I am hashing through Redemption Movement materials that have been sent to me by WW. He is still trying to wrap his head around the lie that has been sold to him since his incarceration. Copied text appears in blockquotes: anything that appears outside of blockquotes is my writing.
How a Prisoner Funds America
[Editor’s Note: In the mid 1990’s, I began finding out information about an educational process called ‘Redemption’ which referred to taking back your sovereign rights as a natural born citizen of America due to a deception that was perpetuated on the American people by the Illuminati during the 1930’s.
I’m going to come back to this for fun later, but there really are people who believe this.
A number of legal ‘fictions’ were created at that time by federal fiat that declared that the U. S. was in a state of bankruptcy and that a ‘policy’ would now take over that established all legal matters-from civil to criminal-to be under the jurisdiction of the Uniform Commercial Code, the UCC, which is created by statutory laws (‘laws’ created by legislatures without approval -and usually without knowledge-of the general public), in place of Constitutional law which was created with the approval of the American people.
Believers of the Redemption Movement cite House Joint Resolution 192 as revealing the supposed bankruptcy of the United States.
This fiction took you, the flesh and blood creation of God out of the picture and substituted in your place something called ‘the straw man’. Whenever you get a summons to appear in court, your name is printed in all capital letters because that is how the ‘straw man’ is distinguished from the flesh and blood, God-created man. Since you show up and answer to your all-capital name on the docket, the court accepts you as the ‘representative’ of the straw man and proceeds to play the game with you. If you don’t show up, they’re still arrest you for failure to appear, because the state has already recognized you as the representative of the straw man-unless you learn how to break that connection (called a ‘nexus’) and take back your straw man from state ‘ownership’.
This passage establishes how the farce became known as the “Redemption Movement” – it stems from the desire to redeem the “strawman.”
I know it sounds complicated and you weren’t told a thing about it, but I did tell you it was a deception, remember?
If you don’t realize that you are ‘owned’ by the state, then consider this: whenever you go to a car dealer and buy a new car, the deed (from the manufacturer) of that car is sent by the car dealer to the Secretary of State of the state in which you live. It’s recorded and then destroyed. You, in turn, are given a title of certificate by your state which says that you have a legal right to possess and use this car which is now owned by the state who received its deed.
This would be great if not for the fact that deed and title are used interchangeably here.
For those who are unaware: by the time that you see your new car at a car dealership, it’s already got a title on it. The owner of that vehicle is typically a bank, with which the car dealership has a line of credit. Ask anyone who has worked at a car dealership, particularly those individuals in their finance departments. They will have seen a representative from the bank coming around to inspect the vehicles at one point or another.
The manufacturer of a vehicle does not issue titles, nor do they issue deeds. Vehicles don’t come from the factory with legal documents. Those documents aren’t then delivered with the vehicles to the car dealership. The original (first) title on any car goes to whoever purchased it. In the case of a car at the dealership, the name on the title is probably a bank. If the car was purchased in cash and built to order for the buyer, then the title will reflect the name of the original buyer.
The state has no such ownership over the vehicle. Your title states that you own the vehicle. If you financed the vehicle, a lien will appear on the title. Lienholders have rights to the vehicle so long as the lien is in effect.
Your ownership of the car is an illusion, the reality is-the state owns the car.
Same for a marriage licence. You are asking the state to give you permission to become man and wife.
No: by seeking out a marriage license, you are making a public record that you are entering into marriage.
By seeking out said marriage licence, you are affirming to the state that your are slaves of the state (“chattel”) and you recognize that the ‘massah’ has authority over you for such things, otherwise you wouldn’t be asking for its ‘permission’ in the first place. Beginning to see the big picture, Bunky?
Bunky, if you are still nodding your head in agreement with the editor, keep reading. Otherwise consider yourself learned.
To learn more, type in “redemption + straw man” into Google and see what comes up. Don’t forget, the debunkers are there too to dissuade you about the Redemption process, so don’t let a little sand in your eyes throw you for a loop…Ken]
Yes, someone is lying. Is it the followers of the Redemption Movement?
By Lynn Schmaltz
October 3, 2004
Hi–here’s some interesting research on ‘crimes’.
