Why does the government call the people corporations names spelled in all capital letters?  Why do all courts fly admiralty flags, the ones with the gold fringe, in the courtroom.  This is because they derive their "power" to control the population indirectly from the constitution specifically from Article 1 section 8 "To declare War, grant letters of Marque and Reprisal.  A Letter of Marque is an international agreement that allows a Pirate to become a Privateer.  A Privateer is someone commissioned by the government to capture booty and split it with the government.  The Letter of Marque gives the Privateer the full authority to Rob, plunder and murder as long as the government gets it's cut of the booty.  Full Authority provided by a government entity to a corporate entity.  Black law Dictionary 6th edition.

There are 3 requirements for the LOM to be valid.  It is only applicable on the High Seas, against Vessels of the Enemy.

This is why we are currently in the united states fly a WAR flag, where the stripes are horizontal.  The Peace Flag the stripes are vertical.

The Paris Peace Treaty of 1783 is the document that formally ended the hostilities between Britain and the united States.  The LOM was outlawed by the Treaty of Paris of 1856

 

Letter of Marque and Reprisal Subpoena (.doc Word file)

 

Letter of Marque and Reprisal I.R.S. (.doc Word file)

 

 

The three big questions in the “patriot” community that have been going around for the last thirty (30) years that I have been associated with the different groups are:

1) Why do they use Admiralty courts; and

2) Why do they consider us enemies of the state; and

3) Why did they create a corporate pseudonym for us?

The following abridged treatise is my attempt to quantify the only possible reason that ALL three (3) requisites must be met in accordance to one (1) Law form. I personally do not believe it is a coincidence that over two thousand (2000) years ago Jesus asked his followers to find a Law form that met the same guidelines as the Law form that will be discussed in this treatise. 

 

The following quote corresponds with the aforementioned concept and is accurate according to the scriptures:

                                                                                     Author; Mobius Nemesis

Only the very basic concepts of the Law form known as “Letter of marque and reprisal”, pursuant to Article 1, section 8, paragraph 11 of the United States Constitution and Public International Law will be covered in this abridged treatise as an accurate explanation would include every “government agency” acting under color of law.

 

There is a lot more to all of this. Do not read this and think you will know enough to do anything other than piss off a pirate. Be patient, more will be revealed.

 

With that stated, let’s start with a fundamental concept that predicates all venue and jurisdictions.

  

Flags were the first from of long range communication, especially between military forces, friend and foe.

 

This is the Arizona State flag.

 

 

 

This is the United States flag; it is a flag of peace.   It was described in Nathaniel Hawthorne's “Scarlet Letter” published in 1850 before the War Between the States. The description of the U.S. Civil Flag is in the introduction, "The Custom House" ---". . . Here, with a view from its front windows down this not very enlivening prospect, and thence across the harbor, stands a spacious edifice of brick. From the loftiest point of its roof, during precisely three and a half hours of each forenoon, floats or droops, in breeze or calm, the banner of the republic; but with the thirteen stripes turned vertically, instead of horizontally, and thus indicating that a civil, and not a military, post of Uncle Sam's government is here established.

 

 

This is the United States War flag.  You should only fly it if you are at war. 

 

                                                                         

 

 

The appearance of our flag is defined in Title 4 sec. 1. U.S.C. "The flag of the United States shall be thirteen horizontal stripes, alternate red and white; and the union of the flag shall be forty-eight stars, white in a blue field." This doesn’t say much and is remiss in the important details. There is a foot note on page 1113 of the same section which says: "Placing of fringe on the national flag, the dimensions of the flag, and arrangement of the stars are matters of detail not controlled by statute, but within the discretion of the President as commander-in-chief of the Army and Navy." 1925, 34 Op.Atty.Gen. 483.

One president added a yellow fringe to our flag: "Pursuant to U.S.C. Chapter 1, 2, and 3; Executive Order No. 10834, August 21, 1959, 24 F.R. 6865, a military flag is a flag that resembles the regular flag of the United States, except that it has a YELLOW FRINGE, bordered on three sides. The President of the United states designates this deviation from the regular flag, by executive order, and in his capacity as COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF of the Armed forces."

"...The agency of the master is devolved upon him by the law of the flag. The same law that confers his authority ascertains its limits, and the flag at the mast-head is notice to all the world of the extent of such power to bind the owners or freighters by his act. The foreigner who deals with this agent has notice of that law, and, if he be bound by it, there is not injustice. His notice is the national flag which is hoisted on every sea and under which the master sails into every port, and every circumstance that connects him with the vessel isolates that vessel in the eyes of the world, and demonstrates his relation to the owners and freighters as their agent for a specific purpose and with power well defined under the national maritime law." Bouvier's Law Dictionary, 1914.                                                                                                   Note: Admiralty law came on land in 1845 with the Act of 1845 by Congress.                                                See: Ruhstrat v. People, 57 N.E. 41, 45, 185 ILL. 133, 49 LRA 181, 76 AM. "Pursuant to the "Law of the Flag", a military flag does result in jurisdictional implication when flown. The Plaintiff cites the following: "Under what is called international law, the law of the flag, a ship-owner who sends his vessel into a foreign port gives notice by his flag to all who enter into contracts with the shipmaster that he intends the law of the flag to regulate those contracts with the shipmaster that he either submit to its operation or not contract with him or his agent at all."

