Tuesday, May 15, 2018

Don’t sign NDAs




Anna von Reitz 
Dec 2017

     Don’t sign NDAs

a. NDAs should not be signed for a currency exchange. Currency exchanges that are legitimate are perfectly legal and if they are gold or silver based currencies, lawful as well.

b. (By signing an NDA) they have "captured" your unwitting signature on a water-marked or otherwise trademarked or "enclosed" legal document. Just as they do with house mortgages.

c. This gives them the power to exercise your signature as if it belonged to them and they use it just like a rubber stamp to create assets for themselves and debts for you. It's a form of counterfeiting, but if you allow them to do it, they will.

d. My advice:
Serve them with a Notice of Liability and Copyright Notice. Inform them that you own the copyright to your Given Name in all its styles, orders, punctuation, and forms and they are foreclosed from using your signature on an NDA or any other paperwork for any use or purpose not fully disclosed, including the issuance of any orders or securities or receipts.

e. What I see a lot of is cheating by lawyers operating as "Paymasters". They are the only ones getting paid. They take the money into trust accounts and then block the funds and trade on them, benefiting themselves while the actual owners of the assets wait and wait and wait some more.

f. They roll these assets every 45 days so there is always some big "stir" every 45 days and nothing ever comes of it. Once in a while somebody gets fat enough to drop off the vine or gets forced to pay off by a Strong Arm and then a few people actually get paid - only a small pittance compared to what the lawyer already made off their money.

g. Most Paymasters are intrinsically dishonest and you have to beat them with sticks. Once they get scared enough, they pay. Not until.

The Real Agenda Concerning Our Currency Exchanges



Re-post from a reader concerning signing an NDA .............

Friday, July 14, 2017 

The   Real   Agenda   Concerning   Our   Currency   Exchanges


The Rothschilds have been in power for over three hundred years as they have plundered major moolah from some of the richest nations on earth. They take their orders from the satanic warlords of this planet and they will stop at nothing to keep their $$$ and power from getting into the hands of the people of the earth. Let's not forget that the Vatican and the Queen of England have both been working with these plunderers for hundreds of years as they, too, have taken their share of the wealth from us hard working stiffs for over 100 years in the form of income taxes.

Ok - so we know that the dark ptb are demonic in nature and refuse to change and that evil will stay on planet earth until Christ comes back to set up His kingdom here on planet earth which, according to The book Of Revelation and The Book Of Daniel, isn’t too far away from now.

And we also know that the currency exchange is very real and will soon be upon us. How does this fit in? 

My reasoning is this:

Since the Rothschild Family own and OPERATE every central bank on the planet and set EVERY BANK POLICY under the sun, there has to be a method to their utter madness. If these thousands of currency exchange redemption centers exist and will be fully staffed at the time of our exchanges, one has to be smart enough to read between the lines and notice the nefarious but brilliant plan that could go into effect.

Since we were all designed by Our Father God in His spirit image and given a body and a soul, He also gave us all a brain to think with and we are expected to use it wisely.

The Rothschild Family didn't spend trillions of dollars out of the goodness of their hearts to construct thousands of redemption centers fully staffed for us to exchange our currency if they didn't believe they could confiscate the vast amounts of wealth from us.  This is only my opinion. 

The Zim Gold Backed Bonds are the quintessential keys in all of this.  We have been hearing from people like Kent Dunn who says that the Zim rates are astronomically high and at face value. If we sign an NDA, we could call the shots at the available rate set at close to $125,000.00 per note. Since the funds will be in digital format, this to me isn't hard to fathom.

I understand the reasoning in accepting such a rate is that we know we will never see another opportunity to receive this vast amount of wealth ever again in our lifetime. I get it.

The point here is that I feel we are being setup by the cabal in being told about the enormously high rates so that when we have agreed to the NDA requirements, the banks will eventually confiscate them! 

My advice to all is DO NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES SIGN AN NDA because, if you do, you could lose it all over a short time. Once one signs the initial NDA binding document, guaranteed there will be subsequent mandated second and third part documents which bank regulators will force one to sign since the signing of the original document is legally binding. These people mean business! 

Remember Cyprus a few years back when the banks froze all of the peoples accounts and stole over 60% of their funds? 

Use your brains and don't be greedy as you will have enough $$$ if you accept the street rates for your currencies. And, if at all possible, transfer your $$$ from your bank to insurance policies where your money will be safe out of the hands of the cabal.

God bless and trust God, if you belong to Christ.  Then He will protect you and your funds as you begin to help those who desperately need financial help.

