Expressing Law by Giving Notice

Trespass is what occurs when another of mankind infringes upon or causes harm to you or your property in some way without permission

What follows are facts in law, cases, and statutes, of how citizenship is different in America. The statutes are written, if there is a corresponding code and is added to the federal register, a way to provide a remedy if you know to look for said remedy. You can express your law simply by giving notice and you can then send notices to anyone of mankind who does trespass. A memorandum example is provided below as proof of the facts in law.

We are endowed by our Creator with unalienable rights. Those rights are what we bring forward and express through notices. Then we give notice to those of mankind of those rights. The act of giving notice creates evidence of what rights we express and what trespass we do not permit upon said rights. These rights are whatever we bring forward, as long as it causes no harm to another of mankind.

Giving notice, and correcting your political status through correcting the evidence and agreements of who you are [“the actual recorded documents to prove you are NOT dead, lost-at-sea”] should be all you require. Many people see no value in the correction of political status. However, if it is not in the public record, how can you disprove the legal societies presumptions? The legal society has set up so many licenses and registrations that are pushed to gain both voluntary servitude and developed evidence of the “person”. If done properly, you prove your standing and political status as an attestation of rebuttal against any presumption.

Mankind gives an attestation of rebuttal, where persons give affidavits.

If you were born in America, you were born with the claim of an American; or, you may be naturalized at a later date if you moved to America after being born in another country. A living soul can step forward at any time and correct the evidence and agreements of their status.

If you take the time to examine any of the STATE statutes you will notice the definitions are almost the same from STATE to STATE. The legal society copies and pastes from STATE to STATE to facilitate uniform mechanisms of control. All the court paperwork typically received is per Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and local municipal practice [“minor variations for local practice”].

Davis v. Wechsler, 263 US 22, 24: “The assertion of federal rights [Bill of Rights], when plainly and reasonably made, is not to be defeated under the name of local practice.”

The Fourth Amendment is unique in that it makes the distinction between people and persons.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Notice how people have a right to be secure in their persons?

In this sentence, “persons” belongs to people. This shows the clear distinction between man and the proxies of the “persons” for which he, as a man, is the Holder In Due Course of all such “persons” in their various forms.

The local district attorney [“treasonous trespasser on the land and soil jurisdiction facilitating the military district court”] is responsible for the “proper” paperwork of the court they are attempting to bring forward with the issuance of the case bond security. If the paperwork is in error and uncured [“See Holder in Due Course”], the district attorney can be placed in default. There is now an uncured default on a security of the case bond. This default deals specifically with the court documents and does not have anything to do with the set of accusations. The Notice of Error and Notice of Default challenges the paperwork, and not the accusation that prompted a filing of the security in the form of the case bond.

What follows is simply an example of a second NOTICE memorandum section [“a minimum of three notices are required to establish record and honorable effort at remedy - if there is a lack of a proper rebuttal to the notices of trespass, the fact of trespass now stands in law”]. This example is to a local tax office to demonstrate the difference between a “resident” who is a U.S. citizen [“citizen of the United States”], versus a Citizen or National of a state/State.

This is only an example of a memorandum. In addition, there should be a very short pre-section “Notice” that establishes facts associated with an expressed right or trespass. Those facts may be verified boundaries of property, identity of you, what is believed to be a “trespass by way of…”, and other key statements of fact about the potential trespass that the subsequent memorandum addresses as evidence in law. This “Notice” pre-section should be included while also offering remedy. The actual “Notice” portion should be short and simple, however, the method can be initially difficult to understand in structure and content. That is not covered here.

Note: “I” in the capital form is a number in law [“a decapitated man missing the head”] - “i” [“still has his head”] is who you are in the present tense and current at all times since we are always in the present - you are “i am”, a living soul, one of mankind, a seed of consciousness - trespass is always in the present tense unless a remedy is accepted or forgiveness is blessed to those who do trespass.

One of the most grievous trespass is one in which forgiveness was given, and then the man or woman proceeds to trespass AGAIN.

Please read what follows carefully…

Note: this is not legal advice. This is only the sharing of knowledge. Each of mankind chooses their own path. Each of mankind has unique circumstances and experiences. Each of mankind has their own agreements and evidence. Any notice is uniquely yours.

