Introduction
I wrote this book because I feel that the cannabis users, as well as all passionate users of psychedelics in general, (who are the least harmful members of society, overall), are being unduly burdened by the drug laws and there are solutions that most people are completely unaware of. I’ve talked to several thousand people on Venice Beach in California from 1991 to 1997 and have come to the conclusion that very few people know very much about politics and how things really work. I’ve studied the new world order & secret societies for 20 Years now and “sovereignty” and the law for 15 Years. I’ve been a hemp and legalization activist since 1991 and I feel that it is very important for people in the hemp movement to learn about sovereignty & sovereign politics. Hemp is sovereignty! The Founding Fathers knew it and hemp helped the founding fathers to make early America sovereign and free from Great Britain. I was raided and arrested even though I had a doctor’s recommendation. It didn’t matter in Los Angeles even though there were people selling it out of a Cannabis Co-op in West Hollywood, which is in Los Angeles County as well. I had the option to use the information presented in this book or to go with a liar, I mean lawyer. I went with the lawyer at first, and then I abandoned everything to use the information in this book, and then I turned everything around. But, it’s not just black and white. In matters of the courts, nothing is always the same, and the oppressors have many tricks up their sleeves. In fact, they have sleeves hidden within their sleeves, with even more tricks hidden still.
What happened to me, looking back in retrospect, was the best thing that could have ever happened because it enabled me to break free from the mental constraints and true bondage I was in, by using the information I had learned, in court. Ninety-nine percent of our enslavement is in our minds. But this enslavement is as real as the prison they place our physical bodies in. The fear of judges and prosecutors, and fear of jail, keeps us in line, and forever obeying the authorities, regardless how criminal they are. My experience taught me that everything I feared about cops, prosecutors, and judges, was all in my mind, and that the only thing they had over me was my own lack of understanding about the system and how it operates against me. It gave me an opportunity to come to grips with my worst nightmares and to confront them. But confronting them is the scariest step one may undertake in their lifetime. This enables us to grow in ways we can only imagine, and for me, I’ve grown tremendously from my experiences. Now, when I go through legal troubles, they are no longer looked at as problems, but rather, as challenges that I have to overcome on my personal road to freedom. This is the path I have chosen, and if you choose this as your path, this book will hopefully serve as a lighthouse in the fog.
There is extremely powerful information in this book. Do not be fooled by simplicity. If you decide to use it, it is at your own risk and should not be construed as legal advice. I used some of the information presented here, but I was not confident enough or knowledgeable enough to go all the way through with it. However, I used it to the degree that I got satisfaction and partial remedy that I wanted. I felt like I needed to write this book to let people know what potential powers lie in simple information and how it can be used to keep people from getting caught up in the debtor/prison and how we can be free people once again. Our power lies as much in the bluff as theirs. As soon as we all know the secrets to their “game” we can individually call their bluff and their resistance will be weakened slowly until the power structure comes crumbling down with the incapacity to deal with the pure truth. The truth can be very, very, devastating to corrupt and heartless individuals looking to prey upon helpless citizens.
The majority of politicians do not know the facts and law contained in this book. Do not take this information for granted. All judges know this information and most, but not all lawyers do as well. None of the police out there know any of this information as a rule, however there are some dedicated good policemen who do follow these truths and know them well. The information in this book, if used properly, may be the only thing that guarantees your freedom. It all depends on how it is applied.
This book primarily deals with “sovereignty.” We are all sovereigns unto ourselves. Sovereignty is best understood this way: We were born onto this planet by our creator’s will, our own will, and this earth and all of its inhabitants are part of the natural order. Mankind has created “laws” to be used to regulate the activities of people. However, if one has not agreed to be bound to any set laws or regulations, then he is a law unto himself, hence he is a “sovereign.”
