Freedom Reigns/OPPT-IN
Monday, February 18, 2013 7:00 pm EST (USA
Tuesday, February 19, 2013 (Australia
Lisa: Welcome everybody to one of the most
anticipated two hours and possibly the most pleasant two hours of our whole
week. My name's Lisa Harrison. This is the OPPT-IN show on the Freedom Reigns
channel at Blogtalk. Wow! It's been a big week at OPPT-IN for The People's
Trust. The Courtesy Notice did go out and that will be the focus of our
conversation today. There are a lot of questions. There's a bit of confusion
and we have to clear all of that up today. The OPPT-IN website currently has
the initial version of the Courtesy Notice and its guidelines. By the end of
the show, if not by now, if it didn't take (inaudible) seconds before we went
live, an updated version will go on. That's just a couple of typos and spelling
mistakes essentially.
There will also be a two-hour audio
discussion between the primary authors, being Scott and Ken Bartles and Chris
Hales, talking about the Courtesy Notice. So, if you listen to that and we want
you to share that as well for people who don't join in today. That will give
you a very well-grounded understanding of what it is, why it is, how it works,
the situations in which to use it and all of that. Now, we will be going over a
lot of that today as well. But there is a permanent record there, or there will
be.
Without any further ado, we'll bring out
some of the co-hosts we have here, which is Bob Wright. Are you with us Bob?
Bob: Hello, hello everyone. Welcome to the show.
Glad to be here Lisa.
Lisa: Yes, glad to have you. And we have
Chris Hales.
Chris: Hi, everybody. Also welcome to the
show. Also great to be here. We've got lots to talk about today.
Lisa: And, of course, we have Brian
Kelly.
Brian: Hello. gosh, I would be remiss if I
didn't say welcome to the show and I'm very glad to be here. (chuckles) Thanks,
Lisa.
(general laughter)
Lisa: (laughter) Nice. We've also got Scott
and Ken Bartle. Now, I'm just trying to find out if they've actually called in
via Blogtalk or if they want me to bring them in...what's here? Is this Mr.
Scotty perhaps?
Chris: (affirmative response) That's him.
Lisa: That's him? That would make sense.
Okay, Scott, you're unmuted.
Scott: Hello, good morning.
Lisa: Good morning. And is Ken with you?
Scott: He is. He's wrangling with Blogtalk.
Lisa: (chuckle) Is he? Well. Hi, Ken.
(chuckle) Okay, let's kick this off, because I know we only have the two of you
for a little while today. So, can you just give us a brief background on what
the Courtesy Notice is, in terms of how it evolved out of your process that you
already had?
Scott: Sure. I suppose the methodology I
was using was to write to individuals...let's just say, back then it was in the
context of people working at these corporations, departments, banks, whatever,
at the lowest possible level I could find. So, we're writing to them, asking
for validation of...say for example, of a bank, reduction of a debt or with
regard to so-called government…whether they had lawful authority. The reason I
was doing that was going right in at the bottom, such that the theory was they
may not be able to answer that question. So they're going to ask their manager
and it's going to be reverberated around the coffee machine or the water cooler
in the morning. And it's slowly going to escalate it's way up through until
someone who can answer that question. So along the way, there's going to be
various people who are actually being exposed to those questions of "Hang
on, is there real debt? Or are we real government?"
I thought that's an educational kind of
tool for those who I'm dealing with. That was where I think a lot of the old
processes of going into your local council, your government, and telling them
and saying "You're this. You're just a corporation. You're just
that."... was just the roller shutter coming down across their eyes and
they stop thinking about beer and football. So, we'll go in that bottom way.
We'll let it escalate up. We'll educate as many people along the way as we
possibly can. Now, over time that took so much effort going to the individuals
asking each one of them for the three step process to get to the point where
they couldn't provide the evidence they were legitimate or there was a debt,
that we slowly started saying "Well, okay, why don't we just go to the
top?" Once we've found that there's no debt or there's no evidence of
lawful government authority, why don't we just point to that. Then we'll get it
back to these people at the bottom and say "Here's the judgment we got
from your boss. Until that's invalidated, will it stand as the ultimate
statement of facts that there is either no debt or you're not real government?
" So, at that point, it was like a streamlining of the process. We could point
at that judgment that we'd reached through an administrative process, just like
the UCC filings had done.
