The Tender For Law

Volume 3

Aug 13, 2013 7:00 PM

Mick Parker

this arrived from the District court clerk & here is my proposed response, any insights/corrections most welcome......

AUTHORISED REPRESENTATIVE for MICHAEL PARKER.

FOR YOUR IMMEDIATE ACTION.

TO: OFFICE OF CHIEF CLERK, DISTRICT COURT.

TOM WARD

An envelope arrived at the address of my person from YOU in your Public Office.

In a correspondence in that envelope, signed by YOU, TOM WARD on 7 August 2013, YOU address a Mr. Roche in the matter of MICHAEL PARKER. WHO is Mr Roche & what is his involvement in this matter? I have NO knowledge of this PERSON. I seek clarity and understanding on his involvement in this matter. On what authority do you believe he can act AND/OR MAKE DETERMINATIONS/accept legal ADVICE for MICHAEL PARKER. Why have YOU caused this confusion TOM WARD? I cannot take action while you deny me understanding and lack of understanding negates contract.

Contained in that envelope were also documents which I had sent to YOU under clear instruction that they were to be placed on the relevant court file. YOU HAVE FAILED AND/OR REFUSED .

On what Authority have YOU FAILED AND/OR REFUSED MY instruction? YOUR actions may constitute an unlawful interference ,dereliction of duty AND/OR YOUR Complicity in FRAUD.

YOU will provide me with the authority AND/OR Court rule/procedure YOU applied in this matter which allowed you make summary judicial determinations on documents YOU were instructed to put in the Court file by ME, Keeping in mind that you must follow court rules AND/OR procedures only in so far as they do NOT conflict with the purpose law or the right of the PERSON. YOU WILL DOCUMENT AND VERIFY ALL YOUR ACTIONS up to this point while stating your observations of your duty to me.

YOU, TOM WARD will now as a matter of public function and in accordance with law, release to me the full details of the PERSON ACTING AS SURETY claiming CONTRACT AND/OR AUTHORITY UNDER HIS OWN LIABILITY which would give rise to THIS claim. As is my right to know.

Failing to substantiate your super powers to hurdle law, logic and higher jurisdiction, YOU, TOM WARD, Chief Clerk, PUBLIC SERVANT WILL as a matter of lawful OBLIGATION AND/OR Fiduciary PUBLIC DUTY WILL Place the RELEVANT documents NOW IN YOUR CUSTODY . BIRTH CERTIFICATE AND NOTICES of MISTAKE,DECLARATION OF UNDERSTANDING AND INTENT, DEFAULT on the relevant Court file.

ANY PERSON acting on AND/OR stating court procedure AND/OR legislative rule of contract in contradiction to the purpose of law or in contradiction of MY AND/OR MY PERSONS RIGHTS WILL be considered to be committing a FRAUD. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

Authorised Representative

Read Comments

Mick Parker

I stay away from the term, i believe SD refers to them as clubhouse rules, if something is unlawful it should stand to reason, even by their interpretation should be illegal, i often hear the example of Hitlers actions being legal but unlawful.

Mick Parker

interesting that a few weeks ago when i applied for a couple of copies of my birth cert, it arrived out without a surname, i had previously identified myself as "just mick" upon arrest/imprisonment, am i being a conspiracy theorist Scott Duncan or is that something they can change for purpose??

Mick Parker

Garda involved cruised by today upon my receipt & they have re issued the fines by post (time already expired) as URGENT, the PERSON is supposedly liable for 5 days imprisonment. should i send the fines to the clerk?

Scott Duncan

They NAMED the documents and have accepted that it is proper notice. They have NOT accepted the terms.

Someone may hand me a flyer saying TWO FOR ONE HOOKERS. I may choose to throw it away or return it to him, but there is NO dispute as to whether I know if 2 for 1 Hookers are being offered.

Mick Parker

AHH its nothing..... I had a good teacher :p Thank You very much Scott Duncan, i asked you a question 4 months ago, you told me he had accepted surety & directed me here, the way you have answered me & the benefit i have recieved was previously unfathomable, you ARE a clever fuckin man!! i get that (Y)

Scott Duncan

Ok. Let's run with this.

