Karl: I already gave the guy the answer. If you are not moving your case or claim, you have no voice and you are defined as a debtor. If you are defined as the debtor you are defined as the slave.
Angela: what should he do? Make his own claim?
Karl: make his own claim.
Angela: that is not a counter claim?
Karl: no, of course not. If I was going to make a counter claim I would have to make a counter claim against another man. if you want to say a dead, fictitious entity like IRS, DMV and make a counter complaint against them, you are taking that status out of being a man who has the capacity to make a claim and you bring it to the 2nd dimension like IRS or DMV and all they can do is file criminal complaint. They can’t prove anything is true. they are fictitious entities and they cannot prove anything is true. only a man can say what is true.
Angela: it’s such a gigantic paradigm shift to make the leap from ‘citizen/entity/person’ to the man for a lot of people. It’s interesting that we are so enveloped in the program they have programmed us with and it takes a long time to get to a point…
Karl: the higher your grade point average in school, the more A+’s and gold stars you got, the harder it’s going to be to understand what I am doing. They indoctrinated you guy. I have so much an easier time dealing with a housewife that didn’t give a damn about school or a guy who left school in the 2nd or 3rd grade than I have with people who have a high school education. The college education? It’s almost impossible for me to get through to these people. They are programmed more. You cannot show them the simplicity and the beauty. They never see, “Me Tarzan, You Jane, Jane do wrong, Jane no do wrong to Tarzan. So Jane give back to Tarzan.’ That’s it. And people go, “Holy crap, how did this figure this out? He made a claim; he stated the facts: Jane do wrong; Jane give back. It’s simple. And you guys are …US Constitution, 3rd article court of confederation, and the charter, and the compact act …you guys have to stop.
Karl: This is all misdirection and confusion. This is not acting like a man who says, “I make a claim.” Someone did me wrong; I want compensation. This is what is due to me. OR, it may be, “Who is making a claim that I owe what they claim is due?” Where is it? Where is this man? Where is this woman? I am not dropping down to your level; you are going to come up to my level. How many injuries(?) have you got? You are going to come and talk as a man. I am not going to talk to my servants. You are public servant and I am the public. I am not going to drop down and talk to you. You just do your fxxxxx job and leave me alone.
Angela: I think I mentioned to you briefly about my friend who is on a fixed income and they have now reassessed him because his living situation changed and so they are deducting $200 a month from his Social Security or his supplemental security income. He had a right to appeal that decision and ask for a re-assessment and he filled out the paperwork and sent it in. that was 3 months ago and they are supposed to get back to him within 19 days. But they have ignored him. There is an article online about how terrible social security is in not giving people their right to due process.
Karl: you know why? Because people are sitting around and complaining like he is. Is he making claims in his local mom and pop district court?
Angela: he is kind of a disabled person.
Karl: is there a reason why he cannot just make 2 or 3 simple sentences? They have a duty and an obligation which they ascribe to. this lady named Susie: Susie has been in dereliction of duty in which she is failing to perform a service or function for which society is paying her to perform. Why can’t he just make a simple claim like that saying she is refusing to do her job. By her failure to perform in a duty in which she is acquiring public funds for doing her job is causing him harm. It is causing him a financial loss. Why can’t he just do what I’ve just said (at the 2 minute mark of the Angela call recording) and do his claim?
Karl: he has to file the claim. Once he is dragged before the court he is going to say why he believes that she can collect a salary and an income and money from the public and not perform the job which she said she would perform.
Angela: someone else usually does the appeal that is not familiar with the case.
Karl: that is their appeal. That is the appeal within their system. I didn’t say appeal within their system; I said to take it to the local mom and pop county court. It is what you guys would call small claims. But a one penny claim is a huge claim. I don’t define my claim. They say my claim might be so tiny and insignificant that they are going to call it ‘small.’ No. My claim is a claim and it means the world to me. If it is worth me getting off my behind and going down to the court house and filing something that is tremendous and it took me 50 years to know what I am doing. THAT IS A HUGE CLAIM! That claim is amazing for me to put pen to paper. It took me 12 years of school, I had to learn how to drive and get insurance for my car, so that is a massive claim. So don’t ANYONE diminish my claim by saying, ‘oh, it’s only a penny.’ Look, it’s a penny to you and it might mean the world to me. Don’t you tell me how much this penny is worth.
