Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
A Working Hypothesis about Sovereign Status Recognition

A Working Hypothesis about Sovereign Status Recognition

Ratings: (0)|Views: 37|Likes:
Published by Master Loki
A rough draft document outlining the legal theory behind my current hypothesis about how to reclaim individual sovereignty from the State.
A rough draft document outlining the legal theory behind my current hypothesis about how to reclaim individual sovereignty from the State.

More info:

Published by: Master Loki on Mar 11, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





A Working Hypothesis about Sovereign Status Recognition
by Loki, 11
March 2012
For about the last 15 months, since early 2010, I have been researching and experimenting with legal theoriesabout sovereignty. Just to give some background, prior to the beginning of my foray into the question of sovereignty, I had spent about a year intensively studying Austrian Economic theory, and a notable, and by meregarded as the 'Grandfather' in office of Austrian Theory, Hans-Hermann Hoppe, logical theory about law and property essentially points out something that I consider to be the essential root of sovereignty, expressed in amanner which is more clear and concise as to explaining from where sovereignty originates.The essence of his theory is that since no matter what obligations may be presumed upon a person, there is no-one else who has any control over the capacity to initiate action within the human body, than the seeminglyinvisible entity often called by various people the 'spirit' that animates us, which is produced of course by theactivity of the brain, which in humans is uniquely capable of modulating instinctive drives to serve theachievement of ends via a selection of means to gain these results. Ludwig von Mises expresses it thusly: allhuman action is rational, and any action that may seem to others to be 'irrational' is not in fact without a rational basis, as is well known in the Garbage In Garbage Out principle of computer science, rather that the invisiblerating system which a person so acting uses to determine their decisions, is different, and maybe not based uponreality but a distorted filter that is not based on intersubjective or objective reality, the data they are basing their decisions and from those decisions, deciding actions which do not achieve what outside observers consider to be the desirable results.So, the first piece of data that I am basing my hypothesis is that this ability to control one's own actions makesone's physical body an unalienable, absolute right. Even when faced with overwhelming force constrainingone's ability to exercise this sovereign exclusive power over one's body, there is always a slim margin of freedom that cannot ultimately be taken away. This is often spoken of by people who have suffered fromenslavement, that no matter what the slave masters try to do, they cannot entirely separate a person from their ability to think independently, and from this grain of freedom with ongoing application to maximising freedomand finding a way out of slavery. I am designating this exclusive ability to control one's own thoughts to be theroot of sovereignty.There is of course techniques that tyrants can use to try and fill people's minds with ideas that diminish further this freedom, brainwashing and persuasion, but ultimately it is impossible to entirely contain the human spiritwithin an externally imposed box, and given enough time people who hold strongly to this one piece of  property that they can maintain control over, eventually subjugation is ended. Sometimes it is slow, sometimesit is fast, it depends on how deeply ingrained these mental, conceptual prisons are within the minds of a groupof people who are subjugated mainly by force. No such notional confinement is entirely watertight, mainly because such subjugation is at odds with the factual reality of human experience. Mental prisons are always based upon absurd and illogical premises and it is through recognition of this contradiction that humans can slipout of the prison and move from there to liberation in society at large.
Sovereignty of the State and the Concept of Allegiance
The premise upon which all systems of government are based is the voluntary or presumed assignment of all but the grain of sovereignty to a State by people in exchange for an offered protection of people from themischief of those with criminal intent to transfer property or rights to things. This is of course a fraudulent idea, because the only way to protect any given individual person's rights and properties would require a full-timeguard including not just mercenary type soldier/guards, but also lawyers, who would enable the protectionagainst incursions into intangible properties of people. This is of course impossible because it would mean for every individual there has to be at least two people, or at least two functions, that of physical and mentaldefence against criminality. Ultimately, based on the principle of unalienable sovereignty outlined above, allindividual human beings are responsible for their own actions and for their own protection.Embodied in statutes like the Cestui Que Vie Act 1666 (“CQV”) of the UK parliament is a presumption bygovernments to claim any property or rights not properly defended by the rightful claimants to these things, areautomatically reverted to the State. The State then has further obfuscated the means to assert such a reclamationof property reverted to be held in trust by the State in order to produce the result as discussed above, of creatinga 'mental prison' in which people are controlled and restricted in their actions not by the boundaries of thePage 1 of 7
