Submitted for Your Education by Morton IX
This is an article I found in reference to a subject near and dear to us all, and it exposes the truth about the whether you actually own your land or even your own body and person-hood. This is about land patents, but it is so much more than that. Read the article, then watch the video. As a quick side note, computer word programs do not even recognize the word Allodial as being part of the English Lexicon. It thinks it's a misspelled word. How about that?
"We the People have the unalienable right in a free republic of American Nationals and/or sovereign "state" Citizens to acquire, utilize and "own" property. We the People have the unalienable right to have and hold that property free and clear of government liens and encumbrances. These rights have NOT been abridged, although they have come under attack by the government and the principles/creditors controlling it...
...Americans have not yet figured out that they have so little control over what they do on "their" land because they do not own it. The federal United States government maintains the true title in the original land patent which it has pledged as collateral against the federal debt. If you had the true title, the government couldn't utilize your land as a security against the federal debt. Your government and the international bankers via the Federal Reserve Bank has been using your land for it's own purposes, without your knowledge or consent.
Getting a mortgage, and paying a bank note is nothing more than glorified " renting", a qualified and diminished "ownership," and a return to a feudal relationship with the land that the serfs and slaves endured for hundreds of years. Qualified ownership means that the ownership of land is shared (with the government), while absolute ownership is not.
The underlying reason the American Revolution was fought and won was over the right for the sovereign, state Citizens to own land absolutely, without government encroachment of any kind. The founding fathers abhorred the idea of feudal land and owing allegiance to any foreign, sovereign power.
The American people have unwittingly surrendered their allodial titles and sovereign rights as a condition of every bank contract or mortgage involving the purchase of land or property, or the use of land and property as collateral, and bought with debt currency, money substitutes, checks or other negotiable instruments. You can only "discharge" debt with negotiable instruments. Since you never actually pay for it with lawful money, unless it?s with gold or silver, you cannot "own" your land or property either. You are "renting" property with a "rented" debt currency system.
All land not held in allodial title has been hypothecated to the Federal Reserve Bank, as collateral against a federal debt that cannot be paid. As legal "persons," U.S. citizens have no right to "own" land, anymore than corporations or trusts could prior to the 14th Amendment. By defining U.S. citizens as legal persons, a doorway opened for legal "persons" such as corporations and trusts to gain control over land, and take it from the people.
U.S. citizens have entered adhesion contracts with the federal United States government under the 14th Amendment whereby their unalienable rights to own land absolutely in an allodial state, have been reduced to a qualified ownership and "color of title" under the Negotiable Instruments law. In the twentieth century, America has returned to the dark ages of feudalism, its former "state" Citizens having been reduced to tenants and renters once again, not the sovereign owners of their land.
Having an allodial title will not eliminate any debt or mortgage if any is presently attached to your land or property. The allodial title will prevent the creditor from going after your land to collect on the debt if you cannot make a payment for any reason. After having received proper notice, your creditors have 60 days to challenge your "Declaration of Land Patent." If they don't the land reverts to its allodial title. If they do, they must take you to court, and you must demonstrate the superiority of your allodial title. The law is on the side of the sovereign "state" Citizen regarding allodial titles.
If for some reason, you cannot pay your mortgage or default on the loan, instead of a bank foreclosure whereby you lose everything, a land trust might be created whereby you and the bank become "partners" in the property until it's paid. With an allodial title, debts or claims will remain, but the land itself will be forever removed from assets upon which creditors can attach..."
If you think this is a benign subject just remember, it is things like this that allow the Obama Administration to think they can get away with doing whatever they want with your land AND YOU! Don't think so? Watch this, then tell me what you think.
Replies
More uneducated nonsense.
In the legal system we inherited from feudal times all the land of a country is "owned" by the sovereign, the supreme lawgiver. In a monarchy that would be the monarch. In an aristocracy that would be the aristocrats acting in concert. In a democratic republic it is the people who can vote, acting in concert (not as individuals), as supreme lawgivers, which means for most of us as electors for the ratification and amendment of constitutions of government.
When the U.S. Constitution was adopted, member states were sovereign over their land, and the general government over its incorporated nonstate territory, which was initially organized under the Northwest and Southwest ordinances. Properly understood, when a territory becomes a state that state becomes the sovereign, and therefore owner, of the land of that state, unless the state started as an independent country (Texas), in which case the former country and now state was already the sovereign owner of its land.
Private parties do not "own" the land itself. They may own estates in the land, which are bundles of rights, such as exclusive possession and use, conveyance, inheritance, subdivision, and hypothecation. Elements of those rights may be separated and separately conveyed. An example of this is leasing, in which the title holder conveys the right of exclusive possession, and some but not all uses, to the lessee.
The state being the ultimate owner of the land is the legal basis for property taxes, eminent domain, and land use regulation.
There can be four kinds of title that establish an estate, only two of which are used in the United States: fee simple and fee tail. (Look them up.) Almost all titles are fee simple. A conveyance of title from a private party is usually called a "deed" and from a government a "patent".
There is such a thing as allodial title. It is just fee simple title conveyed from a government (usually with a "patent") that relinquishes the power of the government to tax the land. It can also happen that a government can, after an initial conveyance, sell to the title holder its power to tax for some period of time, or forever. The resulting title is sometimes mistakenly called "allodial" but strictly speaking it is not the same thing, as there may be additional strings attached to the deal. There are no allodial titles anywhere in the United States.
All this is indicated in Art. I Sec. 8 Cl. 17 of the U.S. constitution which requires consent of a state legislature to any purchases of land by the federal government over which it will exercise exclusive sovereignty. This provision was usurped by the federal government, abetted by the Supreme Court in Kohl v. United States, 91 U.S. 367, 373 (1876), which held that the federal government could exercise the power of eminent domain on land in a state without having to get the consent of its legislature. That issue is discussed at http://www.constitution.org/proppriv/e-domain/dub-dom.html The decision needs to be overturned, and one of our proposed amendments http://constitution.org/reform/us/con_amend.htm would do that.