Karl: if the Dalai Lama swallowed the penny, pooped it out, and I went to the Himalayas and got the penny. It would be ‘worth’ a million bucks. Don’t tell me how much my penny is worth. All I am saying is that I am making a claim and it’s mine, and back off.
If you are saying this is his and he is due some compensation and some lady has the capacity to make it happen and for some reason she is in dereliction of duty and for some reason she doesn’t feel like performing the function for which society is paying her to do her job, then make a claim against her and let her answer in court and say, “I don’t have to give you due process, sir. I don’t have to process your claim because I don’t feel like it, because I’m the United States Social Security and I can tell you to go fxxx yourself and what are you going to do about it?” Let her say that in open court in front of a trial by jury. Let her give the reason why this man is being done wrong.
Angela: what if he doesn’t have the name of the person?
Karl: then he’s lazy?
Angela: I’m just saying, what happens if he doesn’t know who is the one that did it and it’s just a computer deal?
Karl: he can’t call and ask, “Who has been assigned to my case? And they will say nobody?”
Angela: no, what if he has done that several times and they never get back to him?
Karl: if he asks who has been assigned to my case and he wrote this in a letter. He said, ”My name is ‘Bob Johnson’ …
Angela: he calls the number and he has to leave a message.
Karl: What the hell is wrong with you people that for some reason you forgot how to pick up a pen and paper and use ink. I say to people all the time that the only way to properly answer the court is in writing. Have I ever said to you people to use your tongue that God gave you? No. Did I ever say to flap your tongue? No. Did I ever say to pick up the phone and make a call? No. you guys can listen to over 100 shows that I have done and I have always said, “paper and pen, paper and pen, paper and pen.’ IS there some reason why he cannot put in paper and pen and write to them?”
Angela: he has, he sent them a ….
Karl: good; what did he do? He sent them a letter, correct?
Karl: after he sent them the letter he gave them what, 3, 10, 20 days to answer the letter?
Karl: then he went out and got a process server and the process server made delivery of the letter?
Angela: no, he didn’t go that far.
Karl: because the benefits aren’t worth it? Isn’t it worth it to make a claim? Is he a young kid and he doesn’t know how to operate within the public?
Angela: no, he’s an older gentleman and he can’t get around, back and forth, and he uses a walker.
Karl: I have a process server deliver upon the court and the people. I was suing in Alabama. I didn’t have to go to Alabama to find a process server—it’s like ‘processserver.com and they are all over the US. You call the process server at the .com company and they will give you 4, 5, 20 or 100 people in your neighborhood and for $50 they are more than glad to go serve your letter on a party that is not answering. Because as soon as they are not answering, the process server says, “hey, look I handed the person that letter.’ Now the process server is going to write a statement to you that says, “I made a delivery to this man or this woman on this day at this time.” Now you have proof that this person is deliberately ignoring you and has not answered and they are not doing their job. So now that is proof when you go to court that you did everything you could to communicate with this person. This person has a duty and obligation to communicate back with me. For some reason this person feels he can be derelict in his duty.
Karl: By dereliction of duty…go to the finance division of your state or to risk management and it clearly says that when someone is in dereliction of duty and the causes someone harm or loss as a state employee, compensation is due. Make a claim that someone is derelict in his/her duty and causing you harm. Look at this simple example of pot holes in a city in Ohio or Illinois. They said that people are coming in and the city is compensating them for not fixing the holes in the ground and people’s cars are being damaged and the city is paying them millions of dollars this winter because of the pot holes. It is dereliction of duty and they have a certain duty to perform a certain function in which they are getting paid. And, when they are not doing it you make a claim for compensation that the car got damaged.
Karl: she can make a claim of compensation that his life has been impacted by the fact that this woman has a certain duty and obligation and she is accepting federal funds, government funds or public funds and she is derelict in her duty. Make a claim. This is like saying he’s caught in a pothole and it affected his rent? I’d tell them the same damn thing. Find out who is in charge of the department and say that a subordinate of theirs are in dereliction of duty and you have accrued a financial loss due to their actions or inactions.
