2013-01-15

Chaffing/Chemtrails Central Florida

0 comments

Eyes Burning or Itching?  Thank Mac Dill AFB!



My eyes have been bothering me for the past couple weeks and a local weather man for our local ABC Action News Station explained the drizzle-looking "rain" signatures on the radar:

"We mentioned "chaff" last night as our radar was showing what appeared to be rain...with no clouds, obviously, it's not. Every now and again, the military does experiments with little strips of aluminum. It's a radar jamming experiment, and the results are radar signatures. The Local NWS did a nice tidbit on it today. Just click on the link to see it...then LIKE their page. Great folks over there!"

   Checked out the page and here is the referenced material:

Is it really rain? Or chaff? - Sun Sentinel
Using WSR-88D Dual-Polarization Products to Identify Chaff - NOAA


Continue reading →

UNITED STATES, INC. (Part II)

0 comments

Names and NAMES

What is a name, really?  At its simplest, it is an address or a way to address someone and get their attention.  Below is the best description I could find in context of names and titles.  Just a forewarning (for little ears, lol), there is some swearing in the video; mostly satirical.  He adequately and elegantly explains the multiple facets of names and the abstractions of them therein, but goes off on a weird tangent about "gurus" and stuff like that that I obviously disagree with.  If you like the way he explains things of this nature, please feel free to buy into his seminars (I believe they are over the phone).  You can skip the video if you want, but just understand that when I refer to a name with correct punctuation (ie: Philip Smith), I am referring to myself.  When I use the corporate form, I will capitalize each letter (PHILIP SMITH, for example).  
  I would like to note that it doesn't really matter what name you use or how it is spelled or capitalized, it is simply a way to understand the fact that you are you and a name is simply a way to address you and what capacity you are operating in.  For instance, when referring to "The United States of America" we are referring to the Constitutional Republic operating in Common Law organically and originally intended or UNITED STATES referring to the corporate, illegal, Legislative Democracy in the District of Columbia operating in Statutory Jurisdiction.

Do Your Homework!  

  If you are the observant type,  you may have noticed that I have linked many words and phrases to their respective definitions in the Black's Law Dictionary.  I would like to recommend that you cross-reference said definitions with the Bouvier's Dictionary as it predates Black's.  Another good read to get you ahead of the game is to read about the Maxims of Law, but it is not required as I will make a feeble attempt at summation.

Here's Where It Gets A Bit Crazy


  I'm going to say something that will most likely either make you think I'm crazy or make you poop your pants.  You are a corporation owned by another corporation.  There.  I said it.  In 1862 Congress decided to take it upon themselves to change the meaning of a very important word: Person.  

"...every individual, partnership, firm, association, or corporntion, (and any word or words in this act indicating or referring to person or persons shall be taken to mean and include partnerships, firms, associations, or corporations, when not otherwise designated or manifestly incompatible with the intent thereof..."

  The meaning of the word was changed to mean and/or include corporations.  This was further blasphemed by making people subjects to the jurisdiction of the newly created corporate government.  The 14th Amendment to the UNITED STATES Constitution in 1868:

"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof..."

  In Bouvier's Law Dictionary, there are many definitions for "UNITED STATES", but one sticks out specifically:

"5. The United States of America are a corporation endowed with the capacity to sue and be sued, to convey and receive property. 1 Marsh. Dec. 177, 181. But it is proper to observe that no suit can be brought against the United States without authority of law."  

   Better yet, we can use the United States Code or USC to define the corporation:

"(15) “United States” means—
           (A) a Federal corporation;
           (B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States
           (C) an instrumentality of the United States."

   I will reiterate, you are a corporation (in this definition, "entity") owned by another corporation (DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Inc. (dba. UNITED STATES)).

Can A Corporation That Owns Other Corporations Tell It What To Do?

  In short, yes.  If you look at Federal (Commercial/Statutory/Corporate) Code of Regulations, Title 27, Part 1, Section 72.1:

" 72.1Procedures relating to personal property and carriers.Regulations in this part shall relate to personal property and carriers seized by alcohol, tobacco and firearms officers as subject to forfeiture as being involved, used, or intended to be used, as the case may be, in any violation of Federal laws."

