:h: Welcome
to Team Law’s Forum!

Happy Thanksgiving!!!

Please remember our offices are always closed for the week of Thanksgiving;
therefore, our next Conference Call will be on Monday, November 27, 2017.

Have a happy and blessed holiday.

We generally hold Free Conference Calls every: Monday, Wednesday & Friday morning from:
8:00 – 9:00 AM (Mountain Time)
Join us on our next Conference Call and invite your friends.

Call: (857) 232-0158; use the Conference Access Code: 110045.

Use this Forum to contact Team Law;
use this link for more: contact information.


Please be aware that: The Way of Kings™ Forum is back online; however, they were not able to salvage their old database for that forum. Wherefore, all of the registrations and content that was on that forum is gone; which means that you will need to re-register on that forum to communicate with them and to receive their forum based services.


We hope this information is helpful to you.
Tell everybody about Team Law! :t^:

After reading this announcement, you may remove it by clicking the “X” in the upper right corner of the announcement's green background.

Trading With The Enemies Act of 1933

This forum is for topics not listed below.

Moderators: Tnias, Jus

Hobie
Registered User
Registered User
Posts: 8
Joined: Wednesday December 21st, 2005 12:55 am MST

Trading With The Enemies Act of 1933

Postby Hobie » Thursday April 27th, 2006 5:10 pm MDT

Team Law's History page says in part:
In 1933, Corp. U.S. went bankrupt and the States agreed to support their resolution. In keeping with the bankruptcy, the Corp. U.S. Congress adjusted their Trading with the Enemies Act with their Emergency War Powers Act, which recognized the people of the United States of America are enemies of Corp. U.S.
How was this "in keeping with the bankruptcy", and what did it accomplish for Corp. US?

How is recognizing the people as enemies consistent with finding the people acceptable to provide consciousness for Trustee roles of SSA-created Trusts?

--hobie

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1581
Joined: Thursday June 9th, 2005 12:16 pm MDT

Re: Trading With The Enemies Act of 1933

Postby Admin » Saturday April 29th, 2006 11:36 am MDT

:h: Hobie:
Thank you for your inquiry.
The States supported (acted in keeping with) the bankruptcy by accepting the fiat money system exchanging Federal Reserve Notes for Federal Reserve Notes with no reserve or backing of gold or silver at all. The States did not have to accept this because the Constitution forbids them from making, or demanding, anything but gold of silver coin for debts. Thus they could have compelled Corp. U.S. into dissolution in favor of restoring the original jurisdiction government. They did not; rather they simply accepted the results of the 1933 banking holiday and the new codes that recognized the people of the United States of America as the enemies of Corp. U.S. continuing on as if nothing ever happened.

That is not to say the Corp. U.S. bankruptcy was beneficial or acceptable to anyone or anything other than Corp. U.S; the benefits to Corp. U.S. should be obvious, but let’s review it anyway: it set the stage for the Social Security Act of 1935 and the peoples’ privately and voluntarily contracting with Corp. U.S. in accord with that Act to operate the trusts the Social Security Administration creates thereunder (which allows Corp. U.S. to become the effective owner (as beneficiary of those trusts) of everything exchanged for their Notes under their bankruptcy); and it was certainly an elemental forerunner of WWII (held after most of the working populace were voluntarily working as Corp. U.S. agents (trustees of such trusts)) and its settlement (the Bretton Woods Agreement in 1944—wherein Corp. U.S. was quitclaimed to the International Monetary Fund) as well as the elemental setup and or cause of the original jurisdiction states forming their Corp. State counterparts that most people deal with today. Thus, the people effectively gave Corp. U.S. totalitarian control over, and ownership of, virtually all business relations and property in the United States of America. Not bad for a bankruptcy.

Your last question is answered by realizing that the best way to change the status of an enemy is to form a treaty with them. A treaty is a contract between sovereigns. Thus, if Corp. U.S. offers the people the opportunity to serve under contract as an agent of Corp. U.S. then their status under that service changes from enemy to friendly agent. The proof of the friendliness of the new agent is proven by the agent developing a continuous stream of assets into the total net worth of Corp. U.S. as a result of the agency. If the stream stops then Corp. U.S. comes to collect.

We hope this information is helpful to you.
Tell everybody about Team Law! :t^:
Team Law,

"In memory of our God, our faith, and freedom,
and of our spouses, our children, and our peace.
"


As with all Forum posts, comments made by Admin are:
copyrighted—all rights reserved; and, provided here for educational purposes only.