The Kings in Europe are all sovereigns, and so are the Pope and the Vatican. To be a sovereign means to be responsible, not unruly. Unruly sovereigns are dealt with by other sovereigns. If you are conquered, you are no longer sovereign. To be “free” means to be “sovereign,” and to be “sovereign” means to be “free.” During the course of this book, the reader will learn how we were once free people, and how we became enslaved through the debt based monetary system, and how laws and courts today are set up to keep this practice in place. Since there are many different takes on what “sovereignty” is, I will try to explain really quick right here. Some people and some groups claim that if you do not have a Social Security number or a driver’s license or a birth certificate and you are not registered to vote and you do not have a bank account that you are a “sovereign” and the law cannot touch you. Some others claim that a special “class” exists like “state citizens” instead of federal citizens of the District of Columbia, referred to as “U.S. CITIZENS.” Well after having looked into this extremely closely I have concluded that both are half-truths and neither will get you all the way there. The proof is that there are no cases where they let people go based on one or the other. It may happen here and there, but if there is no consistency, then we are back to where we started. Where is the “sovereignty”? A true “sovereign” would not be subject to the laws and or jurisdiction of the federal or state governments. A true “sovereign” would be able to walk into a court and walk out of that same court and not be dragged off to jail. And a “state citizen” is not even necessarily a citizen of the corporate state, he can be a citizen of the non-corporate state government, hence unencumbered by contractual obligations. I first learned about state citizenship from Richard McDonald in Semi Valley, who is a retired ex-police officer. Richard was both hated and loved by fellow police officers who understood what he was teaching. Richard was in his 60’s or 70’s and he used to “travel” around in his “automobile” without a license or registration. He was a true inspiration and my first teacher, thanks to Jared. Still though, people argue about whether or not citizenship in a state really matters or if being an American national, a Freeman on the Land is a better form of status. The key here is your status and how you see yourself. You may have been a US citizen before, then learned that the contract has undisclosed terms and therefore it’s null and void, due to fraud and non-disclosure.
The reasoning behind “sovereignty” is that after the revolutionary war, the people themselves were to become the sovereigns just as the King of England was at the time. That’s what it meant to be free, white and 21. (No racism implied here, that is another topic altogether. There were black freemen in the Revolutionary War days, as well). You were able to vote as long as you held land or were in possession of some gold or silver. (Specie) Then you were as sovereign as the King. That is also where the phrase “Every man’s home is his castle” comes from. Since after the revolutionary war, we supposedly had no ties to Great Britain, right?
Though this case of Chisholm v Georgia is related to sovereignty of the state and whether or not a state can be sued by a citizen or not, the case gives insight into the mindset of the justices in 1793, in regards to general issues of sovereignty. It would not be a good case to cite in regards to individual sovereignty though because that’s not what the case was ruling on.
“…at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people; and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects…with none to govern but themselves; the citizens of America are equal as fellow citizens, and as joint tenants in the sovereignty.” — Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 U.S. 419 (1793) Page 2 U. S. 456 (Verified)
Another one is Lansing v. Smith from 1829:
“The people of this State, as the successors of its former sovereign, are entitled to all the rights which formerly belonged to the King by his prerogative. Through the medium of their Legislature they may exercise all the powers which previous to the Revolution could have been exercised either by the King alone, or by him in conjunction with his Parliament; subject only to those restrictions which have been imposed by the Constitution of this State or of the U.S.” —
Lansing v. Smith, 21 D. 89., 4 Wendel 9 (1829) (New York)- Lansing vs. Smith, 21 D. 89, 4 Wendell 9, 20 (1829) (Unverified)
In this case, again, the dispute is not about the sovereign individual, but mentions the sovereignty of the people, themselves, in respect to government.
“For when the [American] Revolution took place, the people of each state became themselves sovereign; and in that character hold the absolute right to all their navigable waters, and the soils under them, for their own common use, subject only to the rights since surrendered by the Constitution to the general government.” —
Martin vs. Waddell, 41 US (16 Pet) 367, 410 (1842) – (Verified)
In this following case, the issue at stake was a Chinaman’s laundry business being unfairly regulated by municipal code ordinances and whether prejudice could be allowed to occur since enforcement was being aimed primarily at Asian launderers.
“Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law; but in our system, while sovereign powers are delegated to the agencies of government, Sovereignty itself, remains with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts.” —
Supreme Court Decision, Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356 (1886) (Verified)
And here is what Supreme Court Justice Field had to say: “There is no such thing as a power of inherent sovereignty in the government of the [federal] United States…in this country sovereignty resides in the people, and Congress can exercise no power which they [the sovereign people] have not, by their Constitution entrusted to it: All else is withheld.” – (Unverified)
“The ultimate authority…resides in the people alone.” – James Madison, author of the Bill of Rights, in Federalist Paper No. 46.
Nobody is a higher authority than anyone else right? Then how can anyone tell anyone else what to do? Well, if you talk about these things in a social setting most people will respond with something like, “Well these are the rules that we have agreed to live by in our society.” Anytime you discuss sovereignty, it usually boils down to the same old questions and statements like “We would have lawlessness prevail and how would the murderers and rapists be dealt with?” Then it needs to be explained that those are real crimes with real victims who can make a “claim” and qualify as an injured party as opposed to paper crimes where there is no injured party and there are only “charges.” Cannabis and drug crimes are “paper crimes.” They are crimes on paper, but there is no injured party. There is a big distinction here which warrants consideration. If you think about it, most crimes in our society are consensual crimes, where adults agree to behave in a certain way, and no one gets hurt.
Today, there are alarmists and reactionaries running around claiming that these crimes do have victims, they are just not so apparent, like the babies of crack addicted mothers. If you think about this long enough, the question boils down to “Do we want the government making these decisions for us or are we capable of making them ourselves?” Are we responsible for our actions or is the government responsible for us? If you want to give the government that much responsibility in your own life, why should that have any bearing on my life or the lives of others? Just because a few people are incapable of making decisions about their lives, should we allow the government to assume that none of us are capable of making responsible decisions about our lives? You see, there is a lot of assumption going on here.
The government assumes that we are incapable of regulating ourselves, and that we therefore elect to have them regulate us. This is our fault for allowing the government to assume this about us as individuals. There are two forms of consent in law. That of explicit and that of implied. Silence is a form of “implied consent.”
There is nobody around to make the clear distinction. That is what we leave up to the judges and the juries, right? Well what if you realized that the judges and juries do not operate as they are supposed to, or rather, they are kept from functioning properly due to some form of fraud built into the modern court system which includes profits for the court, acting as a business instead of a judicial venue for justice? Then there is no one left again to make the decisions as to what to do properly and legally. That leaves us as individuals to decide how we choose to govern ourselves.
This was the basic struggle between the Federalists and Anti-Federalists, who wanted less government, or a limited, central government. That is what we got! But somehow it changed over time to control everything we do in our lives. The original intention of the federal government was to represent each of the several States in trade with other nations, so we sent a couple representatives from each state to represent us in the federal government. This was the basis for the District of Columbia and it was limited to 68 square miles. The States delegated a limited jurisdiction to the federal government so as to conduct business in a uniform manner for the benefit of all the states combined as a Union. The States did not give up their power over their jurisdiction or the citizenry.
“Generally, the states of the Union sustain toward each other the relationship of independent sovereigns or independent foreign states”–
States – 81 Corpus Juris Secondum, hereafter referred to as C.J.S. –
Samuel Adams had this to say about the subject in 1789, “I have always been apprehensive that through the weakness of the human mind often discovered in even the wisest and best of men, or the perverseness of the interested, and designing, in as well as out of government; misconstructions would be given to the federal constitution, which would disappoint the views, and expectations of the honest among those who acceded to it, and hazard the liberty, independence and happiness of the people. I was particularly afraid that unless great care should be taken to prevent it, the Constitution in the administration of it would gradually, but swiftly and imperceptivity run into a consolidated government pervading and legislating throughout all the States, not for federal purposes only as it professes, but in all cases whatsoever: Such a government would soon annihilate the Sovereignty of the several States so necessary to the support of the confederated Commonwealth, and sink both in despotism.”