Jackie Blue


********************
Thank you Jackie Blue!!!  OO

 

NDAS - How to sign your name without assuming liability



FOLLOWING IS A REPOST OF AN ARTICLE SUBMITTED EARLIER BY JUDGE ANNA VON REITZ IN REGARD TO SIGNING THE NON-DISCLOSURE AGREEMENTS ….

07 – How to sign your name without assuming liability
 
What does a signature mean? I will tell you right now that when you sign something (no matter what “they” say), it means that you accept liability. And if you don’t read and agree to EVERYTHING you sign, you are making a big mistake.

I am constantly being asked… “How do I sign my name? … AND maintain my rights?”

We all know that before they let us go, they ALWAYS want us to sign something to keep us coming back. There are other points in the “legal” system where a “signature” is expected or required before the court can proceed as well.

I have heard that adding “Under Duress”, or “All Rights Reserved” to a signature when signing a document will maintain our inherent human rights; and while this could work as well,
the proper and Latin way to sign under duress is to add a “V.C.” before your name.

Vi Coactus, abbreviated to V.C., is a latin term. The website wikipedia cites the definition of vi coactus as:

“constrained by force”. Used when forced to sign (“or else …”)
Perhaps the most famous use of vi coactus when signing a document was that of Cornelius de Witt. Alexandre Dumas captured the event as follows:

The Grand Pensionary bowed before the will of his fellow citizens; Cornelius de Witt, however, was more obstinate, and notwithstanding all the threats of death from the Orangist rabble, who besieged him in his house at Dort, he stoutly refused to sign the act by which the office of Stadtholder was restored. Moved by the tears and entreaties of his wife, he at last complied, only
adding to his signature the two letters V. C. (Vi Coactus), notifying thereby that he only yielded to force.

There is scant authoritative information regarding this term on the web. However, on the One Heaven Society of United Free States of Spirits website the following information is provided:

The Bar wants you to sign as surety

At key points in a Court case, the Bar members want you to sign certain documents. Why? Because
your signature is like your vocalized consent – it can be legally interpreted as your agreement to be surety for an obligation and to perform as well as to waive other rights.

Do you have to sign? No you don’t. But in many cases, the Bar has designed a system so that if you don’t it is interpreted as dishonor so that they can invoke their power of attorney powers to declare you delinquent, incompetent and send you to prison anyway.

This is why you may have heard of people who refused to sign the papers when entering prison and yet were treated worse than most serious criminals, with complete apparent ignorance of their rights.  Why? Because the system is designed at certain points where you MUST sign.

So how do you overcome an unjust and unfair system that forces a man or woman to sign under duress, against their will and yet interprets such signatures as valid under Canon Law? The answer is making sure your signature follows a clear mark of duress.

Vi Coactus

Before you sign anything under duress, in order not to be unfairly determined as in dishonor and incompetent,
you may lawfully initial in large letters the letters V.C. where you will sign, then sign your name after- always after.

What V.C. stands for is Latin for Vi Coactus which means literally “under constraint”. This should normally be sufficient on any document which you are forced to sign to bear witness to the fact that it was done under duress.

Now, at the earliest opportunity before the court or official, you can make it known that, upon review of your signature, it can be proven to have been forced under threat and coercion and so cannot be used as legally binding agreement.

In some locations and in some prisons as this knowledge grows, it is possible that law enforcement officials may start to reject such signatures, adding more threat and force on a person to sign without using V.C. It is your choice remembering that if you allow such criminal intimidation and torture to prevail and do sign without protest then the system can simply lie and state you made such a sign of your “own free will”.

So if they tear up the paperwork and demand you do it again, stating that such a signature is unlawful then such claims are against the laws of the Roman Cult Canon Law - the actual law that underpins their own statutes and regulations. However, if after several attempts they still refuse, there is a second method equally valid - the use of ellipse.

The use of ellipses

When the threat of intimidation or outright rejection of lawful protest is too great, then a second and equally valid method of signing under protest is permitted, namely the use of three full stops placed first, followed by the signature so that the three dots are not obscured by the signature.
This is called an ellipsis eg “…” and indicates that legally there was a form of words you wanted to state but were unable due to some event, in this case because of threat and coercion.