  Summarizing the several sections of the amendment in order, the first is that of the most general application, and which has mainly engaged the attention of the courts. It creates or at least recognizes for the first time a citizenship of the United States, as distinct from that of the states; forbids the making or enforcement by any state of any law abridging the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States (see PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES) ; and secures all "persons" against any state action which is either deprivation of life, liberty, or, property without due process of law or denial of the equal protection of the laws.  (SEE: Article 4, Section 2 of the Constitution):

"The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States."

    In other words, all laws are subject to all citizens (or persons/legal fictions) of the United States.  The next question should automatically present itself.

How Is This Legal?

  That's just it: it isn't.  Article 6 of the Constitution specifically states:

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any state to the Contrary notwithstanding."

  And, the 14th Amendment (never being properly ratified, by the way) creates a new form of government, different form of citizenship, and different jurisdiction.  That is why the 10th Amendment does not apply to a 14th Amendment citizenship (the "new" definition of citizen, that is).  Here is the 10th Amendment for your convenience:

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

  For brevity's sake, I am going to continue on to the following questions in my next post.  Sorry for the ranting, but it needs to be explained in depth.

  • Does Congress know that the 14th Amendment is unconstitutional?
  • What is the Birth Certificate?
  • What is it to be Sovereign?
Continue reading →
2013-01-14

UNITED STATES, INC. (Part I)

0 comments

Forward

  Since September 11th, 2001 I have been changed into a bit of a skeptic.  The uphill battle of breaking down the wool intricately woven over my eyes since birth proved a challenging endeavor.  What I mean is I felt something was amiss regarding the official presumptions of the mass media's portrayal of significant historical events as they seemed to be either incomplete or completely flawed.  9/11 will remain a mystery for those who refuse to accept either side of the conspiracy.  I use the word "conspiracy" intentionally.  The word, as defined by numerous dictionaries, essentially means an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot (ref.).   So, any reference to the events of the attacks revolves around a conspiracy; the official and unofficial accounts without significant physical evidence are both, in fact, conspiracy theories.  The goal of this series of posts is to open your eyes to the facade of legitimate governance this country can no longer see because we neglect to remember our own history.

  Regardless of your stance on terrorists and conspiracy, you have to agree that the world changed in late 2001.  But, is that really the most significant turning point, at least in American history?  Let's go back for a moment and get a bird's eye view of another significant (but, subtle) event in our nations' history (apostrophe after "nations" intentional).

Republic or Democracy?

  This has been a hot topic for over 100 years.  Why?  Why do Democrats and Republicans constantly and consistently bicker and argue?  One argument that has been convoluted by micro-managed differences is the all-encompassing question as to the governmental state of our country.  So, what are we?  First of all, let's define the two.  To avoid arguments over what dictionary best suits who, I will be using Bouvier's Legal Dictionary 1856 edition and for brevity, Black's Law Dictionary (when necessary).

REPUBLICAN GOVERNMENT:
  1. A government in the republican form; a government of the people; it is usually put in opposition to a monarchical or aristocratic government.      2. The fourth section of the fourth article of the constitution, directs that "the United States shall guaranty to every state in the Union a republican form of government." The form of government is to be guarantied, which supposes a form already established, and this is the republican form of government the United States have undertaken to protect. See Story, Const. §1807.

DEMOCRACY [government]:
  That form of government in which the sovereign power is exercised by the people in a body, as was the practice in some of the states of Ancient Greece; the term representative democracy has been given to a republican government like that of the United States. 

  Wait.  What is a Representative Democracy?

REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY:  A form of government where the powers of the sovereignty are delegated to a body of men, elected from time to time, who exercise them for the benefit of the whole nation. 1 Bouv. Inst. n. 31. 

  Not to be confused with a Direct Democracy, by the way.

What Happened in 1871? 