When the UCC filings came out through The
One People's Public Trust, we were faced with the possibility of going, well,
okay, we can either do our own filings and some filings were starting to come
out. They're a bit perplexing, really, and think talking with Chris and others,
we're going, nah, this is going to be a struggle for a lot of people. I admit I
was struggling with some of those filings as well in the process. It's a bit boggling.
We thought, well, this has already been done. We've got the judgment. It's game
over. They've been foreclosed on. Why don't we do the same as what we're doing
to the CEO of the bank or the head of the department and point to the judgment
that was reached with them and say, "Until that's invalidated, it
stands." That's where the Courtesy
(Notice) came from. We basically pointed at those UCC filings and said
"Well, sorry fellas. It's already been done. Game over. In that sense,
let's work our way through this Courtesy Notice." Does that help, Lisa?
Lisa: Yeah, it does. You're informing them.
You're educating them. Not just in the way you were doing it, that their
corporation is invalid or their standing in authority isn't valid, now you're
actually pointing out to them and saying "The whole structure that you
believe surrounds you and protects you, the corporation, is not there. You're
actually standing there naked as an individual. Now, person to person, let's talk."
Scott: Exactly, yeah.
Bob: Scott?
Scott: Hey, Bob.
Bob: Hey. One question. Can you explain
what kind of reaction you got when you started asking those questions?
Scott: Oh, good question. At all levels,
whether it be right down the bottom of an organization or the top...and when I
say the top, I'm thinking the top of a branch of a much higher pyramid...the
reaction ranged from absolute rejection. So you get a letter that comes back
from the legal department that says "Your claims have no legal authority."
and most of the time it wasn't a claim, it was a question. So, here's a really
bright lawyer who can't distinguish between a claim and a question. That was
hilarious itself. The other thing would happen, would be that they were trying to
label your document as a letter. I'm putting a demand to them for validation of
authority or the substantiation of a debt. So, I'm not writing a "Dear
Grandmother" letter, signed "Love and Kisses, Scott". I'm
writing a demand for validation. You get a response that comes back that tries
to belittle your demands and label it as a letter. So, you get the "your
claims are baseless" or the other one would be that they would point out a
document that they believed gave them the authority to do what they're doing.
A perfect example is local government. They
would go to the local government Act of whatever State created it, point at
that and use that to steamroll you. Now, the fact that I was asking for the
origin of that Act and going all the way back to it's inception didn't seem to
phase them. They would focus on one little bit that gave them their security
blanket and that was what they were taught. They were taught, "There's the
Act and you can rely on that." So,
there was a lot of people holding on to an interim or mid-level document.
Translating that to banks, the first thing that banks did was to point to the
mortgage contract or a loan agreement and point to your signature and say
"Look, you signed the document. There's the contract." The fact that
you're trying to go back to before that, to whether there really is a debt that
a contract could enforce, was irrelevant to them. They were seeing like an
interim document that they believed was their basis for their authority or pay
debt(?) and they would throw that at you. Does that help, Bob?
Bob: Yes, yes, very much. Thank you.
Scott: No worries(?).
Lisa: So now, just explain the evolution of
that a little bit more, with what the Courtesy Notice is now doing.
Scott: Okay. Basically what we're doing is
we're saying "Here we go, ladies and gentlemen. Here are these filings
that are saying that the banks and governments have been foreclosed upon. In
that event, you're acting as an individual in full, unlimited liability. Now,
unless you have a contract between me and you, individual to individual, that
would compel performance, that would compel me to pay you or do something, then
you don't have anything to do so. You don't have anything to compel me to do
something. There is no agreement or arrangement between us. So, in that event,
I'm going to offer you my terms should you wish to interact and deal with
me."
So, it's quite a logical sort of process.
Your banks and governments are foreclosed. Unless there's a contract that
governs the relationship between the two of you, you offer your terms and
conditions and you go from that point there. Then that individual has the
choice of saying "Well, yeah, I choose to interact" and in
interacting, they're accepting your terms and conditions. They also have the
choice to go "Actually, no. Don't really like that. Now I'm going to go
away and leave this guy alone." In
that action, they have rejected those terms and conditions and off they go on
their merry way. Which for most people, I think would be the outcome they'd be
very happy with. Is that where you're headed, Lisa?