It is important to know the language you are speaking, for you can be held accountable under the law for the word’s legal definition. Just as words have legal definitions that are sometimes antonyms of the laymen use of the same word, flags have specific legal meanings also.

My advice to understand how egregiously you have been mislead into your own enslavement is to get your hands on a Black’s Law Sixth Edition and look up the following words, it is imperative that you completely understand the last four (4):

1) Marriage license; and

2) Enrolled; and

3) Person; and

4) Include;

5) Acquiescence; and

6) Chancery.

 

If you spend some time learning the legal use of words you will garner a more accurate understanding of why what happens to you in court seems to have nothing to do with right and wrong and/or rights and wrongs.

 

Pursuant to Public International Law, and Public International Law of the Flag, land flag(s) PREVAIL and nullify ALL Admiralty flags while on land, when the former is unfurled in the presence of the later. This is very important, as you may extrapolate from the following pages.

It is VERY important to truly know a language before you attempt to speak it, especially when the simple misunderstanding or incorrect definition of a word may cost you your freedom. Our courts are nothing more than word wizards that have chosen a maniacal form of lying instead of have the testicular fortitude to just come right out and lie. In other words they make words mean something differently then they do in the “laymen” sense. You may think you are a “person”, but persons can’t bleed, remember that as a trick in court.

 

Ergo, I have included the legal definitions you need to understand if you are interested in discovering why you have no rights and the why government is not inclined to befriend you.

 

When we think of government agents and “employees” one must remember what these people really are according to the legal definitions of such. ALL government agents; police, revenuers, counsel, employees, etc are in the strictest legal sense; Privateers, simply another legal term, which means a legal pirate that shares his captured booty with the government that granted him the authority to rape and pillage you.

If that concept alone doesn’t scare the hell out of you, stop reading now, for in this document is the truth, and the truth is uglier than your ex-spouse’s attitude.

 

First, the definition of LOMAR, then the definition of the words used in the definition of LOMAR.

Letter of marque and reprisal: page 905;

An authorization formerly granted in time of war by a government to the owner of a private vessel to capture enemy vessels and goods on the high seas.

     Note: There are three points that must be met for a LOMAR to be validly applied;

               i) Against an enemy; and

              ii) Against vessels and goods; and

             iii) On the high seas.

                   Absent any one of the requisites the LOMAR is defective and void, not just voidable, ab initio 

                   (from its beginning). Also, nowhere are the words human being and/or fines written in this 

                   definition.

Authorize: page 133;

To empower; to give a right or authority to act. To endow with authority or effective legal power, warrant, or right. People v. Young, 100 Ill.App.2d. 20, 241 N.E.2d 587, 589. To permit a thing be done in the future. It has a mandatory effect or meaning, implying a direction to act.

“Authorized” is sometimes construed as equivalent to “permitted”: or “directed”, or similar mandatory language. Possessed of authority: that is, possessed of legal or rightful power, the synonym of which is “competency.  Doherty v. Kansas City Star Co., 143 Kan. 802, 57 P.2d 43

War: page 1583;

Hostile contention by means of armed forces, carried on between nations, states, or between citizens in the same nation or state. Gitlow v. Kiely, D.C.N.Y., 44 F.2d 227, 233

Laws of war: This term denotes a branch of public international law, and comprises the body of rules and principles observed by civilized nations for the regulation of matters inherent in, or incidental to, the conduct of a public war; such, for example, as the relations of neutrals and belligerents, blockades, captures, prizes, truces and armistices, capitulations, prisoners, and declarations of war and peace; e.g. Geneva Convention.

               each other.

Owner: page 1105;

The person in whom is vested the ownership, dominion, or title of property; proprietor. He who has dominion over a thing, real or personal, corporeal or incorporeal, which he has the right to enjoy and do with as he please, even to spoil or destroy it, as far as the law permits, unless he be prevented by some agreement or covenant which restrains his right………….

         Note: Person ONLY includes human being, and not a corporation, in this case as the word

Private: page 1195; Affecting or belonging to private individuals, as distinct form the public generally. Not official; not clothed with office. People v. Powell, 280 Mich. 699, 274 N.W. 372,

        Note: Any corporation publicly claiming to be and/or acting under the color of law as a

Vessel: page: 1562;

A ship, brig, sloop, or other craft used, or capable of being used, in navigation on water…….

On the other hand, however, everything that floats is not necessarily a “vessel”, in purpose of the Jones Act.

Enemy: page 528;

Adversary; e.g. military adversary.  Enemy alien……..; Enemy belligerent……; Public enemy.

            Note: the definitions are very long and not ambiguous. Basically, an enemy is exactly 

Goods: page 694;

A term of variable content and meaning. It may include every species of personal property or it may be given a very restricted meaning.

            Note: the definition of goods shall NEVER include human beings.

