Ep. 368 - The Informer - Part 6
Notes
If you took notes and would like to share them with others, please send an email to the archivist and be sure to reference the title of the interview.
Transcript
Machine transcription — may contain errors. Click a timestamp to jump the audio there.
Vyzygoth: Welcome to another segment of the grassy knoll. This is a pre-record. We have with us the informer, which will probably be our last segment. So we've agreed to kind of do a review, if you will. And I guess I'm looking back at a lot of the questions that I've gotten from folks since the series started and trying to hit them as best I can and of course anything else that Iman wants to address but here he is again and it's been a great time I think and I hope he feels the same way and thanks for coming back.
The Informer: Yeah, thanks.
Vyzygoth: I'm starting to enjoy it a little bit. Just when you're ready to go. Right.
The Informer: Yeah, a little of an interpretation is when I started because people not believing, they have their own beliefs and when they're hit with stuff that I've got and researched, they kind of look down on it and say, no, that can't be. But I think they're getting some education at least, whether it's things I don't know. If they have any questions, like you said that they had a lot of questions, but if they really went to the ATG perhaps and looked in there and looked at all the writings that I did, that will answer a lot of their questions. It's just that they have to dig for it and look for it, which I know a lot of people are lazy, they don't like to do it.
The Informer: But if you sat down and just read everything and absorbed it, it would probably take you a week.
Vyzygoth: People do have time. The question is, how do they want to spend it? Slogging through probably what is most daunting language is that of the legal slash government combine. And it's true. In fact, I'm going to open up with a question about this also. Can I do that at this time? Sure. You know, remember we went back and forth about the meaning one of the meanings of the term character. And I said I couldn't find it in the 1828 Webster's and you said you did find it. Now I want you to understand something also, and this is kind of disappointing to me, that that 1828 Webster's is online.
The Informer: Oh well I've got the hard copy that's where I went to look at it so they apparently didn't put it in there.
Vyzygoth: No and that like I said is disappointing because obviously it isn't the same as what you had in your hands. Right. And I gotta think about that now so unfortunately I guess what's out there is not necessarily an exact lift of that particular edition.
The Informer: Well yeah I would say because the The one that I have, I got quite a few years ago by the original fella that did it and they did a reproduction of it and oh gee, I mean it's a regular 8 by 11 and I'm going to get my ruler right now to measure it.
Vyzygoth: I would have taken your word for it.
The Informer: It's a two and three quarters inch of stick. So that's a lot of writing. when they transpose this or copied it or whatever they did to put it into the online stuff, I can see where they miss or could miss a lot by mistake. Or then it could be that they just didn't want certain things put in there.
Vyzygoth: Yeah. Yeah. Well, now, and this gets to where I want to go because you've been in this a long time. And so, let me ask you, you have an email group apparently between James Montgomery. Can you count how many other folks that are of the like mind that you kind of keep abreast of?
The Informer: Five.
Vyzygoth: Okay. Okay.
The Informer: I mean, that's not much. When you take, there's 200 and, what, 280 million people, but out of that 280 million, there's only 192 million that are taxpayers. That's recorded as taxpayers. The rest are kids. older people that don't pay taxes anymore. But if you take, that's less than, way less than one half of one percent. But if you take five people, it's like trying to find a piece of sand on the beach from the moon.
Vyzygoth: How are you? Beginning back to the terminology, the legalese or even some I would say more the esoteric uses of language that is quite common to law, it almost gets to the point of being, and let's call it what it is, so esoteric, it's almost like a secret society's language and signs unto itself.
The Informer: Yeah it is, and the only way that you're going to be able to know whether you're talking legalese or not, well naturally it's legalese if you're in a law dictionary or looking at a contract or anything like that, or looking at a statute. you automatically look and say, well, that's legalese. But then the people say, well, these are words. Well, no, there are words and there are terms. And the only key when you're looking at a statute, if they use words, they use common everyday words, but they also, when they want that word to mean something else, they make it a term. That is specific, it can't deviate, it can't be included, And nothing like the old argument is, oh, well, includes and including, right?
The Informer: But if you look at the word term, and I say word term, but if you look at terms, there can be no expansion or contraction of the term. It is what it says it is, and nothing can be included. So then if you look at the Internal Revenue Code, and you'll see that starts out in all the definitions, which are the key element, the term, yada, yada, yada. The first two words means the term, you know automatically, it is not a common everyday word, even though it looks like it, it is specific to what the law writer wants it to mean.
Vyzygoth: That, of course, is never shared with the general public. No. And as you said, I mean, it gets to the point where, you know, I mean, we always talk about contracts and even your insurance policy.
The Informer: Insurance is all maritime. I don't care whether it's house insurance, whether it's car insurance, whether it's life insurance, it's all maritime and it's couched in maritime terms.
Vyzygoth: Well, it's interesting also because it said, beyond belief, what happened in that Gulf Coast and what could happen here. And that is the insurance companies defaulting on paying people. Right. That's amazing.
The Informer: Oh sure.
Vyzygoth: And they walk. Getting past the obfuscation, if you will, with regarding to, and we'll go back to the legal situation if we could, but we talk about there are two, well there's the United States and there's an America, correct? Alright, not going in so much in depth, and again, let me ask you this, Can people apprise themselves of this whole situation by going to the website?
The Informer: Yeah, if they know how to do the research, right? A lot of people, they do research and they say, well, they're a researcher. Well, there's different levels of researchers. To be a real researcher, like I was in the major industry, you've got to understand the whole basics of the foundation of research. And you're just searching and you're doing whatever anybody searched before and found. You were doing a research on that. And what you have to do is you can't be so narrow-minded.