Thus, at the earliest opportunity the ellipsis can be revealed and it can be stated that you intended to write V.C. but were prevented therefore nullifying any agreement
.
It would be of interest to the author if there have been any more recent cases where V.C. has been used to sign a document. There appears to have been a case in Indonesia where Dutch interests signed V.C.; however, the author does not have full access to the journal in question:
The Measures Taken by the Indonesian Government
against …by I Login – 1958 – Related articles
Authority” or “o.p.” (under protest) or “v.c.” (vi coactus). And that, of course, was preciously what it was: compelled by force. …
Source: 
journals.cambridge.org/article_S0165070X00029879
Further definitions and their sources:
Black’s Law Dictionary (9th edition)
The ninth edition does not provide a definition for vi coactus.
Cassell’s Latin Dictionary (27th edition, 1955, pp.103)
Coactus – a compulsion, compelling; coactu atque efflagitatu meo, cic.
The Oxford Latin Dictionary ABS-LIB (1968, pp. 339)
coactus1
1. Compressed, condensed; (of milk) curdled. b (neut. pl. as sb.) felt cloak.
2. Unnatural, artificial, forced, contrived.
3. (of instruments, actions, etc.) Unwilling, forced. b. required by law, compulsory.
coactus2
Compulsion, constraint.
Interestingly, Cassell’s Latin Dictionary and the Oxford Latin Dictionary provide the additional definitions:
Cassell’s Latin Dictionary:
coacto – To compel.
coactor – 1. a collector of rents, money at auctions, etc. 2. One who compels.
 
References

List of Lation abbreviations (
wikipedia.org)    Dumas, Alexandre – Black Tulip, The (literature.org)    Signing in protest and under duress (one-heaven.org)    Cassell’s Latin Dictionary, pp.103 (exfacie.com)    Oxford Latin Dictionary, pp.339 (exfacie.com)
Note: Correction to the reference from 
one-heaven.org was applied (removing the term ellipse for ellipsis). Thanks to Gerald for identifying this correction.
Article courtesy of Freedom From Government

VOID JUDGEMENT
The Commonwealth Style manual says at page 116 that the only proper way to spell some one’s name is in lower case and that even to capitalize the first Letter is a family decision…  so here you have the Commonwealth Government admitting that all caps is not the proper way to spell some one’s name then if you add to that this statement by a USA supreme court justice the following…
“Inasmuch as every government is an artificial person, an abstraction, and a creature of the mind only, a government can interface only with other artificial persons. The imaginary, having neither actuality nor substance, is foreclosed from creating and attaining parity with the tangible. The legal manifestation of this is that no government, as well as any law, agency, aspect, court, etc. can concern itself with anything other than corporate, artificial persons and the contracts between them.” – S.C.R. 1795, Penhallow v. Doane’s Administrators (3 U.S. 54; 1 L.Ed. 57; 3 Dall. 54), Supreme Court of the United States 1795 [Not the “United States Supreme Court”]
This tells you where it stands at the moment…
If you need proof this unconscionable system is used in Australia, then all you need to do is examine your birth certificate, driver license and most government and financial institution issued documents.  In effect the law changes a human-being’s status from one of a free man or woman to an artificial person, juristic person, “ens legis” (creature of legislation) or legal fiction.  It is despicable fraud and deception by the political and legal systems.
If you have ever read a statute or Act, you will see references being made to a “person” instead of a man, woman or human-being.  Most Acts do not define what type of person they refer to: is it a “natural person” (human-being) or an “artificial person?”  In some law dictionaries a “natural person” can also mean an artificial person, so it would be best not to refer to yourself as a natural person, but only a man, woman or human-being.
If you are ever charged and summoned into court always ask and demand to know if your first name and family name is written in all-capital letters on the charge sheet, summons and any other court document.  Ask something like: “Before I grant my conditional consent to this proceeding, what is the nature of the entity this court believes me to be?” and/or “Does that name printed in all capital letters represent an artificial person; a juristic person and a legal fiction?”
If the magistrate or judge ignores, evades or disregards your question, then you can be reasonably certain that they want you to be liable and responsible for their created “strawman” legal fiction.  You are standing in a court acting deceptively and fraudulently in that it won’t disclose the fact that it’s dealing with legal fictions instead of free-born sovereign human-beings.  Tell the court: “I am not the artificial person/entity printed in your legal documents despite my name sounding the same as the all-capital printed name.  You are attempting to enslave me against my will and consent to accept liability for the artifical person/entity printed on those documents.”
Do not answer a magistrate or judge whenever he uses your name unless he is willing to state on and for the record the context in which your name is being used, and all the legal documents have been changed to spell your name in proper noun English and not all capital letters.
Continue to object, protest and dissent even if the judgement goes against you because, without your consent, any judicial decision is null and void and of no legal consequence.  The judgement only applies to their artificial person/entity – not you!
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 and statements, loans, mortgages, speeding and parking tickets, car documents, road tax, 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 ones own advantage.”
Blacks 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)