Lisa: Lovely, yes, thank you. Let's move
into the how and the why of what to do with this Courtesy Notice now that it's
available to us. Firstly, before I move on any further, if you're at Blogtalk
radio and you want to get involved in the chat, please go to freedomreigns.us
and click on chat. There is a chat room over there for everybody, so got that
out of the way. We've got close to 200, maybe even more, 200,000 people this
week listening to this show.
For every matter that is before you,
whether it's to do with the local council, whether it's to do with the police
parking fine, a court or a bank or whatever, there's probably half a dozen
individuals that you've heard from. Especially if you've got, say a debt
collector, you're dealing with a debt collector. You're dealing with the
original bank. You're dealing with a few individuals. If we could get 100,000
or 200,000 of these Courtesy Notices in to the system, that's a huge wake-up
call. I don't believe that there's anybody that probably can't find anyone to
be a recipient of one of those. Let's move into why you would use it and under
what circumstances. Who gets it? Who is the recipient? There seems to be some
confusion about that.
Scott: Okay. Well, I suppose what we're
doing is we've drawn a line in the sand. We're not digging up past matters.
We're looking at things that are being pursued in the Now and future. Let's
just say, you get a demand in for some form of payment or a fine or you've got
to apply for a license or whatever. It's been written on a nice, little
corporate letterhead. Somewhere behind that is a living being who's authored
that, put it into the envelope and sent it to you. Lawyers are brilliant at
this, they hide behind the name of the company and they'll sign the documents
in the same way, sign it as XYZ's lawyers. It's addressed to an individual.
You're looking for the name of the person who's actually written to you and
that's where you're going to write it to.
I think what you're asking, Lisa, was say
there's more than one person involved in this matter that you're dealing with.
It's likely there's someone who's originated the action way back. What's likely
to have happened is perhaps you were unable to resolve that matter to their
satisfaction and they engage someone else to try and compel some performance
from you. They might have even engaged someone else to assist them. The typical
one is where, say you get a parking ticket and they refer the matter to the
Fines Enforcement Registry. The Fines Enforcement Registry goes and talks to
the court. The court gets a process. There's a whole chain of people who got
involved. Now, it's one matter and yet there's all these different players
involved. Ideally, I would be looking at finding the names of the individuals
that have been involved in that and addressing a Notice to them that gives them
that Courtesy Notice. That's probably the way of who to send it to. Now you
also mentioned about how it works. Is that something you wanted me to get into?
Lisa: Yeah, definitely.
Scott: Okay, the how is, essentially you’re
sending it out there as a courtesy. I mentioned sometime before that there are
two example energies that can be performed with this. You send out the Courtesy
Notice thinking “Geez, I hope this works. I really don’t want to pay that
parking fine. Geez, I hope it works.” The other one is “Well, okay, that’s the
evidence that the banks and governments have been foreclosed. I’m letting this
person know that is what has happened. I
expect that in the future the terms that I am offering is how this relationship
will be governed by.” So, there’s two different intents that have gone behind
that. I would say that if you’re in the camp of “oh, geez, I hope this works”, the
outcome that you might receive, I suspect, will be entirely different from one
who sends it from the point of view of “well, yeah, it’s game over, they’ve
been foreclosed, it’s done and dusted, don’t need to worry about this, I’m just
putting my terms up on the price list, almost like at the coffee shop, you post
the price list”. So, the how is, there is a certain basis before I’d step in to
do it. Does that assist with that, Lisa?
Lisa: Yeah, but I’m noticing in the chat we
still have at least one individual who is quite confused about what this means
and about why, or perhaps, how this works. Now, the easiest way to explain it, Michael
in the chat room, is either you believe the UCC filings works and it’s done.
Now, if you don’t believe it, then don’t move forward with the Courtesy Notice,
would be my suggestion. But if you do believe it and you understand what’s been
done by the Peoples Trust, then what you’re doing with this Courtesy Notice is,
you are educating another human being, another individual, that the corporation
that they believe they work for no longer exists and that the action that they’re
taking against you is on them personally, because the whole corporate structure
is based on limited liability. Nobody is responsible for their actions. Everybody
can pass it up the line, “I’m only doing what I was told”. This changes the
whole playing field. This puts that person in front of you, person to person.