MONETARY THEORY time! :D Let's go over this:

You have the original letter with a "wet" signature (Not a photocopy) and a TRUSTEE... Some shmucks called "Courts Service". All you need to do is ENDORSE it with YOUR note and sign it (blue/red).

CA-CHING! Instant LEGAL money they can pay ANY debt with.

Scott Duncan

It's a fucking cheque.

That's all.

They end up writing themselves a cheque. When you receive it for ENDORSEMENT, you make notarized copies of it as PROOF they SOUGHT YOUR ENDORSEMENT.

So endorse it and return it to them to cash.

Derek Moran

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh- thats why you said, "Make as MANY notarized copies as you can."

Get the ORIGINAL FUCKING LETTER NOTARIZED, into as MANY copies as you can.....bring them home from the Notary.....Suil writes his response on the NOW NOTARIZED COPY of the ORIGINAL.....Suil puts his SIGNATURE on it.....Suil sends it to them REGISTERED-MAIL back to them?

Anibal Jose Baez

<<S�il Eile: ...my wet ink sig endorses the cheque, the responce & demand are incidentals if i am correct???>>

Once again, another example that it's ALL ABOUT SURETY and ACCOUNTING! The rest is just "busy work." :)

But the "programming" is going to make us try to stir back to worry ALL about the BUSY WORK, and forget it's really all about SURETY and ACCOUNTING.

Mick Parker

my response is as a result of my understanding at one level, at another level, i didn't understand the "value" of the clerks note, it was still beyond me to certify copies & return as a cheque... theres still stuff i'm missing dude :/

Mick Parker

i've taken a lot of stick from certain elements of the sovereign/freeman/activists here for my efforts ...they fear my conviction(not knowledge yet) i think? fuck them, if you'll indulge me in this small celebration... this is for them..... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o8VZX4sHn-4

Carl Dunne

Well if I'm following this right the signed letter I recieved from the garda in relation to a fine last week does exactly the same thing. I sent them a notice of mistake they sent me back a similar letter and returned my birth cert but kept the notice :D

Pete Daoust

I am taking a chance here..... :/

So if a PUBLIC servant send me a document with his WET signature, and the LOGO of the PUBLIC OFFICE he is in duty for, this document is considered a PUBLIC document.

If I endorse with WET signature that document for the NAME i have in my pocket, which is a PUBLIC NAME, I automatically create a VALUABLE instrument ? :/

It gives two signatures and a TRUSTEE, the trustee being the PUBLIC OFFICE, the FRONT signature being the SURETY, and the back signature being the acceptance ?

Thanks

Scott Duncan

Asking the right questions gets you the answers. I have rules I must comply with... so if it's "been a long time", it means you are asking the wrong questions.

This is a direct result of thinking wrong, and valuing the wrong things.

...just sayin' :P

Carl Dunne

I haven't been asking any questions :P... I've had my head stuck in commercial law books trying to come to these conclusions by my self but as I just told suil I wouldn't of put that together without being told thanks (y)

August le Blanc

This is fucking awesome.. A big atta boy for following the process. Mik :-)

The Catch 22 of it all is deceptive and has led to much confusion over here , I find. ( which is the point of it ) Studying the clubhouse rules is for me a part of comprehending but I am finding the language truly is secondary to the process's for practical purposes. The process's are what we have been told all along, It's all accounting... but needing to be able to speak the language to back your claim... B O E a fucking simple accounting process. Verifiable proof from not 1 but possibly 2 ( i till I see a substantiated claim... well you know) ;-) Gratitude is here from this semi-evolved chimps grasping at the edges of comprehension... Scott Duncan Adam Thomas Who-are You Frisbey MIk Pete Daoust Carl Dunne I salute you.

Scott Duncan

Unlike the Free-Dumb movement, and the Nazi Christians calling themselves "Sovereign Citizens", I actually tell you the truth.

Unlike the Tony "Sounds-like-he's-got-a-dick-in-his-mouth" Butros', and Rob Menards of the world, I am not seeking ANY profit.

I am starting to get reports of Christians who intend to harm me because people are listening to me. This is why I can't stand most of you.

MOST of you will say the Christians are right for doing it. If Jesus actually showed up, he'd be killed at the hand of a devout Christian in the first week.