The Informer: You have to go in and it becomes like a tree. If you search one word, let's say you want to search Republican or Republic. Now you go and find out that there, in the definition, there is a word called commonwealth. Now you have to go and say, well, what is a commonwealth? Now you go and read what a commonwealth is. And that leads you to another word that appears in the definition. And now you've got to lock on to that word. And it sort of ranches out that you've got a huge oak tree where you had a spindly little stump before. And this is what a real researcher does. He not only researches to prove his case, but he researches to prove it's not.
The Informer: And if you fail to prove and look at research that it is not, you're not a researcher.
Vyzygoth: Yeah, well, you have to go in, I would assume, with as objective a mind as possible and be willing to take the information where it goes.
The Informer: Yes, exactly.
Vyzygoth: I think a lot of us are guilty of wanting to only look for that which substantiates what we believe.
The Informer: Right. And that's why a true researcher doesn't do that. He goes in with the attitude, let's find out where I am wrong.
Vyzygoth: Okay.
The Informer: And that's the basis because that saved me personally many times in the laboratory, but two times it didn't. And it wasn't my fault. But I had two laboratory explosions in my lifetime and both times it put me in the hospital. But it was because that even when the PhDs who helped design this particular test that I was doing could not even duplicate what I did to get the explosion. And so that's why whenever I had something to do, and this is all in new territory when you do a research like this, You have to cover all bases.
The Informer: And in fact, when I got on the safety committee, someone wanted to do an experiment and we would be called in to look at what the experiment is going to be. And then we says, okay, if this happens, how are you prepared? And the guy would look at you, well, you didn't research far enough to find out what would happen if it did happen. And what are the antidotes that you got to have? So this is when you go in to do the legal research. You've got to say, okay, why did they do it this way? Why are they using the particular terms that they are? And now let's see if I am wrong in my assumptions that they're wrong. Making sense? Okay.
The Informer: I didn't want to lose you.
Vyzygoth: Oh, no, no, no, no.
The Informer: So that's why when you're doing research into statutes, look at the statutes and then what you have to do, and this is where the ATG press is, I've already gone through the session laws now like in when we did the archives in Raleigh and we had to go down and find out what happened during this country during 1933 in that era when the war powers came in at Roosevelt and we weren't particularly looking at Roosevelt but we were looking in this particular state and the governors in the state. And you start looking at, okay, first we went in and we pulled all of the papers, the personal papers of the governor.
The Informer: And we sat down for hours and looked at it and read it. And what struck our mind, we marked and you put a little tag on it and the archivist then takes all this stuff back and tags that he sees on there is what he knows he has to copy. Then he copies it. Then you go up and you tell him you want to certify it. Now you go back down to your desk and you sit there and when you have his copy, because you don't read the whole thing, you're skimming. And now you read the copy. This ain't no good. I don't know why I got that. But you got it. You know, it has to be done. And then another one would come up, oh, this is great. Oh, well, we got to go to the session laws now.
The Informer: Now you've got to go into the session laws and you start reading the session laws for that particular period of time and out of the whole book you might find five pages that you want. You're reading like a 400 page book in the session laws and you only get five pages out. Now you take the five pages and you make copies and you sit down and you read it and you understand what you're reading. Anybody can read words. But do you understand what they're saying in legal terms, in legalese, not in standard everyday talking on the street language?
The Informer: So then once you get the session laws, then you find out, okay, they had the first reading in the statute, the first reading before three readings to become a statute in North Carolina. And it can't be all the same day. So now you go and you find the book and the next day, and you read that and you see, did they change any wording in here? Oh yeah, they changed five words in here. And you just keep doing this and so if anybody goes to the ATG Press and they have questions, they don't have to go to the library and sit through session laws and read the Federal Register and read the statutes and the regulations.
The Informer: It's all been done for you on ATG Press. Going back to the two countries, what is... Well, America, like you were saying, it's very hard to find anything on the term America or the word America, but you find a lot of it on the United States. But like I said, I have some old maps that we have and where it lists today, it shows you the country, it says United States. It didn't say that, it said America.
The Informer: And we have letters from people in Europe to the people over here in the 1700s and late 1700s that refer to America, not United States. We are coming to America. There is documentation with consulates from Spain, from France, from Portugal, speaking of America, not United States. So the land mass is a country called the United States. It's called America, not the United States. The United States is a place in America.
The Informer: When they say the United States of America, people have no concept because they forget grammar and they don't know words. If you look at the word of, it means belonging to, emanating from. It's a derivative of the word from. Are you not of your mother and father? Well, that means you came from your mother and father. You were produced from your mother and father. Okay. So when you look at the United States of America, it says the United States belonging to America. What's America? It's a country. What's the United States then? It's a place within the country. Okay.
Vyzygoth: A place within America. Was this set out? Right from the very beginning since 1776? Nope. Alright. Was this the 14th Amendment aftermath?
The Informer: Excuse me. Was that?
Vyzygoth: Was that a 14th Amendment aftermath?
The Informer: No. They were called colonies. They weren't called states. Alright. And they were colonies which were actually plantations. And you don't look at plantation as a farm. It's a corporation. Okay. If you read John Burke's treatise on, let me see, reconciliation of the colonies by Burke, it explains that all of the colonies, it says in a preface, the speech on conciliation with the colonies delivered 150 years ago, is read today in American schools, say American schools, not United States schools, with the interest which attaches to a current day topic.