Hobie
Registered User
Registered User
Posts: 8
Joined: Wednesday December 21st, 2005 12:55 am MST

Postby Hobie » Saturday April 29th, 2006 3:37 pm MDT

Hi, Admin -
Thanks - very informative and "on point." :)

I find it puzzling that a corporation could declare the people of the United States of America - or any people, actually - as "enemies". It seems a misapplication of the term, somehow. But it appears to have established a sort of "commercial wall", with "the enemy" on one side and "our agents/Trustees" on the other.

If I understand you correctly, you're saying also that the use of FRNs (the corporation's notes) to "gain a purchase" on anything leads to the Corporation's being the "owner" of it...?

About the foreign ownership of Corp. US: I've searched multiple sources, seeking the exact place in the texts where it can be seen that Corp. US was quitclaimed to the IMF. I've found various references to "Special Drawing Rights", but I'm left with the impression this was an aspect of the Agreements and applied to other signatory nations as well. Every mention of that sort has also included a specified sum, some number that, for the moment, puts a 'cap' on the amount in the drawing account.

Is there other text, something I perhaps have not found yet, that contains more of a "smoking gun" with regard to the QuitClaim? Or is it right there, staring me in the face but obscured in a cloud of words, do you think?

Thanks kindly,
--hobie

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1581
Joined: Thursday June 9th, 2005 12:16 pm MDT

Re: Trading With The Enemies Act of 1933

Postby Admin » Sunday April 30th, 2006 10:14 am MDT

:h: Hobie:
You misunderstood the relationship that causes Corp. U.S. to become the owner of everything. It has nothing to do with Federal Reserve Notes (hereinafter “FRN”):
hobie wrote:If I understand you correctly, you're saying also that the use of FRNs (the corporation's notes) to "gain a purchase" on anything leads to the Corporation's being the "owner" of it...?
That has nothing to do with it. The Social Security Administration (hereinafter “SSA”) has everything to do with it. The simple facts are:
  • They were bankrupt so they realigned their bankruptcy with fiat FRNs that could be exchanged in spite of Corp. U.S.' bankruptcy.
  • Under the bankruptcy they were extremely vulnerable to attack unless they were to form alliances with their “enemies” thus neutralizing their enemies.
  • Enter the SSA — they make Corp. U.S. the Beneficiary of the trusts they create.
  • Though such trusts make the purchases the beneficiary of those trusts is Corp. U.S. therefore it is also the equitable owner of all of the property so purchased.
  • When the people stop exchanging labor (for its value) and purchasing things in their own natural capacity and start only transacting relations through those trust’s Taxpayer Identification Numbers the people stop being the owners and those trusts start acquiring ownership of everything so purchased.
The result has nothing to do with the FRN except for the fact that the note is actually a fiat note, issued with no backing to a bankrupt corporation (so that it can stay in business), having no real value at all, and with it the people of this country effectively grant their labor exclusively to the support of Corp. U.S.

The people are placated with the satisfaction that they are temporarily free to manage the affairs of such trusts so as to provide themselves with whatever creature comforts such trusts can provide, so long as they live.

Corp. U.S. is satisfied to take only what it demands through distributions to it from the trusts (taxpayers).

Again the FRN has almost nothing to do with the process and it adds nothing to the exchange. It is simply a transaction vehicle that satisfies the people as they exchange goods and services for said trusts (the actual taxpayers)—they give the people the feeling of having something of value.

As to the quitclaim of Corp. U.S. to the IMF: the definition of a quitclaim is one party granting the assets they may have in a thing to another party. When, under the Bretton Woods Agreement (1944), Corp. U.S. granted the IMF the “special drawing rights” to the United States Treasury they made the United States Treasury the IMF’s checking account, thus effectively quitclaiming Corp. U.S. to the IMF. Certainly granting those drawing rights to the IMF gave the IMF control over the United States Treasury and thus control over Corp. U.S. In the process, Corp. U.S. maintained the authority to control the governors and general managers of both the IMF and of the World Bank, thus making Corp. U.S.’s President the foreign corporate dictator over the whole affair. The caps you referred to are arbitrary. They simply allow for appearance of a limitation on the IMF’s ability to create credit out of nothing to loan to countries around the world. They also allow for additional clout behind the Corp. U.S. President’s dictatorial authority over the IMF’s control.