Angela: that is it right there. Thank you so much.
Karl: my shows are going to stop real soon. Other people are going to have to learn to do this and do the shows. I have to back off and let other people learn.
Angela: well, you are a teacher, right now.
Karl: I have to back off and let other people do them. What if I’m on a plane and it crashes? That is why I have to let other people run the show.
Angela: there are always new people coming on.
Karl: it’s like when Mike Golden (?) died. His show hit the crapper because nobody picked it up and ran with it. the person who picked up the show and ran with it did a terrible job. This is nothing like what Mike did.
Angela: your show is nothing like Mike’s.
Karl: oh yes, it is.
Angela: he had law and order and ran it really well.
Karl: right, he was the host and I was a guest.
Angela: you were fixing motors and changing water pumps and running after the dogs during a call.
Karl: that is why Mike was the host and I was just a guy who bashed his guests. I loved it. that’s what I do with you—you let guests come on the show and I ‘bash’ them. you always make me be nice and polite or you mute my microphone. Mike and I set people up like this and if you listen to Mike’s old shows he would have guests. I’d say to Mike before the show if he minded if I ‘beat up on him.’ Mike would say go ahead. So, it was a free for all. When someone totally disagrees we can ‘slug it out.’ It’s fun.
Angela: as long as we are learning in the process, I don’t mind it. just talking over each other bothers me.
Karl: if you listen to the last 10 of Mike’s shows when I really started kicking into gear with him, we were having a lot of fun. Mike would be ‘good cop’ and I’d be ‘bad cop.’ He would tell me to be nice but off the air he’d say, Karl, get this guy. Nobody knew what Mike and I were doing. He was the ‘straight man’ and he was in on it. The last show Mike had, a guy explained about the IRS. The old man was right on and said I was going to ‘bash him.’ And I said, “No sir, you are good. If anyone wants to buy an IRS book they should buy it from this man. He is dead on. My mom worked at IRS for almost 30 years. I am telling you, this guy knows the IRS like the back of his hand. He was surprised that I was being nice to him. And I said yes I was because the IRS is a wonderful corporation that provides a wonderful service if you know how to access it and you can derive great benefits from it. Yes, I’m a contractor. Yes, I know what a 1099 form is. Yes I can lease new trucks and tools. I don’t have to drive a crappy truck and use crappy tools. I can get compensated and reimbursed by the IRS. But the normal typical 9 to 5 man doesn’t know this is what IRS is like. There is no benefit derived from the common man to use the IRS. But if you are contractor with a corporation or business then it’s wonderful. This man is ‘dead on.’ I really applauded him, he knew the IRS and wasn’t saying silly stuff like don’t do this and that. He was right.
Karl: when Mike had a guest on that was ‘dead on’ and that wasn’t very often I definitely applauded the guest. He had a lot of charlatans and I’d call them out. I’d say, “You’re telling people to do what? Avoid the IRS? You realize they are going to jail. You realize what is going to happen to them.” Like Mark Stevens. He told that guy, a doctor, when he got into court to put IRS on the stand and do “X, Y and Z.” I asked Mark if I’d heard him right. He said yes. I answered him, “When I petition the IRS in district court, who is the defendant?” Mark said the doctor was and I said, no, the doctor was the petitioner. IRS was the defendant and in the United States of America, the law of this land is that the defendant gets to stay mute like OJ Simpson did. He did not say a word. The IRS is not going to say a damn word and Mike has to prove his case. The IRS can stand mute and you, Mark, have no clue what you are doing. This guy is going to go to jail. You have to tell the doctor to get to the IRS office or agent and start saying that you will pay $5 a day for the next 10,000 days or whatever it takes. But, until you learn what is going on between you and the IRS, people like the doctor need to run like hell from guys like Mark Stevens because people like the doctor will be going to jail. That doctor has sat in jail now for over 18 months because he listen to Mark’s crap.
