.  A corporate court means that it has NO equity.  There is no equity in corporate courts and, in fact, the United States Code states it blatantly that these are not courts of equity.  It is abundantly clear but for those that may not know, those that possibly doubt the accuracy of things people say, here is a guru that is spreading out and out lies just when we are reaching a point of clarity to the facts.  

Another movement that has sprung up as we get closer to the truth is now this wholesale promotion to people to go out and register your name as a trading name.  For goodness’ sake, why would you make the process easy for the corporate system to insure that it can claim you are subject to its jurisdiction?  If you go and register a trading name, you are agreeing and more than that, that trading name and the structure of those contracts make it very, very easy to show that you are subject, agreed to and contracted to their jurisdiction. Of course it does.  As some say, well there are examples, legends, cases, however vague where people have succeeded because they have gone and used their name as a trading name and that this has somehow complicated or obstructed, slowed down, or prevented different courts from proceeding.  

I would argue once again just as we saw in the deliberate promotion of the private laws, private laws that are owned by the American legal institute as a body of different law, bar, pirate associations to promote the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC).  Once again, there is enormous white noise out there promoting these issues.  Is there doubt with the points we have been raising?  Sure, doubt is a fact of life.  I doubt every day and I had a discussion with my amazing partner who has supported me for more than seventeen years in this process.  As I have sacrificed days and weeks, years and now decades, she has sacrificed time and effort.  Sure, we had a discussion and we spoke about the future and doubt and concerns.  I have doubt all the time.  

Are there people who have used information and not found a result?  Absolutely.  There are plenty of people who have come to Ucadia, read material and gone on and not necessarily found a result.  But, to say that Ucadia doesn’t work is an out and out falsity, absurdity and a deliberate misconstruing of the truth.  Because Ucadia does not promote a ticker box, a fill in the blanks, a lock and load shoot it out and see what happens.  If anything in the last 6 to 12 months I have been at pains to present knowledge as opposed to ‘plug and play.’  I know this because many people have written after we have done an audio and said, “Can you give this to me in a form?” I say that the knowledge is there, the explanation is there and there is enough for you to go and make sense of what to do. 

Why is it that there is so much doubt, concern, white noise at this moment when we spoke so clearly about these facts?   It comes down to this:  for those that go to court with the best of intentions, with all their ducks seemingly in a row,  courts are still not following not following their own rules, changing things along the way, judging and ordering contrary to due process.  And these judges and magistrates in their professional capacity are smirking like Cheshire cats.   Maybe three years ago or four years ago when people would talk about the courts, at that point for me there was still the belief that these were the ‘temples of law,’ the courts of law.

What a number of extraordinarily brave, intelligent, courageous and persistent people all around the world have been contributing and working together and has made clear that these courts have no competency, no provenance, no knowledge of the law whatsoever.  As that veil has been lifted we see the courts in desperation going back to the old tricks of occult, secret knowledge, handshakes, esoteric words, secret this and that.  Again in the canons of law of www.one-heaven.org from many great researchers there has been the exposure that gold fringe on flags, admiralty this and all these different things are distractions. The courts wouldn’t know the occult, the provenance of what they do if it fell on them.  They have no idea whatsoever.

Yet, the courts still pretend, the magistrates and judges are still pretending that the end of a case, when they have normally ruled against men and women who have gone and clearly shown there is no basis, it is one final curse as they smile and by implication say to us without speaking it, “if only you knew the law, you would be okay, but because you followed some false trail you are a bloody idiot.”  That is their final curse that caused my churning stomach that if I didn’t listen, if I had only followed and believed I’d have been better off and because I read, because I felt I had some knowledge, I was led astray.   Well, it’s time to end that final curse of the pirates tonight, finally end it for all.

I can’t stop the disinformation agents; I can’t stop those that are being paid or suffering grave madness and insanity who are out there promoting all kinds of false information.   But what we can do tonight is we can make clear exactly whether or not these are or are not courts of law.  How do we make it clear and plain?  If you go to a court and indeed if you have watched TV series about courts on television, one of the symbols that you will see most often is the symbol of Lady Justice.   