Note: Adjectives diminish things to an opinion. Opinions are not admissible at court. It is therefore important to minimize the use of adjectives or opinions in any notice and statements of fact.

In reference to 26 USC §7701, Definitions, Xxxxx Code § XXX-X-X Definitions, and other referenced statutes and cases:

i: a man; John-Queue: Public ©, am NOT a “resident” since that term refers ONLY to a “person” [“a legal fiction”] who is a “United States person” and a “temporary inhabitant” which i, am NOT since i, am a “man,” not a “person”; i, live upon the soil and land of the xxx state republic and not within the admiralty jurisdiction of the fictional “STATE of XXX”; a corporate entity; i, am “domiciled” on xxx state: nothing to do, at all, with the STATE OF XXX, INC except that xxx state is the “employer” of the STATE OF XXX, INC; The STATE OF XXX, a Municipal/Territorial Corporation with only admiralty jurisdiction, has no authority to “tax” a man or woman born upon the soil and land of a state of the Union;

The man; John: Doe©, is NOT a corporate entity “person” and has no contracts with any corporate entities; i, however, do claim the political status of an American State National [“or citizen”] of the xxx Republic;

John: Doe© was born upon the soil and land of xxxx, a State Republic;

i, state per US v Cruikshank. 92 US 542; “there is in our Political System, a government of each of the several states and a government of the United States. Each is distinct from the other and has citizens of its own”;

i, state per Belmont v. Town of Gulfport, 122 So. 10; "Taxpayers are not [de jure] State Citizens";

i, state per U.S. v. Anthony 24 Fed. 829 (1873); "The term resident and citizen of the United States (this means 14th amendment citizen) is distinguished from a Citizen of one of the several states, in that the former is a special class of citizen created by Congress"

i, state per Thomasson v State, 15 Ind. 449; Cory v Carter, 48 Ind. 327 (17 Am. R. 738); McCarthy V Froelke, 63 Ind. 507; In Re Wehlitz, 16 Wis. 443. McDonel v State. 90 Ind. Rep. 320 at pg 323; “One may be a citizen of a State and yet not a citizen of the United States”;

i, state per 256 P. 545. Affirmed 278 US 123, Tashiro v Jordan “There is a clear distinction between national citizenship and state citizenship”;

i, state per Tashiro v Jordan May 20, 1927, 255 P. 545 Ca. Supreme Court; “Citizenship of the United States does not entitle citizens to privileges and immunities of Citizens of the State, since privileges of one are not the same as the other”;

i, state per Kitchens v. Steele, 112 F. Supp 383; "A citizen of the United States is a citizen [“14th amendment citizen'“] of the federal government ...";

i, state per Maxwell v Dow. 20 S.C.R. 448, at pg 455; “… the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States do not necessarily include all the rights protected by the first eight amendments to the Federal constitution against the powers of the Federal Government”;

i, state per State v. Manuel, 20 NC 122; "the term 'citizen' in the United States, (means United States citizen or legal fiction) is analogous to the term `subject' in common law; the change of phrase has resulted from the change in government";

i, state per US v Valentine 288 F. Supp. 957; “The only absolute and unqualified right of a United States citizen is to residence within the territorial boundaries of the United States”;

i, state per The Amendment (14th) recognized that "an individual can be a Citizen of one of the several states without being a citizen of the United States," (U.S. v. Anthony, 24 Fed. Cas. 829, 830), or, "a citizen of the United States without being a Citizen of a state" (Slaughter-House Cases, supra; cf. U.S. v. Cruikshank, 92 US 542, 549 (1875)). ['“Again talking about a 14th amendment citizen”];

i, state per Gardina v. Board of Registrars of Jefferson County, 160 Ala. 155; 48 So. 788 (1909); "There are, then, under our republican form of government, two classes of citizens, one of the United States and one of the state". [“Again making a distinction between a 14th amendment citizen and a State Citizen”];

i, state "The governments of the United States and of each state of the several states are distinct from one another. The rights of a citizen under one may be quite different from those which he has under the other". Colgate v. Harvey, 296 U.S. 404; 56 S.Ct. 252 (1935);

