“Label” Me This – The Jurisdictional Entry Point

Posted: Thursday, April 21, 2011 in Born Without Money

The Bankers get their jurisdiction over the people under the acquired land clause of Article 4, Section 3, Clause 2 of the Constitution, through the LABEL/NAME that was signed/affixed, which we do not own, but did make use of, which then attached us to what they determined as an inhabitant, allowing the Bankers/IRS/United States, to draw connection from land to property through the aforementioned label, wherein the Constitution at Article 4, Section 3, and Clause 2 states…

“The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.”

Since we know that land is property, land can be acquired in as simple a way as this; when you are asked, “What is the address, or what is your address?” What you are really being asking is, “Where is the land located that you are connected or associated with?” If you give an address, lets say 12345 Land Street, and then you are asked if you live there, or if you are asked for YOUR NAME, which is actually the LABEL, then a connection can be drawn, and you are actually the one that allowed for the connection to be drawn, albeit in ignorance, but nonetheless still a connection, and now you have unknowingly become subject to a foreign jurisdiction through a very deceptive ploy because, you consented to a connection being made to the very body that you dwell in, and this is how they acquire some more land or property, because the body is the land and the property that you just labeled by using their, “Label,” and you just gave it to them with out qualifying the intent or purpose.

So then, the words, “other Property,” is the key to this debacle. Emphasis on the word, “other.” It does not say, “respecting the Territory AND Property belonging to the United States,” but, “or OTHER Property,” which is a clue that the Property this is actually referring to does not, nor ever did, naturally belong to the United States.

PROPERTY: 4. The exclusive right of possessing, enjoying and disposing of a thing; ownership.  In the beginning of the world, the Creator gave to man dominion over the earth, over the fish of the sea and the fowls of the air, and over every living thing. This is the foundation of man’s property in the earth and in all its productions.

6. The thing owned; that to which a person has the legal title, whether in his possession or not.

In this definition, “property,” is directly connected to the Earth and Mans dominion over it, and this is reason enough as to why Property cannot naturally belong to the United States. So then, the United States is claiming Property as Owner, but the United States is not the Heir to any Property based upon the definition noted above, which follows in accordance with Genesis chapter one (1), otherwise, Genesis chapter one (1) is a lie. So then, the person ONLY has the legal title, but there is no indication in this definition that by having the legal title the person is the owner. Legal title only denotes who has fiduciary responsibilities; nothing more and nothing less.

Now, taking out the middle phrase of definition number six (6) from above, we have, “The thing owned, whether in his possession or not.” Interesting how the middle phrase can clutter up the meaning, is it not? No ownership is being equated to the person, and the United States is but a person, yes? Moreover, the United States has claimed ownership because of having legal titles, however, being a fiction/person, as the United States is, how can it ever enjoy the use thereof? Furthermore, why would this person/fiction make an ownership claim in the first place? I will get back to this question in a moment.

For now, how else do we conclude the claim of the United States but to be for the intent and purpose of being both frivolous and fraudulent in order to advantage the person over the Heir? For the person, the United States is not the Heir, and can never be the Heir, but is the duly created, appointed, and commissioned servant of the Heir, and therefore is to perform specific duties in relation to the property. Perhaps this is why it is written,
“But those husbandmen said among themselves, ‘This is the heir; come, let us kill him, and the inheritance shall be ours,” Mark 12:7. Therefore, consider that the answer to this query is because we are the problem that caused this to come upon us because we adopted an adversarial disposition against and opposed to the true intent and purpose for which it was given, and this allowed such events of enslavement to be perpetuated through our ignorance and inaction.

So then, why would the person/United States/fiction make an ownership claim in the first place? For the answer to this, let us consider the chief operating instructions; the standing orders titled the Lieber Code, being made necessary because we as Co-Heir’s, were not loving our neighbors, but rather were making war with them, therefore this opened the door to allow for the property to be taken away, or more precisely, held in abeyance … notice how in Article 38 and Article 31 respectively of the Lieber Code reveals the United States is not the true Owner, but is only holding the Public Property and all assets in abeyance until the conquest is complete, as sited herein below…

“Private property, unless forfeited by crimes or by offenses of the owner, can be seized only by way of military necessity, for the support or other benefit of the army or of the United States.  If the owner has not fled, the commanding officer will cause receipts to be given, which may serve the spoliated owner to obtain indemnity.”

If the United States is the true Owner, then it would be seizing its own property, would it not? Does that make any sense? Of course not! Furthermore, why would the United States be issuing receipts for its own property it has seized? That would be kind of crazy, yes? The answer is, because it is not its property, but it is only going to hold that Property in abeyance until the conquest is complete, which means all the bickering children have stopped their infighting, and are no longer in need of Governors and Tutors as a result, because they have come to their sense and stopped all belligerent hostile actions, which negatively affect the peace of public, albeit physical warfare, economic warfare, or any kind of warfare.

A victorious army appropriates all public money, seizes all public movable property until further direction by its government, and sequesters for its own benefit or of that of its government all the revenues of real property belonging to the hostile government or nation. The title to such real property remains in abeyance during military occupation, and until the conquest is made complete.

The conquest can only be made complete when we honor the gift once given to all and rightfully live in peace with ourselves, and our neighbors, sharing and giving from the things which we have been given for the benefit of all. To charge your neighbor, is to create debt and make a debtor of your neighbor, which is to be at war with your neighbor, and this kind of action does not honor the life given as a gift unto you, through which you give to all others. This is the war that must cease. This is the war that must end. Remember, you were given Life, and not charged for it. Therefore, anything that is created and manifested through the energy of that Life is to be given, and not sold, or even loaned, for the Heir is neither to be a borrower or a lender, but a giver, because he has freely received, and so gratefully freely gives to express his gratitude.