And Thomas Jefferson, in 1821 wrote the following: “It has long, however, been my opinion, and I have never shrunk from its expression…; that the germ of dissolution of our federal government is in the constitution of the federal judiciary: An irresponsible body (for impeachment is hardly a scare-crow) working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing it’s noiseless step like a thief over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall be usurped from the States, and the government of all consolidated into one. To this I am opposed; because, when all government domestic and foreign, in little as in great things, shall be drawn to Washington as the centre of all power, it will render powerless the checks provided of one government on another, and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated. It will be as in Europe, where every man must be either pike or gudgebn, hammer or anvil…If the States look with apathy on this silent descent of their government into the gulf which is to swallow all, we have only to weep over the human character formed uncontrollable but by a rod of iron, and the blasphemers of man, as incapable of self-government, become his true historians.”
We are also independent Sovereignties, it’s just that each one of us hasn’t woken up to the fact that we are in control of our government and its administrative functions. When we believe that we mean nothing, then we have bought their lie, hook, line and sinker, because we are the government “in fact,” not fiction.
The Founding Fathers as we all know grew hemp and we learn in Jack Herer’s book, The Emperor Wears No Clothes, that we did this in order to be independent of the King of England. If that is true, then why has the original intent of the founding fathers been so obfuscated? What happened to America, the free and independent, where the likes of Thomas Jefferson and other hemp farmers first planted their cannabis crops? The Founding Fathers were Freemasons and they set up our Republican form of government for the benefit of the people. The Congressmen and Senators are Trustees presiding over the Trust, in which all the people are the beneficiaries. That was the original intention, and that is still what exists today. However, it is well hidden behind a maze of Bar Association attorney codes and statutes.
How did a federal government ever assume such monumental power? When did we give it to them? It has been slowly happening over a long period of time. The government didn’t just get this way, so this book will take the reader through the evolution in our form of government to the present day. You will have to learn new meanings for words since lawyers have a completely separate language of their own and when you think that something means one thing, you will be surprised to find it really means something else entirely. This will be covered more in chapter 12.
Several times while reading this book, you will probably ask yourself, “What does this have to do with pot and my rights, and whether I can grow or smoke pot or not?” If you read and listen carefully to all the words in this book, you will have a much clearer perspective on your rights, the pot laws and how it all relates to you, the natural man or woman. Sovereignty can take years to learn and it will never be completely acquired as it is an ever expanding process of becoming more sovereign or more free. Freedom is never completely free though because the more freedom you have personally, the more responsibility you have not only to yourself but your fellow man. It does not obligate you anymore, but you are responsible for all you do and that cannot just be shrugged off at will. Freedom only happens after learning the laws and having time to think about them and time to reflect on the truths like the ones brought to light in this book.
So, immediately, it might not free you or pay for your Attorney’s fees, but in the long run, with careful studies, you should become a Freeperson, and may never again need or require the use of an attorney.
During the 1990’s when the freedom movement was in full swing, just as internet browsers were first becoming available to the masses, the country was brewing and boiling over in revolutionary spirit. Militias were forming all over the nation, in local counties in every state and there was quite an energy about to learn and study law and apply the common law to the courts once again. Lots of events were occurring where Christians were getting attacked for teaching the Bible at home to their children and all sorts of minor events, and the patriot movement was becoming the biggest thing in America. It almost became all-out war, I would add, based on what I overheard from the many meetings I attended with Christian patriots at “sovereignty” type seminars and lectures.
We had three main events that occurred in succession. Waco, Ruby Ridge and the Montana Freemen. Where was their justice? At Waco, they basically torched them because they were teaching the bible to their children and they had guns. They were also teaching the common law and sovereignty, which many people are not aware. The roots of the common law movement are rife with controversy, racism and white supremacy, and even black racism and black supremacy, but that came a little later as the cult movement of British Israelism and the Ten Tribes ideology spread among the black disenfranchised and we see the beginning of Moorish Science in sovereignty. This has been continuously used by the far left and the Southern Poverty Law Center, along with the Anti-Defamation League to point to these people as anti-Semites. Well, within the movement there are anti-Semites who actually believe the Jews run the world through a banking conspiracy, but that’s a whole other topic for a whole book and this is not the place to investigate that matter. My recent book, Ancient Psychedelia might be a better place to look for understanding on religious matters and world power structures. Needless to say, I do not see it that way. The Catholic Church has far more power and controls the State of Israel as well as Great Britain.
