Cult of Personality

The word “PERSON” comes from the Greek word “PERSONA”, meaning ‘mask’ – the masks that people wear – “personhood” – especially the VIPs; the ones with titles and status; this is a very strange feudal concept, but most important to know; because this is the root cause of society’s problems; this is what gives corporations and governments power to ride slipshod over people rights, to confiscate their private property and to destroy the earth and the environment;

Today we live in a cult of personality, a legal fiction paper world that has come to rule over Life itself; Bastiat said it best:


BASTIAT - the state is


Many have tried to explain it; but, it can turn out long-winded, so here goes;

Take your birth certificate or identity document or driver’s licence; 

Next, stand in front of a mirror;   in the mirror you will see two objects:

  1. One object is you: a natural man or a woman; 
  2. The other object is a piece of paper; however, this piece of paper with your ALL CAPITAL NAMES on it, is known in legal circles as a “PERSON”; 

You are not a ‘person’; you are a ‘people’; yes, it is correct to say ‘a people’ [singular] and ‘people’ [plural];

Think about it, your country’s Constitution says: “We, the people…” and not: “We, the persons…”

We, were purposefully indoctrinated into call ourselves a “person” and not a “people” or a “wo/man”; and, there is a very specific reason for this indoctrination education; it is the product of a feudal system: designed to convert our living equal status into that of fictional slave status; this crime of conversion is commonly known as ‘personage’;

And, it suits CORPORATIONS… the scourge of the 20th and 21st Century; think about it,  government – people relationship is a Trust relationship: we trust that our officials will keep their oath – their word – to protect our freedoms, our rights, our property and our country; it is called ‘fiduciary trust’; but, just as what was done to us, the Express Trusts were also ‘converted’ into CORPORATIONS;

In order to restore Republican forms of government:

  1.  we must remove the feudal BAR legal system;
  2. we must “re-publicate” corporations back to Trusts;

Legal scholars can argue these points all they want, but it is time to remove the mask of personhood and be accountable as equals and peers before [educated] juries, public hearings, tribunals or Truth & Reconciliation Commissions; and, according to Restorative Justice Principles;

THIS IS THE ONLY WAY TO PIERCE THE PREVAILING CORPORATE VEIL: Lift those that are causing harm and loss to the 99% out from behind the CORPORATION;



Meet your STRAWMAN

Next, we ask you to watch this 5 minute cartoon giving another explanation:



Are you beginning to see the picture?

Legal Definition of: MEN OF STRAW. Men who used in former days to ply about courts of law, so called from their manner of making known their occupation, (i. e., by a straw in one of their shoes,) recognized by the name of “straw-shoes.” An advocate or lawyer who wanted a convenient witness knew by these signs where to meet with one, and the colloquy between the parties was brief. “Don’t you remember?” said the advocate; to which the ready answer was, “To be sure I do.” “Then come into court and swear it?’ And straw-shoes went into court and swore. Athens abounded in straw-shoes. Quart. Rev. vol. 33, p. 344.  [Black’s Law Dictionary 4th Edition, 1968-71]


STRAWMAN — The Real Story Of Your Artificial Person

A private work by: clint > richardson

This is not a published book

It is not a product of or in any artful form of commerce, nor is it intended for such public means or ends. It carries neither a “fiction” or “non-fiction” title. Rather, it is a 3-dimensional explanation of both, and of that eternal battle between the spirit and the flesh.

Remnants of the history of political activism, such as Paine’s “Age of Reason,” Bastiat’s “The Law,” and the inceptive “Areopagitica” by Milton, were all created in the form of what are known as pamphlets. These were also not “published” books per se, but statements of inert and often self-evident reason with only as many words as are necessary to create a clear and empathetic expression of one’s thoughts, printed sometimes anonymously and thus privately so as to be distributable by a people seeking change in political and moral opinion and disposition. The purpose of those pamphlets was to spread knowledge and often a quite dissenting comprehension of current and foundational political views, customs, and norms, and to expose unseen legal atrocities without the commercial intent to acquire personal gain from those works.