Karl: I asked Mark Stevens if he paid his taxes and he answered that the Tree of Liberty has to be fed by the blood of patriots and tyrants and times. I said, “great. Are you paying your taxes?” He said yes. I didn’t think you believed in the state so how come you are paying state taxes and federal taxes? His response was that his wife would ‘kill him’ if he didn’t. I said that his patriot tree didn’t flow with his blood because your wife would kill you if you stopped paying your taxes. He said yes that she would probably divorce him or leave it. But, I told Mark Stevens, the doctor is sitting in jail and he’s been there since November of 2012 because he listened to what you told him to do. His response was that some people had to take up the cause. I asked him, “what cause?” All the guy had to do was make a payment until he learned how to rescind his contract with the IRS.” That’s all he had to do. He had to learn how to back out gently. He had to learn how to back out and withdraw gently. Don’t just say, Fxxx You (to IRS); that isn’t going to get you anywhere. Learn the rules of the game; don’t just think you are going to turn your back and walk away. Learn how to face them and walk out backwards. Don’t turn your back on these people (at IRS). They will put you in jail just like they did the doctor. That’s what I said to Dr. Mike. If he listened to that guy (Mark Stevens) he’d have 3 years in jail to think about it. I told him when he got out he could look me up and I’d tell him what he did wrong and what he should have done. But right now you are enamored of this guy because he is waving the patriot flag and screaming the tree of liberty must be bled by tyrants and patriots.
Karl: Stop that nonsense…it’s like the Gandhi nonsense. “passive resistance.’ Resistance told them to use some form of force and a million Indians got their heads cracked over with a stick. What did they tell the British: you don’t want us to go to the ocean and make our own salt? You want us to buy salt from you? Where is the store you want us to go to? So if the British said a certain store in Bombay, then why didn’t all the Indians go to buy the salt for a pound and then turn around and hand them a bill for 2 pounds to the East India Tea Company. You have said we are not allowed to make salt any more and we have to buy from your stores. Ok, why not hand the viceroy of Bombay, India a bill for 2 lbs. for every lb. that you spent on his store. Why? Because you are just carrying out his order. Turn around and bill them because you are just carrying out orders (fulfilling ‘orders.’) So, they ordered me to buy salt from their store? I’ll carry out the ‘order’ and here is your bill for carrying out the orders. The viceroy will say, ‘you want me to pay all this?” Yes. Did you order me? Did you order me to do this for you? Did I do it? Yes. Now, pay me two pounds. The viceroy says, “Wait a second, that doesn’t sound right.” Then my answer would be, “stop giving orders.” That’s all Gandhi had to do.. Instead they all walk down to the ocean and get their heads cracked open. That showed the English? What does it show the English? That these people were out of their minds thinking that eventually the English would get tired of killing all of them.
Karl: Why not just hand them a bill; the English had an order. The Indians are fulfilling the order. May I see the order? Who signed the order? The viceroy? Good, so everyone knows who to hand the bill to. The Viceroy because the Indians were carrying out his orders. That is what I would have done; I’d have had a billion Indians behind me, saying good, let’s go to the store and buy a pound of salt. Then we will go give the viceroy a bill for 2 pounds. Watch how many more orders the viceroy puts out.
Because what the English are known for world-wide is their method of commerce. They have a monetary system that is equal to none, believe. Me. They know when you hand them a bill: “is this not an order? Is compensation not due right now? Then if you cannot compensate for all the orders you’d better stop giving them out. You give the orders, we carry them out. Now I guess you’ll stop giving them out. [Notetaker: so why not address all of Obama’s orders in this manner, purely commerce, instead of complaining about them. Go straight to their wallets.]
Texas: I’m dealing with a case that is called “doing business without a real estate license.” I asked the judge last time in court if it was a civil or criminal matter and she pretty much forced me to get an attorney. I would like to know how I use the process you are talking about. The question is, “what should I do using the simple process you are talking about?” I still don’t need a license for what I’m doing as it’s not ‘illegal.’ I lease out properties and things of that nature and I don’t need a license when I am the principal.