The freedom to drive without a license is really the same as freedom to use marijuana and the freedom to operate a business without a license is akin to being able to grow and sell one’s own marijuana crop completely unregulated. A farmer never needed a license from the state to grow crops and if an individual didn’t need one in 1790, or in 1840, or in 1890, or in 1920, then why on earth would he need one today? The power to license is the power to tax and the power to turn a natural god given right into a privilege. Also, in here, is the freedom to own a gun, unlicensed, which is very important. If you don’t think so ask the people in Germany what it was like after they took them all away.
So freedom is freedom as long as a man or woman does not injure another or deprive them of their life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, and absent any consensual contract, he/she is not restricted in their movement or actions. When you realize that, then you can start to unravel where your true freedom really is. Freedom is freedom. Think about it that way.
So long as it doesn’t include stepping on the freedoms of others, it is acceptable “freedom.”
This book is not only about pot, cannabis, marijuana, but also about freedom and how we can all be free from oppressive government. But, the path to a cannabis user’s freedom is along the same path of someone who wants to live government free of their lives, and that leads to sovereignty. The greatest threat to the new world order is sovereign nation states and sovereign individuals. That will always be the greatest threat to a one-world government of one mind and one accepted mentality and belief system. And one of the greatest culprits for getting people to think for themselves and act as individuals is cannabis. That should be obvious from the propaganda of “Reefer Madness” and how they tried so hard to manipulate the minds of people to get them to stay away from pot.
This book is not written in a conventional sense. I wrote this book for pot-heads, dead-heads, medical marijuana patients, collectives, smokers, dealers, and growers, who want to learn how to become free of the system. I did not write it to impress any lawyers or to prove anything. I compiled this information, and put it out this way, so the reader or student of freedom can see clearly what has been done to us, and by whom, and how we can deal with it and apply solutions in our own lives should we choose to take personal responsibility for fixing our own mess; the government nobody has cared about paying much attention to. The part of being government, not just watching it. There are those who make things happen, those who watch things happen and those who wonder what happened. Let’s all be the people who make things happen and turn this country around.
One of the books I read when I was 17 or 18 that inspired me more than almost anything else I have ever read was Abbie Hoffman’s “Revolution for the Hell of It,” first published in 1967 or 1968, under the pen name “Free.” This book was one of the most unconventionally written books I have ever read in my life, yet it still inspired me and affected me more than almost anything else I have ever read. The main reason, I believe, that his book was so brilliantly written and inspiring, was because he didn’t let what people thought or said affect him. Hoffman thought for himself and taught the reader to do the same. He didn’t believe the propaganda of the public, and instead created his own. Hoffman advocated becoming your own media, which this book is intended to be. A media of its own for the purposes of sparking an interest in freedom in the minds and hearts of the freethinking people involved in the cannabis culture.
Many people who read this, I imagine, will do exactly what I foolishly did and will go run to the first lawyer they know, or have relations with, ask them to look at something, then ask them if it is true or not. The reader who does this, then would be missing the whole point of this book. This is the last information that the lawyers are ever going to admit or even want to discuss. Believe me as I have tried over and over, and over again. I have discussed these things with many NORMAL lawyers, and I will tell you right now, you probably won’t get anywhere. The reason for that is explained in chapter 12. I have actually witnessed NORMAL attorneys visibly shake when this information was presented to them. I think they know something they are not disclosing. Shame, Shame Mr. Liar. I know there are good lawyers out there, too, but they are prevented by the judge’s discretion, and fines and sanctions, from doing many things discussed in this book.
Also, I have quoted a great deal from several sources, and some in large parts. In some places I’ve interjected my own thoughts, and other places I have left it mostly to the author I am quoting from to convey the concept accurately. One of the last chapters is a summary of my own personal involvement with the law and exactly what I went through.