The Informer: This is just the, but it's Edmund, E-D-M-U-N-D-B-U-R-K-E, and he was born in Dublin, Ireland in 1729. And they talk about the English Constitution and the government, and it says, They were familiar with that in the United States and he's talking about the British constitution and the United States constitution. Didn't say American constitution and it didn't say England. England is a country. British is in the country and they keep going on with the, with the colonies and the consolidation and everything.
The Informer: And they talk about the plantation. I don't have the particular. thing in front of me, but the book is called Burke on Conciliation with the Colonies, and it was March 22nd, 1775. And they were doing the conciliation because England still owned all the colonies, and the colonies were fighting him And they broke away, supposedly broke away, but they didn't really break away because they were still corporations of the crown.
Vyzygoth: Yeah, this is why I always felt that, you know, after a while, Great Britain or England might not have been all that concerned about shedding any more blood for the purpose of putting down a rebellion when they said, look, this is a business enterprise and they're still hooked into it whether they like it or not.
The Informer: That's right.
Vyzygoth: So let's just corporatize it and hit them where it hurts and that's in the pocket.
The Informer: Well, let me put it this way. Here's a good analogy. As best I can with government and corporation, let's say we all work for GM. We might. Well, GM has got five divisions, right? Cadillac, Buick, Oldsville, Pontiac. So each one of those divisions can run its own business. They can do their own advertising, they can do this, but sitting in the background, it's a parent corporation, GM saying, uh-uh, you can't do that, or yeah, go ahead and do it.
The Informer: Well, let's look at this and let's say that we're all part and parcel of GM. Equate that to the United States, to America, to British colonies, right? And we all decided that, hey, we don't like the way GMs operate and we're going to form our own corporations or our own divisions and we're going to take it over. Okay, that is the scenario that was at that time. Now, what right do you have to violate a contract? Doesn't the Constitution that they wrote up saying in Article 110-1 that no state will obligate a contract? You can't?
The Informer: Or can you come in as an interloper or third party into a contract that your mother and father has with someone else and control it? No, you can't. That's international law. And this is what was happening here that the British corporation, GM, owning all the divisions, the 13 colonies, which is the five divisions of GM, and now once you can get this in your mind, you can now start to appreciate that the whole deal is nothing but corporate law. It's all corporations. It has nothing to do with free land and free this and free people If you work for GM, you have to follow GM procedures.
The Informer: If I'm walking off the street and walk into GM, I don't have to follow the procedures that the employees do. But if I stay there long enough, I sure do. And that's the same thing as why they said in some of the cases in North Carolina that if you don't want to stay in this colony, you must depart out of it. Okay, and then when I wrote in the New History of America, okay, the Lord says, depart out of it, don't take anything in it, but you can still stay on the land, because it's the Lord's land anyway, to begin with, and no man shall own it.
The Informer: Well, then what right does, quote, the state of North Carolina have to say to the people, depart out of it and be gone, because you don't want to join our corporation?
Vyzygoth: But you're never really allowed to do that.
The Informer: That's right. That's right, yeah. See, this is where it gets a little degrade area, hard to discern between corporation and government. Government operates as a corporation, but government is a little bit different than a corporation. I mean, in the way they can operate. GM can't assume that the person on the street, they own them, but in government, they can assume that they own everybody that comes into their territory.
Vyzygoth: All right, and these days what would justify that?
The Informer: I mean... Well, the fact that in a lot of the searches that I've done, the mere presence of being in a state or going by... Let's say you're in Florida and you travel up all the way up to North Carolina here to visit me. Okay, every state that you go through, It's assumed that you will abide by their laws. Okay. All right? The same as the people that live there. Well, that's the assumption that they put upon every living man and woman is that you're here, we own you. Okay. That's the bottom line. I mean, that's reality.
Vyzygoth: So in other words, it doesn't matter necessarily that you have residency somewhere or a driver's license from a certain state.
The Informer: Right, yeah, because when you drive through, see you're an alien and you're non-resident and you can find that in every state constitution and every state insurance law, is that when you drive through every state, the Secretary of State is your proxy for anything that happens in motor vehicle laws should you have an accident or whatever, but they are your mouthpiece.
Vyzygoth: Believe it or not. So the old idea about departing from the estate to plantation, which you'd love to do and say, good, then I don't have to pay state income tax, blah, blah, blah. That wasn't going to happen.
The Informer: No. No, because the only way, you know, and it's hard because, all right, I'll depart out of the state of or this state And I am going to stay in North Carolina. I didn't put state of, I didn't put anything other than North Carolina, geographical area called North Carolina. And, uh, but that's a hard pill to swallow for everybody to understand. And enough people can't get behind that to tell them the state of that I'm not a resident in your state. Now, if you look at the resident and this is, I put in the, the book, Which One Are You?
The Informer: And it goes in and explaining what a resident is and a resident means that you are part and parcel of the body politic and have joined such corporation, whether you know it or not, by the mere fact of claiming that this is your state and so on and so forth. All terms that are legal in nature and not words of common just, you know, you can say whatever you want in words on the street and it isn't going to affect you legally.
The Informer: But if you use those words as a term, then it does affect you. It's convoluted. It sounds convoluted, but it's not really. It's a way that they design this country, these laws, so that the average man on the street has no clue that when he opens his mouth and puts a foot in it, when he's talking to any government people, he's talking legal terms. He thinks he's talking words, but it's a legal term that they know and are using against them. The whole term. You open your mouth and you convict yourself. Sure. Because you're talking words. You're not thinking terms. You're not thinking legalese.