Best start asking the right questions, because when THE TENDER FOR LAW moves to the main site (INVITE ONLY), there will ONLY be people who listen to me.

My work here is almost done, and I shall no longer have to endure the bulk of you people. Seriously. Most of you will listen to these whack-jobs with imaginary friends, and idiotic evil value-systems, and try to integrate the truth I tell with the lies they "believe"... I won't have to endure that much longer.

None of you see the larger picture. You want to deal with YOUR situation, and then be done with it. You don't get to do that. Nobody ever calls the people who CAUSE it to account. I will... and that's scary to a lot of people.

To those who grasp what I am saying (...and it's REALLY hard to say this without sounding condescending. I know), I'm proud of you. You may actually change something.

To the rest of you "believers": I hate you. The only reason I don't kill you on sight, is because it's unlawful to do so... and that's the ONLY reason. Your delusions, apathy, and the imaginary friend that the nobility made for you are what caused all this to happen in the first place. If you are a Christian who lost their children to the very mess they helped create... GOOD! YOU DESERVE IT. The child is better off figuring things out the hard way. Adults with imaginary friends shouldn't be raising children anyway.

This whole year-long venture has shown me that you are all the same, in the end. I have seen the enemy, and it is Jesus.

I can quote from fiction as well as any christian, so how's this for a quote?

"The KEEPER is awake. The Keeper is aware. The Keeper has seen the enemy" - Chapter 8 ASCENSION, Homeworld 2

Derek Moran

"... it was still beyond me to certify copies & return as a cheque... theres still stuff i'm missing dude...I wouldn't of put that together without being told thanks " - my sentiments exactly, thank you S�il Eile, Carl Dunne, and of course Scott

*insert EMPTY-HEADED comment by Adam Thomas here*

Derek Moran

..and i just got not ONE, but TWO wet-ink-signatures from the City of Toronto a month ago- a NOTICE OF ISSUANCE TO A BAILIFF from their 'Collections, Supervisor,' and, a WARRANT TO DISTRAIN FOR TAXES from the private-Bailiff, which i both stamped with the red-ink-stamp i bought VOID, and mailed back to them registered-mail - oh well.....theres always next time :D

..who woulda thunk S�il Eile posting that seemingly ROUTINE letter would've lead to this THIS

Derek Moran

I just re-read the LETTER the courts sent Suil, and the response that Suil will send back to them, written/printed on the BACK of the Notarized-COPY Suil will have done of the ORIGINAL LETTER, which, has created LEGAL money for the GOVERNMENT to use, with these TWO wet-ink-signatures now on it

I now put my CRITICAL-THINKING-CAP on, with the possibilty that i might be blasted again for asking this question:

..how much is this newly created LEGAL money for the GOVERNMENT to use, now worth?

Blake Gardner

The selective mystical power to ordain certain institutions the right to convert money of account to money of exchange...paper prejudice in the highest degree considering that we all are private bankers...set negotiable instruments free!!!:)

Scott Duncan

Jesus is NOT your savoir, any more than Captain Kirk is.

People who say "Jesus was real" sound like people who think "Captain Kirk" is real.

If you produce an old Navy record showing there is a real man named "Captain Kirk"... THAT DOESN'T MAKE STAR TREK REAL!

WE MADE IT UP. ALL OF IT. MOST WAS STOLEN FROM OTHER PEOPLE MAKING SHIT UP.

Christians CAUSED all this. Jews profit from it, and Muslims want to kill all of you because of it.

The thing everyone is missing, is that they are ALL ADULTS WITH IMAGINARY FRIENDS.

ALL BELIEF IS EVIL. ALL OF IT.

Until you grasp that, you will always be stupid, and a victim of the Nobility....no matter HOW much you "believe" in Jesus.

Derek Moran

You know what Pierre- Pete Daoust- THANK YOU! Because what Scott has taught me more than ANYTHING ELSE being on this page, is to put on your fucking CRITICAL-THINKING-CAP, and QUESTION, what you DONT, UNDERSTAND!

Derek Moran

CHRIS- SCOTT HAS TENDERED...feel FREE to ACCEPT-HIS-OFFER. Keep in mind, nobody should expect Scott to answer ALL questions, as his life IS HIS OWN, and he does like weed-sex-and hookers, and not necessarily in that order...

