NOTICE: Claim of “POSTLIMINY”

and Right of
Corporeal Protection Demanded
PREAMBLE

I, :John-Quincy: Jones, Living Man in My Father’s Creation, hereinafter referred to as I, Me, My,
third ‘person’ “He,” or “Claimant,” declare that I am over the age of majority and competent to
testify to the Truth of matters stated herein, to wit:

Claimant acknowledges that He holds, and has held the Office of Honor and Office of We Thee
People (a member and derivative of Society of Friends). Claimant explicitly denies that He
knowingly holds, or has ever held, any Office of Person [outside Claimants’ own Creation] or
Office of Profit or Office of Trust!!

SECTION I – Office Found: DEFINED

Due to mistakes in evidence, fact, and law, this Claimant declares that: Claimant is not in
receipt of any document or evidence which verifies that, Claimant is “resident of”, “inhabitant
of”, “franchisee of”, “subject of”, “ward of”, “property of”, “chattel of”, or “subject to the
jurisdiction of” the STATE of the Forum of any corporate UNITED STATES, corporate STATE,
corporate COUNTY, corporate CITY, or corporate Municipal body politics created under the
primary authority of Art. I, Sec. 8, CI. 17 and Art. IV, Sec. 3 CI. 2 of the Constitution for the
united States of America and subjected to any legislation created by or under the jurisdiction of
any employees, officers, or agents deriving their authority therefrom. Further, Claimant is not in
receipt of any document that verifies that Claimant is a subject of the Administrative and
Legislative Article I [or II, or IV] Courts or bound by precedents of such courts created by the
“United States.” “Legislation enacted by Congress applicable to the inferior courts in the
exercise of the power under Article III of the Constitution cannot be affected by legislation
enacted by Congress under Art. I, Sec. 8, CI. 17 of the Constitution.”

Claimant declares to the whole world that Claimant is a "Belligerent Claimant", and is NOT an
"Office Found", belonging to the King of England, Queen of England, or any of his/her sub-
corporations.

To further emphasize the fact that this Claimant yields no license, or grant, of any sort, to any
"Personage" of governmental origin, this Claimant does not recognize the "Law of Office
Found," as per the following qualification;

The Law of Office Found - definition

 "Office Found" depends on the context. If talking about the king, it refers to an heir or
successor, and removing holdings from aliens. If talking about a sub-corporation, the
corporations are protecting their grants to keep the grants out of the hands of an alien friend
or enemy. In either case, once office is found, the land or possession reverts back to the
corporation, state or king, the sovereign.

The land mark case: FAIRFAX'S DEVISEE v. HUNTER'S LESSEE, 11 U.S. 603 (1812) absolutely
defines a Treaty is the Supreme law of the land, and brings clarity of how the Treaties of 1783
and 1814 protected the kings holdings, period! In the case below you will see what the king has
been doing is recapturing corporate holdings that came about after the two Treaties were passed,
because the holdings were in the hands of aliens.

"Military conquerors of foreign states in time of war[*] may doubtless displace the courts of
the conquered country, and may establish civil tribunals in their place for administering
justice; and in such cases it is unquestionably true that the jurisdiction of suits of every
description is transferred to the new tribunals. United States v. Rice, 4 Wheat. 246; Cross v.
Harrison, 16 How. 164....Towns, provinces, and territories, says Halleck, which are retaken
from the conqueror during the war, or which are restored to their former sovereign by the
treaty of peace, are entitled to the right of postliminy; and the original sovereign owner, on
recovering his dominion over them, whether by force of arms or by treaty, is bound to restore
them to their former state. In other words, he acquires no new right over them, either by the
act of recapture or of restoration. . . . He rules not by any newly acquired title which relates
back to any former period, but by his antecedent title, which, in contemplation of law, has
never been divested. Halleck, Int. Law, 871." DOW v. JOHNSON, 100 U.S. 158 (1879)

Postliminy Defined:
(n.) The right by virtue of which persons and things taken by an enemy in war are
restored to their former state when coming again under the power of the nation to which
they belonged.
(n.) The return to his own country, and his former privileges, of a person who had gone
to sojourn in a foreign country, or had been banished, or taken by an enemy.

* “…in time of war…” Claimant reminds the world that U.S. citizens are defined as “enemies of
the state.”
Claimant has record or evidence to indicate that Claimant is a combatant enemy of the
State, as per; by Chuck Morse, “Is the ‘National Emergency of FDR’ Still In Place?” that:
“This was a classic example of sleight of hand. In fact, Congress exempted all laws,
based on the emergency of 1933 that were already in place. Rather than being based on
the authority of the President under a ‘national emergency’ these federal laws would now
be codified as a permanent part of the U.S. Federal Code. Included among the codified
laws would be Section 5(b) of the Trading with the Enemy Act, which classifies the
American citizen as an enemy of the government.” Therefore, although “national
emergency” technically ended on September 14, 1976, when the 93rd Congress passed
H.R. 3884, the National Emergencies Termination Act (50 USC 1601, Public Law 94-
412), because the last paragraph said that it didn’t apply to any “authorities under the
act of October 6, 1917, as amended,” the classification of an American citizen still
 stands as enemy of the government, Claimant has record or evidence that Claimant
should maintain any association with the label, definition, or designation of “that”
American citizen, U.S. citizen, or any similar appellation as per definitions given in all
corporate governmental codes, statutes and regulations.