In other words, they were not “approved” or “welcomed” by the combined powers of church and state.

Download the pdf:


What is in a NAME?

Memorandum of Law on the Name – Many people are involved in diligent research concerning the use of all capital letters for proper names, e.g., JOHN PAUL JONES as a substitute for John Paul Jones in all court documents, driver’s licenses, bank accounts, birth certificates, etc.. Is the use of all capital letters to designate a name some special English grammar rule or style? Is it a contemporary American style of English? Is the use of this form of capitalization recognized by educational authorities? Is this an official judicial or U.S. government rule and/or style of grammar? Why do attorneys, court clerks, prosecutors judges, insurance companies, banks, credit card companies, utility companies, etc. always use all capital letters when writing a proper name?

Download 22 page explanation: memorandum-of-law-on-the-name


What manner of person are you?

Just exactly what is the legal definition of a ‘person’?

Download pdf: what-manner-of-person-are-you


Where does the ‘person’ come from?

We can find very little historical or legal  commentary on this strange phenomenon; but, we will tell you what we have discovered;

The Holy Bible [KJV 1611] clearly states that God is ‘no respecter of the person of man’:

Download text: on-person-of-man-kjv

It is clear from the comments of Jesus and the Apostles that the ‘person of man’ was well known in that time; and, it was used within the Roman Empire, especially within the cities while in the country the Free citizens of Rome had no use for it;

Different “stiles” of names were used in Ancient Roman Civil Law as a means of distinguishing between free men, bondservants, and slaves:

“mary jane doe” stile indicates a free woman;

“Mary Jane Doe” indicates a bondservant, and,

“MARY JANE DOE” indicates a slave;

Today, we live in a cult of personality; a world wherein we all hide behind a mask; some hide behind a collective mask such as a CORPORATION, COURT, GOVERNMENT, PARTNERSHIP etc.

And, everyone has a “personal” mask aka “person” aka MAN OF STRAW aka STRAWMAN; and, all other masks arise from it;


They Stole Our Names…..And Now, They’ve Lost Them

Sunday, July 31, 2016


by Anna Von Reitz

What I am going to tell you all today is going to blow your minds— if they aren’t staggered already.

First, the rats under FDR pretended that our Trade Names, the Upper and Lower Case names we were taught to use in grade school styled like this:  Felix Morton Morganthau —- were actually Foreign Situs Trusts belonging to the “Federal Government” doing business as the United States of America (Inc.) and represented franchises of that bankrupt private, mostly foreign owned governmental services corporation.
So, those entrusted to act as public servants instead acted as public hogs and placed false claims against the American nation-states and the American People.  And our parents and grandparents were so trusting they didn’t catch on.
Year after year, they toiled away, paying debts for crooks—-debts they never owed. They didn’t even get a thank you for it.  The perpetrators snuck off with their buddies in the Beltway and snickered to themselves and patted themselves on the back and sucked up and siphoned off the wealth of America while sending our young men and women off to war for profits—and not even profits for themselves, but profits for the perpetrators of these abuses.
So they stole our names and bankrupted them and now, they’ve lost all record of them.
You have to go back to court and do an adult name change from FELIX MORTON MORGANTHAU back to Felix Morton Morganthau.
Even worse, they’ve done the same thing with the States.
Where does this bunko stop?  Where in the name of Jesus does it end?
You have to adopt your own given Name and then you have to seize upon and reconvey the bogus franchise trust NAMES, too.  And Expatriate them.  And bring suit against the rats in the proper venue.
And you have to do this to save yourselves and your country.
Do you hate this situation yet?  Do you feel betrayed yet?
You’ve been subjected to the greatest fraud and identity theft in human history and the people you have relied upon to protect you and your interests and paid well to do so—- are the ones that have done this to you and yours.
If you aren’t righteously angry enough to get up off your couch and start talking and walking, too, then I don’t know what I can say to you.
See this article and over 300 others on Anna’s website




