It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Opt out of 'the system'; declare yourself a Human

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 09:55 AM
Came across this guy and his video series.

His name is John Harris, a carpenter who set up an excellent website called where there are some fascinating stories in their memebers section.

Anyway, the video series is long (2 hours), so i thought i'd highlight some key aspects to make people realise that they are lied to and coerced into contractual obligations with TPTB that are just corporate entities, whose mission it is, to enslave the populous into perpetual debt.

The whole point he's putting across, is that you are a Human, not a person. TPTB are all legal entities and as such need you to declare yourself as some sort of employee by making you acknowledge you are person when you fill out forms et al. They ask for your name (as written on a birth certificate) and salutation. If you enter your address then they can 'join' your person(a) to a fictitious legal entity, when in reality you are a living, breathing sentient being.

As long as you adhere to Common Law, i.e. don't hurt or cause loss, then their made up laws aren't valid and are just ways to increase revenue with fines and minor infractions by tethering you to some made up piece of paper, which they use to contractually bind you to their 'business'.

Key points:

* When an orifice says "obstructing or preventing a police officer from completing his line of duty", just simply say "and who is that duty to?"

* When you insure your car, when the person asks "are you the owner of the car?", just say "no, the DVLA is the owner, i am just the registered keeper!"

* For every Fiat paper note in your wallet, write on it "£20 of what??", for example. This relates to the fact that banks operate on fractional reserve banking and create paper money that is worthless. Only the FED or BoE dictate the monetary value and just create digital accounts to perpetuate a false economy with no tangible commodity placed on that piece of paper, they want us to believe it's 'currency'.

* (Not really mentioned in John's videos) If you're threatened with foreclosure for missing payments, check out this video.

* I also wanted to link to this amazing document (0.5MB PDF), which corroborates much of what John says in his videos.

Here's video #1 of 12; enjoy

[edit on 23-6-2009 by PrisonerOfSociety]

posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 10:08 AM
Soo, what legal forms would I need to declare my 'human' rights? This sounds all most too good to be true, but who knows it's crazy (or sane) enough to work. I'm all for declaring that I am a living, breathing individual, not put on this earth to pay taxes so sign me up.

posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 10:17 AM
reply to post by PrisonerOfSociety

The simplest way to opt out is to print m.
Now everyone print m.
Flood every street with m.
TPTB will be pissed off.

posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 10:17 AM
I think you are referring to the Strawman Illusion. Here is a video talking about the "Citizen Ship". The Strawman Illusion Video

This video goes along with your discussion. Its an intriguing and convincing point of view when you know even just a little about "The Law". But the problem is that there really is no simple or easy way out of this matrix we've all been born into. S&F

posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 10:36 AM
Another technique is called the secured party creditor. Several techniques have been discovered.
I would say if you're in USA then tread lightly. The guards don't like people letting themselves out of the debtors prison. And in fact may put you into one with bars.

As shown in the link

posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 10:37 AM
I’ve read this before, had someone come up with all this out of the blue as if it was a genuine legal principle. I found that website and asked for some actual legal documents, statutes or common law rulings that set out what they claimed. They couldn’t give me anything.

The whole thing seems to be based on a dodgy interpretation of the word person in its natural and legal sense; this is usually picked out of an American legal dictionary.

In reality it’s nonsense with no real legal backing.

The OP also woefully misinterprets what common law is. Common law is not a separate type of laws in the sense that it deals with crimes while statute law deals with civil wrongs. It is merely a method by which law is developed; i.e. by judicial rulings as apposed to being developed by the legislative in statute law.

Both however must be adhered to, you can’t separate them.

posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 10:44 AM
This is that "paper terrorism" the ADL loves to accuse everyone of.

You pull this and you will be arrested.

There is no such thing as liberty in America. All of these roads lead to being tossed in prison or being shot to death depending on how angry the Marshalls are that they have to come for you. Just ask Viki Weaver and Ed Brown.

Granted, if we all went this route we'd pose a substantial force but as it is the past 40 years have been spent by government and media and organizations like the ADL slamming any and all of these groups, movements, individuals, as white-supremacist McVeigh factories and because of their campaign most of America believes it to be true.

Be careful if you choose to pursue Sovereign Citizenship. The government doesnt like it and they have all the prisons, most of the guns and the backing of the American slave.

posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 10:47 AM
Well John does look like he's a seasoned veteran and has had many holidays with the courtesy of HM prisons.

He does warn later on his videos, that you must be prepared to spend time in a cell, so this is definitely not for everyone. It will take a few very brave souls to instigate this ideology, but a rolling stone gathers no moss and i think we've all had our fair share of being covered in elitist slime.

