The 1952 Uniform Commercial Code.
This article may confuse and blow many minds, however we at Sovereign Australian believe all need to know and comprehend how far the rabbit hole actually goes.
This is a controversial subject to say the least and many may even say its a conspiracy theory ,however when one combines this information with all the other evidence uncovered it paints a more complete picture.
The Governments of todays world are not our freinds this should be evident by now.
We ask that you have an open mind and make your own conclusions.
So what is UCC and What is the strawman ?
In the United States it was the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) that expanded, standardized, and stabilized sales law.
(The Uniform Sales Act of 1906 was the precursor to Article 2 of the UCC, although not as widely adopted.)
The official text of the UCC was published in 1952, included both express and implied warranties, and has been adopted in some form by the entire United States.
In 1975 the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act ensured that sellers of consumer products clearly state the coverage of warranties.
The United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) provided similar warranty rights and duties for certain buyers and sellers involved in global commerce.
CISG was originally passed in 1980 and was adopted by almost 80 countries, including the United States.
Its warranty provisions (Articles 35–44) were tailored after the UCC but contained some distinctions.
The freedom to contract as desired was a much-protected legal principle under early common law and still is in many ways.
Caveat emptor, let the buyer beware, was a natural consequence of such a principle, since the parties were entitled to enter into a contract as they chose.
However, the freedom was not so absolute as to ignore how fraud or duress would impair such freedom and the resulting contract.
In that same vein, failure to satisfy a promise regarding the quality or type of good would also invalidate a contract as failing to meet its warranty, though the warranty was required to be expressly communicated.
In the United States it was not until the late 1800s that warranty doctrine was expanded to include positive affirmations or representations about the character or quality of an article sold.
An implied warranty of safety for food and drink began in the early 1900s and was then expanded to include consumer products in the 1960s.
Originally, warranties also contained a privity requirement—i.e., any duties or protections imposed were extended only to those directly involved in the sales transaction.
To protect the consumer, the privity requirement was slowly reduced and then completely discarded as industrialized society distanced manufacturers and consumers and thus decreased the built-in safeguards of face-to-face contracts.
With no privity, manufacturers, sellers, and lessors became responsible to the ultimate consumer under warranty, negligence (conduct that fails to protect others against a reasonable risk of harm), and strict liability (legal responsibility for injury or damages, whether or not the liable party was negligent) theories for the quality and safety of their goods and services.
Horizontal privity was also relaxed so as to extend warranty coverage to the buyer’s family, household, and guests and even to bystanders in some states.
During this same period, tort law was also addressing product safety through the theories of negligence and then strict liability.
Although there is some convergence in the coverage, warranties are based in contract, not in tort, and are a bit more limited in the amount of damages available as a remedy.
Contract law is governed by the common law and the Uniform Commercial Code “UCC.”
Common law governs contractual transactions with real estate, services, insurance, intangible assets and employment.
UCC governs contractual transaction with goods and tangible objects (such as a purchase of a car).
Uniform Commercial Code (Strawman)
(uniformed commercial code) is an international body of statutory law which governs commerce beetween nations.
The code only applies to Atificial Persons or Corporations.
So this raises the qestion ‘why would I, a Natural Person, choose to contract into such agreement’?
UCC Law is the highest expression of law as it is commonly manifested in the world.
Meaning to say the basis upon which all contracts exist.
Contracts both visible and invisible between people of the world and the (corporation) governments, (corporation) agencies, (corporation) banks and (corporation) institutions, which commandeer and govern our lives and livelihoods.
UCC or Uniform Commercial Code also over-arches and underpins the codes of exchange between all agencies, governments and institutions between and amongst themselves.
All human affairs are thereby governed by such contracts, which are made, assumed or foisted upon them.
Once mankind awakens to UCC law and learns how NOT to contract, how to REVOKE contracts and how to RESCIND and REDACT signatures and subjugation to the fictions – then we will be rid of the covert systems of control and manipulation (enslavement) which all seek to be freed from.
The UCC Connection to Our Slavery & How to Access Our Strawman Account
The fundamental truth is that we are slaves because of our own incompetence.
We are incompetent because we are made ignorant of how the system actually works.
That failure to educate us on how the system works is the first breach of contract committed by our self-imposed Trustee.
If you so desire to educate and become competent about the mechanics of your own slavery so that you may regain your freedom back, you need to know these….