Ready whenever you are, Lynn. Oh, you wrote this ten years ago?
It appears that all crimes are commercial and have a commercial value to them.
Wait – all crimes are commercial and have a commercial value to them? What is that supposed to mean?
It makes you look at improvements to the freeways, cities and towns in a different light…….especially when those improvements are funded by ‘municipal bonds.’ You’ll also understand why there’s no hurry to end the war in Iraq, and you may ask the question “who is shooting whom?” Take care, Lynn
OK, take it away!
Gxxx is investigating more into the criminal jail/prosecution aspects. The results are incredible.
Let the results speak for themselves.
His strawman is currently on probation from activities that were the result of Cxxxx prosecution of 17 to 18 people who were attempting to help patriots to buy Cadillacs. He was put in jail for a year, then a half way house.
G’s strawman was put in jail, or he was put in jail?
He’s been researching admiralty. When he was ready to leave the half way house he was caught on the computer creating a bill of exchange and the guards and matrons thought it was criminal activity so they jerked him back into jail for violating his probation for putting a blank bill of exchange.
It’s questionable whether this blank bill of exchange was backed by anything of substance
Jxxx had advised him that he had to quit fighting these people or he’d be in dishonor under admiralty and he had to keep raising questions rather than fighting and denying the charges.
I don’t think that this has anything to do with admiralty. Citizens are read their rights in rather precise language. Anything you say or do may be used against you in a court of law.. Meaning shut up and don’t do anything stupid. Or ask rhetorical questions.
He was only in jail about 4 or 5 days and when they tried to interrogate him to get him ready for his hearing where the judge would eventually put him back into prison. He started using the correct tactic of accepting and asking questions. He got the prosecutor (assistant) to throw up her hands and scream he was too smart for her, to just get out. He’s been in a half way house since May.
The last time he had a probation hearing with his officer in Cxxxx, he’d gone to the meeting personally.
Before he went, he’d written a letter to her, the judge, the prosecutor, and others, and said that he requested that they deliver to him the bonds from CUSIP which were being used to underwrite his time in prison and his time on probation. He wanted them to deliver the bonds being held by CUSIP and other government agencies so he could accept them for settlement and closure.
Why would it be their business to retrieve bonds which were allegedly being held by CUSIP? If G was confident that these bonds were held by CUSIP, why didn’t he get them from CUSIP?
When he went to his probation officer meeting he was disappointed because his probation officer wasn’t there to meet with him. He filled out a form and left. It seems that no one wants to talk with him or meet with him now that he’s asked for the CUSIP bonds so he can settle and close the bonds.
Is it possible that his tactics are wearing them down?
CUSIP is an acronym.
Yes and no; CUSIP:
– is a 9-character alphanumeric code that identifies a North American financial security for the purpose of facilitating clearing and settlement of trades.
– is an acronym derived from the Committee on Uniform Security Identification Procedures, a committee of the American Bankers Association
… but so what? WASP is an acronym. USA is an acronym.
Gxxx is telling us that all criminal prosecution is for the purpose for raising revenue for the United States of America and he’ll tell us who that is.
Looking forward to it, G.
Now you’ll have a better understanding of why people are in jail, why they are in prison, why they are on probation and why they are charged with everything from jaywalking on up through murder one.
It might be a stretch here, but might it be because these people have broken laws?
Jack further heard from others researching, and Gxxx is also saying that every American soldier who dies in Afghanistan and Iraq probably carries a $10 million life insurance on him carried by our government.
Cursory research reveals that there is a Servicemembers Group Life Insurance (SGLI), but this is not paid to the government. Jack and G are operating under hearsay on this topic.
After all, every soldier, marine, or air force person is an asset to the United States of America. They have a huge investment in that particular soldier and his activity and it can explain why it is that the US is not so anxious to withdraw its troops from that area.
An asset to the one is a liability to the other. Unfortunately, this statement does not say much..
It’s a money making activity and they don’t want to talk about the fact that they are making money on death and that they are making money the incarceration and imprisonment on otherwise good hearted people.
What logic lead to this conclusion?
The key to finding out what you want on the Internet is knowing how to put it into the computer. If you put the right information in there, you get the right answer. He’s been finding out who the investor is, the 144 holders
Investor in what? (it appears that there is a Form 144)
They have a rule called the 144 holder.