So then, let us now continue on with the main course of this post and reveal some new information to update a previous posting to my blog, but first a couple of supporting definitions, and some concluding thoughts before getting to that.

LA’BEL, n. 1. A narrow slip of silk, paper or parchment, containing a name or title, and affixed to any thing, denoting its contents.  Such are the labels affixed to the vessels of an apothecary.  Labels also are affixed to deeds or writings to hold the appended seal. (Such as the 1040 form)
2. Any paper annexed to a will by way of addition; as a codicil.

The Property problem is all connected to the word, “Label,” on the IRS 1040 form (See the examples below). This means that the word, “Label,” on the form is telling the user of it that this form serves another purpose. That the purpose and true nature of this form gives the Bankers jurisdiction over all the land referred to as, “other Property,” referenced earlier in Article 4, Section 3, Clause 2 of the Constitution as noted above. The “other Properties,” are tied directly into the purpose for this word being on that form. When the Label or NAME is affixed/signed/written upon the 1040 form, it is used against the one affixing/signing/using the Label/NAME, because actually does not belong to the user, but to someone else. This then allows the Bankers to draw a direct connection to one using it being an, “inhabitant,” which refers directly to the person, which is a fiction and a corporation. Do you want to have such a connection made with you? Certainly not! However, by using what is clearly their property without a license, or their permission, it becomes a benefit and a privilege. One that is subject to a use-tax for the benefit and privilege of using it.

INHAB’ITANT, 1. One who has a legal settlement in a town, city or parish. The conditions or qualifications which constitute a person an inhabitant of a town or parish, so as to subject the town or parish to support him, if a pauper, are defined by the statutes of different governments or states.

So then, land is equated to Property when it is tied into the solid matter and is of the Earth as clearly defined above, however, if it is tied into a NAME or more precisely the LABEL, which we should more than likely refer to the NAME as, for it truly is only a LABEL, but is called a NAME causing confusion, the LABEL then becomes tied to the land, and is become the property of the owner of the LABEL/NAME, which is the United States.  This is how a the conclusion of you being the NAME/LABEL was first consummated, by filling out the very first IRS 1040 form, and then reaffirming it by all successive ones.  You see, we are the problem, because we did this in ignorance, and because everybody else was doing it.  But now that you know that you have been the problem, you can now be the solution.

LAND, n. 1. Earth, or the solid matter which constitutes the fixed part of the surface of the globe, in distinction from the sea or other waters, which constitute the fluid or movable part. Hence we say, the globe is terraqueous, consisting of land and water. The seaman in a long voyage longs to see land.

2. Any portion of the solid, superficial part of the globe, whether a kingdom or country, or a particular region. The United States is denominated the land of freedom.

3. Any small portion of the superficial part of the earth or ground. We speak of the quantity of land in a manor. Five hundred acres of land is a large farm.

4. Ground; soil, or the superficial part of the earth in respect to its nature or quality; as good land; poor land; moist or dry land.

5. Real Estate. A traitor forfeits all his lands and tenements.

6. The inhabitants of a country or region; a nation or people

Now, some new information has come to my attention concerning a previous blog that I posted on January 16, of 2011, titled, “Notice the IRS informing them of codicil presumption null and void ab inito,” wherein I exposed the truth of the meaning and purpose of the word, “Label,” on the IRS form 1040, in that its true meaning and purpose is to be used as a codcil (See previous blog for definition) to the original trust setup by and through the organic Constitution by the Forefathers. These four words, “and to our posterity,” includes absolutely everyone who is a descendant of the nation wherein that trust was setup and expressed.

Below, you will find pictures of the IRS 1040 Forms for the years 2007 through 2010. In each one, you will see the word, “Label,” spelled horizontally, and you will also see a spelling of the word, “LABEL,” vertically. However, on the 2010 1040 Form, these spellings are not there! As a matter of fact, they have been removed! Examine them for yourself.

Even though the word, “Label,” has been removed it does not change the fact that by filling out one of their forms, of which you have no license, or legal proficiency to do so. The mere use of their form can imply a contractual obligation, through the creation of an implied trust, if you do not express your intent for the NAME/LABEL and NUMBER that was created and still owned by the International Bankers for their benefit alone. This means that if you use their forms, then make sure that you take the time to educate yourself on every aspect of the form first, and perhaps even include a letter explaining who you are and your intent. So then, it does appear that they may have removed the prime evidence exposing their fraud. However, this does not change the fact that this form can still be used to imply a codicil simply because of the implied contract associated with making use of the form improperly.

Folks, I believe the removal of the word, “Label,” is a sign that more and more people are waking up and questioning the IRS, asking them the questions that they do not want to answer. I AM not the only one who is aware of the meaning of the word, “Label.” Therefore, the removal of the word, “Label,” clearly shows a motive to conceal what it is that they have done through a willful intent of negligence and malcontent. Now their only recourse to avoid being exposed is to blatantly hide what it is that they have done. Make no mistake about this; this is a reaction out of fear. Their anger, which has been sparked by their unbelief, has shaken them into a state of panic because so many are realizing just who they truly are and have always been. This just plain infuriates them.

The solution for this is in informing them of your awareness of this truth, and that it was never your will and intent to give up the gift of your inheritance to them, or pledge the posterity of the expressed trust setup for you to them either. There is more than one way to accomplish getting this message across to them once and for all. Consider the options and come up with a few idea, and I will communicate more of my ideas along this line of thinking in future blogs.

Until then… have a blessed and safe journey.


Comments are closed.