Karl: what you are doing is lawful, but it’s illegal. Do you understand the difference? Did you see me on the English you tube? Go to Youtube and go to UK column and type in UKcolumn dec 27, 2013 and type in Karl Lentz. When I went to help the Punjabi in England with 3 defendants, the barrister came in and said what they did was illegal. When he said they were guilty as charged, I said, Ok. I’m not here to argue the that fact. What they did was absolutely illegal and they are guilty as charged. SO WHAT! They are men and they didn’t do anything wrong. Now, did they do anything wrong? That drove that poor barrister insane. He flipped his wig. How is he going to prove that the man did anything wrong. He can’t! did they do illegal? Yes. Were they guilty as charged? You bet. But this is a common law land. So what. Has a man come forth to make a claim that I as a man have done anything wrong. Yes or no. No? well then what are we doing here today.
Texas: I am going to explain that what they did was illegal. Karl: We agreed (on the illegality). Who cares? It’s a common law land is it not? Where is the man or woman coming forward to make the claim? I only answer to claims. I do not answer to complaints. Are you complaining that I did something? I don’t listen to complaints; my wife complains all the time. I don’t listen to her either. Now are you going to make a claim and do you have absolute proof that I have been cheating on you honey? You got the lipstick, video tape, a third party witness that you saw me with another woman? Let’s say the wife says she thinks I’m screwing around on her. I don’t want to hear it. you go through this nonsense with me every 5 seconds. When you can prove it, I’ll answer it. Until you can prove it, that you have a claim, I’m not wasting my time answering your nonsense. It’s simple. Someone made 400 segments and put it on Youtube. Watch those shows. Who cares that what they did was illegal? Guilty as charged. Whoppee. I made a claim in court: who did these folks do wrong? The case was on Friday the 13th. On Thurs. the 12th we actually went to court to file the claim that there was a false charge being brought into the public and we would require compensation. That’s what we did on the 12th of December. So, when we handed it to the court, we said that they were moving on the 13th that what we did was illegal? Fine. But, what you people are doing is unlawful. And we have a claim at the Queen’s Bench, like a Judge Judy bench, the common law bench. It’s not run on statute and we can actually bring a man or woman forward to say we have been injured, wronged, harmed. We will prove it. when they saw that claim against their complaint, they realized we had the trump card.
Karl: You are not going to get all this on one snippet on an Angela call. There is link that a man named Craig Lynch did.
Angela: go to myprivateaudio.com and there is a link. Look at the top of the home page and it says, “Karl Lentz” Click on that. The UK column video and all the audio links are there. On the top on the left is the link to Craig Lynch’s you tube. You can see all the video.
Karl: I did DVDs in England; there is a site called UnKommonlaw.co.uk. if you got the DVDs from that man it’s all my belief and theory. What is I did in Indiana is I showed them practical applications and drew pictures on the board and said to file this, go here, go there. The man put the DVDs together and Denny is making the DVDs showing the practical applications of what I ma doing. But, back them I was just doing it on a white board or black board. What I need to do is I have to do it with some sort of more professional look. They are very basic….well crude as I don’t have slides and fancy stuff. but I draw the picture and I say you take the claim, you do this, you go over here and go over there—it’s like a flow chart. That’s what people are looking for is a flow chart. Find the person who is assigned to the case. Find the person and send them a letter. When they don’t answer it, then find a process server and have them deliver it. Then file a claim in your local mom and pop court. Then they have 21 days to answer. Then you go to the court clerk and ask if they will assign a court case (number) so I can move this matter before the court? She will assign a case number and then let the other side know they will have to appear on a certain day. When they don’t appear, you don’t wait for the default or summary judgment; you have the court issue a warrant for their arrest. You have the sheriff have the deputy drag that person before the court. You don’t want a default judgment or summary judgment; you want to have that person pay the claim made before them in open court and in an open forum for the whole world to witness that they had the ability to answer. They didn’t answer in a letter; they didn’t answer when the process server served them and they have the final chance to answer in open court and they didn’t. This judgment is final and forever hold the peace. It’s done. Then you have order and then you have it executed by the sheriff. There you go. Now can’t you make a flow chart with that?
Q: are you coming to Boston for Justina?
