The Occult Matrix
Recently Updated as of 2017 - This Website is Completely AD FREE - Please Support Me Via Paypal, Promoted Products and Bitcoin, Etherium Or Ripple

Welcome Page About Me Announcements Personal Writings Knowledge Base News Articles
Video Links Digital Downloads Shop Store Suggested Reading Links Page Contact Me

Credo Mutwa Reptilians

 

Transcript - Shared Conversation with
Roger Elvick - August 9, 2002
 M: Is this R?
R: Who’s calling?
   M:     ** from **  I spoke with you a while back - probably about a month ago about the case that  I have going here.  At that time you suggested that I file an order for ex-parte’ summary judgment, which I did.  And I also filed an ex-parte’ summary judgment as well and something that I called (because I found it in Black’s) a “Charging Order” which basically charges the defendants with various amounts which make up the total amount of the case.
  I’m wondering right now - and I’m trying to read and get myself up to snuff as fast as I can through tapes and all sorts of stuff that I’m listening to about your techniques -… And of course, I just got an answer from one set of defendants, and they didn’t seem at all concerned about this…
R: Oh, of course!  That’s the nature of all these people here.  That’s the one thing that they push here - to not show any concern.  They go to great lengths to do that.
M: Well then my next move in order to perfect this charge I would assume is to file it on my UCC.  But there are 33 people involved.  Thirty-five people actually from the Governor right on down to the lowest police officer and I’m a little bit “iffy” about how to go about this.  I already filed my own UCC1 but apparently I have to file another UCC for this case.  Or does it go on my original filing?
R: Well it goes on the original.  You file a “3” and you just add to the one that was there.  It’s an amendment to what you already have on file.
M: Oh all right.  I’m getting all sorts of different feedback from everybody - because I hate to bother you.  But at any rate one person told me I had to file a separate UCC1 for each individual involved in this case.  Well that would be $17 per and there’s no way I could come with that.  Then another person said I should make sure I put it on my own UCC.  Still another said no, I’ve got to do it on a separate UCC.
R: Well, add it to your UCC.  But you see when you name these people you just put it in the property description.  See these people think here that we have to go and place their names as a Debtor and bla, bla, bla but if you don’t do it that way then you just put the controversy here in the property description because you see it’s all your property.
M: O.k.  So I just put the Claim itself in the property and then on a separate… because see, I broke everybody’s involvement in this thing down to dollars and cents.  And of course everything is very arbitrary because I said, “how can I put any kind of value on my own freedom, or my own security or health and so forth.”  So I have all of these arbitrary amounts and I charged each individual with what I felt they had done to me.  So I have them, and their addresses, and the amounts that they owe from within this total claim.  The Secretary of State is the official representative for all “officialdom” isn’t he?
R: Well, what happens see is when people are dealing in commerce they’re foreigners.  So they’re foreign to the local community, so when they operate in any way in the community they’ve got to register…
M: Yeah.  As foreign representatives.  Foreign agents.
R: Yeah they must register to bond their activities to indemnify whoever they’re doing business with against injuries and damages.  And when they fail to do that the Secretary of State is the Registered Agent.
M: O.k.  But I haven’t studied their oaths to make sure they are word for word.
R: Yeah but see the thing is  that you tell them that you want remedy and that you did not find their check enclosed.  Therefore they are dishonored and it is the dishonor that gets charged.
M: O.k.   So for each of these law firms that sent me something I would accept their dishonor but tell them that I did not find their check…Let me back up… I did not find their check enclosed and therefore I accept their dishonor?
R: Yes.  And the dishonor is what is charged.  Now what you also want to do is prepare a letter to each and every person involved and request - this is a “Discovery” request or a request in Discovery - that they disclose all property items held in their name, or the names of their family or any other name under which they have control over any property, O.k.?  Because they have surrendered their equity by their dishonor and therefore…
M: Do I say that they have surrendered their equity?
R: You bet!  You betcha!  And this here is the property under which you are…
M: Liquidate this…
R:  Yeah, but the thing is to bring it before the court under the…
M: I’ve got to notify the Clerk.
R: O.k.  Is the original part of this a foreclosure or something?
M: No.  Basically I brought a Complaint against them.  They were moving once again against me and were hoping to lock me up because I’m a busybody…
R: Oh O.k.  So when they moved against you…
M: Well you see right now I’m moving against them in order to forestall their move against me.