i, state "...rights of national citizenship as distinct from the fundamental or natural rights inherent in state citizenship". Madden v. Kentucky, 309 U.S. 83: 84 L.Ed. 590 (1940);

i, state per Jones v Temmer. 89 F. Supp 1226; "The privileges and immunities clause of the 14th Amendment protects very few rights because it neither incorporates the Bill of Rights, nor protects all rights of individual citizens. Instead this provision protects only those rights peculiar to being a citizen of the federal government; it does not protect those rights which relate to state citizenship";

i, state per Wheeling Steel Corp. v. Fox, 298 U.S. 193, 80 L.Ed. 1143, 56 S.Ct. 773; "Therefore, the U.S. citizens [“citizen of the federal corporation”] residing in one of the states of the union, are classified as property and franchises of the federal government as an "individual entity"”;

The Municipal Corporation, aka “the United States incorporated,” was served its “Final Judgment and Civil Orders” on APRIL 11, 2014, that of the “FINAL NOTICE OF COMMERCIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE DEFAULT” on all corporations of that criminal organization, and that it was at its completion; see annexed notice;

i have provided you, with the following for historical context;

The United States [“non-incorporated”] is a union of soil jurisdiction “landed (e)states” formed by the former colonies via Unanimous Declaration issued July 1, 1776, published July 4,1776; This is our “national jurisdiction”; Each state has defined geographical boundaries; The United States of America - a federation of Land Jurisdiction States - formed September 9, 1776 for the purpose of joint operations in international jurisdiction, including the international land and sea jurisdictions; This is our “international” jurisdiction; Each state has defined geographical boundaries; “The States of America” - a confederation of inchoate “States of States” was formed under the Articles of Confederation, March 1, 1781, for the purpose of conducting the business of the States in global commercial jurisdiction; These “Federal States of States” have no defined geographical boundaries and exist only on paper [“These are the “Missing” Federal States of States and fictitious entities after the American Civil War in need of reconstruction”];

i, say for further clarification, the “national” soil jurisdiction of the State is guaranteed local control; This is the level of the “state republics” and “republican states” guaranteed by the constitutional contracts; The soil level states are seldom referenced in print after 1851, but, when they are prior to 1851, they appear in all small letters: maine, virginia, florida, etc…; These are the member states of The United States; This determines our basic nationality; We are, for example, “texans” and because we are “texans” we are also considered “Texans”; This, in turn, identifies us as “Americans” for international purposes; When we are born, we are not “citizens” of anything; Being a “citizen” implies an obligation to serve a government; It is ridiculous to claim that a new-born baby has an obligation to serve any government; Nonetheless, certain disreputable governmental services corporations have made exactly such claims against babies born in America for several generations; This is part of what needs to be addressed;

i, state the basic dictum of the national soil jurisdiction is, “Harm none and be harmed by none” lest you, be held to full accountability and responsibility for said harm; Likewise, the republic states and their state republics are seldom referenced in print and even more seldom are they officially populated and used to conduct business - but they can be; This results in a quorum of state nationals opting to act as state citizens, and invoking the national soil jurisdiction of the State of the Union to conduct national-level business;

i, state per Luther v Borden. 48 US 1. 12 Led 581; “governments are but trustees acting under derived authority and have no power to delegate what is not delegated to them. But the people, as the original fountain might take away what they have delegated and entrust to whom they please. … The sovereignty in every state resides in the people of the state and they may alter and change their form of government at their own pleasure”;

i, say the presumptions of you [“tax assessor, local government official, etc…”], as presented upon your “Individual,” a corporate legal fiction, [“title of some referenced document”] for XXX County in the “State of XXX, Inc.” are, herewith, rebutted and i, have provided notice of information, of what i, believe to be, clarifications with clear definitions and case references in order to rebut and correct mistaken “presumptions”;

i, say i, also present “[“State”] Code Chapter #and Letter. Motor Vehicle Administration, Registration, Certificate of Title and Antitheft Provisions § XXX-X-X. Definitions” for your reference to show i, am not a “person” or “individual” as defined therein;