Karl: that would be great. Justina’s mom called me once for help and her dad was on the Glen Beck and Kelly Live on fox. I am telling if some mom or dad would just call, I can get their kid back in two days. I haven’t heard from the mom again. If she wants to call me again, sure. I’d be glad to go up there. I’ll make a claim for them and file it. two or three sentences will make the claim.
Jay: there are 2 people ahead of me. I’ve been listening to Karl for awhile. You sharpen the spear point really well. I called with an example. I have a patriot friend and we run a program here in Maine. He was stopped without a license and registration and they assaulted him. We went to the first session of court and said he was innocent. We haven’t decided whether to do a jury trial or a bench trial. To make a simple claim for the right to travel and we want to charge the officers for assault (2 of them). My friend turned to check the tail light they said was out and they blind sided him, slammed him against the car, onto the ground, face first into the ice, bruised his back and arms; he’s 65 years old. They assaulted him. There was not ‘halt’ or warning or anything. He was just going to check his lights. So how would you make a simple claim against this? Is there a claim we can look at?
Jay: I emailed you to get hold of Carl Miller. I see he’s on here. We have 3 cases and we want to go after the courts. We are trying to pattern cases and go after the courts in Maine as there is no law. we drive without licenses and we have a couple of cases now. The one we are going after is where the fellow was assaulted by 2 police officers and he didn’t do anything.
Karl: let me get people’s brains wrapped around this concept a little simpler. You said a policeman slammed him into the ground. I am trying to get you folks to stop looking at it this way and look at it from a different point of view. I am trying to say this: “a man acting as a police officer did this and that.” A lot of people listening to these calls have the same belief that you do. That a POLICEMAN did something. No, a POLICEMAN is defined as a perfect human being who will lay down his life for any man, woman or child in need. Obviously that was not a POLICEMAN that slammed your friend to the ground. Obviously that was A MAN WHO DID IT WHO WAS OPERATING OUTSIDE HIS DUTY OR OUTSIDE OF HIS OFFICE. That was a Man who at times acts as a Police officer, 8 hours a day. The other 16 hours a day he is a Man. So when someone says to me that a Policeman did this, I’m asking, “you mean a man who had a cop uniform on?” He is in a uniform for 8 hours and the other 16 hours he is a normal man just like you and me. When someone defines him as a policeman, I wouldn’t do that. First, I would define him as a man and then I’d say for 8 hours a day he works as a police man and that is more accurate to define him. There are 168 hours in a week; he is in a uniform 40 hours a week and the other 128 hours a week he is a man. so I wouldn’t define him as a policeman (based on 40 hours a week); I would define him as a man who at times acts as a policeman and he knows that he has certain duties, responsibilities and obligations to his fellow man. there you go. I want people to wrap their minds around this and quit saying: “a Judge did this, a prosecutor did this, a policeman did this.” No, it’s a man or woman who did this who at times acts as a prosecutor, or a judge or a policemen.
Karl: I’m trying to get people to start looking at these policemen, judges and prosecutors as another man and another woman who just happens to be wearing a costume at that particular moment in time in which they intercourse. But first and foremost they are a man or a woman.
Jay: how would you make a claim against these guys? We are enjoying the free right to travel and we are not harming anyone and you get pulled over and assaulted as routine. Karl: why do you use these words like ‘travel?’ use simple words: instead of saying I have the right to travel I say, “me Tarzan, I go from A to B.” I go from here to there. So a guy in Texas asked the cop a very simple question when the cop said, “license and registration.” He said to the cop: “are you a man?” The cop yes that he hoped so. The guy said, well if you are a man and I am a man, are you interfering with my right to go from point A to point B? The cop said, “license and registration.” The guy said, “Are you a man?” The cop said yes. The guy said, “Are you telling me as another man that I cannot go from point A to point B in a certain manner? The cop said, “Well, uh, license and registration sir.” The guy said, “Again, you are a man and I am a man and I don’t believe any man can interfere with another man’s right to go from point A to point B.” The cop walked away from him and got into his car and left. The guy tried 2 different styles and both styles worked when intercoursing with these uniformed mans. The men in man is not plural so I say ‘mans.’ What I just said is technically correct.