An issue remains, and is currently being litigated, whether the power of eminent domain, and therefore sovereign ownership, extends to personal property ("chattel"). By original understanding it does not, but that is a battle we need to win.
You have some valid points, but do you realize how you turn everybody off when you tell everybody how stupid they are?
I recently had a run in with a certain individual who didn't know what he was talking about, but spouted off as if he was giving factual information, when "in fact", he was not. I don't like getting in people's faces, but sometimes it is necessary to stop propaganda from misinforming the general public.
Here, your 1st. sentence just stops most people from wanting to read any further. You just built a brick wall in front of yourself, so the average person will not even want to read what you have to say.
Morton gave you some good advice a few days ago. You might want to re-read it, and adopt it into your platform.
Your information may be helpful, but what good is it if your first sentence drives people away.
I'm not calling anyone "stupid". I called the post "uneducated nonsense", because it pretends to knowledge it does not convey. I am sure everyone on this forum is intelligent enough to understand correctly. They might be too lazy to research a subject in depth, but of course that takes time and we are all busy people. We do need to take strong stands against misinformation, even if it might offend the misinformers.
A post cannot be educated or uneducated. It is an inanimate object. LOL!
Just having fun with you, Jon! Oh, excuse me. I just now remembered that old saying "Dumb as a post"!
Hey Wayne,
Jon is right, we are kinda stupid. We do not have his education or his seemingly complete knowledge of the legal or lawful side of these issues. He may not be as smooth as some others, but give the man his due, as he is a prolific contributor to this forum with what he believes to be the whole entire legal truth as written and tries to help us understand it.
As such he is allowed to try to teach us. My job is to get him and others to express their opinion. I think I do that. Try not to be so stiff on Jon. He's just trying to make sure we don't get too far away from the realities of the legalities. That's what we're here for; to speak, then listen to the other side. He makes good points. There's a lot to know and he seems to know a lot.
You seem to know quite a bit as well. Jon can call everything I write nonsense. I don't mind. He isn't always right in my eyes, but he offers an opinion from a different pair of eyes which is always welcome, just like yours. But thanx for sticking up for me.
No one has complete or perfect knowledge of this field. I have dedicated myself to acquire a breadth and depth of knowledge at least as great as the best lawyers and legal historians, so I can debate them on their level. I am still learning things, and I have been active at this for 70 years now (although the first few years were slow).
Back in 1995 I decided it would help me and help others to put most of what people need to read on one website, constitution.org, and link things to one another so people can find them more easily. That is more than one person can do in a long life but I have done as much as I can. And, yes, I have read and understood most of what is on the website, except for some collections like all the British court cases or the U.S. Statutes at Large. I have read all U.S. Supreme Court decisions up to a few of the most recent.
None of this would have been possible had I not taught myself to speedread beginning at the age of seven. I recommend that to everyone. It is never too late to start. But speedreading is really speed learning. The skill is in actually making the material part of one's understanding. I have a page on that at http://www.constitution.org/col/8113speedread.htm
OK, Morton, I'll give him a break! LOL
Now, for my uneducated 2 cents worth, which I fully admit is hearsay, and what I have been taught. I do not have first hand experience with this issue, as other matters are taking priority on it at the moment.
Presumably, when our Founders started the country, all land ownership was allodial, or "held in allodium". It is my impression that this country did not drift away from this until the Civil War era -to 1871, when the corporation was created.
There are people here in Hyrum, Utah who have gotten their place put in allodium status, so I am told by a friend who knows them. They live in a subdivision, and that area was held in allodium at one time. They researched the land titles back to the point to where it was held in allodium, then they were able to get it put in allodium in their names.
That being said: that doesn't mean you won't have troubles getting it done. That will depend on the bureaucracy where you live. I was not told of them having any hassle here, but in Oregon, I have heard tales of people having a lot of problems with the corporation letting the people get it done. This is somewhat of a common goal in the Republic, and a few have been successful, and some have not. It is a mixed bag right now, depending on the level of corporate corruption in the given area, and how much you know about taking the right steps. When it comes time to go to the courthouse, I have been informed that you are best off by taking MANY witnesses with you, as some of the courthouses house criminals who do not want you doing this. You have to have your act together, then hope it is not too corrupt in your local county courthouse.
That pretty much sums up what I have been informed of, if that is of any help.
Katherine Jillian MacTavish just put out a letter on this a few days ago.
If you go to hisadvocates.org, they specialize in these types of things. They have a whole library of information on different legal issues, especially dealing with property matters. I personally know Kelby, and some others associated with him, and they are good People.
westudylaw.org is/was a good site. I have been to a couple of their seminars, and are excellent People to deal with, and they are closely associated with hisadvocates.org. Fred and Nina at westudylaw.org are taking a break for a while, but will/may be starting again after they get a breather. These People are the ones who first started opening my eyes. A banker at the seminar in Portland, Oregon stood up and told Nina she is "a banker's worst nightmare!!" She knows her stuff, and if you use what she and her husband, Fred, teach, you can pretty much get on top of whatever your challenge is.
Thank you Morton. I'm glad you are exposing this issue. I have been aware of this issue for quite some time, and it needs more exposure. This issue is being dealt with a lot at hisadvocates.org, but primarily with people who are in foreclosure.
Ok OK, without the labor pains,,, who owns the land?
What say The People? RRR
RRRRRRROAR yourself. I am not afraid of dogs or wolves. I am a cat lover, and the bigger the cat the better!! LOL!
-
1
-
2
-
3
of 3 Next