It is usually a young maiden in traditional dress and usually blind-folded, holding the set of scales and sometimes holding a sword.  While that symbol has a lot of dark side, pagan sides to it, what I want to focus on is that that symbol represents the most fundamental premise for a place to be a court in the first instance.  

The lifting of the very last veil

To be a court there must be the appearance at least of fairness, of justice without prejudice, of due process or what we call rule of law.  And of course, there must be clean hands.  Now when any or all of those can be proven not to be the truth, then that place whether it be the most elaborate temple full of marble, some small county court, some district court, whatever it may be, it cannot argue by its own rules of being a court. It is so fundamental that a court must appear to be without prejudice, following due process and with clean hands.  If any of those things are proven not to be there then the matter cannot be proceed, any judgment cannot stand and in many cases those that have prosecuted cases under that find themselves under their own internal penalties.   Sometimes, if it is a grave miscarriage of justice they find that their careers are over.  

So how are they getting away with this?  We know that the courts are stepping out and making presumptions that are not justified, but how are they getting away with it?  It’s very simple.  We are not holding them to account; we are being distracted.  We have focused on all the different procedures, documents, actions, words, varieties, different choices and we have forgotten the most basic things that are on our side.  While I have spoken about documents in terms of our estates and trusts and agents, really in relation to the administrative and paperwork of matters, when it comes to the point that we are forced to make our presence in one of their commercial courts we have failed to address the most fundamental point.  

The single most important question to end the curse

The fundamental point is as obvious and simple as it sounds, “Is this or is this not a court of law?”  It doesn’t matter if it is an admiralty court, a commercial court, business, none of those matter, but “is this a court of law?  Is there any law here today?”  How do we do that?  Providing we get through the dance of the veils of “are you Frank O’Collins or are you XYZ, are you the name or not”, all those games, when it finally comes down to an opportunity in the proceedings at the very earliest opportunity, we have both the right and the obligation to ask the most important question: “will you be hearing this matter without prejudice?”   That is the single most important question we should ask when ever we have to face any of these corporate courts.   

I know when I say that, that people will say, “hold on a second; that isn’t what you have been saying.”  I have heard different things and I should do this or that.  Look, yes we have accumulated material over time and part of what we have been trying to do is drain the swamp, get to the point, pull back the veil so people see these people (judges and magistrates) for what they are which is independent contractors, privateers if they were properly credentialed and if not, just pirates.  In the process sometimes we can throw out so much information that people miss the point.  

The first question we should ask is,”will you be hearing this matter without prejudice?”  A magistrate or judge really has only two choices:  to say “yes” or to obfuscate, distract, answer a question with a question and to forestall.  Let’s take the forestalling, obstruction, the refusal to answer a simple question: is this a court?  Is this a court of law? Will you be hearing this matter without prejudice?”  It is a very simple and straight forward question.  If they won’t answer the question then you can say, “Well, your honor, I request an immediate halt in the proceeding subject to a lodgment to have you recused for admitting willful bias.”  If they won’t agree to hear the matter without prejudice they have just agreed that they are going to be prejudicial before the matter is even foresworn.

It is this simple.  If you cannot get a fair hearing then that judge must be recused.  It does not matter if they are on the payroll of the county.  It doesn’t matter whether they have an interest in the case or any of those things.  If they simply will not hear the matter without prejudice then it is not a court of law.  On this point if we consider what if the answer is ‘yes’, let’s remind ourselves of something that I have raised with you and we have spoken about over the last few weeks, months and years in fact.  That is there will come a time in our dealings with these pirates where the court of public opinion will see them for what they are and that there will no longer be any illusion that they represent in any fashion the law and certainly the rule of law.  

But so long as we are affected by and do not challenge them on these most fundamental concepts, then they will continue to smirk at the curse at the end of each case and sow that seed of doubt as best they can that if only you had listened to the orthodoxy and the dogma you would have been okay.  But, because you went out and you thought you could learn I have cursed you by this adverse finding.  It’s time to end the last curse of these legal pirates.  One day if they wish to remain in business they will have to put up their business shingle, The Inquisition or Tortures Are Us or whatever business they are forced to trade under because everyone knows they cannot be regarded as a true court of law in any fashion or corruption because they cannot, will not and refuse to hear matters without prejudice.  

If they answer in the negative by obscuring and refusing to answer, then fine.  Put the matters on hold, lodge an immediate appeal to have that magistrate or judge recused by his own words on the record that he refuses to hear the matter without prejudice.  As the word gets out, providing you ask this simply and honestly, most I would expect will answer this, “Of course I will,” when we ask if they will be hearing the matter without prejudice.  They may say or act like, “What a stupid question.”  If they answer in the positive, what do you say then?  What you say immediately after is, “Do I have your oath on that?”   Do I have your oath on that promise?  Will you be hearing this matter without prejudice and they say that of course they will, what a stupid question.  So then you ask if you have their oath on that promise.

If they are not prepared to give an oath, then you have a second reason to call a halt to the proceeding and lodge an appeal because the judge, justice, magistrate has just admitted a willful breach of due process.  They are under oath we are told, by their own laws, to administer fair justice.  If they are not prepared to take an oath that moment in support of the proposition that they are hearing the matter without prejudice, then they are breaching due process and they are clearly prejudicial as well.  You now have to reasons to have that magistrate, that judge immediately recused from that case.  

So if you follow up with that straight question, “Do I have your oath on that promise?”   most will say yes, but by this point he judge or magistrate will be most annoyed with you and for good reason because you have just bound then now as the fiduciary; it’s that simple.  And it’s to that promise that they are going to hear the matter without prejudice.  There is only one more question to ask.  “Do you have an interest in this matter, your honor?”   After you have bonded them as the fiduciary and after you have bonded them and they have agreed they are going to move forward without prejudice, then you ask them if they have an interest in this matter. 

You know and I know that they cannot answer that without lying.   If they say, “yes” you can simply say that we have it on the record that you have claimed you have no interest.  Then I would not push it further than that.  There are many, many tricks that they do. We know that they are not allowing affidavits to be on the record, of the affidavit may be accepted by a court clerk and then when it comes to the court matter the judge will throw it out and not admit it and of course without the affidavit, the sworn evidence there are not facts or dispute of facts for the magistrate or judge to ‘weigh.’   If the matter is uncontested in the weight of evidence then they can immediately rule in favor of the party that has presented the facts.  That is another trick they do by ruling out the affidavit and therefore eliminating the opposition.

The tricks played on Affidavits

So there are things you need to consider once you have them to a point and you can ask “is my affidavit entered on the record?”  Yes or no?  If it is ‘yes’ you don’t have to say a single word.  If you have filed and affidavit and the affidavit is consistent with the points we have raised in the last few weeks in blogs, and I won’t go through that now, as we are trying to keep this really simple on these key points tonight.  If they say “No” then you ask why.  They might say they did not understand it, they did not agree, it did not conform.  Then you say, “very well, given that the form is not consistent I will now read it into the evidence as a sworn testimony.”   I am sorry for that mistake, your honor.  Remember you need to have that counter-argument of facts, an affidavit being a clear statement of facts and no opinions or questions.  If they are operating without prejudice they have to allow you that opportunity.  If you hadn’t made that mistake your affidavit should have been on the record, contesting the facts.   

There are many, many tricks that these pirates, independent contractors will do.  As we are saying in this audio tonight, if we allow ourselves the opportunity not to be distracted by the shrill shrieks, the desperate need to distract us to follow yet another dead end, to listen to all the hysteria that is out there, if a judge or magistrate will not answer the question in the affirmative, “Will you be hearing this matter without prejudice?” then it is not a court of law in any form.  There is absolutely no law.  It is that simple.  It is that simple!  

There are many cases to render defective a ruling and one that is often cited is subject matter jurisdiction.  I know that there is material out there that says they don’t have jurisdiction and they proceed anyway and ignore all that.  They are doing this and they are relying on two things as a defense.  One is for you to argue which in many cases once you augment, add, and change what is on the record with your affidavit, once you speak beyond that then YOU, not THEY immediately render your affidavit null and void.  The other is to get people in a position of argument where it can be argued particularly if they raise something that they have been taught falsely by these false gurus, they can use that.  This is why they are doing this; they can use those falsities against you by demonstrating that you need a psych eval because you are clearly insane.  You are clearly upset, you are clearly demonstrating dishonor and you are obviously suffering some form of paranoia. 