You’re educating them on that fact. You’re
also taking on the unlimited responsibility for your own actions as well. This
is not a legal process. This piece of paper is not a legal document as such.
It’s referring to legal documents. It‘s referring to a process that has already
taken place. It’s referring to the foreclosure. You’re pointing it out to them.
You’re letting them know that the whole landscape that they believe they work
under and in has changed. If they want to pursue this matter with you, then
they’re doing so as an individual, which is no different than some stranger
coming up to you in the street and putting a gun to your head and saying “Give
me your money. Give me your wallet”. Maybe you can look at the Courtesy Notice
as poor Hogan saying, “That is not enough, this is enough”.
Chris: Lisa, if I could just take up on
that point. This is very much a lawful and legal document. One of the things
that’s a touch confusing is the term legal. Now legalese, the language used in
statutory law, is something that has been removed from the landscape; it isn’t
there anymore. The term legal appears in these documents, because it still has
a context in UCC law which has been retained. So you’ll see the phrase “lawful
and legal” in there. That’s because this document is built around universal law,
common law and UCC law. Hence, the double-up phrase “lawful and legal” still is
there. So, it is very much a lawful document, in the common law and universal
law context, and a lawful and legal document in the UCC context. We’ve had
people wanting to remove the word “legal” out of the Courtesy Notice; please do
not do that. That was specifically put in there by Heather, who did the final
review on this and corrected it to the standard that it needs to be at. I just
needed to put that in there, Lisa, to make sure people aren’t confused about
the terminology.
Bob: Another thing I wanted to point out. This
is a notice and just so that people aren’t confused, you’re not arguing any
points here. A notice is different, because you’re just pointing out an
existing fact. So, don’t get the idea that you’re here arguing whether or not
they’re foreclosed on. You’re pointing out the fact that they are. This where
it’s very important. If you don’t believe it, if it’s not real to you, then you
really shouldn’t be in any position to notice anyone, because it’s not real to
you. So, people have to make a choice. They have to decide. Is this something
that resonates? Is there anyone who stands between me and my Creator? You
either believe that or you know that in your heart, or you’re still wavering,
because a lot of people ask the question “Where does the authority come from?”
We’re moving beyond corporation, beyond
corporate jurisdiction. We’re making a claim that “Look, you have no
jurisdiction beyond this point. I didn’t have a contract with you. These are
the facts.” It’s a completely different way of approaching than going into the
courtroom and trying to argue your point. You’re just pointing to a fact.
Lisa: One of the questions that’s coming up
in the chat room is “What about people who are already in prison?” Now, this is
something that I’ve been asking about too, people who are in prison for victimless
crimes. Because when I’ve brought it up in the past, people seemed to think I
wanted to let every murderer and rapist out on the street. No, I don’t. We’re
talking about victimless crimes here, paper crimes, for the most part. Yes,
Scott.
Scott: Lisa, one thing that might be worth
exploring with regards to that is the family of that person who’s in jail for a
victimless crime. Would they be suffering harm as a result of not experiencing
the company of being with their family member in jail?
Lisa: Absolutely.
Scott: And would that be a harm that one
might be able to invoice for as a result of turning up at the prison and
providing a Courtesy Notice to the gentleman maintaining that harm?
Lisa: Wouldn't you go to the person who
signed off to the judge? Who signed off on the...
Scott: If that were my family in that jail,
I'd be going to every individual who was blocking me from experiencing the
company of the family member. Every single one of them.
Chris: Not only that, Scott, the immediate
family would be suffering financially from that person being in jail instead of
doing what they would normally do.
Scott: Yeah. So, you can translate that
there’s a harm that’s being suffered, not necessarily by the individual inside
who's unable to provide one of these Courtesy Notices, the family on the
outside are also suffering the harm and so can serve those Courtesy Notices.
Lisa: I think we've got D with us too. D,
are you there?
D: I
am here, hiding in the background.
Lisa: Lovely, lovely. D, is there anything
you want to add in regards to the Courtesy Notice at this point?
D: No. I’m just sitting back here listening
to you guys tell it like it is. This is awesome.
Lisa: (laughs) Cool. Well, your mic’s
unmuted at my end, so anytime you want to join in just do so.