“A” Does Not Equal “A”

What We Know About “YOU

by Judge Anna von Reitz

Here is what we know so far— the “UNITED STATES” subrogated our NAMES under an insurance policy. This was required because they are still operating under the Reconstruction Acts and trying to pretend that we are “unknown” babies “found” on a “battlefield” by the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE which is obligated to then issue an insurance indemnity receipt under the provisions of the Lieber Code. The Birth Certificate is an insurance indemnity receipt and it identifies YOU as being a ward of the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, in their custody.

But what is “YOU”—?

It’s an ACCOUNT, as in bank ACCOUNT set up in your name….. first of all. And from that meager beginning, they have spun off an array of “associated” names and accounts—- until in 1976 they had to redefine “YOU” as an “International Organization”. That same year, they passed the International Organizations Act granting “YOU” immunity.

Read full article:


It’s Your Copyright, Or, Stop Being Stupid Part 32

Posted on February 14, 2017 by David Robinson

Judge Anna von Reitz

The rats seize upon your given name while you are still a babe in your cradle, and they establish a false copyright on it, claiming that it is the name of a debtor to their corporation. They then set up an ACCOUNT in your GIVEN NAME to service the debt. Then throughout your life they have addressed claims against that NAME and they have hired the American Bar Association to operate their corporate tribunals as debt collection agencies under color of law, disguised as American public courts, to collect those debts.

That is the essence of the daily fleecing of America.

It is a little hard to wrap your head around the first go, so let’s examine it step by step and a bit deeper.

A baby— let’s give him the name “Paul Anthony Mitchell” is born in Hennepin County, Minnesota.

What should happen is that his name should be recorded as a land asset. He comes from the land and returns to the land —- “For dust thou art, and to dust returneth”.

This is a recording — not a “registration”.

A recording is a public record of an event or testimony or ownership interest in private property, etc., while a “registration” involves international commerce and involves giving up all or part of your ownership interest in the asset being registered.

Little Paul Anthony Mitchell is the “Holder in Due Course” of the name and estate. His interest must be recorded by his parents or there is no public record in his favor. Instead, the local federal franchise “state” doing business in this case as the “State of Minnesota” registers his name instead, and in so doing, makes him a “ward of the state”.

Once he is a “ward of the state” he becomes property belonging to the state corporation and not to his parents. When he comes of age, if he does not correct this “presumed” political status, he remains a “ward of the state” for the rest of his life—-and the state “inherits” all the benefit of his name and estate. He remains a chattel property and dependent.

This de facto process of undisclosed enslavement has been used against virtually all Americans and this form of slavery has been continuously practiced by the “United States Government” since the 1860’s, first against black people and “rebels” and later against virtually everyone on this continent.

In promoting this practice the vermin responsible have violated both international law and the actual Constitution we are all owed at birth—-and, importantly, they have infringed upon your Common Law Copyright guaranteed by the Copyright Act of 1790.

The foreign federal franchise “State of Minnesota” has no natural right nor ability to use your given name. You have not knowingly nor willingly consented to give your name to them for any such purposes as they propose. So, what to do?

They have set up a collection account under the trademark “PAUL ANTHONY MITCHELL” or, more recently, “PAUL A. MITCHELL”—- these “marks” or “images” or “glossas” are not names; they only appear to be names. They are actually trademarks that have also been created by the perpetrators of this vast fraud and crimes of personage.

And once again, they are infringing on your trademark as the natural Holder in Due Course of the given name.

How can any of this be legal?

Well, they gave you an insurance indemnity receipt guaranteed by the UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE that your property would not be harmed or lost. That insurance indemnity receipt is known as a BIRTH CERTIFICATE.


So how to deal this situation? Our research thus far indicates that you need to establish by Published Notice and Recording a Common Law Copyright on your own given Name. This corrects the failure of your parents to do this for you.