Since every American citizen is declared [by slight of "hand"] to be an enemy of the United
States, Claimant explicitly denies being an enemy of, a combatant of, an individual of any
offensive against any, and all, de jure governments, Constitutionally seated, and accordingly;

A "citizen of the United States" ("citizen of the US") (5 U.S.C. § 552a(2) & (13)) means an
"Individual" irrevocably conflated [fused] with all of the following essential elements being a
citizen of the US, which are; the Social Security Act ("SSA") at 49 Stat. 620 as amended with the
required Social Security Number ("SSN"); and, the IRS in 49 Stat 620 Titles VIII & IX; and, the
denial of access to the Courts in 42 U.S.C. § 405(g) & (h); and, 26 U.S.C. § 6109(a) the
Taxpayer Identification Number ("TIN") shall be the SSN; and, the Form 1040 (OMB 1545-
0074) with the mandatory use of the SSN; and, when rights are created against the United States
for Individuals (SSA - federal benefits); and, the Driver License and Passport in 42 U.S.C. §
666(13); and, Congress can by statute for citizens of the United States deny access to all
courts of the United States and even a remedy as held in U.S. v. Babcock, 250 U.S. 328,
331(1919), Dismuke v. U.S., 297 U.S. 167, 171-72(1936), Garza v. Chater, 891 F.Supp. 464,
466-67 (N.D. Ill 1995) and Allen v. Graham, 446 P.2d 240, 243-44 (Ct. App. Ariz. 1968).

For the above reasons and reason of conviction, Claimant, :John-Quincy: Jones, of the
Family/Community Public, born on the soil of Missouri, "without United States" of
diplomatic representatives by hereditary succession of the Kingdom of Heaven, claim
the property, rights, privileges and immunities granted to me and my heirs by
hereditary succession by Our Father, Yahweh, the Creator and sovereign ruler of the
heavens and the earth and all that is in them, did, on the Fourth of April, 2007, by way of
Claimants’ Notary Witness send by way of United States Post Office, reference number
92732530397, mailing to Henry M. Paulson, Junior, Secretary of the Treasury, and
reference number 92732530375, mailing to the Comptroller of the Currency, and
reference number 92732530386, mailing to the Commissioner of the Public Debt a
collection of documents verifying as Truth and Fact issues in question that Claimant was
not, is not, and has no intention of being an Enemy of the State with validation
instruments including, but not limited to:
1. Index
2. Overview
3. Letter Rogatory
4. Power of Attorney
5. Appointment of Successor Trustee
6. Commercial Notice & Appointments
7. Directive of Information
8. Indemnity Bond
 9. Birth Certificate (copy, accepted for value – presented for value)
10. Social Security Number (card copy)
11. UCC 1 Filing Acknowledgement
12. UCC 1 Application with File # 20050013796E
13. Notice of Mistake and Correction
14. Grant of Authority & Interlocking Directorates
Claimant, at the same time, issued to the Chief of Protocol at the Secretary of State Office in
Washington, District of Columbia, Claimants’ Declaration of American Native, non-enemy of the
state, and non-corporate living man upon the soil, requesting that Claimant be placed upon a list
of Living Men that are NOT ENEMIES OF THE CORPORATE STATE OF THE FORUM.
Of necessity, I reiterate (as often as I must), here and now, to all parties that may deem
themselves to be parties of interest in the affairs of a non-corporate, non-public and non-
enfranchised Living Man, who, by way of HIS OWN entities, of necessity, must enter
commerce:
HEAR YE, HEAR YE; Let it be known that I, and my heirs, in succession claim
sovereign immunity for debts and penalties incurred and imposed by execution of any
adhesion or unconscionable instrument, contract or deed enacted by any entity,
government or corporation, and, ESPECIALLY, any instrument that is not signed by
me/myself with wet ink and in full disclosure of all consequences and ramifications
thereof and not under duress or coercion or under vi et armis (force of arms or at the point
of a gun).
(See Barron's Law Dictionary, 1996, [ISBN 0-8120-3380-9] for the definition of all
words and phrases. See "citizen" for definition of "diplomatic representatives".)

"It is clear, therefore, that this doctrine has no sufficient sanction in authority, and it will be
found equally unsupported by principle or analogy. [152 U.S. 505, 509] 'The general rule is
positively against it, for the books, old and new, uniformly represent the king as a competent
grantor in all cases in which an individual may grant, and any person in esse, and not civiliter
mortuus, as a competent grantee. Femes covert, infants, aliens, persons attainted of treason or
felony, clerks, convicts, and many others, are expressly enumerated as competent grantees.
Perkins, Grant, 47, 48, 51, etc.; Comy. Dig. 'Grant,' B 1. It behooves those, therefore, who would
except aliens, when the immediate object of the king's grant, to maintain the exception."
MANUEL v. WULFF, 152 U.S. 505 (1894)