We hope this information is helpful to you.
Tell everybody about Team Law! :t^:
Team Law,

"In memory of our God, our faith, and freedom,
and of our spouses, our children, and our peace.
"


As with all Forum posts, comments made by Admin are:
copyrighted—all rights reserved; and, provided here for educational purposes only.

Hobie
Registered User
Registered User
Posts: 8
Joined: Wednesday December 21st, 2005 12:55 am MST

Re: Trading With The Enemies Act of 1933

Postby Hobie » Monday May 1st, 2006 12:40 am MDT

Hi, Admin -
Thanks again. The cleverness of the whole thing would be cause for some kind of admiration, if it weren't diabolical. :)

Googling, I've seen reference to Acts passed in other countries where the Special Drawing Rights are also mentioned. Is it the case that some other countries' governmental Corporations were also quitclaimed at the same time? Or is the situation in those other countries somehow substantially different?
--hobie

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1581
Joined: Thursday June 9th, 2005 12:16 pm MDT

Re: Trading With The Enemies Act of 1933

Postby Admin » Monday May 1st, 2006 4:04 am MDT

:h: Hobie:
Whether or not the whole thing is diabolical depends on one’s perspective. If you can see the system allows anyone knowing the law to easily maintain their private sovereign control of their private relationships and still allows them to limitedly control Corp. U.S., you can see the system is actually quite amazing; reserving for the people the ability to restore our actual government if we become competent to do so. Otherwise, it also allows people the appearance of freedom even though the environment they develop using the Social Security number actually belongs to their covert controllers. There is no similarity to such a system in all of the world. Clever? Yes. Diabolical? Who knows. We expect that answer will only possibly be discovered in the end if the question has any real cause for interest.

As to the international relations of the IMF, we have only reviewed their relationships outside of this country minimally. Suffice it to say, they have directive and or financial control over virtually every country in the world and they are controlled by the Corp. U.S. President operating under the Bank of International Settlements. Considering that the solution we offer is educational assistance only there seems to be no reason for us to delve into such foreign affairs at this time in any comprehensive manner. At the very least it is the most polite communistic regime in the history of mankind.

We hope this information is helpful to you.
Tell everybody about Team Law! :t^:
Team Law,

"In memory of our God, our faith, and freedom,
and of our spouses, our children, and our peace.
"


As with all Forum posts, comments made by Admin are:
copyrighted—all rights reserved; and, provided here for educational purposes only.

User avatar
Zeal
Beneficiary
Beneficiary
Posts: 27
Joined: Friday June 17th, 2005 4:30 pm MDT

Re: Trading With The Enemies Act of 1933

Postby Zeal » Saturday May 27th, 2006 9:47 pm MDT

So is the Homeland Security junk just a further extension of the trading with the enemies act in that every agent of corp US is led to believe that they cannot do business with any person who does not have a TIN or govt issued ID (i.e. - another corp US agent)?

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1581
Joined: Thursday June 9th, 2005 12:16 pm MDT

Re: Trading With The Enemies Act of 1933

Postby Admin » Monday May 29th, 2006 1:01 pm MDT

:h: Steve:
We wouldn’t say “just” and extension of such. It is more than that. The simple reality is, under the 1933 bankruptcy, they cannot lawfully do business with anyone other than Corp. U.S. agencies except by private contract and/or private permission, which people generally give them at will if they are not already acting in the capacity of a Corp. U.S. agent (see Myth 22’s points of Prerequisite Knowledge).

We hope this information is helpful to you.
Tell everybody about Team Law! :t^:
Team Law,

"In memory of our God, our faith, and freedom,
and of our spouses, our children, and our peace.
"


As with all Forum posts, comments made by Admin are:
copyrighted—all rights reserved; and, provided here for educational purposes only.

Amicuscuriae
Registered
Posts: 1
Joined: Saturday October 6th, 2012 11:37 pm MDT

Re: Trading With The Enemies Act of 1933

Postby Amicuscuriae » Wednesday October 10th, 2012 11:41 pm MDT

Admin wrote:They did not; rather they simply accepted the results of the 1933 banking holiday and the new codes that recognized the people of the United States of America as the enemies of Corp. U.S. continuing on as if nothing ever happened.

and
Team Law wrote:11th: In 1933, Corp. U.S. is bankrupt, they force a banking holiday to exchange money backed Federal Reserve Notes with “legal tender” Federal Reserve Notes the Trading with the Enemies Act is adjusted to recognize the people of the United States as enemies of Corp. U.S.