The Informer: And that's just the sad fact that is how the Bar Association, the lawyers, were given control of the country to write all the laws and to do everything. Because take a look at the original founders, 55 of those people were lawyers. And they all came from the British Crown. They all came from the Crown Temple. Well, naturally, if you go in and look on the history of the American bar, which I put on the ATEE press, I took the excerpts from a large volume of the history of the American bar by Charles Warren.
The Informer: Impeccable author, well-known, can't dispute anything he says. But the lawyers back here in this country were frowned upon, Virginia even made it a hanging offense if you practice law. And right before the, I guess about 1774, the lawyers got enough control that they were starting to overrun the legal system as it stood so that they could be put in place when the revolution took place so that after it, They had complete control for the crown to write the laws as they saw.
The Informer: And that's what happened. So this is just a little bit going way back in history that people don't look at. They only want to go back, oh, go back to the 30s or to the 40s when Ian Kupak started. No, you got to go all the way back to find out what happened is to how the whole thing piece by piece by piece came into being. And this is where a real researcher does It's only that I was gifted with being taught by the best PhDs in research when I started into this stuff when I first got out of school.
The Informer: And yeah, I care about history and school and I care about a lot of stuff. What's that got to do with today, you know? And it's got everything to do because if you don't know the foundation of where things started and how they started, you're lost. Well, you look at what's going on today. How can they tax me on this? How can they tax me on that? And what right do they have to tell me about seatbelt laws? and what to wear and what not to wear and so on and so forth. But you've got to go back and look at it because here in North Carolina when the seatbelt law and most other states, they said, okay, this, you can't get a ticket for a seatbelt law. You have to be stopped for some other violation.
The Informer: And if we happen to see you don't have a seatbelt, then we can give you a ticket. Right now in North Carolina until the 21st this month, They're going after all the pickups. It was on TV last night and they showed this road stop and out of three hours, they ticketed 55 pickup drivers that didn't have their seatbelts. Now after this, from the 22nd on, it's click of their ticket in Carolina and they can stop anybody and give you a ticket for not wearing a seatbelt. They don't have to do anything else. Well, when it first started, oh no, that'll never happen.
The Informer: Well, little by little, they added it on, and now it's $100. Oh yeah. You know, it's $100 for all those people that got stopped. Just yesterday, they gave the figure, how many tickets they gave. I think it was 55 in four hours. Well, 55 times 100, it's 5,500 bucks.
Vyzygoth: And I listen to this now because it's interesting that North Carolina down here in Florida would be going through the exact same promotion campaign, which makes you wonder where it really comes down from.
The Informer: It comes from the federal because that's what federal is doing. It's telling the people, since the 1966 Traffic Safety Act was passed, that is the criteria which is under federal control, so every state has to abide by the 1966 Highway Traffic Safety Act. And so you go and you start looking, well, why is this, why is that? Well, gee, your driver's license, you have to, before you register your car, you got to get insurance on it, right? Well, once you get insurance on it, that's the key, because now you're an international maritime contract.
The Informer: And because you're in international maritime contract, you have to register the car or truck or, you know, whatever, even for your private use. And because you're a person now, you're not a man or a woman, all statutes are written in the term of person, which is the artificial character. So now because you had to get insurance, you were forced to get it, you know, and it's maritime. And then when you register it, you automatically are in business because the maritime contract put you in business. And you say, well, wait a minute. Well, aren't you a resident of Florida?
The Informer: Yeah? Well, okay. If I'm there, I would say, where's your contract with Florida? There are a residency. Residency means a contract. And if you're not privy to a contract, you're non-resident in that contract, which means that, okay, if I'm non-resident, then none of the statutes written for the contract apply.
Vyzygoth: And yet we spoke before, minutes before, about the fact that by your mere presence in the state... That's right.
The Informer: And that's why you have to argue and bring up the correct arguments But the problem is there's so few of us that it doesn't amount to anything. There has to be millions upon millions of people educated enough to go back into it and say, what right do you have to control us? We don't need government.
Vyzygoth: But yet, you can still be, even though you're in these states, you're still in You're still in the federal... Yeah, the federal realm.
The Informer: That's the presumption that they operate on. They operate on the presumption that everybody's a fiction. That's why everything is in capital letters because they differentiate the human physical being from the artificial being by the capital letters of their name. and that's designed into the system. Like a paper corporation, all have to have capital letters. In fact, Georgia, in their statutes, comes right out and says that all corporations must be identified by capitalization.
The Informer: Yes, it does. I had a fellow, Don Wagers, from down there in Georgia did some research for me and he found it down in Georgia. and they sent it up to me. And I says, okay, that solidifies that. So therefore, all corporations must be in capital A's, capital words, capital letters. GMC, RCA, Foodland, it's all capital letters. So therefore, that means they're artificial. They're paper artificial. They're on paper. They're a group of people that got together created a corporation, registered it in the state, and they're all capitalized.
The Informer: Now, each man, then, if he wants to become part of the corporation, he joins it, doesn't he? Well, how do you join a state? You go down and you're registered to vote, right? So therefore, that takes the presumption away, and now it's a fact of law that you are a resident in the state of so-and-so of Florida. and therefore all statutes, that makes you a person, therefore all statutes are directed toward persons which are artificial characters.
The Informer: So now you gave up your man status, your man character, not status, status is a legal term, character is not, and you gave up that and you are part and parcel a person and all statutes are written for persons and therefore persons are the subject of the statute and you're cooked to meet. You can't go in and argue that I'm a man because if you've got all these latches that they place upon you, it's hard to beat, very hard to beat.