This could be a non-violent way to revolt, but agree with awakentired, they don't want people (nay Humans) to think you're free from their debtors prison, that they have fought so hard to create over the centuries.

I particularly found it interesting when he mentioned passports and they were looking at a request for entry to negate the need for their totalitarian/ID implementation (passports). Just go through customs and show some kind of diplomatic immunity pass.

This is all an embryonic meme, so understand there is no definitive guide to bypass 'the system'. However, with a hive mentality, i'm sure it's just a matter of time before their fragile walls collapse and we are all free to breath the air we so crave on 'the outside'.

posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 10:53 AM

and has had many holidays with the courtesy of HM prisons.

He does warn later on his videos, that you must be prepared to spend time in a cell, so this is definitely not for everyone.

lol does that not suggest that what he is saying might not be 100% correct?

It is utter tosh; all you’re doing by adhering to this is ignoring the bits of the law you don’t like. Fine if that’s the way you want to go but there’s no need to dress it up in all sorts of pseudo-legalese to make it sounds authoritative.

posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 10:55 AM
hey, this is a great thread! S&F

i really like the idea of writing on money. If even a fraction of the population started this it would snowball to the point where every bill of currency brings itself into question. This would be great to raise awarness of what our econemy really stands on.

I think im going to start doing it anyway, because if one person becomes more enlightened about the state of things because of it then thats a start.

posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 11:21 AM
reply to post by thisguyrighthere

I watched the Edward and Elaine Brown video on YouTube about tax evasion and found it most interesting.

They didn't do themselves justice by affiliating with militias and religion, but i found this snippet on Wiki very interesting, where not one indictment mentions tax evasion!!!

As a result of the events during the standoff, Edward and Elaine Brown were indicted on January 21, 2009 by a federal grand jury[60][61][62] in Concord, New Hampshire, and were charged with knowingly and willfully conspiring, by force, intimidation and threat, to prevent employees of the United States Marshals Service in the discharge of official duties in the arrest of the Browns, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 372; conspiracy to commit an offense against the United States in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371 and subsections (a) and (b) of 18 U.S.C. § 111; carrying and possessing a firearm in connection with a crime of violence, in violation of subparagraphs (A) and (B) of paragraph (1) of subsection (c) of 18 U.S.C. § 924; being a felon in possession of a firearm in violation of paragraph (1) of subsection (g) of 18 U.S.C. § 922; obstruction of justice in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1503; and failure to appear for sentencing, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 3146. Edward Brown was also charged with one count of failure to appear for trial in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 3146. See Indictment, United States v. Edward Brown and Elaine Brown.[63] The trial has been scheduled for June 30, 2009.[64]


posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 11:25 AM
reply to post by Kevin_X2

Yep, i will also start writing that on notes; i'll start off small with £5 notes just in case staff play funny buggers @ Asda, but i thought of writing it on just one side and handing it to the clerk face-down so they don't see it.

If they mention defacement, i'll just say that's what i was given in a previous transaction at the petrol station.

I wonder how long it will be before we receive each others scribed note

posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 11:37 AM
reply to post by PrisonerOfSociety

Isnt that great? None of that would have ever happened had the fed not moved in with their storm troopers because of the "tax evasion."

The Weavers had the feds sent upon them for supposedly not showing up to a court date (a court date that was changed without notification) that stemmed from the illegal transfer of a class III firearm that an undercover ATF agent coaxed Randy into altering and selling.

After Vicki and Sam and a federal Marshall were killed and a town brought to it's knees the only charge they finally faced after "surrender" was the missed court date.

I dont trust anyone working for or doing anything in the name of "government." They all have too much power and nobody to answer to.

posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 11:48 AM
reply to post by Mike_A

Thanks for the comments Mike_A, it's always good to get views from the other side of the same coin, but i feel that you think we should just accept 'the system'.

In the UK, the MP expense scandal has opened my eyes as to how there is a demarcation between 'us and them'. How can they get away with flouting the law of fraud, whilst ordinary citizens would be banged up in a heartbeat...It's time to fight now, not with violence but by empowering yourself with your self-worth.

I would like to stress INAL!!!

I found an interesting snippet in the Mary Croft pdf i linked to, where she says she went to court and immediately asked the judge (when asked for her name) if she was entering into a contract. The judge threw out the case as he knew what she meant.

Now this may or may not be real, as i need to maintain a full DefCon alert of scepticism both from CT stuff and MSM BS, but i find the ideology of declaring yourself a non-legal entity most interesting...don't you?

Also, you mention "ignoring the bits of the law you don’t like". Well don't you see how they are invoking laws every day it seems to further suppress the expression of free will? When is enough enough?

This is a one way street of judicial legislation with one goal in mind, to either bang you up for expression or fine you to the hilt to enslave you in debt.

In the UK they now have created NEW laws where you can't film Are you saying we should all just be complicit to every new law as they know what's best for us?

Please remember that g'ments are there to serve the people not dictate their fascist agendas.

Finally, you say "there’s no need to dress it up in all sorts of pseudo-legalese to make it sounds authoritative"......well isn't that what TPTB does? Take the banking infrastructure for example, they convoluted their products so much, to make it difficult for even the most intelligent economist to understand, so they could action their architectured agenda to fiddle the system with bail-outs. They knew exactly what they were doing years ago when they first started giving NINJA (No Income, No Job Applicants) mortgages to applicants they knew had no way to repay once the small print kicked in 6 months into their agreement.

So legalese is there for a reason, to obfuscate the obvious and not raise awareness to Joe Public that their BS legislation is there to perpetuate a hidden agenda. Laws will evolve to a point where you will look back and think how great it was to walk to the shops to buy milk, without being accosted by baton wielding police enforcer saying "papers please"!!

posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 11:54 AM
Perhaps we won't need Fiat currency soon after all...

posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 12:51 PM
You don’t have to accept the current system as it is but it’s no good just making something up then claiming you can ignore what we have now. It just doesn’t work like that; there is no legal basis for it.

If you just came out and said you were going to ignore the law then you would at least be being honest about what it is you are doing but by claiming that it fits within the current legal framework you’re just deluding yourself and others.

In the UK they now have created NEW laws where you can't film

They haven’t, it hysteria primarily driven by the media. At best that particular part of the Act is a little ill defined but it would never get passed court.

well isn't that what TPTB does?

No because when you read a statute it means something and it is authoritative; when someone writes on a blog something along the lines of “Admiralty law dictates that person, when the name of said person (read human) is capitalised, refers to a corporate identity and not the human person” it neither means anything nor is it authoritative.

You can try to change the system or you can ignore it but you can’t pretend it is something that it isn’t.

posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 01:24 PM
reply to post by Mike_A

As i said, i'm not a lawyer but i agree with what you're saying. It is fluffy logic regarding the wish to negate the law, but i feel there is something to it about binding yourself with a summons for example, and their need for you to enter into an agreement by deceit when saying or printing your name.

I don't pay my TV license because they give it to you for free and then threaten you with a fine or imprisonment, for not paying.

I dug this out of the relevant section about photographing police (text bold and underlined), so it does seem law i'm afraid. It's just up to the police to exercise it i suppose

76 Offences relating to information about members of armed forces etc

(1) After section 58 of the Terrorism Act 2000 (collection of information) insert—
“58A Eliciting, publishing or communicating information about members of armed forces etc

(1) A person commits an offence who—

(a) elicits or attempts to elicit information about an individual who is or has been—

(i) a member of Her Majesty’s forces,

(ii) a member of any of the intelligence services, or

(iii) a constable,

which is of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism, or

(b) publishes or communicates any such information.


[edit on 23-6-2009 by PrisonerOfSociety]

posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 01:55 PM
Social Security Cards say this number was "established for" name. Legally the only thing I can think of as a legal binding contract is your social security number. So by authorizing a sale with your social security number to confirm your identity is it somehow construed that you comply to the terms and be held accountable by the guidelines set forth in the social security act? So the only legal way of going about this is by getting rid of Social Security.

posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 02:01 PM
reply to post by PrisonerOfSociety

Can you find anything in UK law that sets this out? I can’t.

With regards to the Terrorism Act, it still doesn’t make taking a photo illegal. I’m sure the wording can be abused by an officer but it just wouldn’t stick, the act includes ample defence against this.

It is at worst shoddy wording rather than totalitarianism. I’m not suggesting that there is no cause for concern, the current government has institute a lot of draconian legislation and has abused its power. But it’s still best to focus on the real threats.

posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 02:11 PM
reply to post by Mike_A

Can you find anything in UK law that sets this out? I can’t.

Sorry i don't know which part you're referring to?

It is at worst shoddy wording rather than totalitarianism.

Try telling that to a copper who has been on a weekend course educating them on new powers to get rid of those pesky protesters and 'graphers! It is 'shoddy wording' for that very reason where they can abuse their powers even further on the front-line and have some recompense in the eyes of the law. Baby steps towards totalitarianism me thinks.

But it’s still best to focus on the real threats.

Okay, i'll bite. What 'real threats'????

new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in