i, state per Hendrick v. Maryland S.C. Reporter’s Rd. 610-625. (1914); “A “US Citizen” [“citizen of the federal corporation”] upon leaving the District of Columbia becomes involved in “interstate commerce”, as a “resident” does not have the common-law right to travel, of a Citizen of one of the several states”;

i, state the Maxim of Law: Ejusdem Generis (eh-youse-dem generous) v adj. Latin for “of the same kind,” used to interpret loosely written statutes; Where a law lists specific classes of persons or things and then refers to them in general, the general statements only apply to the same kind of persons or things specifically listed; Example: if a law refers to persons, individuals, copartnerships, franchises, corporations, etc..., the kinds listed are primarily fictitious entities, and thus ejusdem generis establishes the entire list as fictitious entities; as such, a living soul as a man or woman is not a fictitious entity;

i, state based on ejusdem generis “person” and “individual” is a fictitious entity as in the rest of the list in 26 USC 7701 and [“State”] XXX-X-X Definitions;

i, state per 26 USC 7701 (a) (1); Person “The term “person” shall be construed to mean and include an individual, a trust, estate, partnership, association, company or corporation”;

i, state per 1 USC § 1; “the words ‘person’ and ‘whoever’ include corporations, companies, associations, firms, partnerships, societies, and joint stock companies, as well as individuals;”;

i, state per 26 USC § 865 (g)(1), i, am NOT a “resident”;

i, state per 1 USC § 1; i, am NOT a “person”, “whoever”, or an “individual”;

i, state per the following cases a person is: “a variety of entities other than human beings.” Church of Scientology v U.S. Department of Justice, 612 F2d 417 (1979) at pg 418; “…foreigners, not citizens…” United States v Otherson. 480 F Supp. 1369 (1979) at pg 1373; “ ‘in common usage, the term ‘person’ does not include the sovereign, [and] statutes employing the [word] are normally construed to exclude it.’ Wilson v Omaha Tribe, 442 US653 667, 61 L. Ed 2d 153, 99 S Ct 2529 (1979) (quoting United States v Cooper Corp. 312 US 600, 604, 83 L. Ed 1071, 61 S Ct 742 (1941) See also United States v Mine Workers, 330 US 258, 273, 91 L. Ed 884. 67 S Ct 677 (1947)” Will v Michigan State Police, 491 US 58, 105 L. Ed. 2d 45, 109 S Ct 2304; “a sovereign is not a person in a legal sense” In re Fox, 52 N.Y. 535, II Am. Rep. 751. U.S. v Fox, 94 U.S. 315, 241, Ed, 192;

i, state to be clear; that a State Citizen and a state national is a not a national of the United States. But is a national of the United States of America. See…8 USC § 1101(a) and is “alien” to the United States; and (21), (22), (23) clarifying the definitions; [“The Expatriation Act of 1868 was codified at 25 Rev. Stat. § 1999, and then by 1940 had been re-enacted at 8 U.S.C. § 800.[3][4] It is now the last note to 8 U.S.C. § 1481”];

• (21) The term “state national” means a person owing permanent allegiance to a state. (This is a State Citizen if they take on duties and responsibilities to serve the people in the local republican form of government);

• (22) The term “national of the United States” means (A) a citizen of the United States, or (B) a person who, though not a citizen of the United States, owes permanent allegiance to the United States;

• (23) The term “naturalization” means the conferring of nationality of a state upon a person after birth, by any means whatsoever;

i, state you, can be a national without being a citizen; Citizenship is part of a political community with duties and responsibilities; A “person” is a fiction or constructive fraud; The Creator has no respect for “persons, PERSONS, corporations, or any fake entity…”; this is per numerous passages in the bible which i, have included some of which are shared below;

• Deuteronomy 1:17 – Ye shall not respect persons in judgment; but ye shall hear the small as well as the great; ye shall not be afraid of the face of man; for the judgment is God’s: and the cause that is too hard for you, bring it unto me, and I will hear it;

• Deuteronomy 16:19 – Thou shalt not wrest judgment; thou shalt not respect persons, neither take a gift: for a gift doth blind the eyes of the wise, and pervert the words of the righteous.