You also need to collect at least one, preferably more, Statements of Witnesses, from credible people having first-hand knowledge of you and your family, confirming that you are in fact the man or woman whose live birth occurred at such and such a time and place. These statements must be sworn or affirmed from “without the United States” and further witnessed by a public notary.

Next, you must give Notice of Fiduciary Relationship (IRS Form 56) to the government officials responsible for the existence of YOUR NAME.

You return “HIM” via an authenticated Birth Certificate signed over to the Secretary of the Treasury “without recourse” for the benefit of “The United States of America — Minnesota State” and “surrender” of the DEBTOR.

In this, you are acting as a Bounty Hunter serving the lawful government of your state.

HE is now imprisoned, legally “dead” and unable to cause any more problems. When the rats start issuing BIRTH CERTIFICATES in the “name of ” PAUL A. MITCHELL the same process has to be followed to put HIM out of his misery.

Of course, there will continue to be references made to HIM and ACCOUNTS set up in his NAME, but that is not your concern anymore, is it? The bills addressed to HIM now go back to the Internal Revenue Service for payment and credit, and it is up to them to establish transparent and user-friendly processes to expedite this.

This is not an easy or well-defined process. In fact, it has been deliberately obscured by those profiting from our ignorance, however, the Internal Revenue Service is the organization responsible for providing you with enforcement and once the Internal Revenue Service has been given proper Notice of the circumstances and your actions to correct, they have proven more than capable and willing to go after the perpetrators of this scheme.

When it ceases to be profitable, it will end.

Many people feel qualms about “surrendering” the STRAWMAN back to the Treasury, because they mistakenly feel an attachment to something that appears to be their own NAME.

In fact, all they are “giving up” is a debt they do not owe and all they are doing is shutting down the mechanisms by which their own copyright and trademarks are being infringed upon and enclosed by foreign and predatory interests. In the process, by returning “HIM” to the Treasury, they also pay off the so-called National Debt and help balance the accounts.

I have often observed that we are owed a National Credit equal to the National Debt— a credit that is not being applied. When you turn in the STRAWMAN and appoint the Treasury Secretary your Fiduciary, you enable him to offset and apply the credit that is owed. This, in turn, reduces the National Debt by an equal amount, refunds the government of your actual state of the Union, and unblocks your own accounts.

Anti-intuitive as it seems, the Treasury Secretary and the Internal Revenue Service are supposed to be your best friends and the means of enforcing your lawful interests.

So if you are sick and tired of “business as usual” in these United States, it is more than past the hour when you must evaluate your actual position with respect to the federal corporations and determine whether you serve the government (that is, function as a “citizen”) or wish the government to serve you (that is, claim “state national” political status).

Realize that some people are obligated to function as citizens by their own choices—- federal civilian and military personnel are all citizens according to occupation, likewise elected officials serving the federal corporations and their state of state franchises. African Americans were never granted state national status and have to instead claim “equal civil rights”. Likewise, first generation immigrants, political asylum seekers, and people receiving federal welfare benefits are stuck claiming equal civil rights.

In this discussion it is important to note that despite recent federal efforts to “redefine” Social Security payments as “welfare benefits”—- this is not the understanding or representation that the Social Security Administration made at the time you signed up and you need merely object to any such interpretation and require the blackguards to prove that you are NOT retired from any and all federal employment.

In days to come, our political focus must shift away from such idiocies as transgender public bathrooms to forcing the rats to address the political standing of the American People and the debts owed to us. There is at present no simple and easy and straight forward method for Americans to record and enforce their interests in their own names and estates.

The Internal Revenue Service is ready and willing to assist us, if and when we can demonstrate a substantial knowledge of the whole situation and a willingness on our parts to take the actions necessary to prosecute our claims.