R: Yeah but see you didn’t move against them until they did something to you.  O.k?.  So what they did is make claims on your property, see.  That’s what they’re doing.  They’re making claims against your property.  Because even your name, the name that they use is still a public entity - your strawman in other words.  So therefore that particular property belongs to you.  They have surrendered their interest in it by virtue of there failing to indemnify their actions.
M: O.K.  Now in this letter to them do I state that?  Or do I just simply ask them for a listing of all their personal and real property?
R: Yes.  A listing.  Because they have surrendered their equitable claim in any property here that is associated with their name.  And when you request this you say that this is a discovery for the court.  O.K.  And in the event they fail that this will amount to a contempt of court.
M: O.k. Well that’s fine but the Court has not agreed with this so…
R: No, no, no, no, no, no, no!  You are the court.  That’s your controversy.
M: Oh great!  Oh this is so marvelous!
R: O.k.  And so they will then be in contempt of court if they refuse or fail to provide this…
M: And they’re not going to return…  Not one of them is going to do anything.
R:  No, but they will find themselves in contempt of court here.  And also any property that they hold belongs to you.  You are the owner of it because you own the equity.  Just remind them that they must come back to you with “clean hands.”  And that means a settlement with you.
M: They must what to me with clean hands?
R: They must come to you with clean hands.  Otherwise they have surrendered all the equity.  So if they fail to make settlement here - satisfactory to you - then they have surrendered all equitable claims on any property that is held or associated here with their name.
M: And I put all that in the letter?
R: You bet!
M: Now do I do that letter before I file my UCC3?
R: Well yeah.  Because you’re asking for discovery.  And if they give you the discovery that goes on the “3.”
M: Well they’re not going to answer.  They’re not even going to answer…
R: No, no but you see the thing now is they are admittedly in contempt of court.  And not only that..  now you see here they can see that there’s a direct claim coming against all their property.  And that means their families too.
M: O.k.  All right.  That’s great!  Now, when I’m listing this thing - this case - on my UCC I have a listing of everybody involved and their personal addresses and their d.b.a.’s and the amounts they owe.  Do I put that on as an attachment to the property description?
R: Yes.  Because you see you can’t be a lien holder.  But you can hold an attachment here on the liens.  And that’s what it is.  This is an attachment on all liens on all property identified in this particular filing.
M: Now I used to be in real estate and I never heard of an attachment to a lien.  How does that work?  You said that I can not be a lien holder.
R: Right!  You’re the owner.  And you have holders in due course that do your business for you but these people are the unjust stewards here and they refuse to do it.
M: Oh all right!  So in other words if they don’t come up with the dollars - or their insurance company doesn’t come up with the dollars involved - then I just own everything that they possess?
R:  Yes.  That’s what you’re telling them here.  And that’s going to be the financial disclosure that will come before the court.  In other words you know, if they’re pressing you, eventually…
M: Well they’re not pressing me any more…
R: Yeah, but they were threatening you against your body  O.k.?  Well when those kind of actions get matured farther along see that’s when they start to get property disclosures of you.  And whenever they ask for a property disclosure…see you’re not even waiting for them to ask it.  You’re putting up the property disclosure right in the Claim.  See that’s your affidavit of Claim.
M:  OOOOh!  All right!  So, in other words by writing this letter and not getting a response they are now in dishonor for that and I now own all of their property?!.  Or at least I can then claim all of their property.  And how much time has to go by?  Twenty, thirty days?
R: No, no!  Just tell them immediately!  This here is due immediately.  Use the word immediately liberally.
M: All right.  And then I put this on my UCC?
R: Yeah!
M: Now another question.  The judge - this is the Federal District judge - in this case is absolutely crooked and he has injured more people than I care to even think about. There is one District judge who seems to be pretty fair but I was not lucky enough to get him.  But this guy is a real jerk.  He’s in his 80’s I think, or really late 70’s…But can I add him to this thing?  Or is it too late?
R: Oh, you can add him to it any time you want.  You can tell him that he’s added to it because of his practice of Machiavellian politics.
M: Machiavellian politics.  Oh!  That’s interesting.  Gad I love talking to you!  All right.  So I can add his name to this list.  Do I add a monetary amount to his name?
R: Well, see I’m just trying to…
M: It doesn’t matter.  I can add…  Well of course if I’m sending everybody discovery for this list of property that they own… my question really should have been should I send him one as well?
R: Yeah, yeah.  See otherwise don’t mess with him.