Who are they?
The rule is that they can’t sell private investment securities that are not registered. The rule prohibits them from selling the prison bonds.
OK – G and Lynn Schmaltz are telling us that prison bonds can be traded. This is getting interesting.
They have to wait 6 months before they can sell a certain quantity of private securities without being registered, selling them as private securities.
This is probably written in Rule / Form 144 somewhere.
Basically there are 8 people on the board of directors of CCA (Corrections Corporation of America)-Joseph E. Russell, the top holder, and John M Ferguson. Russell owns 64,000 shares of CCA stock which is worth about $70 million. Ferguson owns 34,000 shares valued at about $37 million.
Corrections Corporation of America is a real entity that is involved in the prison game. It appears that today, insiders own $32.84 mil of stock in Corrections Corporation of America (CXW). Source: http://investors.morningstar.com/ownership/shareholders-overview.html?t=CXW®ion=usa&culture=en-US&ownerCountry=USA
Fidelity Management and Research is the top stock holder, the top investment firm that is selling the bonds as investment securities.
As of today, this is not the case. I’m showing that Vanguard Group, Inc. is the top institutional shareholder with nearly 16 million shares. Fidelity comes in second with nearly 6.4 million shares. Both companies are investment firms, but nowhere has it been established that prison bonds are investments or marketable securities. Source: http://investors.morningstar.com/ownership/shareholders-major.html?t=CXW®ion=usa&culture=en-US&ownerCountry=USA
They pool them and sell them as mortgage backed securities.
A mortgage backed security is just that.. A security that is backed by mortgage payments. I’d venture a guess that G and Lynn are clutching onto buzzwords here.
They also when they pool them, they sell them as mutual funds on the stock market.
Mutual funds don’t get traded on the stock market. G’s not looking too sure of himself with a statement like that.
By pooling you mean the securities on the inmates.
What securities? Oh.. Let me guess – the CUSIP allegedly tied to their social security numbers, right?
What they are doing is they are actually taking the mortgage backed securities, which are really bid bonds, performance bonds and payment bonds. They pool these bonds and when they pool them together they call them mortgage backed securities.
They take these to TBA which is the Bond Market Association. It’s an actual market for bonds.
Bullshit. To be announced (TBA) is a term used to describe a forward mortgage-backed securities trade. The term derives from the fact that the actual mortgage-backed security that will be delivered to fulfill a TBA trade is not designated at the time that the trade is made. Source: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/tba.asp
Where does the Bond Market Association come into this? The settlement procedures of mortgage-backed securities TBA trades are established by the Bond Market Association.
TBA is not a market for bonds, nor is the Bond Market Association.
Anytime a bond is issued there has to be an underwriter. The bonds have to be underwritten. Bonds that are issued have to be indemnified so there has to be surety (spelling?) to indemnify the bonds. The brokerage houses and the insurance companies indemnify the bonds. They’re called surety companies.
After the surety companies indemnify the bonds, which is underwriting them, they do this through an investment banker or the banks themselves do this. They job it out to them. They buy up all these shares and turn around and sell them as investment securities. The shares represent the stock which represent the account of CCA. All of this has been funneled through CCA, the Corrections Corporation of America. What they are doing is selling stock in the prison system by selling the prisoners’ accounts as securities through the securities exchange.
Just to get this straight.. G is claiming that the Corrections Corporation of America is buying up all these shares (of what?) and selling them as securities. Specifically, they’re packaging these shares into mortgage-backed securities. And these shares are made up of prisoners’ accounts. Those accounts being their strawman’s accounts. Right.
They are making huge amounts of money off it. They privatize the prisoners’ accounts and bring all these investors in and what they are doing is underwriting all these prisoner’s accounts (bonds). This is after the surety company guarantees the bonds. Then they are underwritten through an investment bank or banker. Then they are put out on the market and resold to the public. In other words the banks are buying up all the shares and then they resell them as investment securities to the public. The public them buys them as mutual funds or they can buy them as debt instruments, equity instruments. What they are really doing is they are buying up debt instrument. They are using the fiscal accounting cycle of accrual and they sell the prisoner’s ‘capital and interest’ as it is called in accrual accounting. They resell these to the public because the prisoner did not do full settlement and closure on the account.