Karl: what I am trying to say is that after this worked for the guy, he drove to Virginia and hung out with me for 4 days to see if I was for real. He said ‘this crap actually works and I have to meet the man (Karl). The guy’s name is Jimmy. He spent 4 days with me and said that Karl gets up at sunup and doesn’t go to bed till 10 or 11 at night and he eats breakfast about 10 or 11 at night and doesn’t have a chair in his house. Karl’s either up and working or in bed sleeping. That is all he does. This is how I try to make this incredibly simple because I am an incredibly simple guy either working or sleeping. You are either awake and working or you are asleep and not working. There’s no in-between. I’m black or white.
Karl: I’m glad this is being recorded. I have two people from Australia who are standing at Verizon waiting for my phone to be turned on. I’m just a guy. You guys don’t know this? You guys are too complicated. Me Tarzan, you Jane. You don’t understand the simplicity and beauty in that. You guys are making it too complicated.
Angela: that’s the way the school system is. Everything is so complicated.
Jay: It’s not that complicated. I’ve lived this 100 acre life for over 30 years and never got a permit to build; I just do it. I have managers ask me about permits and I tell them that it’s private property and I don’t need it.
Karl: you have to be careful. You just diminished the capacity of your property by putting an adjective in front of it. you limit it. you said private property. You didn’t keep it at ‘me Tarzan, you Jane.’ Me property; not yours. You no property, me property. See, when you say ‘private property’ the teacher gave you a gold star. I just said ‘me property’ and the teacher gave me an “F.” What I am trying to say is that you are taught off the bat to say, “that’s my private property” and you got the gold star. When I say ‘me property,’ the teacher gave me an “F”. Mine is technically correct in court. They can totally destroy your ‘personal property’ version. They will ask, “what do you mean by private property, sir?” What is private. Define private to me. Let’s go by our definition of private and of property. and Our combination as privateproperty as one word. Is that like KARLLENTZ is one object? Is that a term or is that the way to define property? You are making it too complicated. Keep it simple: me property. it’s always crystal clear when a 3 year old says: me property. gimme bottle. No bottle. But you go to schools and get A+ and gold stars and next thing you do is destroy your claims in court.
Jay: how do tell a DA..
Karl: how do you tell a man who is sometimes clothed as a DA … go ahead
Jay: we write out a claim for my friend to be able address in writing to the court and to the DA and we aren’t talking to the judge. We may have to go into jurisdiction. How do you write a 2 sentence claim to travel from point A to point B?
Karl: how do you write the claim that the man has done you wrong? Why you tell me how you would say that a man named Karl Lentz stopped me in the middle of the night and I didn’t have the capacity or authority to do it. How would you make a claim that Karl Lentz did it the same way.
Jay: I would over complicate it, I usually do.
Karl: how would you make a claim that I stopped you or your friend in the middle of the road?
Jay: I was traveling from point A to point B and this man comes up and snaps his blue lights on, pulls me over and tells me to get out of my vehicle.
Karl: what if I had purple lights on, what would you do? What does it matter what color the lights are? why are you destroying your own claim? Why do you have put the color of the lights? Why don’t you just say that a man interfered with my right to go from point A to point B? See how simple? Let him come to court and say that he has the right to interfere with your right to go from point A to point B. let him make the claim. If the society where you live believe that the police have the capacity to interfere with your going from point A to point B you are going to lose. But the judge will say you are absolutely right. The jury will throw you under the bus and you will lose in front of a jury. The jury will say within their society and their little territory our little community that when a cop stops you, you have to stop.
Jay: I recommended against the jury because we have enough information.
Karl: no, it isn’t because you have enough; it’s because you know that jury is going to hang you; they are going to get the nails and the cross and they are going to crucify you. it’s not because you have enough. You have to understand that the people in the jury are people who live in the normal society and they believe in speed limits, drivers’ licenses, insurance cards. You are living in a small cluster with your buddies in a tiny group within a ‘huge city’ and the people in the city will say that you are out of your mind. Now if you are living someplace in eastern Oregon where nobody lives and you have a little community operating like that you can get away with it. but you go into Chicago, NY, or other big cities and say you are a free man and I don’t need the drivers’ license or insurance, and you go in front of the jury, they are going to throw you under the bus. Just go to the guy with the black robe on. Is he a man? yes. Am I a man? yes. Is this a common law land? Yes. Is anyone making a claim that I have done wrong? Well, no, he said it’s illegal. I agree with you it’s illegal.