As an activist, learning about the laws was a great thrill. I remember when I would stumble onto something that upheld my rights as an individual, it would make me happy, and I would feel freedom more and more. Well the more I looked into it, the more citations I could come up with that supported countless, unknown freedoms. But as well, I found that many people cite cases in which they selectively take a sentence or two that appears to apply to something, like perhaps personal sovereignty, and the Justice was speaking generally, but the case was about an issue altogether different and therefore the quote was taken out of context. This must be looked for, and a vigilant eye kept out for.
Did you know that there is no law that requires one to get a driver’s license to “travel” in their “automobile?” But, there are laws that require one to get a “chauffeur’s license (driver’s license) to “drive” in your “vehicle” or transport anyone for hire.
There is a big difference between “traveling,” which is a right, and “driving,” which is a privilege. There is also a big difference between an “automobile” and a “vehicle.” An automobile does not become a “vehicle” until it is “registered,” and there is no law requiring you to “register” your “automobile.” So, as long as an individual does not register their automobile, they are not considered legally a “driver” or transporting anyone for hire. This is just one small example, but I have literally dozens of court decisions that support this. That is fun! When an individual finds their freedoms in the laws themselves, then they know they are following the “letter of the law,” as they say.
Since I have tried hundreds, if not thousands of times, to describe the situation we are in today, to people, in regards to the laws on cannabis, and I have found that without the proper background in understanding the past, people are less inclined to understand the present. I’ve included a good deal of American history and even a little bit of pre-American, European law history. Now get ready for a history lesson that you should have been taught in elementary school.
————————————————————————
Extended Introduction. New, Jan. 2020
The previous introduction was written many years ago. I wanted to provide an update for this new “Official” First Edition.
Today, in America, and throughout the world we are seeing the encroachment of the corporate/government machinery into our lives more than ever. Many people see the world as it is and have little hope to change things due to the levels of corruption which are widespread. However, corruption is as old as the Roman Empire at least, and the people have always struggled against it, in whatever capacity they could with the tools they had at their disposal. Today, we have new tools, and this includes the internet and books like this. We also have laws since we are a nation of laws, not men. Men do not create law anymore. Laws have not been created since the 1800’s when we ceased to be in common law. All laws today are statutory corporate laws and every one of them may be dealt with if understood from this perspective. None of the laws that you see the legislatures pass today are actual laws which affect you and I, unless we volunteer into them by contract. If the people were aware of this and truly understood where they stood in the law, in relation to corporate government, the majority of the problems today would fade away from view as corporate agents run and hide from the truth and the law.
I basically rewrite this entire book and attempted to bring an air of professionalism to this work. I have probably made mistakes here and there, and if any of my readers find it in their desire to point these out to me, please do so, if you truly believe it’s important and I need to correct it. I’ve made a sincere effort to only bring truth to these pages.
If you are a freeman or women and experience success, please don’t hesitate to write me and share it. If you have documentation that is much better. I’m only looking for data from people who are working with the methods described in this book.
I wrote this book because there is a lot of confusion out there with regards to “sovereignty” and freedom methods, including among some of my very own friends. There are lots of videos on you tube and lots of information floating about, but it is not cited well, or organized. As I did research for this revised version, I looked up dozens of court cases and followed many leads online for cites, and found an overwhelming amount of cases cited on patriot and freedom websites which are not actual citations at all, but outright lies, and contortions of information and citations which exist but have been chopped up and mutilated, with added material from other sources, and basically, this renders whatever is used, as void in court.
I arrived at the conclusion this was being done deliberately to dumb down the patriot and freedom movement and cause the cases to be thrown out and the authors discredited. It would seem there are numerous “agents” embedded in this whole process of inserting invalid court citations into law material online. It’s very important to research your cases, in order to know your stuff. In every case in this book, I researched and verified it personally, and marked it as “Verified” and if not, and I was unable to, it was marked as “Unverified.” This way you know and can count on the info in this book, and where possible and necessary, you can find the cases which are unverified and check them for yourself.
Lastly, I should probably add, do not allow the amount of new information you are not familiar with in this book, to intimidate you. It is not difficult to understand and I have made it as easy as possible to comprehend. I never went to college. I’m self-taught.
I hope this helps. Sincerely. Enjoy!