• 2 Chronicles 19:7 – Wherefore now let the fear of the Lord be upon you; take heed and do it: for there is no iniquity with the Lord our God, nor respect of persons, nor taking of gifts;

• Proverbs 28:21 – To have respect of persons is not good: for for a piece of bread that man will transgress;

• Romans 2:11 – for there is no respect of persons with God;

• Colossians 3:25 – But he that doeth wrong shall receive for the wrong which he hath done: and there is no respect of persons;

i, state per Penhallow v Doane’s Administrators, 3 U.S. 54 (1795) at p 93. 2; “Inasmuch as every government is an artificial person, an abstraction, and a creature of the mind only, a government can interfere 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”;

i, state per Lansing v Smith, (1829) 4 Wendell 9.20 (NY); “People of a state are entitled to all rights, which formerly belong to the King by his prerogative”;

i, state per Ohio Life Insurance & Trust Company v. Debolt, 57 U.S. 16 How. 416 (1853), 14 L.Ed. 997; “It will be admitted on all hands that with the exception of the powers granted to the states and the federal government, through the Constitutions, the people of the several states are unconditionally sovereign within their respective states”;

i, state per People v Herkimer, 4 Cowen (NY) 345, 348 (1825); “The people or sovereign are not bound by general word in statutes, restrictive of prerogative right, title or interest, unless expressly named. Acts of limitation do not bind the King or the people. The people have been ceded all the rights of the King, the former sovereign… …It is maxim of the common law, that when an act is made for the common good and to prevent injury, the King shall be bound, though not mamed, but when a statute is general and prerogative right would be divested or taken from the King (or the people) he shall not be bound.”

i, state per Chisholm v Georgia. 2 Dall. 440, al pg 471 (1793); “…at the revolution the Sovereignty devolved on the people; and they are truly the sovereigns without subjects… …and have none to govern but themselves; the citizens of America are equal as fellow citizens, and as joint tenants in the sovereignty”; This was further upheld in Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803) where the Supreme Court and the people can strike down any law that is not Constitutional;

i, state you, are required to initiate the appropriate corrections to your records as it pertains to John: Doe©, an American State National, and send a copy of those corrections to i, so made, by USPS by use of the return address above, at the contact address of i; There is no requirement for a private automobile, not involved in commerce, to be registered with a “State of [“State”], Inc.”, a Municipal contractor, as clearly noted i, am not a “resident”, “person”, or “individual” as defined in the [“State'“] Motor Vehicle Code; Statutes are all dependent upon “commercial application”;

i, state per 18 USC § 31 “The term ‘Motor Vehicle’ means every description of carriage or other contrivance propelled or drawn by mechanical power and used for commercial purposes on the highways in the transportation of passengers, passengers and property, or property or cargo. The term ‘used for commercial purposes’ means the carriage of persons or property for any fare, fee, rate, charge or other consideration, or directly or indirectly in connection with any business, or other undertaking intended for profit”;

i, state the soil jurisdiction also includes surface water, so each state republic also has a republic of state attached to it, and for business purposes, you, have “The [“State”] Republic” [“republican form of government”] operating the soil jurisdiction of [“State”] and “The Republic of [“State”]” operating the surface water jurisdiction of [“State”];

i, ask if you, have any proof to the contrary of what i have presented above then, as a matter of proper decorum, you are required to send me your point-by-point affidavit of rebuttal which contains your autograph signed under penalty of perjury from without the United States pursuant to 28 USC §1746(1); Otherwise, i, will expect your presentment, to me, of the corrections made to your records concerning John: Doe©, a non-taxpayer, as established above, within the next five (5) business days of your receipt of this tracked and signature required notice;

Making “Paper Things” - The fictitious entity…

We are NOT Paper Things

We are born into these bodies as living souls.

We contribute while on this land.

We eventually cease our physical existence - but we move on…

We make paper things, but we are not those paper things…

How do we declare a statute null and void?

This is one of the hurdles of the current unlawful commercially created health emergency crisis. But, there is a pathway. Yet, it is hard to see when the whole world nudges mankind to fighting as a fictitious paper thing. Knowing who you are is the first step.