Carl Dunne

Jesus is NOT your savoir, any more than Captain Kirk is.

People who say "Jesus was real" sound like people who think "Captain Kirk" is real.

If you produce an old Navy record showing there is a real man named "Captain Kirk"... THAT DOESN'T MAKE STAR TREK REAL!

WE MADE IT UP. ALL OF IT. MOST WAS STOLEN FROM OTHER PEOPLE MAKING SHIT UP.

Christians CAUSED all this. Jews profit from it, and Muslims want to kill all of you because of it.

The thing everyone is missing, is that they are ALL ADULTS WITH IMAGINARY FRIENDS.

ALL BELIEF IS EVIL. ALL OF IT.

Until you grasp that, you will always be stupid, and a victim of the Nobility....no matter HOW much you "believe" in Jesus.

Derek Moran

K- all that being said, if you HAD to go into a courtroom, and defend the 'Buck O Five,' if asked- "Where is this CITED?"

You wouldnt honestly answer- "You mean you've NEVER seen 'Team America' your Honour, that marionette-movie??"

August le Blanc

Ok.. It is an accounting procedure, you turn the court documents into accounting instruments... Bills of Exchange. The Bill of Exchange book in the files will help with your comprehension it is 69 pages or something. The void procedure is an accounting practice, the New Original process is an accounting procedure... It is ALL ACCOUNTING... The duty paid stuff is covered in the stamp book in the files above... it is powered by the UPU... All countries postal services in the world belong to it ( well most of them)... Wars do not stop the mail... nothing stops the mail... think about that.

so get out of the clubhouse and come join us ... Please.

Derek Moran

Honestly?...other than the VOID-stamp revelation recently, i dont see Scott pushin' any of this stuff. That, and id be willing to listen to Blake Gardner's take on all of this, only because im with him 100% on his SIMPLICITY motto

August le Blanc

and it is the first time this info has probably come to light in a setting such as this.. It is hidden in plain sight. There are times when it is advantageous to be able to amend a document into an unamendable one. ;-)

Derek Moran

Scott's revelation to Suil yesterday about converting a NOTICE - see this is the thing...if Scott Duncan aint TEACHING IT, i am NOT BUYING IT - like S�il Eile and Carl Dunne both said, who woulda EVER thought about that?!

August le Blanc

Yes I understand that me too... However creating a Trust... Liening your name.. all of it plus the new stuff... removes the sign... you get to make your own ;-) The birth Certificate stuff is important, so is this. we will and have been pointed in the right direction, pointed in the right direction... So, to recap... If it is on this forum it is relevant, all of it... somehow. We need to be able to think for ourselves... it all matters.

Derek Moran

Scott's not not endorsing it cuz he has a plan, he's like The Joker - "Its ALL, part, of THE PLAN..." - he probably thinks its all TOO advanced for us at this stage and doesnt want us ending-up like Dean Kory

Blake Gardner

In admiralty, once a claim is made you are presumed guilty (guilt (n.) Old English gylt "crime, sin, fault, fine," of unknown origin, though some suspect a connection to Old English gieldan "to pay for, debt".) unless you can rebut the claim.

The system is trained to provoke you to react, thereby getting you to take a position. Then they say prove it. Who ever ends up with the burden of proof generally loses. Thus all cases are won solely by one party indicting themselves via there words or actions/consent.

This basic principal therefore gives birth to many possible remedy methods that are only limited by ones creativity and willing resolve.

Without getting too caught up in where does it say this and that and the minutiae, remember its a fictional system and our foundation should be the basic premise of the game, namely contract (offer/counter offer).

The moment we lose sight of that basic element one can get lost and end up bamboozled by legalize, and ultimately capitulating /consenting in one way or another.

So wether it's discharging or setting off a debt with stamp, void, endorsement, ect...it's all just a counter offer...and that game can go on and on until someone consents via word or conduct.

Always reverse proof of claim, because in a fictional system can anyone prove anything?

Peace.