Karl: But is the supreme law of the land common law land? And if Carl Miller and everyone don’t believe it, then go to wikipedia and there is a map there and also on my website broadmind.org where there is a very simple map that is in wikipedia. It’s of common law nations, sharia law nations (Muslim nations) and the Napoleonic code lands. If you say the common law is dead in the State of Michigan, for the government of Michigan and the legislators, it is dead. That is a tiny group called the Government of the State of Michigan. It’s an organization and it’s not the state. Half the state of Michigan has Indian reservations on it. what does that mean? So does half the State of North Dakota. Does federal law of the United States have any jurisdiction over half of North Dakota? No. Does the common law of the Indians that live there reign supreme? You better believe it. So don’t say that the states don’t have common law any more. About 1/5 to 1/10th of the United States is still occupied by Indians and they run under their own laws, codes, beliefs and hold their own courts. You see these Indians eating their own children and running lawless? Do they have codes written on paper? Do they have courts?
Karl: so you are saying the United States constitution secured and protected for the man of this land. So if 1/10th is occupied by Indians you are saying they are the lawless nations within this nation? Is that what you are saying? According to Carl Miller who believes in the Constitution of the United States, all these Indians should have been dead by now because they are lawless people for the last 130 years and they haven’t been able to conduct themselves without an article 3 court protecting and securing their rights. I don’t see a mass exodus from the Indian reservations such as “please help us, the Cherokee nation is so cruel to us. We better move to the white man’s land and be protected by the United States Constitution.” I don’t see a mass exodus from the Indian reservations.
Jay: we don’t either. We have several of them up here and they govern themselves.
Karl: they do fine; they don’t need the article 3 courts and the constitution to protect and secure their rights. That is ridiculous. You folks call them illiterate Indians who have no books and papers and using their native language. You don’t see them robbing and killing each other because they don’t have the benefit of the Bible or the United States constitution. They live amongst us. When they come amongst us they know how to behave as civilized people. They are not running off their reservations and raping, pillaging and killing everybody. They have their own nations and they are doing just fine without us. How do they do their business? They live under natural law. when someone says hat we are not living by the common law the law of my brother, that’s not the issue. Has my brother incurred financial loss because of my lying or my stealing or my double dealing? No? How am I defined in your statutes? Do you see my name in your statutes? No. did you see my signature somewhere that I would abide by your code?
Karl: You guys have to quit complicating this stuff. You are so enamored of your own beliefs and of the jurisprudence and micromanaging, like reading all these Black Law dictionaries like Dean Clifford. A woman called him and told him to put that book down before he hurt himself. That’s exactly what he did; he hurt himself by trying to master their codes. He got arrested and found out they changed the codes on him 3 months before. You know what they are doing? They are trying to learn all the new codes.
Caller: they repealed the traffic codes here because of all the trouble they had.
Karl: I don’t have time to read the codes. I don’t have a chair and that means I don’t have time to read any codes. You go to bed and fall asleep. I’ll write some DVD so people can follow the steps and won’t need me. It would be a shame if the knowledge in my head would disappear. I have done my dictionary but it still have to formatted so it’s uniform. Most people want pretty and knowledge. People care more how it looks than the substance. I try to do things right the first time and then just move on. I want this to be more than a black and white dictionary. It has flow charts. I want it so that kids will want to read. The letter ‘k’ is about 10 pages and the letter ‘c’ is over 300 pages. I want to make it so people want to turn the next page. You have to use color and pictures. My mom bought me encyclopedias for me when I was a child. We used to read the encyclopedias and it was fun to look at all the pictures in them.
Bill: this was great. I like the way you grilled Karl on that dictionary. We get a lot out of it. Karl: Larry knows some inside stuff on how the Untied States postal service works and how the post office works. I like talking to him. He does a show after my show. I like when people bring up controversy to try to show me I don’t know what I’m talking about.