The UCC Connection – How the Uniform Commercial Code ‘secretly took over’ the world.
“I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves, be wise as a serpent and harmless as a dove.” – Howard Freeman
The UCC ‘took over’ all contractual arrangements during the bankruptcy since lawful money did not exist as of 1933.
The clarity afforded the average Joe when it comes to applying the Law to his advantage is about as clear as mud pie; no transparency.
The methods presented in the following are more passive ways of dealing with our legal system, basically by ‘boxing the judge in a corner.’
Instead of having to go into court guns blazing I just ask honest questions transparently and the rest just falls into place.
There are some amazing warriors out there in the field of sovereign man/woman techniques, Dean Clifford is an example.
Sometimes, the system is so corrupt there is no choice but to be the Warrior; and jail time may be the result. Dean has many different approaches and is willing to invoke the Warrior, and like most, humble warriors would rather avoid conflict – settle out of court.
In the Harmless as a Dove approach, we are asking questions in a cooperative manner, we genuinely want them to reveal themselves but because their system is so dependent on secrecy they will want to avoid disclosing their fraud.
Here we have a lot of conceptual clarity. Howard Freeman, does a wonderful job at articulating the concepts in plain English making this understandable point of view.
Howard Freeman reveal’s:
– The story behind why the UCC “secretly took over” all legal/lawful matters on the planet;
– How the UCC works to resolve agreements instead of contracts;
– How to reserve your rights under the UCC;
– How to dispel presumptions in court; with examples and scenarios.
Because of the Bankruptcy of the United States, Inc. in 1933 we have been “keeping tabs” of all our “debts” using accounting and negotiable instruments.
I refer to this as a ‘Global Financial System’ or ‘IOU system’ and use terms to describe the concepts involved but this whole idea is very cryptic.
The words Statements and Bills mean something completely different under Commerce than they do in our everyday usage.
Winston Shrout has a powerful grasp of this knowledge.
Lets look at the definition of a negotiable instrument from the UCC:
3-104. NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT.
(a) Except as provided in subsections (c) and (d), “negotiable instrument” means an unconditional promise or order to pay a fixed amount of money, with or without interest or other charges described in the promise or order…
As you can see “promise or order to pay a fixed amount of money” means the same as an IOU.
I.O.U. ∞ $ Infinity plus Interest
All Federal Reserve Notes are IOU’s backed by the labor of the people.
This ‘Global Financial System’ is similar to a global IOU system, because no lawful money exists – we exchange IOU’s and never actually “settle the accounts” with real money.
Lawful money is backed by real things. Before1933, you exchanged a gallon of milk for a dollar, which is a promise to pay gold or silver; real value for real value.
Now, because the US Dollar is the global reserve currency, based on fractional reserve banking that requires interest to be imposed constantly on the debtor’s, all nations and all over the world are forced under this IOU system with infinite debt due to interest for our children’s children.
Under this system, you exchange a gallon of milk for a promise to pay “nothing plus interest”, that’s what money became after 1933.
Final point, since the money is worthless, literally and lawfully, but you exchange something of real value – your labor – we are getting scammed at a phenomenal rate! It is Literal slavery.
Normal contract law could not function – there was no way to actually provide consideration for services under Common Law and Equity Contracts without lawful money.
Since Common Law (criminal) and Equity Law (contracts) require remedy or exchanges of real value, the entire ‘Justice System’ was turned upside down.
A new system needed to be created which appeared lawful, but was not in any true sense – as long as there was a presumption of true law (colorable), the average joe would be none the wiser.
This is the system we know to today as UCC, the Uniform Commercial Code.
The UCC deals with presumptive agreements, instead of true contracts which have full transparency; and knowing willing and intentional consent of all parties involved.
Instead of contracts being enforceable only if all parties agreed knowingly, willingly and intentionally, now Agreements can be enforced based on essentially cured statements or presumptions.
If I make a ‘ presumptive statement’ with ‘material evidence’ – a bill from your creditor with some numbers on it that ‘suggests’ a contract exist – and you do not rebut this statement, it cure’s under the UCC given a period of time.
This portion of the Julian’s Debt Contesting Experience – OPPT Success Stories describes the concept:
A contract requires transparency and agreement of the parties involved.
Did you sign with your wet ink signature making a new contract with this third party? No you did not and the way they get around that is by asking for you to send them payment, even if it is very small. This creates a legal (but now lawful) basis for contract which they can then try and use against you.