In addition to reiterating and publishing and recording our Common Law Copyright and Trademark interests in our own given names and estates, in addition to re-establishing our true identity via witnesses, and returning the STRAWMAN to the Treasury, we need to take these issues up with President Trump and the members of “Congress” responsible for the predatory practices of the federal corporations with respect to us—– to the people they are supposed to be serving.

It is more than past the time for peace to be declared and for these dishonorable and criminal practices on the part of the federal corporations and their state of state franchises to cease.


Capitis Diminutio Maxima

Sun, 10/26/2008 – 23:28 — Arthur Cristian

Capitis Diminutio Maxima (Name in ALL CAPITALS)

For purposes of understanding one’s legal or commercial status under the Admiralty system (the law system used in England, Canada and much of the US), it is necessary to examine the curious use of all CAPS -Capitis Diminutio Maxima- in legal and domestic income tax forms, credit cards & statements, loans, mortgages, speeding & parking tickets, car documents, taxes, court summons etc.

While seemingly a trite concern, this apparently small detail has extremely deep significance for all of us!

Gage Canadian Dictionary 1983 Sec. 4 defines Capitalize adj. as “To take advantage of – To use to one’s own advantage.”

Black’s Law Dictionary — Revised 4th Edition 1968, provides a more comprehensive definition as follows…

Capitis Diminutio (meaning the diminishing of status through the use of capitalization) In Roman law. A diminishing or abridgment of personality; a loss or curtailment of a man’s status or aggregate of legal attributes and qualifications.

Capitis Diminutio Minima (meaning a minimum loss of status through the use of capitalization, e.g. John Doe) – The lowest or least comprehensive degree of loss of status. This occurred where a man’s family relations alone were changed. It happened upon the arrogation [pride] of a person who had been his own master, (sui juris,) [of his own right, not under any legal disability] or upon the emancipation of one who had been under the patria potestas. [Parental authority] It left the rights of liberty and citizenship unaltered. See Inst. 1, 16, pr.; 1, 2, 3; Dig. 4, 5, 11; Mackeld. Rom.Law, 144.

Capitis Diminutio Media (meaning a medium loss of status through the use of capitalization, e.g. John DOE) – A lessor or medium loss of status. This occurred where a man loses his rights of citizenship, but without losing his liberty. It carried away also the family rights.

Capitis Diminutio Maxima (meaning a maximum loss of status through the use of capitalization, e.g. JOHN DOE or DOE JOHN) – The highest or most comprehensive loss of status. This occurred when a man’s condition was changed from one of freedom to one of bondage, when he became a slave. It swept away with it all rights of citizenship and all family rights.

Diminutio. Lat. In civil law. Diminution; a taking away; loss or depravation.

CAPITE. Lat. By the head.

Tenure in capite was an ancient feudal tenure, whereby a man held lands of the king immediately. It was of two sorts,—the one, principal and general, or of the king as the source of all tenure ; the other, special and subaltern, or of a particular subject. It is now abolished. Jacob. As to distribution per capita, see Capita, per.

CAPITE MINUTUS. In the civil law. One who had suffered capitis diminutio, one who lost status or legal attributes. See Dig. 4, 5.

CAPITIS DIMINUTIO. In Roman law. A diminishing or abridgment of personality; a loss or curtailment of a man’s status or aggregate of legal attributes and qualifications.

CAPITIS DIMINUTIO MAXIMA. The highest or most comprehensive loss of status. This occurred when a man’s condition was changed from one of freedom to one of bondage, when he became a slave. It swept away with it all rights of citizenship and all family rights.

CAPITIS DIMINUTIO MEDIA. A lesser or medium loss of status. This occurred where a man lost his rights of citizenship, but without losing his liberty. It carried away also the family rights.

CAPITIS DIMINUTIO MINIMA. The lowest or least comprehensive degree of loss of status. This occurred where a man’s family relations alone were changed. It happened upon the arrogation of a person who had been his own master, (sui juris,) or upon the emancipation of one who had been under the patria potestas. It left the rights of liberty and citizenship unaltered. See Inst. 1, 16, pr.