High seas: page 728;

That portion of ocean which is beyond the territorial jurisdiction of any country. The “high seas” lie seaward of a nation’s territorial sea, which is the bank of water that extends up to three miles out from the coast.  U.S. v. Roero-Galue, C.A.Fla., 757 F.2d 1147, 1149.

Ocean: page 1080;

The main or open sea: the high sea; that portion of the sea which does not lie within the body of any country and is not subject to the territorial jurisdiction or control of any country, but is open, free, and common to the use of all nations. U.S. v. Rodgers, 150 U.S. 249, 14 S.Ct. 109,37 L.Ed. 1071. Body of salt water that covers over 70% of earth’s surface.

           Note: Land is the other 30% of earth’s surface and may NOT by law be confused even for

Privateer: page 1195;

A vessel owned, equipped, and armed by one or more private individuals, and duly commissioned by a belligerent power to go on cruises and make war upon the enemy, usually by preying on his commerce. A private vessel commissioned by a nation by the issue of a letter of marque to its owner to carry on hostilities by sea, presumably according to the laws of war. Formerly, a state issued letters of marque to its own subjects and to those of neutral states as well, but a privateersman who accepted letters of marque from both belligerents was regarded as a pirate. By the Declaration of Paris (April, 1856), privateering was abolished, but the United States, Spain, Mexico, and Venezuela did not accede to this declaration. It has been thought that the constitutional provision empowering the Congress to issue letters of marque deprives it of the power to join in a permanent treaty abolishing privateering.

    Piracy and privateering are federal offenses, 18 U.S.C. § 1651 et seq.

             Note: this is the reason police vehicles are known as “cruisers.”

Belligerent: page 155;

In international law, as an adjective, it means engaged in lawful war. As a noun, it designates either of two nations which are actually in a state of war with each other, as well as their allies actively co-operating, as distinguished from a nation which takes no part in the war and maintains a strict indifference as between the contending parties, called a “neutral.”

  As a personally trait, refers to one who is overly assertive, hostile or combative.

Belligerents: page 155;

A body of insurgents who by reason of their temporary organized government are regarded as conducting lawful hostilities. Also, militia, corps of volunteers, and others, who although not part of the regular army of the state, are regarded as lawful combatants provided they observe the laws of war.

Ex dolo malo no oritur action: page 567;

Out of fraud no action arises; fraud never gives a right of action. No court will lend its aid to a man who founds his cause of action upon an immoral or illegal act.

Jurisdiction: page 853;

…It is the power of the court to decide a matter in controversy and presupposes the existence of a duly constituted court with control over the subject matter and the parties….

..Areas of authority: the geographical area in which a court has power or types of cases it has power to hear.

            Note: if the letter(s) of marque and reprisal are not authentic, and/or valid and/or do not 

Venue: page: 1557;

Formerly spelled visne. In common law pleading and practice, a neighborhood, the neighborhood, place or county in which an injury is declared to have been done, or fact declared to have happened……..

   Venue does not refer to jurisdiction at all. …As such, while a defect in venue MAY be waived by the parties, lack of jurisdiction may not.

            Note: if a court is in Admiralty then it CANNOT be in the correct venue as concerning  

Vi et armis: page 1568;

With force and arms.          

Ergo, we have at issue a set of questions that courts will refuse to answer;

1) What type of court is this court?

     i) Equity

    ii) Admiralty

   iii) Law

   iv) Chancery

    v) Tribunal

   vi) Constitutional

           a) State

           b) Federal

           c) Foreign

2) By what authority does this court operate

    i) Charter

        a) From what entity

    ii) Letter(s) of marque and reprisal

        a) Issued by what government

        b) Issued by what agent

        c) Does the court have the LOMAR

3) Where is this court’s venue

     i) Land

          a) What county

    ii) Under what nation

          a) Are the laws of war being followed

               * Is the World court being represented by the “STATE”

 

Obviously the list of questions is infinite since the absence of venue creates a lack of jurisdiction. UNLESS, and here is where they ALWAYS get people, the victim of the pirate does not request from the pirate his letter of marque and reprisal that lawfully converts said pirate into a Privateer. By NOT requesting the LOMAR the victim has acquiesced and pursuant to precedent has “agreed” that the pirate is a Privateer and that said Privateer’s LOMAR is authentic and valid and does apply to said victim.

 

Even a lousy lawyer knows two (2) rules:

1) Never ask a question you don’t already know the answer to; and

2) Always make your adversary ask the wrong question.

These two (2) rules can make even an ignorant buffoon seem intelligent and inversely make an intelligent man appear too ignorant to handle his own affairs. See: Non compos mentis, Black’s sixth page 1051.

So, all they had to do was get us to NOT ask the right question.

You do not ask a pirate to see his badge, you ask to see his LOMAR.

You do not ask a pirate to see his accounting, you ask to see his LOMAR.

You do not ask a pirate to see his contract, you ask to see his LOMAR.

You do not ask a pirate to see his license, you ask to see his LOMAR.

 

For the “accepted for value upon proof of claim” people, the claim is the LOMAR, and they will not show it to you, so you win.

For the Title 15 section 1692 (g) people the verification is not the amount, it is the LOMAR, and they will not show it to you, so you win.

 

 

I sincerely hope this helps someone. There will be more to come.