M: O.k.  And I’ve got the Secretary of State and all sorts of other people here.  Of course somebody - And I think it was Rice McCloud - whom you may or may not know - told me a long time ago that evidently he was expecting the State of __** to be placed into…Oh jeepers, it just flew out of my head!  Oh…involuntary bankruptcy.
R: Oh yeah, yeah.  But that’s not a state matter.  See bankruptcies here are all federal.
M: O.k.  but he had said that they had filed for involuntary bankruptcy for the STATE OF  **             …  Oh, by the way that brings me to another question.  The state, and the county and the city, as official entities are listed in my case as well - as defendants.  Can I put them on my…I mean I can’t put everything that belongs to the State on my UCC, can I?…
R: The State can’t own anything.  There’s the name of the State here but…
M: All right.  But, even though I’m suing them, they cannot make good on this.
  Now I just recently made all of these various moves - sending my birth certificate and my Social Security number back …
R: What do you mean Social Security number back?
M: In other words sending it to the Department of Commerce “accepted for value.”
R: Oh o.k, o.k., o.k.   I just wanted to be sure you weren’t disposing of it.
M: Oh no.  I didn’t dispose of it.  I didn’t do any of that.  But I just recently made all of these various moves and I’m a little bit confused because I feel almost - although I’m reading and studying as fast as I can - I feel kind of like I’m blundering around in a dark closet here - full of other people too!  And everybody seems to have different methods…
R: Well, it’s important here that you do.  Because when you make a decision then it becomes your property.
M: Yeah.  O.k.  I wish some of my decisions were not my property!  I’m still living with them thirty years later too.
  So, you don’t think I can put the state, or the county or city in this discovery?
R: Well, I don’t know.  I wouldn’t.
M: Because I originally sued them as well as “persons.”  I said: “Hey, you claim to be a ‘person’. And a person can be defined in any way legally or lawfully.  And as long as you claim to be a ‘person’ and you operate as a ‘person,’ then I’m going to treat you as a ‘person’ and you’ll be held just as accountable as every other individual in this case.”
R: O.k.  In that case… on that basis o.k.  But then you hold them in their official capacity and in their ex officio capacity.
M: All of them in their ex officio capacity?…or just the State?  I know I’ve got everybody in their private capacities - and their official capacities.
R: In their private - that’s ex officio.  And official is just the other side.  See one of them is just the flip side of the other.
M: All right.  So the State of   **   and the County and the city are basically in their official capacity.  But I can’t state that they have an ex officio capacity can I?
R: Why not?
M: Well that’s what I defined in my paperwork to them.  I said, “as long as you claim to be a ‘person’ and operate as a ‘person’ you’re going to pay like a ‘person.’ ”  But I didn’t know if I was just pulling straws out of the air.
R: Well, you know, you can throw it at them here.  It’s not going to cost you anything.  They still have to have somebody say that “the State does this and the State does that.”
  I remember my son was in court one time.  And so when he’s confronting the judge and asking him “is the bank here today?”  The attorney jumps up and says “the bank is here and bla, bla, bla.”  And so my son turned to him and said, “what is your name?”
M: He spoke with the representative with the bank and asked him his personal name?
R: This was an attorney.  And when he jumped up and said, “yes, the bank is here.  I’m an attorney for the bank.”  So my son asked him his name and he gave it to him and then my son said, “well your name is not the bank, is it?”  And the attorney said no, his name was such and such…
  The thing is here… my son at that time…and sons and fathers, and daughters and mothers, you know don’t listen to their parents.
M: Oh-ho-oh!  Tell me about it!
R: And he told me he said,   “Dad, the judge knows that.”  Well, sure he does.  But you didn’t get it into evidence.  And it cost him dearly.  The reason that he was so arrogant is that he was thinking that he knew and had the appeal on ice.  But the appeal is for argument so therefore the evidence is presumed and he loses.  But you see all he would have had to do is turn to that attorney and say:  “Then sir, are you the victim?”  Because the attorney had stated that the bank was the victim.  Well then, we’ll agree to that, that the bank is the victim.  But are you the victim?  Are you the victim sir?  And that’s when the attorney would have had to dissociate himself from the bank.
M: O.k.  Now just as a little review.  I’m going to send out this letter for discovery about everybody’s property.  Do I send one to the State of   **    and the County as well.
R: Yeah.
M: All right.  So I send everybody, including the State, City and County a letter for discovery regarding their property holdings?
R: Right!
M: And I tell them that I am now the owner through their default.
