A non-profit site educating Canadians and Americans
about the differences between human-beings,
natural-persons and artificial-persons
man & woman,
created by God.
|How the Government created your new identity
how you can reclaim your unalienable rights.
created by Man.
|For the text of this web-site is with the absence of the legal-advice.||
Natural vs. Artificial:
Here is a quotation from "Memorandum on Law of the Name", which summarizes the so-called Name Game used by the courts (the All-Caps NAME is a legal-fiction: something presumed by law to be true until said presumption is rebutted and the truth is brought forward):
'It is clear that the existance of a NAME written as all-caps is a necessity-created legal-fiction. This is surely an issue to be raised, and the supporting particulares are outlined in this memorandum. Use of the proper name must be insisted upon as a matter of abatement - correction - for all parties of an action of purported law. However, the current "courts" cannot correct this since they are all based upon presumed/assumed fictional law and must use artificial, juristic NAMES. Instead, they expect the lawful Christian man or woman to accept the all-caps NAME and agree by silence to be treated as if he or she were a fictional entity invented and governed by mortal enemies. They must go to unlimited lengths to deceive and coerce this compliance or the underlying criminal farce would be exposed and a world-wide plunder/enslavement racket that has held all life on this planet in a vice grip for millenia would crumble and liberate every living thing. At this point, the would-be rulers of the world would be required to succeed in life by honest, productive labours, the way those upon whom they parasitically feed are forced to conduct their lives.'
' 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. thereof can concern itself with anything other than corporate, artificial persons and the contracts between them." [underline and bold emphasis added] S.C.R. 1795, Penhallow v. Doane's Administraters (3 U.S. 54; 1 L.Ed. 57; 3 Dall. 54).'
' That the majority shall prevail is a rule posterior to the formation of government, and results from it. It is not a rule binding upon mankind in their natural state. There, every man is independent of all laws, except those prescribed by nature. He is not bound by any institutions formed by his fellowmen without his consent." CRUDEN v. NEALE, 2 N.C. 338 (1796) 2 S.E. 70. Emphasis added.'
' The rights of the individuals are restricted only to the extent that they have been voluntarily surrendered by the citizenship to the agencies of government." City of Dallas v Mitchell, 245 S.W. 944.'
We recently received a copy of a letter from
one of our readers (see letter) sent to the International Bar Association,
and to date, there has been no reply.
Definitions 94. (1):
"exempt amount" in respect of a trust's particular taxation year means an amount that is
Definitions 94. (1):
"exempt foreign trust" at a particular time means
(f) a non-resident trust if
Definitions 95. (1):
"entity" includes an association, a corporation, a fund, a natural person, a joint venture, an organization, a partnership, a syndicate and a trust;
Definitions 118.04. (1):
(2) For the purposes of this section,
Both NP and AP are called "legal persons". When a human acts within the Statute law, as a natural person, he is subject to those laws which apply to the NP. The human's acting in the capacity of a natural person must be by agreement, consent, or contract, as you have indicated. Just as an "artificial person" is a "legal person", so is a "natural person" a "legal person". In fact, any "person" is a "legal person" because when the word "person" is used in law, it means a "legal person". Laws are created by man to have effect on these "legal persons". There must be a mechanism for a human to be subject to some of man's laws (if he agrees) so the law has created two "legal persons", one is called "natural" and the other is called "artificial" (in the law).
No man has dominion over another man, therefore Man's law cannot have jurisdiction over any man, except by agreement.
A statute cannot have jurisdiction over a man unless he agrees to be so ruled (by consent or accepting a benefit from the state). I do not agree with your casual use of the word "natural person" from old dictionaries. Now, all "persons" are subject to man-made laws, so you see that it is not safe to use the word "person" any more, even in casual conversation, because of the confusion it creates. Don't get confused with the expression "natural law" (the law of nature) and "natural person" (a creation in man's laws and dictionaries). The adjective "natural" carries entirely different meanings in each case.
I think the confusion comes when we introduce Statute laws. Your references are from an older dictionary, and have been modified in later dictionaries. The more recently accepted idea is that any "person", natural or artificial, is a "legal person" within the Statutes. For example, the Bank Act (a statute) refers to a natural person. Furthermore, the Interpretation Act defines "person" as follows: "person, or any word or expression descriptive of a person, includes a corporation" and adjectives such as natural, artificial, fake, legal, are all "expressions descriptive of a person", which means that, unless defined otherwise, the Interpretation Act defines "natural person", "artificial person", "legal person", "fake person", etc, all as corporations. You see how twisted these people are when the pull stunts like "any word or expression descriptive of a person". Any use of the word "person" puts us into man's legal system, because no man or woman is the same as a "person". Men and women are living souls occupying a human body for a time. They are not "persons" of any form. "Person" in the legal sense only refers to "bodies" in law, either human or fake, to be governed by the laws. To govern humans, the term "natural person" is used in the laws to distinguish humans from all other legal entities. Outside the law, "persons" do not exist, only men and women exist. In the old days, we used to be able to refer to a man or woman as a "person" however such slack use of the language no longer is safe as a result of the perversion of the laws and the re-definition of words made by those wishing to control others (in other words, your basic childhood "bully" who has moved himself into a position of power and influence over others).
In an attempt to seduce all people into believing that they are subject to Statute Law, there is much half-truth information put forward to add to the confusion. The changing definitions for NP and AP within dictionaries and statures are cases in point. The dictionaries are updated to enforce the current mind-set of the state and the legal profession. As a case in point, the head of the Law Faculty at a Canadian University has stated (via an email to me) that all human beings (men and women) are slaves to the state. That is the belief and doctrine of the Law Faculty at University. This is what is being taught in school without any critical thinking from the students to rebuke such rubbish.
Men and women are outside Statute Law unless they contract to be within them. Then, those humans who agree to be bound by Statute Law are only involved when reference is made to a natural person (a human within those laws). The other non-humans are artificial persons (sometimes called "fake persons" by judges).
'A person, is he, whose words or action are considered, either as his own, or as representing the words or actions of an other man, or any other thing to whom they are attributed, whether Truly or by Fiction.'
"Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,"