Thus, “Office Found” exists within “corporate” UNITED STATES and its subsidiaries, as per:
"Substantial evidence that British Corporations established an office in the United States under a
resident agent, that the office collected dividends from vast holdings of American securities and
did countless other tasks essential to the maintenance of a large investment portfolio, constituted
sufficient basis for Tax Court's finding that corporations maintained an "office or place of
business" in the United States and were taxable as "resident foreign corporations" C.I.R. v.
Scottish American Inv. Co., U.S., 65 S.Ct. 169, 172, 323 U.S. 119, 89 L.Ed. 113. Words and
Phrases [Doubters may inspect Order Number 1778 of 1997 by the Queen and her Privy
Counsel, which raised the Social Security Tax of U.S. citizens]
 "Office Found: "A finding of fact by inquest of office or other proceeding equivalent thereto that
a certain individual is an alien. At common law, until office found, an alien is competent to hold
land against third persons, and no one has a right to complain in a collateral proceeding, if the
sovereign does not enforce its prerogative." Phillips v Moore, 100 US 208, 25 L Ed 603.
Ballentine's Law Dictionary, third Ed.

"Office Found: in English law. When an inquisition is made to the king's use of anything, by
virtue of office of him who inquires, and the inquisition is found, it is said to be office found."
See Phillips v Moor, 100 U.S. 484, 25 L. Ed. 628. Bouvier's Law Dictionary, 1914 Ed.

SECTION II – Office NOT FOUND

Sovereignty is not something that can be claimed or acquired (except as explained herein). A
careful study of the issue will reveal that only the "people" (and, NOT a corporation nor a
fictional legal entity called “government”) and their "posterity" hold the sovereignty in this
country. That sovereignty was devolved by King George II upon Chief Moytoy as “Emperor”
over the entire land in 1730 A.D., then, by King George III in the Treaty of Peace, on those Free
Men who were here in this country prior to the Constitution, who now hold that sovereignty in
joint tenancy. So, only those who in 2009 [of which, Claimant is ONE] can trace their family tree
back to those "people" who were originally granted the sovereignty are the posterity of the
sovereign people and thus hold the sovereignty of the united States of America and of the state in
which they abide of the Freely Associated Compact States [NOT the corporate STATE of the
forum – SEE “Interlocking Directorates”].

Here are the exceptions I mentioned above: There are in fact 3 ways in which one who is not a
"people" by birthright may become one.
1) Marry one of the people; or,
2) Be legally adopted by one of the people; or,
3) Be an African American, who is a descendent of a slave who was set free. There are no other
ways to become one of the sovereign people.

All others referred to loosely as “human beings,” who are not one of the "people" are known as
"persons." Both classes of human beings are identified in the Constitution, and the distinction has
been laid out very carefully and clearly in a series of court cases beginning with the most
important case in USA history - Chisholm v. Georgia in 1791, where the Supreme Court in
about 80 pages made it very clear who the people were that hold the sovereignty.

SECTION III – Evidence and Proof established as FACT

~1. FACT - The Constitution is a written instrument. As such, its meaning does not alter. That
which it meant when it was adopted, it means now. — South Carolina v. United States, 199 U.S.
437, 448 (1905).
~2. FACT - In the United States, Sovereignty resides in the people, who act through the organs
established by the Constitution. — Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 Dall 419, 471; Penhallow v. Doane's
Administrators, 3 Dall 54, 93; McCullock v. Maryland, 4 Wheat 316, 404, 405; Yick Wo v.
Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356, 370.
~3. FACT – The corporate “government” of the United States has taken what was not allowed
under any Common or International Law. In a landmark, time honored, never disputed, and still
distinguished case from Justice Story; 1815 De Lovio vs. Boit, 2 Gall. 398; 7 Fed. Cas. 418;
Case No. 1,776 (Reaffirmed 78 U.S. 1 to 396 U.S. 215) we learn:

“The proper jurisdiction of the courts of Common Law is of things done within the bodies
of counties, and its further enlargements, by means of fictions, can be considered only as
ingenious subterfuges and devices, to amplify their powers.”

~4. FACT – According to: McCurdy v Montgomery County, Ohio, 240 F3d 512 (6th Cir. 2001),
"government officials in general, and police officers in particular, may not exercise their
authority for personal motives, particularly in response to real or perceived slights to their
dignity. Surely, anyone who takes an oath of office knows - or should know - that much."

~5. FACT – According to: In re McCowan (1917), 177 C. 93, 170 P. 1100, "Ignorance of the law
does not excuse misconduct in anyone, least of all in a sworn officer of the law."

~6. FACT – Found at: 18 USC 31, (6) Motor vehicle.— The term “motor vehicle” means every
description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used
for commercial purposes on the highways in the transportation of passengers, passengers and
property, or property or cargo.

~7. FACT – Found at: 18 USC 31, (10) Used for commercial purposes.--- The term "used for
commercial purposes" means the carriage of persons or property for any fare, fee, rate, charge,
or other consideration, or directly or indirectly in connection with any business, or other
undertaking intended for profit.

~8. FACT – According to: Lefkowitz v. Turley, 94 S. Ct. 316, 414 U.S. 70 (19 73), "The Fifth
Amendment provides that no person shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness
against himself. The Amendment not only protects the individual against being involuntarily
called as a witness against himself in a criminal prosecution but also privileges him not to
answer official questions put to him in any other proceeding civil or criminal formal or informal,
where the answers might incriminate him in future criminal proceedings.”