DE CAPITE MINUTIS. Of those who have lost their status, or civil condition. Dig. 4, 5. The name of a title in the Pandects. See Capitis Deminutio.

DEMINUTIO. In the civil law. A taking away; loss or deprivation. See Capitis Deminutio.

DIMINUTIO. In the civil law. Diminution; a taking away; loss or deprivation. Diminutio capitis, loss of status or condition. See Capitis Diminutio.

DIMINUTION. Incompleteness. A word signifying that the record sent up from an inferior to a superior court for review is incomplete, or not fully certified. In such case the party may suggest a “diminution of the record,” which may be rectified by a certiorari. 2 Tidd, Pr. 1109; Stepp v. Stepp, 195 Ga. 595, 25 S.E.2d 6, 8.

WERA, or WERE. The estimation or price of a man, especially of one slain. In the criminal law of the Anglo-Saxons, every man’s life had its value, called a “were,” or “capitis cestimatio.”

‘ESTIMATIO CAPITIS. Lat. The value of a head.

In Saxon law, the estimation or valuation of the head; the price or value of a man. The price to be paid for taking the life of a human being. By the laws of Athelstan, the life of every man not excepting that of the king himself, was estimated at a certain price, which was called the were, or cestimatio capitis. Crabb, Eng.Law, c. 4.




 Did you know that the “BERTH CERTIFICATE” aka “PERSON” aka “STRAWMAN” is trading on the stock-markets?






Birth Certificate Bond

How To Look Up Your Birth Certificate On The Stock Market


Uploaded on Jul 8, 2010

Instruction 8 Birth Certificate –

For Instructions on the birth certificate to see if they are trading on it go to – Click on Research – Click on Quote – Click on ‘Symbol Look Up’ – Type in the Birth Number on the Birth Certificate, the first three numbers.

Make sure the top two areas say MUTUAL FUND and FUND NUMBER BEFORE You do the search to find out who is trading on the FUND for the Birth Certificate.

Original method: Birth Certificate Stock Proof… (No longer works).

Unanswered questions:

  1. What exactly is the red number on my un-abridged Birth Certificate?
  2. Why is the number not identified as to its function?
  3. Is it a ‘bond tracking’ number?
  4. If so, when was a bond generated?
  1. Who generated it?
  2. Did they enjoy informed consent?
  1. What is the current value of the bond, assuming there is one?
  2. Who owns title to that bond?
  3. Does that bond generate revenue?
  4. Does my pledge, promise, oath or obligation, support the bond, if there is one?
  5. If yes, when did I pledge, promise or make oath?
  6. If there is no money in my bond generating revenue, who stole my money?
  7. Who initially put money in the bond?
  8. Is interest paid on that bond?
  9. If so, to whom and how much interest is paid?
  10. Does the revenue generated by the bond, if there is any, form part of the ‘Federal Transfer Payments’ the National and Provincial levels of government bicker over?
  11. Would either level of representation have the right to control or access those payments if they were not acting as a representative?
  12. To whom do those Federal Transfer Payments actually belong?
  13. Is there a fiduciary over the bond?
  14. If so, who is fiduciary?
  15. If not does, this mean NO ONE is in charge of the bond?
  16. Is it true we have the right to deny consent to be represented and thus governed?
  17. Has your hand been ‘in the cookie jar’?

Please answer these questions as herein directed. Many people want and need to know the answers to these simple questions. If you cannot or will not answer them, all must conclude that you are grossly incapable of representing me, and appropriate and lawful steps will then be taken.



Did you know that they did the same with lawful government?  

Did you know that RSA (INC.) and what we think of as “government” is in truth merely foreign privately-owned, federal, corporate franchises? Therefore, FRONTING as “lawful government?




By or before ANY court? By any judge or magistrate? By any police? By any agent of RSA? By any election official? At any voting station? By any census official? Home Affairs?

Then where is the consideration for giving up our unalienable rights?