You listened to all this stuff so the judge or magistrate will then order a psych eval.  That is what they are doing to people.   They are promoting these false things.  We are making it easy for them, so easy for them, because so many of us are listening and mixing up absolute rubbish out there.  They are paying these people big money to go out and promote this on the internet.  If they can get one person in a court who is close to winning their case to vomit forth something they heard from some crazy guru talking about equity or some magic phrase or anything else, then they harm their case.   

There are lots of way to deal with the appeal, the nullification, the voiding of judgments and orders that are made but really tonight is about the simplest of realizations.  They cannot get away from the argument that the matter before them MUST be handled without prejudice.  That is an obligation that they tell the public and it is in the symbols of their courts and the symbols of their coats of arms, their seals and it is embedded in the psyche.  If the courts are seen to openly and willfully act with prejudice you can clock their survival with an egg timer.   

As we said, the very first question we should be asking when we go to court and before a detail of the matter is brought forward, is, “will you be hearing this matter without prejudice?”   Before I finish, this is the key message for tonight.  If they say, ´yes,’ then we ask if we can have their oath on that promise. Once you have that you can ask if the judge or magistrate has an interest in the matter.  Without prejudice, due process, and clean hands are three fundamental principles that they cannot ignore.

So what else is keeping the last veil in place?

The last thing I want to cover is the question of why is this veil remaining and why is so much information clouded?  What is going on?  Why are people still being so distracted?  I am going to refer to a topic we raised a few weeks ago and it was a topic at the time which I know people may have found outside of their comfort zone, but I am referring back to the key element of the status quo.  That is, there is a definite energy, a definite spiritual presence that is active in promoting the status quo and active in continuing to distract and confuse and weaken as more and more knowledge comes out.  It is a spiritual energy that is desperately fearful and there is a clue as to what it is:  desperately fearful for the power of the awakened mind and for the power when people stand up and are not distracted and not continuing to go down the rabbit hole.  It is an energy that when people accept personal responsibility, is terrified that people will take personal responsibility.  

That should be enough if you have read the canons at www.one-heaven.org and that is to be able to name and see this energy.  It is playing a big, big part in distracting people from the simplicity. The simplicity of the message tonight has no forms, no long dissertations, no citations, no confusion, no long list of ‘to-dos’ and something that anyone who can read, right and remember what they have said on television would see as sensible, the energy, the distraction we are talking about is all that negative energy of unrestrained consumption, murderous video games, sadistic pornography and addictions to drugs and rampant ego combined with ghosts.  It’s not spirit in terms of demon, not mind in terms of the collective awareness, but between two worlds.  It’s an energy that finds itself between two worlds and seeks to maintain what it senses and believes to be its ultimate position which is a hatred of the world, a hatred of life, a hatred of redemption, a hatred of love, a hatred of rule of law. It’s everywhere; we see it everywhere.

I mention that because that is something that we need to name and indeed we need to collectively forgive.  The thing that this energy that continues to distract is terrified about is that its removal is not by hating or fearing it but embracing and forgiving it and name it for what it is.   To name a thing for what it is.  This continues to play a key part in this destruction of law.  Why?  Because when the courts of law are exposed as nothing more than a fraud, when magistrates and judges have to start administering law without prejudice, again, then the world can be healed and this energy can be healed.   This ghost energy will have to move on and will move on because we forgive, remember, name and see it.   

So there it is.  This is ending the last curse of the legal pirates by remembering the three Achilles of their system in perpetuating the lie of their courts of law.  Will you be hearing this matter without prejudice?  Yes, of course.  Do I have your oath on that promise?  Yes.  Do you have an interest in this matter?  Any one of those, all of those is grounds to stop it dead in its tracks.  

As I say each week and I say this sincerely, most importantly I want to thank those of you who haven’t given up, been distracted by all the white noise out there and have found ways to continue to help with what we are doing.  Your help and support is invaluable.  We know how difficult it is for everyone with what you are doing.   I know how hard it is in the way that the financial system constrains the energy of money.  So those that have and continue to help, thank you.  Thank you for not giving up.  

Be well and be safe.  Thank you and good night.