~9. FACT – According to: U.S. V. Ramirez & Sandoval, 872 F2d. 1392, “The Fourth Amendment
forbids stopping a vehicle even for limited purposes of questioning its occupants unless the
police officer has a founded suspicion of criminal conduct…”

~10. FACT - Harassment by threat of fraudulent proceedings prohibited:

Source: Statute at Large 1997, ch 45, § 10; Statute at Large 2005, ch 120, § 228.
(Text of section effective July 1, 2006) Harassment by threat of fraudulent legal
proceedings or liens prohibited--Misdemeanor--Subsequent violation felony. Any person
who harasses any other person by sending or delivering, or causing to be sent or
 delivered, any letter, paper, document, notice of intent to bring suit, or other notice or
demand that simulates any form of court or legal process and that threatens the other
person, directly or indirectly, with incarceration, monetary fines, or penalties, or with
the imposition of a counterfeit lien on the real or personal property of the other person is
guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. A second or subsequent conviction for a violation of this
section is a Class 6 felony. Lack of belief in the jurisdiction or authority of the state or of
the United States is no defense to a prosecution under this section.

~11. FACT – According to: Bradley v. Fisher,13 Wall 335, 351, 352, "A distinction must be here
observed between excess of jurisdiction and the clear absence of all jurisdiction over the
subject-matter any authority exercised is a usurped authority and for the exercise of such
authority, when the want of jurisdiction is known to the judge, no excuse is permissible."

~12. FACT – According to: O'Connell v. Judnich (1925), 71 C.A.386, 235 P. 664, in reference to:
ART II SECT 1: Usurpation of Political power… "To say that one may not defend his own
property is usurpation of power by legislature."

~13. FACT – According to: City of Dallas, et al. v. Mitchell, 245 S. W. 944, 945-46 (1922), "The
rights of the individual are not derived from governmental agencies, either municipal, state, or
federal, or even from the Constitution. They exist inherently in every man, by endowment of the
Creator, and are merely reaffirmed in the Constitution, and restricted only to the extent that they
have been voluntarily surrendered by the citizenship to the agencies of government. The people's
rights are not derived from the government, but the government's authority comes from the
people. The Constitution but states again these rights already existing, and when legislative
encroachment by the nation, state, or municipality invade these original and permanent rights, it
is the duty of the courts to so declare, and to afford the necessary relief.”

~14. FACT – According to: Bell v. Hood, 71 F.Supp., 813, 816 (1947) U.S.D.C. “History is clear
that the first ten amendments to the Constitution were adopted to secure certain common law
rights of the people, against invasion by the Federal Government."

~15. FACT – According to: Billings v. Hall (1857), 7 C. 1., "Right of protecting property,
declared inalienable by constitution, is not mere right to protect it by individual force, but right
to protect it by law of land, and force of body politic." and, "Constitution of this state declares,
among inalienable rights of each citizen, that of acquiring, possessing and protecting property.
This is one of primary objects of government, is guaranteed by constitution, and cannot be
impaired by legislation." Billings v. Hall (1857), 7 C. 1.

~16. FACT – According to: Chambers v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad, 207 U.S. 148, "The right to
sue and defend in the courts is the alternative of force. In an organized society it is the right
conservative of all other rights, and lies at the foundation of orderly government."

~17. FACT – According to: U.S. Judge, in American Communications Association v. Douds, May
1950" It is not the function of our Government to keep the citizen from falling into error; it is the
function of the citizen to keep the Government from falling into error." - Robert H. Jackson
(1892-1954)
~18. FACT – Nowhere has Claimant found any Right or Privilege granted to any agency that
said agency is allowed to ignore Claimants’ demands, as per: Lwin v. I.N.S., 144 F3d 505 (7th
Cir. 1998) “Agencies must respond to the arguments made to them.”

~19. FACT – The United States military (with the assistance of various U.N. forces) invaded
Iraq. The “form of local judicial enforcement” was completely under the pre-established laws of
Iraq, enforced by U.S. (and other) military. The point is: the invading forces enforced the “local”
form of Justice, which means Iraqi courts, NOT U.S. Military Admiralty courts!! Right of
“Postliminy” was in effect at all practical times.

SECTION IV – Oath of TRUST Accepted

Claimants’ acceptance of the Presidential Oath made by the President of the United States of
America (Article 2, Section 1), is a “Binding Agreement” to fulfill his Promise as Executive
Trustee. Claimant has accepted that Oath.

The President’s oath is consideration sufficient to support the simple contract the President
(executive trustee) has with the people [ME] (beneficiaries). He does not have an oath of office.
That is different than an oath. All legislative, executive, and judicial officers performing under
him in his capacity as Commander in Chief have oaths of office. He has a Constitutional Oath.
By “accepting” an Oath, one consummates an agreement, a contract. When you accept for
“value” you are accepting the consideration the United States has offered to you as evidence of
an obligation it has to you as a beneficiary; as well as whatever consideration is offered on the
instrument that is being transferred to you through the U.S. citizen [person] you “represent.”