Legal but not lawful? How does that make sense, lets take a look.
The legal basis is referred to as Tacit Procuration.
Understood or implied without being stated and
The act by which one person gives power to another to act in his place, as he could do himself.
A letter of attorney.
Procurations are either express or implied; an express procuration is one made by the express consent of the parties; the implied or tacit takes place when an individual sees another managing his affairs, and does not interfere to prevent it.
Consent for Procurations can be ‘implied’ by failure to respond or ‘stand up and state otherwise.’
Given these meanings what we can understand is FAILURE to respond is CONSENT.
We must REBUT the PRESUMPTIONS that this new third party has any claim to the debt.
Contesting the debt with a written statement is, in law, absolutely effective as a means of rebutting the presumptions and REMOVES the IMPLICATION that this undisclosed third party may have PROCURED the claim on the debt by TACITUS means.
It is unlawful because in order for a contract to be binding and enforceable there must be a “meeting of the minds” or full disclosure and transparency.
A-party to a contract that sells off their interest to a new party without the express consent of ALL parties involved (which means your explicit consent) is unenforceable in law, unless you unwittingly allow them Tacit Procuration by NOT rebutting their presumptions and responding to their offer to contract.
Under the UCC you must assert your rights in advance of any presumptive circumstance in order to secure them.
What is a presumptive circumstance?
When you are pulled over and you hand the Police Officer your Corporate Identification documents (your drivers license) there is presumption you are working for the United States, Inc, are an agent of government, knowingly consenting to be subject to ALL Statues and Rules under their Corporate system.
It’s as if you are saying: “because I wear Nike shoes I work for Nike and have to follow the rules as an employee of Nike.”
“I reserve my rights WITHOUT PREJUDICE UCC 1-308”
This is the state of affairs on planet earth.
Deceptive acts and practices.
It is this same system that the now reconciled One Peoples Public Trust used to foreclose on all banks and Corporations masquerading as Government in late 2012.
Reserve your rights or loose them!
A statement of “I reserve all my rights without prejudice UCC 1-308” prevents any presumptive contracts from being asserted; however actually using this can be more complex.
One should be well prepared with key knowledge and understanding before trying to apply anything that goes against the grain – in my opinion.
It is important to understand our society is based mainly on these presumptive offers to contract.
The IRS is a prime example of an unlawful presumptive organization.
It asserts the presumption you are a taxpayer when under all the Statues of the US we are tax payers and only pay taxes by government granted privilege; i.e. you are an agent of government or you are earning income in a way that was enabled by the government (tax shelter from foreign earned income for example).
Here is what Without Prejudice UCC 1-308 means from the UCC:
1–308. Performance or Acceptance Under Reservation of Rights.
(a) A party that with explicit reservation of rights performs or promises performance or assents to performance in a manner demanded or offered by the other party does not thereby prejudice the rights reserved. Such words as “without prejudice,” “under protest,” or the like are sufficient.
The method of articulation seems intentionally cryptic – they are trying to hide the meaning in plain sight; lets analyze.
“Explicit reservation of rights”
means, you make a statement, just like they make statements, that your rights are totally yours without any presumption to the contrary.
“Performs or promises performance or assents to performance in a manner demanded or offered by the other party” means, if you get duped or coerced into an agreement – even if you were not aware of it – the agreement will not be enforceable under the UCC system, if you assert your rights beforehand – “without prejudice UCC 1-308.”
There are presumptions to contract everywhere in society.
The UCC is designed to be based on statements, which go un-rebutted, and then become enforceable.
Transparency is your friend.
And as we often say : Know Thyself.
Be aware of who you are and how that BEingness extends outwardly everywhere.
There is only ONE of us after all and this one makes up all things.
You are your greatest asset and investing in the knowledge of yourself and how that relates to this world you live in and how it works will be your greatest tool.
This is slightly condensed, casually paraphrased transcript of tapes of a seminar given in 1990 by Howard Freeman.
It was prepared to make available the knowledge and experience of Mr. Freeman in his search for an accessible and understandable explanation of the confusing state of the government and the courts.
It should be helpful to those who may have difficulty learning from such lectures, or those who want to develop a deeper understanding of this information without having to listen to three or four hours of recorded material.
The frustration many men and woman globally feel about our judicial system can be overwhelming and often frightening; and like most, fear, eventually, with the seemingly tyrannical power of some governmental agency and the mystifying and awesome power of the courts.