Vyzygoth: Now we could move ahead with the idea of the United States as the framers knew it.
The Informer: They knew it, sure. Because, remember, they all had property in England. They were all millionaires, according to today's standards. And the Crown said, hey, look, guys, we got the Navy. We can put a blockade against America. And you ain't going to get squat. And therefore, we will also take all your property and confiscate it under the law of Mortmain. You can't give it to anybody. That's where mortgage came from, the law of Mort Main. And in case people wonder what Mort Main is, in the old days, in England, when people died they would give their property to the church.
The Informer: So the crown couldn't control the churches at that point in time anyway. And the king saw all his land being donated to the church, right? And to stop it, he wrote the law of Mort Main, which means you could no longer donate your land to the church when you died. All right? And so anyway, that's where Mort Main comes in. And if people want to research Mort Main, they can go on the internet, probably, and type in Mort Main and see what they come up with.
Vyzygoth: Well, now mortgage is used to mean, probably, you're paying until you're dead. That's right. Yeah. So, but when the Constitution was drafted and the Bill of Rights in particular, it's your belief, not belief, I mean if you've got the goods on it, we'll just call it what you found out is that they didn't apply to you and me. Right. Why did it apply just to those who hang out in the district?
The Informer: Because remember, the United States consisted of Congress assembled, which was 75 people. That was it. That was we the people. That's why the word people was capitalized and it's the third word in a sentence of we the people and that's why Patrick Henry said, who gave them the right to say we the people?
Vyzygoth: Alright, so in other words that isn't some kind of archaic form of grammatic rules as most of us, and I in particular, have always believed.
The Informer: Yeah, that's what they did. See, they had to couch it in words that people, the common people, the common people then is the same as the common people today. Have no clue. All right. So it's very easy to put off over people today the same way as they did back then because the people in Philadelphia, when they... Okay.
Vyzygoth: For all those who are listening, we were doing this in a prerecord and a dropout. So we just went ahead and patched that. And we'll continue with the discussion about the use of the capital P for people and Patrick Henry's resistance to that.
The Informer: Well what they did was whenever you use a capital letter in a sentence and it's not the first word of the sentence, you're talking about a specific thing or person or place or whatever. There can be many red cars out in the parking lot, and if I tell you to go get a red car, well, you can go get any red car. But if we're talking before that, and I say, well, gee, there's a Ford out there. It's a red car. It's mine. And here's the keys, and maybe I'll ask you to go get it for me sometime. And then I say or write where it's emphasized Next time I see it, oh, go get that red car.
The Informer: And I capitalize red. That means it's red, but it's a particular red car that you already know what that is. Therefore, you go out and you get the Ford, red Ford, and you bring it back to me. That's how you know that is a specific Ford red car. Specific red car, which is a Ford.
The Informer: And that's what they did when they wrote people because they wanted to be specifically sure that it meant them, the 75 people that signed the constitution and not everyday common man on the street, which then they would have taken the capital P out and replace it with a small P, meaning everybody.
Vyzygoth: Yeah. But, but, but Pat, you know, Patrick Henry knew this and yet he still signed on.
The Informer: Yeah.
Vyzygoth: Alright, what do we think about Patrick Henry?
The Informer: Patrick Henry was a lawyer.
Vyzygoth: Above all other things, huh?
The Informer: Right. So, in other words, those characters... In other words, he was telling people, hey, you're getting screwed, but I'm a lawyer, and I have first allegiance to the court, and I'm telling you people, but this is the way it's going down, but I have to sign off on it.
Vyzygoth: So the founding fathers, the original politicians down there, were basically securing their own butts?
The Informer: Exactly. Exactly.
Vyzygoth: So then what in the heck difference was it really that we never did get rid of the king?
The Informer: No, that's what I say. That's what I wrote in the book. And that's why Montgomery said, we never got rid, we never won the war. And like Montgomery pointed out, if you win a war, like we did in World War II, and MacArthur went over and on the battleship they signed the treaty and he dictated all the parameters and Japan couldn't have armed services, they had to give up their guns and all this stuff, right? Well, how come during the Revolutionary War when this happened and we won, why did the King dictate the Treaty of Peace? Why did they keep the armed soldiers on this land all the way up to 1812, if they won the war in 1776.
Vyzygoth: Let me ask you, did those troops hang around long enough for the battle of, for the war of 1812? Yeah. They were, they were, and then this must mean from the time in between, I mean, you're not going to have the same soldiers in the outfit. That's too many years.
The Informer: They're constantly changing, just like we changed over in Vietnam or Korea. Look how long it's been, what, 1953? Okay. And the soldiers are constantly being changed on the guard over there for the demilitarized zone, the DMZ. Alright, so we have... The 38th parallel or something like that?
Vyzygoth: So we have American citizens watching soldiers disembark from the ship to be stationed in their country. Yeah. Same thing. So what was, in a nutshell, what was the whole idea of the War of 1812?
The Informer: to start another war, which when you have an international law, when you have a treaty between two countries, and one of those countries starts a war all over again, it negates the treaty. Nothing is in the treaty. That's why they had the 1792 treaty in the interim to make sure that things were going back in the 1783 treaty that the king couldn't really sign off on. And then, after the 1812 war, when they destroyed a lot of the documents in Washington, what cropped up next was the secret treaty of Verona in 1822.
Vyzygoth: And you know about that? Yeah. Yes, and that was what, over there? The signatories said, we're not going to have this Republican rebellion spirit on this side of the pond. Right. And the Vatican was involved in that? Yes, oh yes. All right. So that was it then, huh?