R: Yes.  This letter here for discovery is because of the dishonor.  And spell out that when they dishonor they surrender the equity.  And therefore all the equity, by virtue of that fact, passes to you as owner and you are now the owner of the equity and they have no equitable claim to any equity until settlement is made.
M: O.k.  And then once this thing is effected as a UCC filing and registered then actually this thing, this judgment becomes marketable.  My former husband - and I’m still on pretty good terms with him - was a banker.  He was a small banker in Egypt before we were nationalized but he still has contacts.  And I’ve always thought it would be fun to take a judgment, whether it be mine or somebody else’s and see if he could market it to some third world country that’s paying through the nose and blood and tears of their own people, to buy things like grain and technology, etc. and just sell it to them and say, “o.k. ten cents on the dollar - now you can present this as your payment for however many bushels of grain or corn or what have you and see what happens.”
R: Yeah, well see all the attorneys and judges that you’re up against are all foreigners too.  You see they have already taken foreign aid by virtue of their license.  They got their license due to foreign aid from the United States.  That’s why the property belongs to you now when you claim it because it’s prepaid.  See, it’s already prepaid by virtue of their having already taken foreign aid.  And since you’re a stockholder of the United States then you’re saying “O.k. I’m going to surrender my portion of the stock here which means the corporate pledge, which is the promise to pay.  See it’s the corporation that made the promise to pay.  And you’re just telling these corporate people, “you just go ahead now and surrender your liabilities and I will give you my exemption which will clear your debt.
M: Now do I say this in the same letter?  In other words that I now own everything and I now offer them my exemptions to clear their debt unless they come forward with the amounts specified in my Claim?  Is that it?
R: Yeah, you’re not going to…they do not have your exemption unless they make settlement in fact.  The rules of assumption have been displaced now by the facts and you’re not in dispute of any of the facts.  In other words when you tell them that there’s no cause for trial, unless they go to trial for their misconduct.
M: Well that’s what I did.  I took them to trial for there misconduct and basically what I did was start out on Constitutional questions.  You know, “you’re in neglect for such and such Constitutional Amendment and such and such Constitutional Article” and so forth.  And then, when I kept getting their gibberish back I said,  “you guys are going to answer these questions or you’re going to go into commercial default.  And I don’t care.  I accept your dishonor.”  So then they sent back a lot more gibberish trying to force me back into Statutory law and at that point I basically said, “Hey, the game is over.  I’m tired of this.  And put them into commercial default officially under the court seal.  So that’s where they are right now.  And then of course I filed the ex parte Summary Judgment and the Charging Order, which is what I called this particular document.  But now I have to give orders to the Clerk don’t I?  As to how they are to pay.
  So what I would do is send the Clerk this sheaf of letters that I’ve sent to every individual here?  And I file each one individually?
R: What do you mean file each one individually?
M: Well, in other words, I will have - unless I just send a copy of this letter for discovery that I’m sending every individual here telling them that they’re in default and that I now am the owner of all of their personal and real property…
R: …Held in their name or any of their aliases or alter ego.  Alter egos and aliases.
M: All right.  Do I file a copy of that letter with the District Court?  Cause this case has not been totally dismissed yet - except by me.
R: O.k.  Well o.k.  You’re bringing it in as a Summary Judgment.
M: Well, I’ve already done the Summary Judgment.  And my Charging Order was attached.  Now my Charging Order was for the amount, the total amount that I claimed.  But this letter that I’m sending to everybody…should that be under the Court chop too?  In other words:  I’m sending them a letter for discovery.  And I’m sending the same letter to everybody.
R: Well, this here is a subsequent proceeding to the Summary Judgment.  You see it’s part of that Summary Judgment.
M: So do I list it as that?  Or do I just call it “Discovery Pursuant to Summary Judgment”.
R: Yeah.
M: O.k. So that’s what I’ll call it.  And I’ll file the text of the letter for all Defendants and then I’ll send each Defendant a copy of that.  O.k.  I don’t really even have to send each individual a copy of the document.  I’ll just copy it and send it to the attorneys that represent them.  So I could basically send the text of that discovery letter to the individual law firms and let them wrestle with it.  And they won’t do anything with it.  They’ll think this is just a big joke.
R: Well, that’s why sometimes, if it’s not too much of a burden, I send it to their lawyers but also to them.  Because the lawyers many times don’t disclose what’s going on.
M: Well o.k. that makes sense.  They’ve got certain ha-ha rights.  Of course they’ve been the only ones with any kind of “rights” on this planet for too long.  O.k.  now after I’ve done this discovery then I can go on by and file my UCC3 with the amended…  And as an attachment I can have each individual defendant in the case listed with their address and the amount owed.