We have been taught that we must “get a good lawyer,” but that is becoming increasingly difficult, if not impossible.
If we are defending ourselves from the government, we find that the lawyers quickly take our money, and then tell us as the ship is sinking, “I can’t help you with that – I’m an officer of the court.”
Ultimately, the only way for us to have even a “snowball’s chance …” is to understand the RULES OF THE GAME, and to come to an understanding of the true nature of the Law.
After all if one commits no harm to another being there is no real crime committed, there has to be a injured party.
The attorney lawyers have established and secured a virtual monopoly over this area of mankinds knowledge by implying that the subject is just too difficult for the average person to understand, and by creating a separate vocabulary out of English words of otherwise common usage.
While it may, at times, seem hopelessly complicated, it is not that difficult to grasp – are lawyers really as smart as they would have us believe? Besides, anyone who has been through a legal battle against the government with the aid of a lawyer has come to realize that lawyers learn about procedure, not about law.
Mr. Freeman admits that he is not a lawyer, and as much, he has a way of explaining law to us that puts it well within our reach.
Consider also that the framers of the Constitution wrote in language simple enough that the people could understand, specifically so that it would not have to be interpreted.
So again we find, as in many other areas of life, that “THE BUCK STOPS HERE!”
It is we who must take the responsibility for finding and putting to good use the TRUTH.
It is we who must claim and defend our God-given rights and our freedom from those who would take from us.
It is we who must protect ourselves, our families and our posterity from the inevitable intrusion into our lives by those who live parasitically off the labor, skill and talents of others.
To these ends, Mr. Freeman offers a simple, hopeful explanation of our plight and a peaceful method of dealing with it.
Please take note that parts of this article only represents one chapter in the book of his understanding, which he is always refining, expanding, improving.
It is, as all bits of wisdom are, a point of departure from which to begin our own journey into understanding, that we all might be able to pass on to others; greater knowledge and hope, and to God: the gift of lives in peace, freedom and praise.
“I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves, be wise as a serpent and harmless as a dove.”
Meet Your Strawman!
Capitis Diminutio Maxima
(Name in ALL CAPITALS
Your straw man (Strawman) is an artificial person created by law at the of your birth, the inscription of an ALL-CAPITAL LETTERS NAME on your birth certificate/document, which is a document of title and a negotiable instrument.
Your lawful, Christian name of birthright was replaced with a legal, corporate name of deceit and fraud.
Your name in upper and lower case letters (Jane Mary Doe) has been answering when the legal person, your name in ALL-CAPTIAL LETTERS (JANE MARY DOE), is addressed, and therefore the two have been recognized as being one and the same. When, you Jane Mary Doe, the lawful being distinguish yourself as another party than the legal person, the two will be separated.
Legally, since your birth your artificial person, has been considered a slave or indentured servant to the various federal, provincial and municipal governments via your STATE-issued, STATE-created birth certificate in the name of your all-caps person.
Your birth certificate was issued so that the issuer could claim “exclusive” title to the legal person created.
This was further compounded when you voluntarily obtained a driver’s license and a SSN (Social Security Number).
The state even owns your personal and private life through your STATE-issued marriage license/certificate issued in the all-caps names.
You have had no rights in birth, marriage, nor will you have them even in death unless you re-capture your straw man.
(The names on tombstones in cemeteries are in all-caps.)
The STATE holds the title to your legal person it created via your birth certificate, until Jane Mary Doe, the rightful owner, the holder in due course of the instrument, that is yourself, reclaims/redeems it.
On April 5, 1933, then President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, under Executive Order, issued April 5, 1933, declared:
“All persons are required to deliver on or before May 1, 1933 all Gold Coin, Gold Bullion, & Gold Certificates now owned by them to a Federal Reserve Bank, branch or agency, or to any member bank of the Federal Reserve System.”
James A. Farley, Postmaster General at that time, required each postmaster in the country to post a copy of the Executive Order in a conspicuous place within each branch of the Post Office. On the bottom of the posting was the following:
CRIMINAL PENALTIES for VIOLATION of EXECUTIVE ORDER
$10,000 fine or 10 years imprisonment, or both, as provided in Section 9 of the order.
Let all this sink in
Be sure to go through the links provided for a better comprehension of the UCC and the trespass against you’re individual sovereignty