The Informer: Yeah.
Vyzygoth: They had to vacate the old treaty, begin a new one.
The Informer: They had to vacate the old treaty, and then when they vacate the old treaty, guess what it reverts back to? The original treaty before that. Now, how many people know what the original treaty was? What was it? the Virginia Charter of 1602.
Vyzygoth: That's the first, that's it, that's the first.
The Informer: Uh huh. And that meant that all the colonies were back under the control of the Crown. Now the states are called states now. But they're under control of the Crown and that's it. Bottom line. Now, if you don't know this and how to research going all the way back and do this, you don't have the foundation to where you're operating today. And you wonder, why is this happening?
Vyzygoth: Sure.
The Informer: Why are we being controlled? Why are we losing all our freedoms? It's a slow process because the international people look hundreds of years down the road where the American people look past the ends of their nose while next week we're going to do this. I don't know what we're doing next month.
Vyzygoth: And this is like another whole show. I mean, it's just amazing. But we always felt that the falling out that England had with the Vatican over Henry VIII really wasn't a falling away from the Church. And so can we also assume, let me just ask you, do you believe that perhaps by the time of the 18th century into the early 19th century that the Vatican had been using England perhaps as one of its agents over here?
The Informer: Sure.
Vyzygoth: Okay.
The Informer: And the same as France and the same as Spain because they were all controlled by the Vatican. The Jesuits was hell bent and their main goal was to anywhere a republic was started they had to go in and destroy it. Which they did. They went to Brazil, they went to Argentina, way back before this country was formed into what it is to stop them from being a republic. You can find this in documented form in the Rockefeller and their gold corner by Emanuel Josephson, which was printed in 1946.
The Informer: It's really convoluted. Poor American people are out there saying, well, how can they do that? Well, gee, just go back and look at contract international law. And you got it.
Vyzygoth: Well, in the time that we have left, this is the reason for this last show. Well, I mean, the reason we wanted to discuss about this, because it would be the last show. And that is folks wanted to know how in the world did this ever happen, and that's what we're talking about today. And now we're so far removed from all this layers with subterfusion and such that I mean, I can understand myself when some people go, you know what? I don't want to know about this. Let me put my head back in the ground and what difference it's going to make in my life. And I'm not even going to argue that with them.
The Informer: Oh yeah, because that's true. I mean, that's the mentality because like just this morning on air talking about the driver's license and about those people in Baltimore, they got stopped for asking directions and thrown in jail. I don't teach you. Yeah, you can fight it. My daughter-in-law got a ticket through the mail from Virginia, I think it was Washington DC, on these cameras, speed cameras. Now she wasn't there, she wasn't driving the car, she loaned her car, right?
The Informer: So she got the ticket and it was $100 and she could pay it and there's no fine, I mean there's no points on her driver's license or nothing like this, right? And it showed the picture of the car. You couldn't see who was in it. And, um, she paid it. Okay. And I just happened to notice when I got the mail for her the other day that there was a notice in there as a failure to pay, but she had paid it. They crossed in the mail. Okay. And she says, why would I go out and get $400 for a lawyer to fight it? A hundred dollars. I'm going to be out $300. I don't have it. I pay it.
The Informer: And that's what everybody does, and that's how they make their money.
Vyzygoth: Well, it gets one step weirder, too, and I'm sure you're aware of what took place up in Connecticut when the fine print told a car rental we saw. that he had GPS in the vehicle and if he went over the speed limit he would be duly ticketed and so what he found out is he got like two or three. But the interesting thing was it wasn't a law enforcement agency that collected it, it was a private company. That's even more scary I think. So yeah, and then let's go into this last thing if we could. A lot of people argue about this, we've touched upon it, but if we could one more time, in the time that we have, the reality of what law we, the Kearns, are under when we go into a court.
Vyzygoth: We talk a lot about common law, civil law, admiralty, maritime, UCC. You want to just kind of segment that out so it's clear to folks?
The Informer: Well, the bottom line is, it's contract law. It's under maritime in an admiralty court. They merged admiralty equity, got rid of common law, and I have some court cases I just got, just found, that defines the fact that we don't have no more common law. I don't have them. They're so new to me that I can't even give you the site, and I've got to read them some more to digest it. You know, I read a case five times, and I read the case backwards. Many people don't understand reading the case backwards.
Vyzygoth: I do because what happens is you start to drift. Your eyes go across the words after so many times, right?
The Informer: Yeah. But what you want to do is you want to see what the court's determination was in the very beginning. Was the guy guilty? Was the guy not guilty? And why? Okay. In the conclusion, all right? Now you go and you start reading from the front down and now you know the guy lost, all right? Why did he lose? If you're reading it down from the top down, and by the time you get to the bottom, you forgot what you're reading, especially in a long case, and you read what the conclusion is, and now, why did he lose? Because you've got this free presumption in your mind when you're reading the case.
The Informer: You're looking for something. You can't look for anything. You've got to read the conclusion first and the decision, then go back and then you start reading and then you'll hit on certain key words that was in the conclusion and say, aha, I can now see why he lost, or I can see why he won. But equity, okay, they're all there for the court to use how it wants to use it. Now let's take contract law. I go down to buy a thing from Sears and I take it back because it don't work and there's a dispute, so we go in. Now, what court are we in, okay?
The Informer: We're in the basic Admiralty court, but we're going to go by contract. And now we're going by contract law. That's why Repi on contracts and others are so well published.
Vyzygoth: But does contract only, does it only exist under Admiralty?