  So, who sets the policies in a Representative Democracy?  The elected "body" creates policies/laws.  But, this still does not answer the original inquiry.  To answer the question, we must step back to the year 1871, more precisely, February 21st. The Forty-First Congress is in session soon after the Civil War. This Congress passed an Act titled "An Act to Provide A Government for the District of Columbia", more commonly referred to as the "Act of 1871" (Acts of Congress, Section 34, Session III, Chapters 61 & 62). What this act created was a separate government for the Distric of Columbia (a ten square mile land parcel in America's Northeast quadrant).

  The Act of 1871 was passed at a vulnerable time in America. Our nation was essentially bankrupt — weakened and financially depleted in the aftermath of the Civil War. It was a strategic maneuver by European interests (the international bankers) who were intent upon gaining a stranglehold on the neck (and the coffers) of America. Does this sound at all familiar?  Remember Egypt, Libya, Syria, and the "spreading of Democracy"?  Believe me, Democracy spreading is more accurately akin to spreading herpes.  The Congress realized our country was in dire financial straits, so they cut a deal with the international bankers — (in those days, the Rothschilds of London).  Essentially, Congress indebted themselves to said bankers by creating a government in their name and with their [Statutory] laws.  Yes, this is treason.

  In essence, this Act formed the corporation known as THE UNITED STATES. Note the capitalization, because it is important. This corporation, owned by foreign interests, moved right in and shoved the original "organic" version of the Constitution into a dusty corner. With the "Act of 1871," our Constitution was defaced in the sense that the title was block-capitalized and the word "for" was changed to the word "of" in the title. The original Constitution drafted by the Founding Fathers, was written in this manner: "The Constitution for the united states of America".  The altered version reads: "THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA". It is the corporate constitution. It is NOT the same document you might think it is. The corporate constitution operates in an economic capacity and has been used to fool the People into thinking it is the same parchment that governs the Republic. It absolutely is not.  

  The question regarding the type of government should now be clear. We are both a Legislative Democracy and Constitutional Republic simultaneously. Essentially, what we want and expect our nation to be is a Republic, but the Federal Government (the Legislative Democracy) has stripped away our sovereignty and basic Human Rights to enable a subtle takeover by foreign banking institutions.   This now presents more questions. One of which may be "why?" and another "how?", but the next questions that I will attempt to answer in Part II will be the following (probably,):

  • Why does the capitalization matter in the name? 
  • How does this effect me and my family?
  • What is the Birth Certificate, really? 
  • What is a Person? 
  • What is a Citizen?
  • What does it mean to be sovereign?

  Let these questions marinate in your head for a moment; deeply consider the meaning of each (for an exercise of sorts, heh).  Stay tuned for Part II, if you're still awake at this point.

Next>
Continue reading →
2013-01-09

Free Online Learning!

0 comments
  Recently stumbled upon some free online classes and thought I'd share it with my readers (do I even have readers?  lol).  There are 20 categories from 33 participating universities.  Give it a whirl!

https://www.coursera.org/
Continue reading →

Resent Personal Discovery: Mind Mapping Software

0 comments

What is Mind Mapping Software?

  I have heard about it for quite some time now, but have always passed it off as weird, hippy, metaphysical crap.  I saw a video somebody posted on Google+ regarding a Android app and, of course, the screenshot caught my eye.  I tried the free version of the software and really liked it, but the $4.99 price was a bit steep for something I wouldn't use too often on my mobile phone.

  I found myself scouring the Internet for [free] Linux solutions.  I tried two different applications that looked great and had the functionality I desired.  First, I tried VYM (View Your Mind) simply because it was high-rated in the Ubuntu Software Center, but found the graphics to be a bit crappy.  Don't get me wrong though...it is great software, it just didn't work the way I wanted it to.  


  After a while of tinkering (see screenshot above), I decided to replicate the same map of United States courts in another application I saw called XMind and, so far, I like XMind a bit more than VYM.  



  I think I'll stick with XMind for the time being.  Not a very big post, but I wanted to express the value I feel this software will bring me in breaking seemingly complex systems and ideas down to a more reasonable, visual level.  Give it a whirl!  For the record, XMind is also available for Windows and Mac users too:

http://www.xmind.net/
Continue reading →