D:
Well, you know me, I can't keep my mouth shut. If I have something to
say, you will all hear it.
Lisa: Exactly. Okay.
Chris: If I could just bring up a couple of
questions and things that have popped up about the Courtesy Notice itself, how
to suggest a change of providing a bit more area in the addressing of the top
of page one, for longish names of claims and longish names of addresses and so
forth, and so we will do that. We're not going to change anything else in the
document itself at this point, except for there's one number which we have to
add in there at the moment which will go in on the next update also very
shortly. We've picked all of the little bits of grammar on the last page; all
those two to three little grammatical things. The last page is in fact the
description of the OPPT; the story of the OPPT. I just need to let everybody
know that domicil is actually spelled correctly in this document. In the
context it's used here, there’s no 'E' on the end.
There were a number of other people who had
inquired about the meanings of various phrases. I'd just like to point you to
the audio file that we put up there on the website where Ken, Scott and I have
a conversation, where we actually go through the document paragraph by
paragraph; the whole thing. Each paragraph discussed and it's context. On the
way we talk about the logic behind how you address the document. The logic
behind how you address the document. The logic behind how you actually
distribute it, to whom and why. It's very comprehensive, so if anyone's got any
questions, that is a great place to start.
Lisa: I just want to sort of back up what
you’re saying. If you get the document from the OPPT-IN website, then that will
be…I don't want to use the word official ‘cuz it's not right, but it will be
the endorsed version. Because people do want to change things in it without
understanding, like thinking that domicil is a spelling mistake, but it's not.
It's very specific and wanting to take out words like legal or lawful, because
they think they're not relevant now, they are in the context of that Courtesy Notice.
So every word that’s in there is there for a reason.
If you get it from a different website,
excluding of course Removing the Shackles, Kauilapele, and American Kabuki,
because they are using the same version. But, if you get it from anywhere else,
we can't be sure it hasn't been tampered with. If you do change it, everyone's
entitled to do what they want here, but just know that you are stepping away
from the very well thought-out, very well-considered process that went into
those documents. Every word was very well-considered. Heather contributed to
that as well. I certainly wouldn't want to be changing it myself.
Chris: One of the aspects that Scott has
touched upon is the effect these documents have when they're circulating around
inside organizations and being discussed inside an organization. There's an
energetic injection that we're making into them at that point. That is actually
one of the key things that's going on here, because you'll find that the system
at this point will initially push you back. But the energy in these
documents...Heather's described them as 4D documents. The reason she describes
them that way is that they're built around an I AM statement and free-will
choices. These things have actually...the rights to actually do that...are one
of the things that are bound up in the UCC filings. The One People have guaranteed
right to actually BE who they are. That is the actual person and not some statutory
fiction and they have free will choice. That’s actually in the statutes and
clearly written into the CVAC's specifications. So if you want to, say,
summarize what the energetic situation is, you’re injecting a 4D document into
a 3D environment. It'll be bouncing around having energetic effects and that is
one of the most important things that are going on at this stage.
Lisa: We do have Ron Van Dyke on the line
and he's in the queue. He's dealing with an issue right now that is gonna
relate to a lot of people. So, I'd like to bring him out while I've still got
Scott here as well. Ron, you're unmuted.
Ron: I'm here. I'm glad to be on, Lisa.
Good to talk to you and everyone else. You listened to my video from yesterday;
you know a little bit where I'm coming from. I did get some clarification on
those documents that were received on Saturday. I interpreted it incorrectly
looking at the heading. As I looked at it more closely, they didn't actually
dismiss my complaint, they gave me 14 more days. They’re recommending
dismissing my complaint, which is a Title 42 action in Federal court, because
the local court has been trying to steal my house for several years. I've held
them off with various legal things, including filing my own UCC 1 in 2010. Then
I held them off for almost a whole year with an appeal, which ultimately the respondent
never responded. It was dismissed without a response from the respondent
following my initial brief. Then I brought forth my land patent on the
property.
I've just done a whole lot of things. It's
in a common law...the property is held in a common law trust, so I don't even
own it. Just a week before Christmas they sent me a notice that they own my
house, the bank. That’s when I filed the Title 42 claim and they keep finding
little technical issues that I'm not addressing something exactly according to
their rules and codes. I have noticed them in the last two submissions about
the One People’s Public Trust ruling. I've sent them actual documents as
attachments in my case. They have not responded to those at all. I have not
sent a Courtesy Notice yet, but that is I believe to be my next step.