Blake Gardner

Funny example of this precept is a court case I heard about but can't confirm. A guy got charged for poaching furs on a reserve. The lawyer in court brought some furs in as "EVIDENCE":-) and sat them on the table. He then proceeded to question the defendant about "THE FURS" his goal of course being for the man to "CONSENT" to the lovely and benevolent benefit of prison and/or fine by incriminating himself. (All is by consent in this system, because involuntary servitude is unlawful) The defendant however keep replying to the plaintiff with the question "WHAT FURS". The plaintiff was pointing to the furs, picking them up and saying these furs. The judge looked back to the defendant who countered with, "WHAT FURS" again. This went on for 5 or so minutes before the judge apparently dismissed the charge. Upon leaving the court room the plaintiff said to the judge, what do you want me to do with all these furs? The judge smiled and while walking away said, what furs!

Whether true or not this does illustrate the simplicity of the systems game and the vast possibilities that can be derived from that understanding. It also confirms the very reason the code of legalese was created to obscure in plain sight the simplicity of the game so only a select few can truly consciously play:-)

Chris Evan

Yeah Derek, I DEFINITELY do that. I think humans have made it to this point by listening to others (specifically lawyers) and what they say. I see no benefit to knowledge if I can't prove it! All I ask for is "How do I prove that?". I picked that up from Bill Cooper.

Mick Parker

cheers Derek!!! David, i didn't ask the clerk to interpret them for me, i told him put them on the record because they are relevant facts to the case, they may do as they like but with my stuff on the record... theres a problem with their books, things no longer add up, this transaction is not complete.lol so improper in that regard only :p my returning it signed with incidentals means they have payment but also the liability for the mess. 2 wet sigs & a trustee...... hahaha

Derek Moran

Now, there's no $ amount on either THEIR letter, or your response Suil....will it just be IMPLIED then that this is to DISCHARGE/SETOFF whatever debt they are seeking from you once you place your WET-INK on it?

Mick Parker

i'm essentially endorsing payment under the clerks/trustee's liability to make sure everything is correct & act accordingly if its not, now with little effort we watch the giant gears of the system chew themselves mwa ha ha the summary court was created for the purpose of speeding up the BoE mechanism, thats all thats going on, there is procedure to be followed & liability when they slip... provided we know to spot the mistake & make it relevant

Mick Parker

i had no contract/dealings ever with Dept of social welfare, i was in a building i had a lease for, perjury was commited claiming i was "working" there for someone else when i had implied no commerce, nobody would indentify themselves, my breach of peace was insisting on i.d. i was shown a .38 when i asked for i.d. i responded "his pissy little 38 didn't impress me i'd had bigger" ego's were bruised. criminal damage was relieving myself outside my trousers rather than piss myself, which i alerted the garda to & offered to clean up if he got me a mop :p

Mick Parker

next time we meet he will be more cautious, i've gained standing with the local cops now but for the most part its useless arguing law with a cop who has no clue & is used to getting his own way, focus on your facts & your future actions against them, they're gonna do what they're gonna do.... it'll be your move next so dont waste energy arguing ;)

Mick Parker

In the next chapter in the book i'd like to entitle "The great Fall of the Oligarch in Ireland" the court clerk believes ignoring the facts & fobbing me off in confusion should do the trick, i've prepared this.... in the absense of the admiral to shout COMPREHENSION into me i leave my self in the hands of your "constructive"? criticisms :p... cheers, ill scan the actual letter in a bit, but basically "forgive him his typo, heres your documents back, no legal effect yada yada...."

Authorised Administrator for MICHAEL PARKER

Authorised Administrator for MICHAEL PARKER

NOTICE

TO; OFFICE OF CHIEF CLERK,DISTRICT COURT

TOM WARD

I received a correspondence from you apologising for your error. I cannot forgive you while YOU continue apparently oblivious to the evidential aspect of law and the unalienable right to consent. A mistake of fact occurs when a person believes that a condition or event exists when it does not.

YOU have FAILED AND/OR REFUSED to discharge under my terms.

I have also received unsolicited claims from Tazbell T/A FCS as a result of your error which you will immediately correct or both you & they will bear liability . Threats of enforcement of default on a claim you cannot substantiate does not alter anything except your level of liability.

The District Court is a court of limited jurisdiction. Summary hearings are administration of Bills of Exchange. Your comprehension of how the documents sent to YOU will effect later actions in greater jurisdiction is irrelevant.