Notice how this amendment does not state the Supreme Court can re-examine the constitutionality? The people, through a trial by jury decides.

• Miranda v. Arizona, 384 US 436, 491: “Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them.”

• Marbury v. Madison, 5th US (2 Cranch) 137, 174, 176, 1803: “All laws, rules and practices which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void.”

• Davis v. Wechsler, 263 US 22, 24: “The assertion of federal rights [Bill of Rights], when plainly and reasonably made, is not to be defeated under the name of local practice.”

• Hurtado v. People of the State of California, 110 US 516: “The state cannot diminish the rights of the people.”

• Shere v. Cullen, 481 F 946: “There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of this exercise of constitutional rights.”

How do you express the trespass in common law? Give notice!

By providing notice and expressing your rights, you can then call your court of mankind to be deliberated by a trial by jury [“not a jury trial which exists in the entity courts”]. You can bring your notices as evidence of your rights being expressed. Provide evidence of any rebuttal [“or lack thereof”] from those of mankind who do trespass. Call forward those of mankind who did witness the harm or trespass. Have those who did witness provide the facts, evidence, and conclusions of law along with your notices.

Once it has been decided, the statutes can be made null and void. It takes the people [“not entities”] to nullify statutes. The provisions exist to nullify anything unconstitutional. But, we need to come forward as one of mankind in a friendly court where the public servants are at least aware of the rights under common law. This friendly court of proper common law jurisdiction may be the hardest part. Corporate greed is infused everywhere. The public trust has been broken.

Any man can file a case to be heard at any time. It would be trespass on the case if the public servants were to refuse due to local practice. It is their duty to assist in having your case heard by a jury of your peers. The public servants are there to serve you, and it is an honor to serve. That is how a republican form of government works.

Question:

What if we are what we seek?

As one of mankind, we are unique and we are endowed with extraordinary unalienable rights and powers. We express this awareness clearly in the Declaration of Independence. And the power is in each of us.

Please consider this next part as a form of asking questions. Pay particular attention to the use of the words “in”, “on”, and “name”. America was founded on the belief in a singular Creator. This belief formed the founding documents and declared the stance on unalienable rights.

John 14

Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me. 2 In my Father’s house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. 3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also. 4 And whither I go ye know, and the way ye know.

5 Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest; and how can we know the way? 6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. 7 If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.

8 Philip saith unto him, Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth us. 9 Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Shew us the Father? 10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works. 11 Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father in me: or else believe me for the very works’ sake. 12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto my Father. 13 And whatsoever ye shall ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. 14 If ye shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it.

15 If ye love me, keep my commandments. 16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; 17 even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. 18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you. 19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also. 20 At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you. 21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.

22 Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world? 23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him. 24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father’s which sent me. 25 These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you. 26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

27 Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid. 28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I. 29 And now I have told you before it come to pass, that, when it is come to pass, ye might believe. 30 Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me. 31 But that the world may know that I love the Father; and as the Father gave me commandment, even so I do. Arise, let us go hence.

Is it spelled out for us?

In the preceding passage: i am in the Father; the Father is in me; believe on me [“who is me? on not in… “on” is being above or over - in this case believing over or above”]; he dwells with you and shall be in you; what i do you shall also do, and greater; i go to my Father, and if you ask in my name [“remember, a name is given and taken, it is a reference, it is NOT the seed of consciousness”], if you ask, “i” will do it…

All the contexts are the same; i, you, me, Father, Son. All being with the same divine power… “I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you”.

What if one were to write this as a math equation? What would it look like? If that equation, based on this account, is somewhat balanced for each variable, what does that mean? It seems to be shared parts of the same whole.

It is in each of us - the spark of Creation. How can it be that we can do the same and more? That begs the question of the power already within us.

Law is what we express as long as it causes no harm to another of mankind.

So, ask yourself, if you can do the same, and greater, what less is in you - and what less are you?

Harm is caused by mankind. War is caused by mankind through evil means. Harm is not caused by corporations, franchises, fictitious entities - that is injury. What if, through your unalienable rights and the law you bring forward, you can do anything and more? What if you simply need to give notice by expressing your law?

What if that is what they do not want you to know?