The Informer: Most of the time, yes. There are some cases where it's not. Now, contract of insurance, that's Admiralty. Straight out, boom, Admiralty. Contract of motor vehicles, straight out, Admiralty. You'll find it in Benedict on Admiralty and the seventh edition, that's the best one that I like to use. I've got the original one, but people can't get that. But anything after the seventh edition, they get so convoluted and everything that you get lost. Okay. All right. But so I have a dispute with my hurricane went through and blew my roof off. So I go to the insurance company and say, well, I want to give you half of it.
The Informer: Well, wait a minute. No, this is a dispute. You know, it's a contract dispute, but it's an admiralty because it's a maritime claim.
Vyzygoth: What makes it a maritime claim?
The Informer: Insurance.
Vyzygoth: Okay.
The Informer: Delovo versus Boyd. way back in U.S. steamship versus United New Jersey steamship navigation.
Vyzygoth: Yeah, but this isn't happening over water, so how come if it's terrestrial it's maritime?
The Informer: It don't matter because what they did in 1857 is they moved Admiralty inland no matter what.
Vyzygoth: Okay, now is Admiralty and maritime synonymous?
The Informer: No, there is a little difference and when I read the the difference on that maritime. The only way I found it was on the Benedict, on Admiralty, in the 1850 edition, which is the very first edition that I got that most all judges in the know have this bench book in their chambers. They don't go outside their chambers. Now, let me see. If a maritime is not depend on a particular court, civil law is admiralty, not common law.
The Informer: This is right out of the American admiralty as jurisdiction in practice.
Vyzygoth: It's civil, not common law.
The Informer: Yes, it says in section five on page three about the admiralty laws indebted for many of its characteristics to the circumstances of the countries in which it was first administered. It says in England, Where the common law was the law of the land, the civil law was held to be the law of the Admiralty, and of course, the proceedings in the Admiralty closely resemble the civil law practice. So therefore, when you talk about civil rights, you're talking about Admiralty rights. There's five ways of Admiralty, and the Constitution of the United States grants to the federal government judicial power over all cases of Admiralty and maritime jurisdiction.
The Informer: This is the whole of the grant of that branch of judicial power and brief and simple as it is upon the true construction depends the whole of the American Admiralty jurisdiction. It has received five different constructions and then they list all five.
Vyzygoth: Can you give us a headings with the five bar?
The Informer: Well, let me see. that this Constitution grants only those few cases in which the English high court of avarity was permitted to take cognizance of time of the American Revolution. The actual jurisdiction of the state courts of avarity, which were existence in the adoption of the Constitution, the United States was alone embraced in the grant. The words avarity and maritime relate simply to subject matter and were used in that general sense were employed embraces all the cases related to ships and shipsing, which under the maritime municipal regulations of each nation, which arise under the general maritime law, in endeavoring to ascertain which of these constructions ought to prevail, I shall first in the place recur to some general principles."
The Informer: And then they go on to the general principles, and this book is about 800 and some odd pages thick, and it's the original Admiralty practice in jurisdiction and forms. in the United States in 1850.
Vyzygoth: Could you give us in a sentence or so what the distinction is between maritime and admiralty?
The Informer: I was just looking in here to give you the right maritime not depend on secret court. They must use the English dictionary in all the laws in this country. This is 1850 now. Oh yeah, it's what it says. It says, still is it not to be forgotten that our people were not homogenous, but consisted of persons from all civilized nations, English, Scottish, Irish, Welsh, Dutch, Swedes, and French. By some conquest and some by immigration were mixed and united to make the American nation. Got that? You say United States, the American nation. All right.
The Informer: And that's where it then says, It is to the English law and to the English dictionaries that we must resort for the meaning of those terms. But it by no means follows that we must look to the same source of the structure and jurisdiction for our national courts or for the rules of decision which they are to follow. The force of the common language even aided to that of our historical connection was altogether too feeble properly to give our new made and original political institutions any transatlantic odor much less to characterize them by strong English analogies. Maritime, I'm trying to find here.
The Informer: The five ways of Admiralty is administered. Transactions embraced in Maritime Congress may only be classified in a simple and intelligible order. Vessels, the only means by which navigation management of the vessel is entrusted to the leader. Also, whether people know it or not, a car is a vessel. that comes under international law. The common law, I'm trying to find. I have as many pages in here porcupined as I do pages. Which means there's no sense to... Yeah, I'm trying to find all attorneys conflict of interest, process of REM, who we are in amnesty, real party of interest.
The Informer: Now, in the warring thing, Both parties are the actors. The live one is some called the promovant actor and plaintiff. Now actor is a person. That's his character. He operates in. Call the process in Admiralty. All IRS processes in Admiralty is liens and stuff. They're all Admiralty. Admiralty applied to statute. Ah, darn. Rule 44, Admiralty.
The Informer: Rule 53, in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rules 636 and 28 is all Admiralty rules. Rule 55 to 58 is Admiralty. And people don't understand that, but that is Admiralty. There was a difference in here, don't I?
Vyzygoth: I tell you what, you can email it to me because it's obvious. And by the time the show airs, I cannot put that somewhere in the show, that answer. The good thing about doing a recording is the fact that I can amend it.
The Informer: What is maritime? Maritime law regulates and enforces all maritime contracts. It does not take cognizance of agreements, not in themselves maritime, although they may be preliminary to maritime contracts. So too the building of a ship is a maritime service and the building contract is one with your cognizance of avarity. But a mere undertaking to make a building contract for a ship or to procure a person to build a ship is not within the jurisdiction of avarity, but maritime. It is not a maritime contract. It is not subject to regulation of the maritime law. The distinction in many cases will undoubtedly seem shadowy and unreal still in a large class of cases, it will be readily perceived and it's important, fully appreciated.