There is no account. I said it.
They sell the prisoner accounts as a commercial dishonor and sell it to the public as a commercial dishonor.
For the record, G is pulling strings from the U.C.C., specifically the part on dishonor pertaining to negotiable instruments.
When you go in the courts they always say they are operating under a statute jurisdiction. The Black’s Law Dictionary 4th edition says a statute is a bond or obligation of record. That’s what all the criminal statutes are……..bonds or obligation of record. Go in and read the definition of a recognizance bond and you find that it is a bond or obligation of record. They are selling bonds. They are charging prisoners under a bond; the prisoner signs the bond and the bond becomes the agreement for the payback. This is done when the prisoner signs the final court papers at a sentencing hearing.
Individuals within the Redemption Movement love the fourth edition of Black’s Law Dictionary. Supposing that the fourth edition does include this definition of “statute,” amongst others, it’s possible that a criminal statute is really a criminal bond or obligation of record. However, is this bond the same bond as is traded in financial markets? It strikes me that G’s entire argument hinges upon this one word.
Just: how many of us remember when our government attempted to finance from the private sector during the second world war? Weren’t they selling war bonds? They were soaking up the people’s equity in terms of buying bonds, transferring your funds to the government. The government by purchasing those bonds, was promising to pay you back your investment at sometime in the future with interest.
I remember WWII like it was yesterday. And yes, bonds represent a financial obligation.
At that time what they were collecting from the people was their so-called cash equity. What Gene saying now is that people have gotten too poor, too stingy, too smart to buy bonds to finance the government.
G is actually Gene. Cool. Gene may have been poor, stingy, maybe too smart for his own good.
How long has it been since you heard the Post Office or anyone trying to get you down to buy US savings bonds? So what they are doing now instead of getting us to voluntarily give our cash equity to the government for a promise to be paid back in the future, they are securing from us some violation of a statute by which the law ascribes from us a penalty; i.e., the payment of a sum of money due.
When you break the law, there are consequences.
Instead of collecting the cash from us, they put us through a criminal procedure where we dishonor the system and what Gene said is what is happening is they are selling our capital and our interest.
Actually, you can pay (in cash) for breaking some laws. Others will have you put through a criminal procedure, and it’s entirely your own damn fault if you dishonor the system. You could always be honorable.
Gene’s point was flimsy at best.
In other words, they are selling the liability you had in whatever charge was brought against your strawman. They are taking that capital and interest that you should pay and are grabbing that from us and selling it on the open market to bankers and investors to transfer their funds to government which is covered by the bond of the violation of your strawman of that statute. In order to secure the bond the living soul is placed in prison as the surety to back the bond which is financed on the investment of the public market place in terms of the sales of stocks and bonds.
Here’s where things get very interesting. There have already been some pretty generous assumptions made in the course of establishing “all crimes as commercial” and in painting the notion of prison bonds being securitized. By sticking a living soul into prison, what capital have we taken in? What interest is accruing to collect upon?
The public doesn’t directly bid on my (the prisoner’s) debt. Your debt is assumed by the bankers.
Who owns the banks?
The bankers issue secondary paper that allows me to invest in what they are holding as the holder in due course of the claim against your strawman. The reason they are doing this is because you dishonored the post settlement procedures for settlement and closure of the account.
Nope. Again – what account? How did you dishonor the procedures for settlement and closure of this account?
The prisoner should have come in and accepted and used his exemption.
What exemption is that?
Since the prisoner dishonored the post settlement proceedings, then the prisoner is in dishonor and the issuance of the bonds by the financing system was done in order to pass the punishment on to him because of his inability to fulfill his post settlement objectives.
If you get into to dishonor by nonacceptance, what they are trying to do is get an acceptor which is the same thing as a banker. They need someone to pay off the obligation and if you get into dishonor, they sell your dishonor and put you into prison as the collateral and they sell the bond. The bond is issued and they get a surety to underwrite the bid bond with a performance bond and then they get an underwriter to underwrite the performance and payment bonds. What the performance bond does is it guarantees the bid contract, or the bid bond. What the bid bond does is guarantee the payment of the performance bond. This is done through a surety company. Then they get an underwriter or an investment banker to underwrite it. After it’s underwritten, they sell it to the public as investment securities, debt instruments, or mutual backed securities.
