Sat Mar 23, 2024 11:33 pm by globalturbo
Are You a "Hue-Man"? The Entrapment Game on a Global Scale
by Anna von Reitz
For the last year or so I keep knocking into bright-eyed, bushy-tailed idealists preaching about the Universal Declaration of Human Rights promoted by the United Nations.
A "hue-man" by legal definition is not a man (or woman). It is a "color of Man"--- something that appears to be a man, but not and isn't actually, similar to "color of law"-- a statute or other representation that appears to be a law, but isn't.
Another definition of "human" is "monster"---- a thing, and again, not a man or woman.
So, are you a "human"? No.
Should "humans" have rights? Arguably not, if they exist. Why would you give rights to something that only appears to be a man, but which is in fact, a monster--- an animal or a thing only appearing to be a man?
Universal Declaration of Sasquatch Rights?
What does that have to do with the price of beans in China?
Let me tell you---- it's all about what lawyers call "admissions", and it is the same filthy game that you have already seen before, when they used similar names deceits to get your Mother to agree that you were a "US Citizen". She admitted it, so it must be true, right? Even if she was deceived, even if she was coerced, there is a record of accusation called an "information" signed by your own Mother standing against your good name that is admitting you are a "US Citizen".
Oh, and also an unwanted bastard child born out of wedlock and cast upon the mercy of the State of Whatever corporation as a ward of the state.
In fact--- unless you are a federal employee or dependent or political asylum seeker, there is no way that you are now nor ever were a "US Citizen", nor have you ever been a "citizen of the United States"---- but by getting your Mother (and you) to ignorantly sign paperwork agreeing that you are such a "citizen" the vermin have an excuse for treating you as one.
And that's the whole point of the exercise--- to test you and see if you know who and what you are. If you don't, you are prey.
This is how they gain the evidence needed to "presume" against you in court. This is how they allege that you are liable to pay federal income taxes, that you are obligated to follow all 80 million federal codes and statutes, that you are responsible for paying their public debts, that you are subject to their government, that you are "eligible" (and required) to pay into Social Security (which is their private pension plan) and so on.
If you admit to being a "US Citizen", you are one until you go through a very arduous learning and reclamation process to prove that you aren't in fact a "US Citizen" and don't desire any such foreign political status.
So that's the Entrapment Game--- get you to ignorantly admit being something you aren't and then take full advantage of the admission.
It's the same thing with admitting to being a "human".
If you are not a man, they are justified in treating you as something subhuman, something that merely appears to be a man. And the whole diatribe about "human rights" is just sop, a means of allegedly providing you with "benefits" that you are already owed anyway, that cost them nothing, in exchange for your admission that you aren't really a man or woman--- and are therefore inferior and subject to them.
Another common gambit is to call you "Mister" or "Miss" or "Missus" or some other "title"---- titles are a British means to subject people to the rule of their government. In fact, a "Mister" is either a Midshipman in the British Navy, or a Warrant Officer in the British Merchant Marines, which is, interestingly enough also the definition of a "Withholding Agent".
I once witnessed an absolutely brilliant defense against tax charges. It was clear that the man had won his case. As he was walking out the Judge called him, "Mr. Smith" (not really his name, but you get the point) and he didn't immediately object and he didn't just keep on walking. The victim turned around and answered politely ----and zap! Right back into the net, right back into the presumption that he was in fact a "Mister"--- a renegade Withholding Agent who failed to do his duty and didn't give the Queen and the Pope their cut.
The judge then proceeded to ream him and sentence him on the spot to 3 years in jail and a huge fine---and the poor man had no idea what happened or why.
Now you know and I know that he admitted to being a "Mister" which then gave the judge the needed prima facie evidence to convict him of tax fraud.
It's the same thing with the word "resident". US Citizens--- real ones--- can't own land in the states, because they are foreigners merely "residing" here on a temporary basis while they conduct their business of providing "essential government services".
If you admit to being a "resident" either by calling yourself one or by allowing one of them to apply that description to you, your claim to own your own property (as in a foreclosure case where this is a common ploy) flies right out the window. Such verbal tricks are the stock and trade of these fraud artists and you must learn to be wary and recognize them and rebut them whenever and wherever they rear their ugly heads.
Any time anyone applies any kind of descriptive label to you--- balk. Object. Even if you are not sure that there is any agenda afoot, object and "demur" anyway. Give yourself the chance to look up the legal meanings of the words or force your opponent to define the meaning of the word for you.
Anyway, a big thumbs down on "human rights" and a big thumbs up for the natural and unalienable rights of all natural men and woman worldwide.
Next time someone starts blathering to you about human rights--- you know what to do.