 property of others, but by intangible ideas that are propagated to further the interests of those who gain benefits by being the agents of the State in a monopoly of these reverted claims, which is properly speaking a breach of trust by these agents – a trustee does not have the right to privately profit from publicly entrusted resources, but because the people at large have swallowed the lie that an intangible entity animated only by its agents, theState, has the exclusive right to claim anything unclaimed by default.It was the CQV that made it such that allegiance to the State claiming exclusive jurisdiction in a region of landis assumed and that therefore reclaiming this sovereignty, granted through this process of automatic allegiance,is something that has to be understood and acted upon by a person desirous of claiming back the sovereigntygranted in this automatic pledging of allegiance. The general concept in law for what kind of law is involved inthis process is 'Positive Law', which is in contrast to 'Negative Law', and these principles correlate to what isknown in computer science but also in other fields, such as reputation systems in commerce, correlative toWhitelists and Blacklists. The CQV functions as the equivalent of a whitelist. Only that which is expresslydesignated as being different from the default can be regarded as such. This is of course much the same as the principles of law of 'innocent until proven guilty' which is a negative law principle, contrasted with the way thatmodern State run Courts operate especially in relation to offences that have no actual victim, but are instead aviolation of custom codified into statutory law.By this process of Positive Law, we find ourselves in a position that in order to expand the boundaries of our individual sovereignty beyond what has been left for us by the State, now diminished to the extent that evenmany forms of speech are highly regulated, that we have to express in the form of a declaration that is properlyformed and certified. It is my personal opinion that unless people start to reclaim their sovereignty that the Statewill expand to totality and render the bulk of humanity, perhaps even more than 99%, as effectively to beslaves, having the sole sovereignty, further damaged and limited by propaganda, of the exclusive control over their own thoughts. To this end, I have been researching the law for the last 15 months to figure out what themethod by which recognition can be achieved of sovereignty.
Notary Acknowledgement and the Apostille Convention
The Hague Apostille Convention is a treaty between many, but not all nations, of a means to have an instrument(legal document) become 'legalised', which is another way of saying, that the document can then be recognisedas being valid, between the sovereign jurisdictions of the various governments who have ratified thisconvention. There is a number of conditions limiting what kinds of documents may have an Apostille affixed tothem, one of them is some kind of notary certification. Notary certificates consist of some kind of claim that is witnessed by a notary and is then signed by the notary,underneath the signature is a stamp specifying the qualification and name of the notary, a sticker is affixed tothe right of the signature and qualification, and then the seal sticker is embossed and the signature also has thesame emboss done. The reason for the embossing is it is difficult to duplicate an embossing plate withouthaving access to the original, it is not easy to take the embossed paper and make an embossing plate out of it.The signature is embossed over as well for the same reason, to further protect against parties other than theregistered notary from being able to produce such certificates.The following are the different types of notary certificates, sometimes also called 'Jurats' which notaries canapply to a document:1.There is the 'True Copy' certificate, which affirms that a duplicate of a document is a faithfulreproduction of another document, at least in regards to the substance of it (being the words and imageson the document).2.There is also the Affidavit, which is an attestation of the taking of an oath or affirmation by a personupon the content of a legal instrument to be true and its effect is to render the author swearing to theveracity of the contents of the document subject to the penalty of perjury if it can be proven that theauthor of the document intends to defraud via the claims therein embodied.3.Finally, there is a type of notary certificate usually called 'Acknowledgement' which is simply anattestation that the person named in the qualification underneath their signature, is in fact the personwho is claiming this is the case, that the signature was applied to the document by this person.Apostilles are a further type of notary certification, which are only allowed to be affixed to an instrument by thePage 2 of 7