Claimants’ acceptance of the Presidential Oath is in reference to a “Pre-existing Contract” known

as a “Certificate of Live Birth,” to wit:

1. A person (corporate United States) gives value (certificated security = birth certificate) for
rights [extension of CREDIT] (to create money on the signature of the man = borrow from the
people) as security (promise not to deny or disparage rights of the people) for satisfaction
(acknowledgement of obligation to people) of a preexisting claim (beneficial interest in the Trust
created by the Constitution).

2. A person (state citizen [Mother]) gives value (signature on application for birth certificate)
for rights (to be beneficiary on the trust) as security (promise) for satisfaction (distribution from
the trust) of a preexisting claim (beneficial interest in the trust created by the Constitution).

3. A person (a state, i.e., Missouri, etc.) gives value (Constitution) for rights (to be recognized
internationally) as security (promise to pay creditors of the Confederacy) for satisfaction
(acknowledgment of international law) of a preexisting claim (need for a plan to pay
international creditors).

4. A person (officer in the federal government) gives value (Article VI oath) for rights (to hold
an office) as security (promise to support “this” constitution [of 1789]) for satisfaction
(performance) of a preexisting claim (people’s beneficial interest in the trust created by the
Constitution).

5. A person (a state, i.e., Missouri, etc.) gives value (office in the federal government) for rights
(to be part of the union of American states = federal United States) as security (promise to abide
by terms of Constitution) for satisfaction (performance on terms of Constitution) of a preexisting
claim (promise to pay creditors of the Confederacy).

6. A person (President) gives value (Article II oath) for rights (to be Commander in Chief) as
security (promise to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution) for satisfaction (performance)
of a preexisting claim (people’s beneficial interest in the trust created by the Constitution).

NOTE: – The President of the United States of America, because of his Oath, is the ONLY
EXECUTIVE TRUSTEE of the Trust, of which, I AM THE BENEFICIARY. I am the
HOLDER OF THE NOTE (Birth Certificate). It is the holder who acquires a security interest in
the instrument, IF he takes the instrument for value [which, I have]. It is not the issuer who has
the security interest; it is the holder. The issuer has the liability [U.C.C.].

I have several hundred articles that I have authored to draw from if more clarity is needed.

SECTION V – Reason for “Mis-Trust”

~20. FACT - President Alexander Hamilton said, "We are a republic. Real liberty is never found
in despotism or in the extremes of democracy." And,

~21. FACT - In Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137; 2 L Ed. 60 (1803), we find: “The government
of the United States has been emphatically termed a government of laws, and not of men. It will
certainly cease to deserve this high appellation, if the laws furnish no remedy for the violation of
a vested legal right.” And,

~22. FACT - President Rutherford B. Hayes said, "This is a government of the people, by the
people and for the people NO LONGER. It is a government of corporations, by
corporations, and for corporations"; and,

~23. FACT - Admiralty Law has come inland to, and upon, all soil unless, and, until, a living
Sovereign Man claims otherwise, as per: claim US citizenship is “residence” at 28 USC 3002
(14) & (15), and, here is the law which any such citizen is also subject to: 28 USC 3003 (c)
where Admiralty laws supersede any other law;

Whereas, an "oligarchy" is a government run by the few, the "few" being, without doubt,
attorneys, is the extreme of democracy, the end product of which is mass confusion in the
minds of thoughtful meaningful people with a simple explanation as follows:
 To show that Congress INTENTIONALLY has made the laws unreadable by the average
person, an objective method of measuring the readability of English text must be
discussed. English scholars use a scale known as the "Flesch Index" that measures the
level of understanding necessary for an individual to comprehend the written English
language. Newspapers are written at an average comprehension level of 7. The average
high school graduate reads and understands at a level of 10. The average law school
graduate reads and comprehends at a level of 15. The Internal Revenue Code ranks on
this index at an average level of 31, with some specific provisions as high as 55. And the
words that are used in the law have specific legal definitions that are different from the
common English definitions. If the laws that we are supposed to obey are written at a
level that an individual of reasonable intelligence cannot understand, then perhaps we
should be highly suspect of the law writer's motives. By making the law so difficult to
read, Congress has effectively removed our access to it.

To show how the government uses common English words in such a way that they have
meanings that are different from what you might think, I will show how the word 'state'
is redefined. In the IRS code, it says you are subject to the income tax if you live in: one
of the states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, or the northern Mariana
Islands. From this definition it sounds as if the Code includes the 50 states. But, if you
look at how the IRS defines the word state you probably will be confused. In the
definition of the word state, it uses the word state. If you check this definition in years
back you will see it has been modified several times. Before Alaska was admitted into
the Union, it was in this list of states. After it became one of the states of the Union, it
was not listed in the IRS definition of a state. The same thing happened to Hawaii. What
does this mean? The definition that is used in the IRS code for the word state, is not a
state like Texas but a state like Guam, which is a federal territory.

~24. FACT – According to: Connally et al. v. General Construction Co. 269 U.S 385, 391 (1926)
"And a statute which either forbids or requires the doing of an act in terms so vague that
men of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its
application, violates the first essential of due process of law."

~25. FACT – According to: MAGGIO V. ZEITZ , 333 U.S. 56 (1948) "...But in affirming the
Court said: ‘Although we know that Maggio cannot comply with the order, we must keep a
straight face and pretend that he can, and must thus affirm orders which first direct Maggio
'to do an impossibility, and then punish him for refusal to perform it’." “Whether this is to
be read literally as its deliberate judgment of the law of the case or is something of a decoy
intended to attract our attention to the problem, the declaration is one which this Court, in view
of its supervisory power over courts of bankruptcy, cannot ignore."