I'm feeling much more confident because of
what spirit showed me since I did the video yesterday. There’s energies
involved here that are beyond what meets the eye. It's sweeping things away and
sweeping things clean. I just felt such peace when I was seeing those images
this morning in meditation. I talked about that on my video today, but my
concern yesterday was who's going to enforce it. And, it almost became a moot
question to me today, because I really am feeling much more confident that this
is part of a divine plan. What you're saying about believing in it is
absolutely essential. If you don't believe in it, then obviously you shouldn't
use it. You need to be guided within your own spirit, within your own heart and
trust your own gut in order for it to actually do what it's designed to do.
Lisa: (Lisa and Ron talking at same time)
...has come from has been loud and clear for weeks. You have to bring it back
to the individuals. We are the enforcement. No one else is coming to your/our
rescue to enforce this, in some respects. In other respects, I agree with you
completely. This is a grander, spiritual, multi-dimensional endeavor/adventure
that we are in right now. But we’re so used to and we have all grown up in this
limited liability corporate structure and we are not used to being our own
enforcement. Whether it’s call the cops,
whether it’s call somebody else to come and do the dirty work, we’ve so disassociated
from our own power that we don’t understand that we are the enforcement. Because that’s all there is left, it’s just
us. There’s us, there’s the Creator and the planet. So who else is going to
enforce it?
Scott: Lisa, if I could jump in there?
Lisa: Yes.
Scott: One of the things that I am finding
when people ask the question of who’s going to enforce it, is it appears that
it’s an externalization of that enforcement. The analogy is, if you’re standing
around the coffee machine at work and someone drops a cup on the floor and it
just shatters into a thousand pieces. Someone stands there and asks “well who’s
going to clean that up”? The inference is, that person has asked who’s going to
clean that up, because they don’t want to. The same thing pretty much applies
here, when there’s the “Who’s going to enforce it?”, because I don’t want to,
or at least there is the possibility of that. What I’m saying is, what we’re
doing by sending these Courtesy Notices, we are doing the enforcement. I gave
the analogy just recently, say one person wrote to an individual at the local
council, you get an effect. Ten people
write to one individual at the local council, you get a different effect. Ten
people write to ten individuals at the local council, I’d suggest that you get
an even varied effect. You can see where that compounding process goes on. If
we are the ones doing the enforcement and we focus on one individual who is
maintaining the slavery system, I suspect that we’ll start getting results.
Chris: I have a suggestion here. I’m
sitting listening to this and I’ve seen a couple of examples of the foreclosed
legal system, saying back to people sending Courtesy Notices, “Well, this is
just meaningless. What is this?” That is just a complete deflection and in and
of itself is the only response they can actually take at this point. The fact
that they’re responding in this fashion means they’re bothered. It means we are
getting flack, we are over the target. What I would suggest is this. There are
people around you and people that you have contact with who actually are doing
the same thing with their own problems. What Scott is suggesting is that you
engage those people to support you by sending copies of the Courtesy Notice to
the people who are trying to say this is not real and saying you’re obliged. This
is part of the legal landscape. Whether you think you have been foreclosed on
or not, you are obliged to actually check these filings out. If you want to
argue against them, you better actually rebut them with particularity and
specificity. Otherwise, you will ultimately be personally liened.
Bob:
Another thing I want to point out is, we also have to change the energy
of the situation. Open up your awareness a little bit more. If you have a
beloved pet, how many of you look at that pet and say “I own him” or is he more
like a friend? You have a relationship.
You don’t feel as though you own that pet. Most of the people that are pet
lovers, they look at that pet as a friend, as a member of the family.
Everything around you and everything that you believe that you’re fighting for…are
you fighting to be another slave owner? This fighting over titles and ownership
or maybe you can change that energy because you have a relationship with your
home. Because it has a consciousness of its own, it has a spirit of its’ own.