secretary of state, or the equivalent within a government hierarchy, which is the office that handles foreignrelations, these are the most senior agents of the State who are permitted to make agreements between thesovereign governments, such as treaties.For all governments, which is to say, pretty much all of them, a notary certificate is sufficient to allow adocument to be recognised in a foreign jurisdiction, but to further improve the protection against forgery, theApostille was invented as a means to get certification extended beyond the simple notary acknowledgementsuch that all signatories to the Apostille Convention will then accept such a document, originating from,usually, the 'private capacity' of the author of an instrument.To clarify, 'private capacity' means an act (authoring of a document) that does not involve a public entity, whichis usually just another way of saying a branch of government. Such instruments can include private contracts between people and declarations, which are usually referred to as 'Deeds' or 'Titles', which usually involve anindividual human or an entity staking a claim upon some piece of property or right.
The Extrinsic Fraud of Birth Certificates as Identification
An example of such a deed or title is the filing of the record of the birth of a child. Such instruments arecompleted and filed by a person in their private capacity. The reason for this is that, as an intangible, fictionalentity as the government cannot produce real (or moveable), physical property. Only a living flesh and bloodhuman being is capable of producing a child, for example. Thus the record of such an act by a living human being can only be made in their private capacity.These deeds, therefore, memorialise an event that is outside of the ownership of the State. In the specific case of  birth registrations, therefore, the registry that accepts such filings of public records of events is thereforeholding such titles and deeds in trust, as the granting of this title can only be done in the private capacity of theauthor of such deeds, it cannot logically be said that such an instrument is the property of the State, but rather that the State is obliged to ensure that the record is kept for public inspection and protected from loss. Theseobligations are the essential components of what a trustee does in a trust agreement. The trustee does not gainthe right to personally profit from the property entrusted to them, for this would be a breach of trust.The fact of it being a trust arrangement, the filing of a record of birth, is not made explicit, for the reason of it being the basis of a package of information which is intended to then be used by the State in an act of extrinsicfraud. Extrinsic fraud means deception through omission of information vital to determining the proper courseof action by the victims of such fraud. Intrinsic fraud, to contrast, means to fabricate information. Since theinformation is produced by the party making such a record, it cannot be said that the State is engaging inintrinsic fraud, because the information is not produced by them.By not expressing this arrangement as an expressed trust agreement, they can then use the information to createa new instrument, in this case being a file record in the database of the registry accepting such lodgements of records to be acknowledged and recognised by the public. This transcription of the original filing then allows itto be implicit that anything issued out of this record is the property of the State. The form which this takes is theBirth Certificate.The fraud comes into this because this certificate is in fact issued from the transcript, and not authorised by theoriginal author of the original filing. It is often written upon the birth certificates issued by the registries of many governments stipulating that the birth certificate is not to be used as identification, while at the same timerequiring the presentation of this document in order to establish accounts for receiving the services of the State.By requiring the presentation of the Birth Certificate, or other instruments which require the presentation of theBirth Certificate in order to establish accounts, be they directly with the government or corporations under a public charter issued by the State, they acquire the tacit agreement that the person presenting such an instrumentas identification is acting as an agent of the State, and by this, bound then to the rules governing the activities of the State, also known as “Acts” or “Statutes” and deceptively referred to as Laws, which, unqualified, is afraudulent label, because they are only the laws of those in the employ or service of the State.This then permits the state to prosecute persons deemed to have breached these rules governing the activities of the State and its' agents, and is the fundamental basis of 'victimless crimes' such as possession of contrabanditems such as drugs or weapons, or the violation of transport department rules such as running a red light thatdoes not lead to any harm to any other person's property. These are marketed by the State as being in thePage 3 of 7

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->