Its very simple TOM WARD, The District Court had its scheduled opportunity to substantiate its standing in my affairs. An individual in the court took it upon himself to deal with the matter contrary to my instruction & his offices ability,HE accepted surety under full commercial liability, Then HE refused to identify himself. I want that PERSONS name and relevant information.

YOU have no lawful reason or ability to WITHOLD AND/OR REFUSE to provide that information upon demand. I have already shown my intent to make my facts relevant. YOU have referred to them by name in both your refusals. There will be no need for legal advice, the whole law society can not change the EVIDENTIAL facts in this matter.

YOU have Seven days to indicate that you realise YOUR mistake and are willing to take the corrective action or I will be forced to take action against YOU AND/OR THE DISTRICT COURT.ND/OR THE DISTRICT COURT.

Mick Parker

in fairness, i wont say i created the situation but i have been very aware of its unfolding & i'm all in. I cant leave it hanging, i have lessons to learn & so have those fuckers, as the justice says in the video.... this goes on :) this response was intended to be followed by a lien. cheers for the response Blake (Y)

David Johansen

if you were just arbitrarily submitting those for no more reason than shits & giggles, you did send them to the secretary (of state/nation) cc'd to the attorney general. not just the county district court?

Mick Parker

Silence can be a powerful responce ;) I think the point is i'm too far along to be pulling on Scotts shirt tails so i'm sorry for that. it boils down to my conviction not to allow anyone interfere, confuse or ignore my facts. I appreciate the comments butt CC'ing at this point would be somewhat pleading with my rapist, i'm getting the surety's fuckin name & thats that. new responce will be sent in the same fashion as last, its up to them. if they want to test my conviction, i'll give them a lesson in it. cheers again (Y)

Pete Daoust

conviction is a word which is pretty close to the belief word :(

it boils down to my KNOWLEDGE would be not to bad as a word :D

if they want to test my KNOWLEDGE would be AWESOME :D

Sorry Man, could not resist :D

Mick Parker

fair comment Pete (Y) yeah its my conviction based on knowledge, my attitude knowing what i know, not easily swayed. I understand i may make mistakes but i wont allow mistakes pass me without understanding them, once i understand then i can be sorry... so i'm not too worried i'm on the learning curve :)

Derek Moran

Speaking of movies, like Oblivion, have you ever seen Django Unchained, Scott?...it just occurred to me today...Quentin could've easily have called it 'Everyone Unchained,' or at least- 'How to Get...'

"..here- i've even got the WAYBILL" - LOL ;)

Mick Parker

over the weekend while holding virtual argument with Pete & Adam over signing the BoE, i got a flash of a slip of pink paper, the recognasince i signed when bailed from prison. It equates to a large shitstain presumption they are holding so that went back this morning as a "New Original" with a simple note :)

Mick Parker

Authorised Administrator for MICHAEL PARKER

TO; OFFICE OF CHIEF CLERK,DISTRICT COURT

TOM WARD

I received a correspondence from you on 19 sept. 2013

YOU are again creating confusion, If as YOU suggest I am not entitled to the information I demanded it could only lawfully be because it has nothing to do with me. Ipso facto

Therefore I return your offer as Void, Not Accepted, Not Understood, No Consent!

If liability for YOUR court order infringes on me AND/OR my PERSON'S right in any way I will exercise my right and lien the court file to gain the information required for remedy. All Rights reserved.

Authorised Representative

Chris Evan

NO! I can as I have a copy of it. I wrote this into my NoM:

4. If I, AND/OR ANY DOCUMENTS BEARING MY SIGNATURE OR SEAL, have led A COURT and/or STATUTORY BODY and/or A GOVERNMENT SERVICE and/or AGENTS and/or OFFICERS of such bodies, to believe, that I am acting as SURETY for the LEGAL PERSON, that would be a MISTAKE. Please forgive me.

Mick Parker

if you gave your signature, thats the element of consent they are hanging on to i'd say dude. if you signed they gave you a copy, that pink slip has been lying in the drawer getting ignored every day, thats the contract/consent they used to ignore my NoM afaik

Pete Daoust

Anyway, I am really careful with this, it's important I think to make sure that they know that you know........if you leave them any doubts, they will try even harder to create controversy and confusion.....They are EXACTLY there with me, trying to create confusion, and it won't work :D