The Informer: And there's more to it, but that's one part of it.
Vyzygoth: We're running over and I'm going to let that happen, but because we are, I'm just giving you a heads up. How does UCC fit in all this?
The Informer: UCC is contract law. You have to have a contract with a particular party in order to go into a court with them. Now, in the Senate Admiralty, I'll read you. Okay. The Sixth Amendment is expressly limited to criminal prosecutions for crimes committed in some states or districts of the United States. The Seventh Amendment is limited to suits of common law, which does not include either suits of equity or of Admiralty and maritime jurisdiction. So, That means that if you go in on the 7th Amendment, and it comes right out and says so, the 7th Amendment is common law and has no business in an emeraldty court.
The Informer: Now, guess why? The court says you can't bring in the 7th Amendment because it's $20 in common law suit silver. There is no silver.
Vyzygoth: So, in other words, since you don't have the means of transaction, you can't do it? That's right. Now, you could really get that, couldn't you?
The Informer: Well, in the phrase, suits a common law, and the Seventh Amendment to the Constitution has also been made the foundation of the objection to the Admiralty jurisdiction in all these cases, which in England, at the time of the Revolution, could not be tried in the Court of Admiralty. But it must be brought in the courts of common law, an objection which seems to have been first raised by the late Judge Baldwin in the case of Baines versus the Schooner, James, and Catherine. All right, now remember, this was written in 1850. 1857, they brought Admiralty in land, and no matter what contract you had, came under a maritime jurisdiction. Therefore, Admiralty court.
The Informer: By cases in law was meant the cases which legal rights and duties and offenses are to be ascertained in courts of law. By cases in equity they are meant in cases which equitable rights and duties are to be ascertained in courts of equitable jurisdiction and proceedings. And by amity and maritime is meant which maritime rights, duties, and offenses became subject to the judicial cognizance in courts of amity and maritime jurisdiction. What is IRS? What is any revenue? Maritime amity. jurisdiction.
Vyzygoth: Now, amongst these three, one is not, shall we say, more powerful or ubiquitous than the others, or is there?
The Informer: No, no.
Vyzygoth: Okay.
The Informer: There has to be a maritime contract, in other words, for an, uh, for a, uh, uh, Admiralty Court to sit, or the court to sit as Admiralty. The court can pick and choose what it wants, and that's what it usually does.
Vyzygoth: And what about capital offenses, like murder?
The Informer: Uh, capital offenses in the United States was never given the court the jurisdiction for capital offenses. What they do is they took it and applied it like a capital offense, like in the two cases that I had cited in my New History of America, United States versus one Chevy pickup and one was a Ford, in that they started the case in Admiralty and slid over to the civil side which then everything became civil, even though it was criminal prosecution.
Vyzygoth: Well, we see cases where you have a criminal trial, and like with OJ being high profile, then they go civil.
The Informer: Yeah. But in this way, they can make the whole trial civil. In other words, they have to bring the civil rules of procedure, Title 28, in, and they don't bring in Title 18, the criminal procedures.
Vyzygoth: So they morph right during the trial? Yeah. Does anybody tell the defendant's lawyer? The defendant's lawyer knows it. But it's a game he plays, too?
The Informer: Yes.
Vyzygoth: All right. Is there a point where he calls him to the bench and says, all right, we're doing it this way from here on in? Or in his chambers?
The Informer: Well, let's put it this way. If you and I are mechanics, and we happen to go and be working on a car or something like that, we know exactly what we're supposed to do, huh? Mm-hmm. To get that car back, to run it. OK. The owner doesn't know. Well, the same way in court. The owner doesn't know, but you and all your bar members know the procedures that have to take place during that trial.
Vyzygoth: Another dirty little secret on us, huh?
The Informer: Yes. Yes.
Vyzygoth: All right. I'm going to bring it to a halt there, and there's not enough I can say by way of thank you for coming on. I hope you appreciated it. I guess you indicated that you did, and I did right from the outset, and so did a whole lot of listeners.
The Informer: Yeah, I think the last time I was on a live radio show that I happened to be was back in about 1992, 1993. This is the last time I was on a radio show.
Vyzygoth: Well, welcome back. Okay. Check out, again, The Great Press. That's informerarchives.com. Everything you want to know is there, and like Ivan said, we can please go there and listen to their view at your pleasure. Go read it, go find out, and you'll have a better understanding of it yourself. Once again, Ivan, thanks very much. I'll talk to you down the road somewhere. Thank you so much for your time and uh, get your study. You got mine, bye. Bye bye.
Vyzygoth: No damn rebel if there ever was Even if you had no cause to seek Set it all so clean If I know my life would look alright I can see it on the silver screen When I talk about a low down bed Refrigerating you were just too cool Got you almost breakin' all the rules James Dean, James Dean I'm so hungry and so weak James Dean, you said it all so clean If I know my life, it'll look alright If I can see it on the silver screen Little James Dean, up on the screen, wondering who he might be.
Vyzygoth: When on came a spider, picked up a rider, took him down the road to eternity. James Dean, James Dean, brought in the sight unseen. James Dean, James Dean, Too young to die, die, die Too young to die Too young to die Too young to die Too young to die Too young to die Too young to die Too young to die Too young to die Too young to die Too young to die Too young to die Too young to die Oh, I ain't saying anything