Look that glazed-over, starry-eyed individual in the eye and with as straight a face as you can manage, say, "Oh! How interesting! Are you a monster, or just favorable to their cause?"
by Anna von Reitz
For the last year or so I keep knocking into bright-eyed, bushy-tailed idealists preaching about the Universal Declaration of Human Rights promoted by the United Nations.
A "hue-man" by legal definition is not a man (or woman). It is a "color of Man"--- something that appears to be a man, but not and isn't actually, similar to "color of law"-- a statute or other representation that appears to be a law, but isn't.
Another definition of "human" is "monster"---- a thing, and again, not a man or woman.
So, are you a "human"? No.
Should "humans" have rights? Arguably not, if they exist. Why would you give rights to something that only appears to be a man, but which is in fact, a monster--- an animal or a thing only appearing to be a man?
Universal Declaration of Sasquatch Rights?
What does that have to do with the price of beans in China?
Let me tell you---- it's all about what lawyers call "admissions", and it is the same filthy game that you have already seen before, when they used similar names deceits to get your Mother to agree that you were a "US Citizen". She admitted it, so it must be true, right? Even if she was deceived, even if she was coerced, there is a record of accusation called an "information" signed by your own Mother standing against your good name that is admitting you are a "US Citizen".
Oh, and also an unwanted bastard child born out of wedlock and cast upon the mercy of the State of Whatever corporation as a ward of the state.
In fact--- unless you are a federal employee or dependent or political asylum seeker, there is no way that you are now nor ever were a "US Citizen", nor have you ever been a "citizen of the United States"---- but by getting your Mother (and you) to ignorantly sign paperwork agreeing that you are such a "citizen" the vermin have an excuse for treating you as one.
And that's the whole point of the exercise--- to test you and see if you know who and what you are. If you don't, you are prey.
This is how they gain the evidence needed to "presume" against you in court. This is how they allege that you are liable to pay federal income taxes, that you are obligated to follow all 80 million federal codes and statutes, that you are responsible for paying their public debts, that you are subject to their government, that you are "eligible" (and required) to pay into Social Security (which is their private pension plan) and so on.
If you admit to being a "US Citizen", you are one until you go through a very arduous learning and reclamation process to prove that you aren't in fact a "US Citizen" and don't desire any such foreign political status.
So that's the Entrapment Game--- get you to ignorantly admit being something you aren't and then take full advantage of the admission.
It's the same thing with admitting to being a "human".
If you are not a man, they are justified in treating you as something subhuman, something that merely appears to be a man. And the whole diatribe about "human rights" is just sop, a means of allegedly providing you with "benefits" that you are already owed anyway, that cost them nothing, in exchange for your admission that you aren't really a man or woman--- and are therefore inferior and subject to them.
Another common gambit is to call you "Mister" or "Miss" or "Missus" or some other "title"---- titles are a British means to subject people to the rule of their government. In fact, a "Mister" is either a Midshipman in the British Navy, or a Warrant Officer in the British Merchant Marines, which is, interestingly enough also the definition of a "Withholding Agent".
I once witnessed an absolutely brilliant defense against tax charges. It was clear that the man had won his case. As he was walking out the Judge called him, "Mr. Smith" (not really his name, but you get the point) and he didn't immediately object and he didn't just keep on walking. The victim turned around and answered politely ----and zap! Right back into the net, right back into the presumption that he was in fact a "Mister"--- a renegade Withholding Agent who failed to do his duty and didn't give the Queen and the Pope their cut.
The judge then proceeded to ream him and sentence him on the spot to 3 years in jail and a huge fine---and the poor man had no idea what happened or why.
Now you know and I know that he admitted to being a "Mister" which then gave the judge the needed prima facie evidence to convict him of tax fraud.
It's the same thing with the word "resident". US Citizens--- real ones--- can't own land in the states, because they are foreigners merely "residing" here on a temporary basis while they conduct their business of providing "essential government services".
If you admit to being a "resident" either by calling yourself one or by allowing one of them to apply that description to you, your claim to own your own property (as in a foreclosure case where this is a common ploy) flies right out the window. Such verbal tricks are the stock and trade of these fraud artists and you must learn to be wary and recognize them and rebut them whenever and wherever they rear their ugly heads.
Any time anyone applies any kind of descriptive label to you--- balk. Object. Even if you are not sure that there is any agenda afoot, object and "demur" anyway. Give yourself the chance to look up the legal meanings of the words or force your opponent to define the meaning of the word for you.
Anyway, a big thumbs down on "human rights" and a big thumbs up for the natural and unalienable rights of all natural men and woman worldwide.
Next time someone starts blathering to you about human rights--- you know what to do.
Look that glazed-over, starry-eyed individual in the eye and with as straight a face as you can manage, say, "Oh! How interesting! Are you a monster, or just favorable to their cause?"