It’s all done through bonds…bonding. That’s what all these municipal bonds are. What they doing is following everything through the prison system. The prison system is being privatized. Through privatization , private enterprise can fund the prison system cheaper than the government can. They are subsidizing everything through privatization.
Ignoring the whole nonsense about the bonds, this person is onto something. The prison system is being privatized, and you should be glad that it is if you don’t like big government.
ALEC does this; the American Legislative Exchange Council, promotes privatization through foundations like the Reason Foundation owned by David Knott. They get the foundations to promote this and gets investors to come in. Cornell was merged with Trinity venture Company which is an investment company. What they did was change their name to Reid Trinity Venture and then merged with SB Warburg. (Warburg was out of Germany or France and partnered with Rothschild). SB Warburg is in Chicago, Illinois, and they merged with BIF in Switzerland, which is a settlement and closure bank, and the biggest bank in the world for settlements. They are connected to Cornell Company which is owned by David Cornell.
Whenever you want to spice things up, mention the Rothschilds.
Everyone is tied in.
For argument’s sake, sure.
Paine Webber Group is the United States of America and all the big international corporations are the stockholders and own all the stock in CCA.
Did you catch that? The claim is that Paine Webber Group is the United States of America. And that all the big international corporations (hand-waving) own all the stock in Corrections Corporation of America. Which, by the way, is false as evidenced by looking at the major shareholders of that company.
Everyone is using our exemptions on the private side.
Who? What exemptions?
They filed a 1096 tax return and show it as a prepaid account, as prepaid interest and they returned it back to the prisoner.
Oh, now we’re talking taxes.. Where’s the record of this taking place?
They took the prisoners deduction for the exemption and they deduct the tax and the IRS bills the prisoner for the tax.
I’m pretty sure that the prisoner will be able to produce a record from the IRS then, right?
So the corporations are stealing your exemption which is your intellectual property.
What a load of horse dung. You’re filing taxes, not inventing a better mousetrap.
What’s wrong with this? They are not telling us what they are doing.
Let me guess – you connected the dots yourself?
It’s all commercial. When you go into the court room everything is commercial.
Again, this was established on flimsy grounds.
Vxxxxx in her seminar says the facts don’t matter, the facts are on the moon.
Is V trustworthy?
What matters is honor and dishonor. The courts have to dishonor the potential prisoner or get that ‘person’ to argue or get that ‘person’s’ attorney to argue. Just like Martha Stewart. Argue and you’re in dishonor and you’ll end up in jail.
Wrong. Martha Stewart broke a law. There was evidence that showed her engaged in insider trading. Any fool knows that.
The attorneys are actors to make us think the whole process is a factual issue.
If there’s one thing that never ceases to amaze me, it’s how people manage to rope others into believing that our American attorneys have sworn allegiance to the British crown. More on that, later.
They get us into the guilty/not guilty mode and they get into all the cloak and dagger or what evidence to present.
Well look, at least you’re innocent until proven guilty.
It’s a dog and pony show to cover up that they are after the debt money.
All corporations work on a fiscal accounting year which means that they spend debt.
By nature of the fiscal accounting year, corporations spend debt?
They can’t get rid of the debt and balance the books unless they run it through our accounts on the private side.
What led to that conclusion?
We the people run on a calender year and the corporations run on the fiscal year.
Making corporations sound pretty alien
They can only balance their books is to run it through our accounts using our exemptions. Then they can do their reverse bookkeeping entry and go to post settlement and closure.
How are they using your exemptions? Are they doing it without your permission? What are we settling here?
They can’t do that until the prisoners do the cceptance (if they do it). That what they are looking for in the court room under 3-410 is the acceptor. That means we are assuming the liability for the debt as the principal. A lot of times with debt the principal is always the primary libelant in the commercial setting. He has to assume the liability and then you get your remedy. Otherwise you don’t get a remedy.
They sell your account to some corporation while you’re sitting in prison.
This document was meant to show how exactly this was taking place, but so far we’ve gotten nothing of substance.
