RECOGNITION AS as opposed to BEING
BEING is not the issue. Recognition As is the issue.
Our saying Im not the Name; Im not a Person, etc. is obvious and this is not the matter, anyway. Judges, albeit programmed, are not stupid and they can SEE that we are not BEING either a Name or a Person (Legal Fiction). For what they are looking is one whom they can recognize as a Person and, thus, apply their laws, since it is a Person which was in violation of said laws. So, if we state, up front, that we waive the right to be recognized as a person, pursuant to Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) Article 6 and International Covenant for Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) Article 16 both within the International Bill of Human Rights (IBHR), BY WHICH ALL PUBLIC SERVANTS ARE BOUND then, their laws do not apply to us, as they apply only to persons.
Just as money is borrowed into existence, via our signatures, so too, the person is operated into existence, via our use of the name.
We DO have the RIGHT to be recognized as a person, i.e.: as the Beneficiary of the Trust, on such occasions when it would benefit us, e.g.: unemployment benefits and social security, however, in cases where the public is accosting us to pay THEIR debt, we ought NOT to reserve that right to be recognized as a person, aka the Trustee of the Trust; we ought to waive that right. If they continue to accost us, not only are they in violation of our human rights but also of trust law. We could file a Title 42 USC § 1983 action against them for Human Rights Violations and a complaint under CCC §363 for Criminal breach of trust and, in some cases, §363 (b) for Obtaining execution of valuable security by fraud. We can use US Codes, as, publicly, Canada is a subsidiary corporation of the United States Corporation and so US law applies. (On the private side, the uSA is a part of Canada, called, South Canada.)
We have the right to be recognized as a person which we can exert for the instances when it benefits us, e.g.: CPP, bank accounts, etc. and the public is bound to honour that right, because it is written twice in the IBHR, by which they are bound. But for the circumstances which do NOT benefit us charges, fines, IRS/CRA, mortgages, bills, etc., we have the right to WAIVE that right to be recognized as a person and, if they do not honour our option to do so, that is a Human Rights Violation and we go after them with a Title 42 USC § 1983 action and they lose their bonds and, hence, their jobs.
If we are threatened to behave in a manner by which they might still recognize us as a person, such as identifying with the name, we can ask, Are you forcing me to violate §403 of the Criminal Code? (Personation); or, when asked, Are you John Doe, yes or no? If youre not, you can leave and Ill issue a warrant for John Doe, we can respond, No; Im not John Doe so you will not be executing a warrant on this man, standing before you, will you? If we are threatened to state a name, besides asking, Are you threatening me? we might refer to the CCRF and the Bible. Why is that book in every courtroom? The preamble of the CCRF reads that Canada recognizes the supremacy of God and according to Genesis 5:2, God called our name Adam.
If we are dragged to court then we ought to threaten them with, If you proceed against me and attempt to apply to ME, a living man, your laws which apply only to persons, this will be construed as Human Rights Violations.
In my previous article, Removing Suretyship, I wrote that the given names are ours. It seems they are not ours, in the public, because they are registered with the province/state. There is no distinction among names; they are ALL registered. I know, the question begs asking, So, if my car is registered to the name and the name is registered with the state, and, hence, the state has legal title to the car, then, why did I pay for it, let alone the insurance? We ought to be asking, Doesnt the legal title holder pay all costs?
Pick a law, any law, but it is ALL man-made Bible, IBHR, CCRF, Constitution, etc., so keep in mind that, since the original purpose of law was to keep the tyrants in line, then, we can use any of their laws to come against them. They cannot come against us with their laws. We are not a party to them until we consent.
I must add that I continue to receive emails from people complaining, and they pay for this with MY taxes!, this being war, illegal immigrants, etc. I re-iterate: our taxes pay for NOTHING not roads, schools, hospitals, post offices, etc. Our taxes go directly to the IBS (International Bank of Settlements) via the World Bank and the IMF (International Monetary Fund) to service the interest on the debt.
Up until 1933, the Bank accepted our gold, forests, mineral, and water rights as interest on their loans to the government, but once those were all spent, so to speak, there was nothing left but for the countries to declare themselves bankrupt corporations. From then on, the only source of revenue remaining was the labour of the people. This is why we pay income tax solely to pay the interest on the bank loans.
So, from where does the money come, in order to build roads, etc. (I dont know why people always use the example of roads, but I did have one friend who asked, Where do they get the money to build post offices? I was grateful for the much-needed respite from roads.) There is no money; there is only credit which is at the Treasury. It can be accessed by the public, via a trust account, backed by bonds which are backed by our future labour. This account is evidenced by birth certificates. By our authorization, via our signatures, public entities of all kinds can access said credit in order to do what they do. The problem is that they access vastly more than is required to do their jobs and, hence, create the debt which is now so out of control.