CLARITY - The corporate rule of governmental entities has not, does not, and can not
apply to this Claimant, as Claimant is not a factor of Interstate Commerce, the Federals
have written it within the copyrighted Codes, Rules, Statutes, and Regulations other
impossibilities, such as: “But, in fact and in law, such statutes are intended to be applied
to those who are here as "residents" in this State under the Interstate Commerce
Clause of the Federal Constitution and the so-called Fourteenth Amendment.” United
 States v United Mine Workers of America, (1947) 67 S.Ct. 677, 686, 330 U.S. 258.

When, “I am NOT here as a resident of any State (Nation), nor am I “in this State”,
nor a "citizen of the United States" (in Congress assembled) as ALL are fictions/creations
of government and therefore no statutes apply to Claimant as evidenced in above case. I
am a Creature of Nature (the Creator) and therefore am transient by Nature traveling
through Life in intinere, as a neutral, for a short time, on my way to a greater beyond, a
steward of my Fathers land and wishes. My documents of “in intinere” standing are
recorded in the Public for all to see.” See: Dred Scott v. Sanford, 60 US (19 How.) 393,
595 (1857) Justice Curtis, S.Ct..

More confusion:

"Acts of Congress" are not applicable to "sovereigns" [Real People] in the 50 states. 18
USC, Rule 54 C Positive Law enacted -Titles of United States Code.

[They have modified the above rule and moved it to the following:]

Rule 1(b) is composed of material currently located in Rule 54(c), with several
exceptions. First, the reference to an "Act of Congress" has been deleted from the
restyled rules; instead the rules use the self-explanatory term "federal statute." Second,
the language concerning demurrers, pleas in abatement, etc., has been deleted as being
anachronistic. Third, the definitions of "civil action" and "district court" have been
deleted. Fourth, the term "attorney for the government" has been expanded to include
reference to those attorneys who may serve as special or independent counsel under
applicable federal statutes. The term "attorney for the government" contemplates an
attorney of record in the case.

~26. FACT - President Abraham Lincoln after the National Banking Act of 1863 was passed
said, "The money power preys upon the nation in times of peace and conspires against it in times
of adversity. It is more despotic than monarchy, more insolent than autocracy, more selfish than
bureaucracy. I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to
tremble for the safety of my country. Corporations have been enthroned, an era of corruption in
high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its REIGN
by working upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in a few hands and
the Republic is destroyed"; and,

~27. FACT - 28 USC 3002(15)(A): "United States" means a Federal corporation; and,

~28. FACT - The Government of the United States is nothing more than a “person”; as per, 22
USC Sec. 1621 -EXPCITE- TITLE 22 CHAPTER 21 SUBCHAPTER I -HEAD- Sec. 1621.
Definitions -STATUTE- For the purposes of this subchapter - (a) The term 'person' shall include
an individual, partnership, corporation, or the Government of the United States; and,

~29. FACT - In 1871 Congress created a corporation pursuant to powers granted to them.
 st
Recorded in the United States Statutes At Large, 41 Congress, Session III, Chapter 62, Feb. 21,
1871, one finds “An Act to provide a Government for the District of Columbia…a body
st
corporate for municipal purposes…” (1 paragraph). Seven years later they further clarified
th
this Act in the 45 Congress, Session II, Chapter 180, June 11, 1878, where it reads “An Act
providing for a permanent form of government for the District of Columbia…the permanent seat
st
of government of the United States… shall remain and continue a municipal corporation.” (1
paragraph). This legislation gave Congress its lawful power and permission to engage in
transactions in negotiable instruments and do commerce as an independent “legal entity.”

~30. FACT – According to: (quoted at) SCHEUER v. RHODES, 416 U.S. 232, 238 (1974)
However, since Ex parte Young, 209 U.S. 123 (1908), it has been settled that the Eleventh
Amendment provides no shield for a state official confronted by a claim that he had deprived
another of a federal right under the color of state law. Ex parte Young teaches that when a state
officer acts under a state law in a manner violative of the Federal Constitution, he
"comes into conflict with the superior authority of that Constitution, and he is in that
case stripped of his official or representative character and is subjected in his person to
the consequences of his individual conduct. The State has no power to impart to him
any immunity from responsibility to the supreme authority of the United States." Id., at
159-160. (Emphasis supplied.)

~31. FACT - The "intractable" monsters of unruly and seemingly unstoppable corporate
government have played the role of the harlot, where everything is commerce and everything is
for sale, and have, practically and subjectively, hidden behind the harlots skirts of "judicial
immunity," [who “ALSO TRADES AS”] (the “impartial” courts of the “people”), fabricating the
fabled "Gordian's Knot." [Recall, Alexander the Great provided the “solution” to this fabled knot
– with his sword!]; and,

~32. FACT - Rule 45.1 of the Supreme Court Rules, subtitled "Process; Mandates", says; "All
process of this court issues in the name of the President of the United States." For this reason,
Claimant, the Beneficiary to the Trust, requisitions His Trustee, the President of the United
States, through His extended “arm,” the Executive Department named, listed or enumerated at
the heading of this document by way of Claimants’ Exigent Call For Relief to said Executive
Department in order to thwart the “alternative” of physical violence to protect Claimants’
PRIVATE Property.