R: Sure.  Put that in the property section.
M: O.k. as property description.  Then it becomes a perfected instrument.  This sounds too easy.
R: Well, just get it done.  Then, you see, they’ve got problems.
M: Well, golly R.  I can’t thank you enough for being so generous with your time and information.  I am in contact with B.B. via e-mail and she’s put me on her transcript mailing list as well.  So that’s very helpful.  I sometimes wish I had more people like her that are not involved in kind of like “dual law.”  Some of them seem as though they’re still hanging on to their years of law study and don’t want to throw it away.  And so it’s kind of hard to figure out whether they are untainted or not.
R: Well that doesn’t make any difference here.  See we don’t have to make that determination.  You don’t need to be burdened with that.
M: But sometimes I find myself in a bind and I say well “who can I call that can help me out with this sort of thing?”  I hate to call you because you’re a busy man and I know how tough it is to get up early in the morning.
(Personal chit-chat)
M: We have a friend who’s just recently been in jail - and this is on a traffic matter - a native American Indian, not registered in any way.  His children were born at home, and are home schooled.. His sister-in-law acted as mid-wife.  None of the children are certificated or in any way registered with the State.  And now the State is desperately trying to force this man into a position where he will come over and get himself registered - he and his children.  So they’ve got this case going against him.  He was arrested for having home-made plates on his car and he’s been locked up now for six or seven months.  And this thing has gone to circuit Court already where he just received three year.  This is because he had asked the former Judge certain questions on Discovery about Indian Treaties and the Constitution and had subpoenaed the Judge to appear and answer these question.  And this judge then charged him with threatening and tampering with the judicial system.  People like that judge I would like to take out to the back fence and just shoot them.  But hey, I can’t do that but that’s my natural inclination.
R: Well see what we’re doing is giving them an opportunity to shoot themselves.  You see that means that we turn their conscience against them.
M: Do they even have a conscience?
R: Yeah, But look here now.  You see what you’re doing is going after these people and telling them to register because they’re foreign agents here in the local community.  O.k.  and foreigners have got to register.  See they’re in violation of the Green River Ordinance which requires registration of all foreigners doing business in a local community.  And basically what that means is that we’re taking out city, the city that we live in the suburbs of, which is Washington D.C….  That is the municipality that has loaned money to all the world through their U.S. Corporation and all of the rest of the world has taken foreign aid.
M: By the way, as a little interjected note, I discovered recently that the ten square miles that Washington D.C. sits on is in fact owned by the Vatican.  And I thought “wow!  That’s really interesting!  Somebody went and dug up the deeds and what have you and discovered that it’s the Vatican that owns Washington D.C. - the land it sits on.
R: That doesn’t surprise me.  Because whatever that is, when they go into secret proceedings - and you see they’re not prosecuting you under the State or federal statutes - there is no record.  They’re prosecuting you under Canon law.  And that’s the Vatican or the Universal Church.  And means that all of the acts of terrorism and homosexuality that are being carried on are carried out here by the Cardinals and Bishops.  They’re the ones that are ultimately responsible because when we take these people into a court of conscience, if there isn’t anyone else that understands those hoodlums, they either do or are taking the benefits of the office without understanding and it means that when we prosecute it we’ve contracted with them for the aid, and they now have taken the aid and now if they want the benefit of the aid they’re going to surrender their soul or they’re going to the happy hunting grounds.
M: Well I think they surrendered their souls a long time ago when they made the decision to…
R: O.K. but that’s assumed.  Now, because they’ve assumed authority in certain areas, now we’re going to say well that’s well and good now that you wanted it here you assumed you had it now you’re going to have it in fact buddy.  And that means an execution of law occurs.  And an execution means he’s going to his happy hunting grounds.  He’s contracted for it and we’re going to say:  Hey, I agree with the contract.
M: Anyway, let me thank you once again.  And I’m going to get to work on this letter.  Actually it’s more than a letter, it’s my Notice to the Clerk Pursuant to the Summary Judgment.  And I’ll send everybody a copy of this Notice once the Clerk has put her chop on it demanding a list of their personal and real property and stating that they’ve surrendered the equity, unless they care to make good on the Claim - on the monetary amounts.
  Now, these monetary amounts, if they decide to pay them off, just come to me on the normal debt side of the ledger don’t they?
R: Yeah.
(More chit-chat and good byes.)