How many times has government ever had a case against anyone.
Every single federal case. If you haven’t gotten to that level, it’s because you’re just smalltime.
The attorneys have to attempt to get you to go right into argument and trial and go into dishonor.
Your attorney knows that your only shot at getting a lighter sentencing is to play nicely at the trial. If the facts in the case weigh in your favor, then you get off free or with a lighter sentence.
Axxxx was given documents from Redwood Trust on a mortgage foreclosure. She did an conditional acceptance and she did a heck of a job. She stopped them cold and they took the property off the market. At the end she said if they didn’t answer her within 14 days she was going to resort to notarial protest and get remedy for dishonor.
Conditional acceptance form letters are strewn about the internet on various websites promoting the Redemption Movement.
She went into the fact that their charter doesn’t allow them to loan credit, she wanted to know the name of the company who was the source of the credit, she wanted the name of the account number, she wanted certified copies of the font and back of the promissory note.
She read their charter, I’m sure…
She was trying to get them to divulge that it was her secured party creditor that was the source of everything they were doing.
Who is her secured party creditor?
She was forcing them to admit that it was her promissory note that was the basis of the credit instrument that they loaned and that they had already sold the note to someone else and they didn’t have it in their possession.
What promissory note did she possess?
What they do is they sell the notes just as they do when you go into prison.
See above… Lynn fails to make a convincing argument that a prison bond is a marketable security
They endorse the note and they no longer the holder of the note. The mortgage company wasn’t involved in this process….the attorneys are doing all this. What they are doing is coming to the private side to get the debt without any permission from the mortgage company.
Again, emphasizing that attorneys are evil and in bed with corporations.
IN this case they quoted from the UCC, and it’s from Lex Mercatoria, the Law of the Merchant.
What was quoted from the UCC?
If you read John Hall’s book, it talks about letter Rogatory, indictments where you are indicted and brought into the court under a warrant. What the warrant is, is a demand for payment of debt.
Not all warrants are demands for payment of debt.
What they did under admiralty in the court room is they are demanding payment. You sign a bond to be released until the civil complaint is prosecuted and then they release you under the bond until civil bond is prosecuted. If you didn’t pay the debt they put you in prison until the debt is paid. They use the same terms in this practice book from 1700. This is an actual practice book. It was written by Courts Practice who worked in the Court of Arches for the Crown as a registrant. This is a private book, not meant for public viewing. It laws out the whole practice of admiralty during the American Revolution.
Not going to budge until I see evidence of this book. Until then, it sounds like Lynn has access to very privileged, very old information.
Hall translated this and put it in put it in district court in Maryland in 1809. This was written in 1692. It’s an actual practice. Benedict is not a practice; it gives information about what admiralty is.
Admiralty is all debt and it’s all civil;
What is admiralty law? Admiralty law deals with maritime questions and offenses. We’ve not yet established why admiralty law applies to us landlubbers. That will come in a future post.
it becomes criminal when the prisoner gets a contempt charge when he refuses to pay. They can keep you in jail until you pay the debt. The initial get out of jail bond releases you until you’ve successfully paid the debt.
We should talk more about criminal procedure, as I’m certain that there are misunderstandings being expressed in this writing.
This book goes into the history and practice of admiralty. It tells how to set the bond, and do court room procedure. The laws haven’t changed; the circumstances of the government have changed so admiralty can be applied instead of constitutional law. Warden comes from admiralty-warden of the sea. The warden is the warehouse man who is warehousing all the goods; he’s the bailee. The commitment order is your bailment, your contract for the commitment of the goods. Then they put the goods in a warehouse and store them there (prisoners stored in prisons, just like the people stored in the pods in the movie, The Matrix).
Lynn Schmaltz should consider writing children’s fiction. Her email is riddled with holes and arguments that rely upon liberal interpretations of outdated sources.
Only a certain type of desperate individual would exclaim, “Aha! My questions have all been answered, and thanks to Lynn Schmaltz, I now understand how prisoners fund America!” I urge anyone who dares venture further into texts belonging to the Redemption Movement to maintain objectivity.
As for further discussion of why followers of the Redemption Movement believe admiralty law to be the dominant law in courtrooms, this is a question for another time.