SECTION IV – Qualified “Plea” for ASSISTANCE

Recapitulation of REAL and TRUE Points of Authority

The purpose of this section is to show that Claimant, in the “Public,” is a non-corporate, non-
enfranchised, Living Man free of all claims of indemnity, charge, levy, penalty, fee, fine, or any
other type of encumbrance. Clearly, the purpose of the Trustee (that’s YOU) of any Trust is to
administer to, and protect, the Beneficiary: ME, Claimant, in all “public” accounts and venues.

NOTICE: This statement solidifies Claimants position in relation to “Pirates upon the Postal
Roads and the Common Way- Inland Piracy.”

To bring clarity to the issue of “which ‘hat’ Claimant is wearing, Claimant is Trusteeand
BAILORin the Private Side [the Source]; Claimant is Beneficiaryin the Public Side.

On the public side, the Birth Certificate represents value, and is evidence of a pledge by a U.S.
citizen to be a surety for the United States. On the public side, it is security for the pledge of
allegiance to the United States and its statutes, made by U.S. citizens.

On the private side, the Birth Certificate is a receipt, and is evidence of a promise made by the
President to the people. On the private side, it is security for the promise of distributions from
the trust to the People as Beneficiaries. It is a Trust Receipt for the use of the baby’s physical
description that was symbolically delivered by an informant (Mom) to the United States. The
setoff resulting from accepting an instrument for value is a distribution from the trust.

ALL is in reference to a “Pre-existing Contract” known as a “Certificate of Live Birth,” to wit:

1. A person (corporate United States) gives value (certificated security = birth
certificate) for rights (to create money on the signature of the man = borrow from the
people) as security (promise not to deny or disparage rights of the people) for satisfaction
(acknowledgement of obligation to people) of a preexisting claim (beneficial interest in
the trust created by the Constitution).
2. A person (state citizen [by Mother]) gives value (signature on application for birth
certificate) for rights (to be beneficiary on the trust) as security (promise) for satisfaction
(distribution from the trust) of a preexisting claim (beneficial interest in the trust created by the
Constitution).
3. A person (a state, i.e., Missouri, etc.) gives value (Constitution) for rights (to be recognized
internationally) as security (promise to pay creditors of the Confederacy) for satisfaction
(acknowledgment of international law) of a preexisting claim (need for a plan to pay
international creditors).
4. A person (officer in the federal government) gives value (Article VI oath) for rights (to hold
an office) as security (promise to support “this” constitution) for satisfaction (performance) of a
preexisting claim (people’s beneficial interest in the trust created by the Constitution).

5. A person (a state, i.e., Arkansas, etc.) gives value (office in the federal government) for
rights (to be part of the union of American states = federal United States) as security (promise to
abide by terms of Constitution) for satisfaction (performance on terms of Constitution) of a
preexisting claim (promise to pay creditors of the Confederacy).

6. A person (President) gives value (Article II oath) for rights (to be Commander in Chief) as
security (promise to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution) for satisfaction (performance)
of a preexisting claim (people’s beneficial interest in the trust created by the Constitution).
The President of the United States of America, because of his Oath, is the ONLY EXECUTIVE
TRUSTEE of the Trust, of which, I AM THE BENEFICIARY. I am the HOLDER OF THE
NOTE (Birth Certificate). It is the holder who acquires a security interest in the instrument if
said holder takes the instrument for value. It is not the issuer who has the security interest; it is
the holder. The issuer has the liability.

CONCLUSION: For all practical purposes, the Postmaster General of the United States of
America is the SOLVENT executive agent/agency of the Presidential Branch and is directed to
settle all financial matters wherein balance, continuity and harmony in commerce has not been
rendered and the United States Coast Guard is the Presidential Agency over and within The
Admiralty Jurisdiction. Claimant (that’s ME) exercises His Right of Subrogation and herein
does appoint the Commandant (G-OPL) of the United States Coast Guard as Successor Trustee
over all corporeal matters wherein Claimant is Injured; further, Claimant herein directs said
Commander to place restrictions upon all polity enforcers of the “Public” realm exercising
implied, but not Real, jurisdiction over Living Men (of both genders) upon the Post Roads and
the Common Way acting only in a corporate de facto capacity as Privateers, Pirates and other un-
common Thieves to refrain from harassment, delay, impeding, restricting, levying, or in any non-
lawful manner prohibiting commerce and travel in the Private Sector by Private Men.

SIMPLY STATED, Claimant would have no charge against corporate entities with ostentatious
exhibition of red and blue lights fastened upon Privateering and Pirating vessels IF their policies
were clearly enforced within certain parameters of corporate and other fictional legal entity
characters. The bankrupt corporations of STATE OF ARKANSAS, BOONE COUNTY and
CITY OF HARRISON may keep a kennel of Pit Bull dogs to protect their corporate property if
they choose. If their Pit Bull dogs injure me, damage my property, abscond with my private
property, or detain me to “sniff my shorts,” or in any other way impede my commerce, they have
created an injury against me, a theft of my private possessions, removed me from my potential,
and trespassed against a Living Man (non-corporate) and solidified treason against their Oath to
be a “Good Pit Bull.” The “owner” of a dog is responsible for the dogs’ damages to others.