While reading Team Law's "Historical Outline," I came across the information titling this forum topic (the TWEA amendment of 1933). Well I did what I normally do with information I come across (and just as Team Law recommends), I researched it for myself. I went into the 1917 TWEA and compared it with the 1933 TWEA amendments. At the beginning of both versions of the Act (both 1917's version and 1933's version), the first section is titled "Definitions," wherein the word "enemy" is defined. In both versions, the definition of "enemy" remains the same. Also, the 1933 amendments did not amend the "Definitions" section at all.

So what "codes" did you find that prove "people of the United States of America" are enemies of Corp. U.S. which were not overruled by the "Definitions" section of the Act?

I know this Act has had standing ever since 1917 (under Corp. U.S. President declaring "emergencies" or under declared times of war), however the I.M.F. did not have control of the Federal Reserve System until 1944, so up until that time "people of the United States of America" were not considered foreign to Corp. U.S. So, between 1917 - 1944, the TWEA, according to my interpretation of the "Definitions" section, did not apply to "people of the United States of America."

I will be grateful for your time to answer my question from above, if you so choose.

User avatar
Admin
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1581
Joined: Thursday June 9th, 2005 12:16 pm MDT

Re: Trading With The Enemies Act of 1933

Postby Admin » Wednesday October 17th, 2012 8:47 pm MDT

:h: Amicuscuriae:
The “Definitions” section is § 2, not § 1; however, that has no relevance to the gist of your inquiry.

At this moment I have neither Act before me and it has been years since I reviewed those Acts. Nonetheless, we do have a few articles that review the gist of the acts; so I will provide a bit of text from those Acts; and, from that we will see if we can help you resolve your inquiry.

Respectively, let’s take a look at the law in question:
On, October 6, 1917, at: Public Law No. 65-91 (40 Stat. L. 411), Congress wrote:CHAP. 106. - An Act to define, regulate, and punish trading with the enemy, and for other purposes.

Sec. 2(c) Such other individuals, or body or class of individuals, as may be natives, citizens, or subjects of any nation with which the United States is at war, other than citizens of the United States, wherever resident or wherever doing business, as the President, if he shall find the safety of the United States or the successful prosecution of the war shall so require, may, by proclamation, include within the term "enemy."

Sec. 5(b) That the President may investigate, regulate or prohibit, under such rules as he may prescribe by means of foreign exchange, export or earmarkings of gold or silver coin or bullion or currency, transfers of credit in any form other than credits relating to transactions to be executed wholly within the United States

In 1933 Sec. 5(b) was changed to:
At Sec. 5(b), Congress wrote:During time of war or any other period of national emergency declared by the President, the President may, through any agency that he may designate, or otherwise, investigate, regulate, or prohibit, under such rules and regulations as he may prescribe, by means of licenses or otherwise, any transactions in foreign exchange, transfers of credit between or payments by banking institutions as defined by the President, and export, hoarding, melting, or earmarkings of gold or silver coin or bullion or currency by any person within the United States or any place subject to the jurisdiction thereof; and the President may require any person engaged in any transaction referred to in this subdivision to furnish under oath, complete information relative thereto, including the production of any books of account, contracts, letters or other papers in connection therewith in the custody or control of such person, either before or after such transaction is completed

Thus, the Act was expanded to include any period of national emergency, any transaction and any people. In 1970, Congress again adjusted that section to remove the “any other period of national emergency”; but by then the issue was not as critical because Corp. U.S. had by then well established the social security cardholder agency relationship so that they could control the resource in a far more powerful way.

Today, the Homeland Security Act and, that which follows, should clearly exemplify that Corp. U.S. considers the people of the United States of America as their biggest nemesis. However, so long as the people remain ignorant of our laws and our history, that threat does not worry them too much.

As you are reviewing such matters it is always a good idea not only to follow the Standard for Review, but also keep in mind the The Cardinal Rule of Definitions and the necessity of keepings matters within their own context.

We hope this information is helpful to you.
Tell everybody about Team Law! :t^:
Team Law,

"In memory of our God, our faith, and freedom,
and of our spouses, our children, and our peace.
"


As with all Forum posts, comments made by Admin are:
copyrighted—all rights reserved; and, provided here for educational purposes only.


Return to “Miscellaneous Topics”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests