Written, researched, experienced by one Antonio Vacci ©1999.
The Next CCC; a Newer Deal for the next millennium
As can be seen from part two of this article living in an occupied state has its consequences, most certainly not truly beneficial. At some time prior the State of the State of Oregon ought to have been, a Union of free people in a whole State and not as a corporation, a free state of whole people joined together sharing welfare. This welfare concept reaches near perfection in the 'New Deal' and the Civilian Conservation Corps, (CCC) of 1935. Every body works! You noticed this subtle collectivist disclosure (free state/ whole people) enscribed upon the marble at the entrance to the capitol building in Salem, Oregon. This enscription in stone intends and rules as a commune guarding the shareholder benefit of welfare. It does not give notice that it serves a free people in a whole state, rather a free state of whole people. Subtle aren't "they"?
The Corporate Collective Consequence.
You read under corporations law that there are shareholders; those that have voting rights and those that don't. Under the corporate by-laws called 'ORS©' every "elector" has a voting privilege as a shareholder if 'it' can qualify. You think, this sounds quite democratic in a social fascist sort of way. What if you can't qualify, do you die? This is certainly 'proof' of the Corporate Collective Consequence (CCC). Also, it is conveniently consistent with socialism from across the Atlantic. What happened to the choice of not voting and acting independently without the 'benefit' of sharing welfare? What happened to free people exercising true independence. As you have seen if it is not already apparent, Freedom is not part of the perfected CCC Newer Deal for the next millennium.
StAtEmEnT oN cAsE.
In any extensive research on corporations you've noticed the peculiar use of capitalization or 'case' in words of legal documents you have read. Does capitalization really matter? What is this significance? A friend of yours knowing of your research and this question approaches you with a letter from the secretary of state's office which in paraphrase says, "The corporations division disregards differences in upper and lowercase. Our files list all legal entities in uppercase, exclusively. This person you have requested information about is not in or records." Another friend shows you a rule of the Oregon Court of Appeals, "Do not capitalize a word unless there is a reason to." and another reference in the Local Bankruptcy Rules LBR 1005-1 Petition Captions which states, in part, "the caption of each petition shall include the debtor's full and correct name in capital letters". So what does all this mean? Apparently, you deduce, this means that the name of an entity, 'legal' in person (created through act of law, not God), is designated by all capital letters and is a 'person' corporate or a mere 'legal entity' and the courts recognize this distinction or purportedly so and certainly in special proceedings. (continuing receivership of the public bankruptcy since 1933). A legal entity exists in fictional places, i.e., 'OR', 'CA', OH, etc., and is designated in improper form. That is why the STATE OF OREGON is spelled funny on the reverse of the Title pages of the voluminous writing called the 'ORS©'.
Corporations to keep records and make books.
To your knowledge, you thought, making books was illegal, but you remember something you read in HB 2, 1953, and ORS© Chapter 57, 1953, that requires a corporation to keep records and make books of everything 'it' does. You realize now that corporations or all legal entities are called "person", natural or otherwise, with designation of such class or status through capitalizing of the name. The STATE OF OREGON is a corporation having, like any corporation, peculiar 'legal' requirements upon 'it' which are, incidentally, foreign to red-blooded American people. This foreign state is further confirmed by a friend who tells you that pursuant to federal policy 26 USC 6001 the Secretary of the Treasury shall determine a 'person liable' for tax and order 'it' to keep records and make books of the activity of the 'person' (corporation) for 'income' (return on profit invested) tax purposes.So why do you keep records and make books? a free people do not have the requirement to keep diligent activity records. A free people have no liability to account, however, subjects are imposed upon sharing of the benefit of welfare enjoying the servitude of taxation and book making. The records kept by the people prior to 1953 were merely of the law in force which complies with common law notice requirements. Hence, you reason why it is that Oregon archives prior to 1953 are inconsistent. There was no corporate character to require the State of the State of Oregon to keep records and make books. The foreign corporation law under foreign occupation statutes were not yet "substituted 'as law' in a continuing way".
Now from Part I it becomes more clear what the archivist at Oregon State Archives was suggesting about records and books being consistent after 1953. After 1953, the STATE OF OREGON, a bankrupt corporation, identified and designated so in the capitalized spelling, was required to keep records and make books of its corporate activities. That the corporation is an international foreign private entity doing "charitable" works and is entitled to exemption or more aptly exclusion is of no matter. It is a creature of the law deriving its existence and substance from the benefit of the Law provided by the people. It would still be required to keep records and make books. Even if masquerading as a government, it would need to account to the master its creator. In this case the Bar Association or more accurately the 'fiscal agent' for the STATE OF OREGON, the CHASE MANHATTAN BANK in the Empire state, STATE OF NEW YORK! Does that surprise you? Remember, "Westward the star of Empire takes its way"
Who do you really work for?
Is all the foregoing 'proof' continued in the first two parts of Pea in a Cup enough? If it is not what would be adequate proof? You have seen in Bar Association courts of the STATE OF OREGON of foreign occupation a criminal justice and upon its altars of sacrifice, a people suffering conviction upon NO facts or ACTUAL evidence. Victims purportedly 'convicted' by the idiota voting shareholder called juror or a tyrannical 'judge'. These courts are a foreign adversarial arena made by the Bar Association brotherhood, and temples of abomination. A cult (occult) brotherhood that in a moments notice, through dutiful agents and officers, binds up then sacrifices the lives, property, and families of those unfortunate unsuspecting victims from the ranks of the people. Ultimately, who will you answer and pay tribute to? Who do you work for? If you are not outraged enough to throw off your oppressor are you ashleep?
The Crown of Thorns.
When you see evidence indicates the real intention behind the three days "War of 1812", where the Crown of England sent troops merely to burn the Library of Congress, was to rid the Crown of the evidence of a law prohibiting all Titles of Nobility and authorizing penalties, you see what enabled the subsequent Bar and Banker invasion of this country after defaults of the prior engagements to the Crown recognized in the Constitution. You have a new understanding of the function of the Title of Nobility, 'Esquire'; a feudal term the rank of which is given to all attorneys in the brotherhood. You notice that the Crown has had a long-time interest in stealthily creating an occupation of America and the people through corporate takeover. Your reading suggests that at that early time debates in Parliament were of how best to conquer the Yanks. The fact then remained, war was costly and protracted; Besides, there was an easier way, economics. The banks would make an accounting of the debt and the lawyers would preserve superiority and control through legal deception, intimidation, and word-smithing and the 'public' (government) education system. To date this crowning plan has been a total corporate raid and complete successful. The Parliament was right, war was protracted and the Yanks could be taken an easier way, economical development.
Bearing the burden and the unpaid debt; the cross to bear.
It appears the United States still owes the unpaid balance of the prior obligations to the Crown of England! The Crown is merely protecting its interest. To bad you think, those contracts weren't for kidneys instead of livre, for we have two kidney and could pay that debt off in no time and still keep going. (Anatomical donation authorization takes on a new interpretation doesn't it?) These debt engagements precipitating obligation upon the United States to the Crown of England were recognized in the Constitution at Article VI, required by the Contract Between the King and the Thirteen United States of North America, signed at Versailles July 16, 1782, and the Contract between the King and the Thirteen United States of North America February 25, 1783. Some would say these "contracts" were called a "Treaty of Peace". If that is the case then by definition, the country accepting such a named treaty is truly under an occupation. And so since it has been, and shortly after Independence we fell bearing until today our cross under the occupation.
Equally bankrupt.
With this it appears the mere "United States" was formed with other than free people, indentured subjects of the Crown under servitude to a creditor because Congress failed to pay the prior debt. You figure that indicates Congress allowed you into voluntary servitude with the ratification of the Constitutional after Convention in 1789? Could the States actually have ratified a constitution with such a condition? Actually, the united States have been since before this a colony under corporate development authorized through Letters Patent issuing of the Crown of England in 1610, hence the colonies! Voluntary servitude is not illegal but that was not within the authority of Congress or the States to accept as either a precondition in the birth of a free nation or its subsequent enslavement. Is that, you wonder, why the states are required to join the "union" on an equal footing? You are sure it is. They and the people they represent must all agree to come in equally bankrupt! They also must give "full faith and credit". They (WE) did this again in the various and continuing provisions of the "New Deal" for 1933 and hereafter! (See: HJR 192) WE agree to share in the benefit of a welfare state. You continue this agreement by not stopping it. Isn't that interesting? Voluntary slavery. Working your life away for all what you do not understand, to line the pockets of the Esquire elite and corporate pirateering government. Apparently, you have been indoctrinated into the Newer Deal for the next millennium, the Corporate Collective Consequence. Congratulations Conscientious Crown Comrade. It's so U.N.-American!
Not fit for human consumption unless you are Ashleep.
Now who is left 'consuming' this illusionary pea in a cup? Legal tender works only because you believe in it. Otherwise it is, by law, worthless "securities" (USC26165g2C). Legal policy or statute works only because you believe it is law. Otherwise it provides worthless security. It's "as money" by "as law". Remember, before you were to choose the pea in which cup, the Confidence Man secreted the pea into his private care. This is the eventuality of your money and therefore your law. It never really existed. You never really possessed them nor could you. Do you still trust and play this con-fidence game? Have you bought into the 'con'? Are you Ashleep®?
Antonio Vacci ©1999