Now, I regress to recall a statement from an earlier related document. Certain “maxim of law”
brings clarity to this situation, to wit: “As a thing is bound, so it is unbound.” In plain language,
those Pirates (police) with a third-grade bully mentality that have been issued badges, guns,
clubs, tazers, mace, handcuffs, etc., etc., are not to be argued with [when you argue with a fool,
two fools argue]. It does no good (as I have attempted) to reason with them OR THEIR
STUPERIORS, as they are the machinery that feeds the Beast of Fraud [all involved are
beneficiaries of the Fraud]. This is the main reason my appeal and plea is to you, their Higher
Power. Those are YOUR DOGS, please get them back on a leash. The two “really bad” dogs that
tore into my flesh, I cordially request and corporeally demand that they be quarantined and not
allowed back into Society until I, the Injured Party, deem [to my satisfaction] that they have
successfully graduated from Obedience School. The two female guardian dogs stationed at the
BOONE COUNTY JAIL that stole merchandise from me should be punished in like manner with
lesser stipulations, however, the one male guardian dog stationed at the BOONE COUNTY JAIL
that paced around saying, “I’m agonna knock his fuckin’ false teeth outa his fuckin’ hayud” shall
receive a much harsher punishment. If any of the alleged “dogs” refuse discipline and obedience
training, I recommend that their doghouse, food bowl and water dish be taken and given in
recompense for their injuries and they be banished and quarantined from those in the Private
FOREVER, without opportunity for parole.

SECTION V – Plain Language for sake of Clarity

As stated elsewhere within this set of documents, Claimant is NOT an “enemy combatant” nor
an “enemy of the State,” according to documents delivered (via Claimants’ Notary Witness) to
Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice’s Office, Chief of Protocol, approximately two years ago
establishing that Claimant is NOT an Enemy of the State, contrary to all U.S. citizens under Title
50. Corresponding and complementary documents in the Nature of Secured Party Creditor that
has EXTENDED HIS OFFER OF CREDIT was sent, at the same time, to Henry M. Paulson,
Junior, Secretary of the Treasury. [Do you really think that China will continue to “fund” the
extensions of fiat surety for corporate “government”?]

If the office of Chief of Protocol, Secretary of States’ Office had done their duty as required, the
minions of lesser intelligence that assume powers over Sovereigns that they do not possess
would have been notified to let Claimant alone (DND, do not detain). An “identification” status
should have been instituted to readily notify “them” of their lack of jurisdiction. This
identification is not to protect Claimant from piss-ant polity code enforcers; but, this alleged
“I.D.” is designed to protect the “public” from Claimant when the ramifications of their
incompetence they, so stupidly, usurp over a Creditor, Stock Holder of the Trust, and Secured
Party comes against them (the Public).

I reiterate: Proverbs 29:19 “A servant will not be corrected by words: for though he
understand he will not answer.” Claimant is the Injured Party by “his own servants,” the
Trustees for the Public Trust. I am the Beneficiary. The “Duty” of the Trustee(s) is/are to protect
and provide for the Beneficiary. All Oaths of the various offices of government have been
accepted by Claimant to form a binding CONTRACT between [all of] them (thee) and Me. At no
time did Claimant voluntarily take, assume or hold any position of Trustee of the Public Trust.

Claimant has taken Oath and made Law as recorded within the Public Domain under the
umbrella of Common Law,* established within the Holy Writ; Claimant, by necessity, traverses
the penumbra of commerce under the direction of “Ye are in this world: but, are not of this
world;” and, Claimant bears, at all times, the panoply of Bloodshed from the time of Righteous
“Abel” through the Sacrifice of the Holy Son of Yahweh; then, through the sacrifice of
Claimants’ lineal ancestors that died in the discoveries and settlement of the Merica Continent by
the Templars of Scotland around 1296 A.D. and, then, through the Bloodshed of Claimants’
lineal ancestors that died in the Revolutionary War, also known as the War of Independence.

IF TRUSTEES OF THE PUBLIC TRUST had performed their Duties as required, no conflict
would ever have arisen. Claimant DID Notice all the heads of agencies in proper manner. This
situation MUST be corrected immediately and restitution MUST be made to this Injured Man
with full restoration and remedy. You: Trustee(s) of the Public Trust: are herein directed to
correct this/these problem(s) [Notice to Agent is Notice to Principal]. (Hosea 8:4.Therefore, one
must be wise and attentive, since there are those among us who make kings and set up princes
outside His law.)

"If we know the truth, we must tell it; if we don't, we must learn it!"

The purpose of our Constitution is to create a government that protects people from each other.

The purpose of our Bill of Rights is to protect each of us from our government.

*On Oct 4th 1982 Congress passed SJR 165, 96 stat 1211 public law 97-280, 96STAT.
1211 (97th Congress) CONGRESS DECLARES BIBLE "THE WORD OF GOD"

I, :John-Quincy: Jones, Claimant and Injured Party, Private Man upon the Soil, am calling upon
my government for protection.

:John-Quincy: Jones, sui juris