The Native Americans would say “the spirit of my grandfathers lives in this
land”. This is something we need to start to have a different relationship. Are
you fighting to hold title of ownership or do you want to continue in your relationship
and invite the home to that type of relationship? Free them and then you’ll
find that the energy shifts, you will feel the winds change. Because this is
the direction that the current is going, this is the direction that the energy
is flowing and they know this. Get in
line with that and there are multidimensional things that go on in every
experience, in every situation that anyone is facing and you’ve got to look at
all of the aspects.
Chris: Indeed. As an example, there’s
actually a Facebook piece that has been posted by a Judge Leighton. Now, Judge
Leighton has given exactly what I thought we would see. I expected this to
appear. Basically saying this is meaningless stuff from the delusionary
sovereign citizen group. He has not actually deflected the filings in anyway,
shape or form from a legal stand point. In fact, it is the only push-back they
can do. Our response to that should be as a group. If people are going to
distribute deflections from the system like this, what I would ask you to do is
this. Put in a contact point for the person who is the source of the
deflection. In this case it is a judge, he’ll have an email address or a fax
number or a mail address. If you are going to put out material like this, put
up a contact point. So that We the People can actually support our brothers by
either just a direct contact saying “You’re obliged under the laws of the United States
If that person received, as Scott said, 10
such emails, faxes or letters; or 50 or 100 or maybe 5000 or 10,000. We’ve done
a couple of Facebook blasts for various media outlets. We‘ve had 15 to 20
thousand people dump their opinion in one spot. That has to have an effect and
I think we need to do that. This is part of us being the enforcement. I don’t
want people to feel like they’re actually enforcing alone. Everyone around us
in this movement came to participate. We just need to get the information out
there, so that we know where we can put that energy. As Bob said, we actually
have to put it in the right energy. It is a case of saying “No, no, we are not
going to take that, because we know you have been foreclosed. We know that you
know that you have been foreclosed. This
is just a dance you are doing to maintain a pretense and we are not going to
accept that.” We have to do it with as many voices as possible. It’s all about
the voices folks. If they can hear the energy from us, there is no way that
ultimately they can hide behind essentially what is bluster.
Scott: Chris, nice work. I’d say to add to
that post by that judge, look for what wasn’t said by him. Like you said, he
did not deflect any of the filings of the UCC. It seems the common thread
through any letter that’s come back in response of a Courtesy Notice. You’ll
find that there’s no rebuttal with specificity, etc. Look for what isn’t there.
You’ll find that they lack completely any evidence, any rebuttal. They’ll be
citing various little acts or statutes in the interim and there will be a
complete lack of any sort of evidence that will rebut the UCC filings.
Lisa: Guys, there’s somebody in the chat
room who just wants to understand. They get that it refers to governments,
corporations masquerading as governments. They get that it applies to banks,
but does it apply to all other corporations? My understanding is this and if I
am wrong, somebody will correct me. Corporations get their corporate charter
from government. Now, if the government is invalid, if the government itself is
a corporation pretending to be a government and has been foreclosed on and is
no longer. Then everything below that…so yes, all corporations, whether they’re
operating as a hospital, a private hospital, whether they’re operating as a
loan company…anything that is a corporation, its corporate charter was
canceled, was deemed invalid.
Bob: There’s a reason, understand that this
was part of the slavery system. There’s a reason why everything is centralized.
They’re all going to the same place, because they’re all feeding the same
entity. So it had to be structured that way.
Ron: We’re just taking out the structure.
Chris: Yeah. If you listen to Heather’s
interviews, and Ron is absolutely right, listen to Heather’s interviews speaking
about the processes they actually undertook, they found two nexus points in the
system. They confirmed that if they cut the head of the beast off at that
point, the rest of the body would die, because that is what it was attached to.
It was the BIS and I think the second one was the United Nations, but don’t
quote me on that. But they appear to be the two points where the snip-snip was
done and that the rest of the structure underneath it was at that point
terminated as well. I think that is effectively what they did. So yes, all
corporations, it doesn’t mean they’re not running anymore, because folks the
thing that makes a corporation a corporation is the energy of the employees in
it. Take that out and it isn’t one. Now, that’s all still in there. They’re our
brethren in the One People. They’re energizing those things. The message we’ve
got to get to them is that first of all, that the old structure is going and
secondly, that there is a real alternative under the CVAC system, which is
going to completely change their lives.
Lisa: Okay, we’re still asking for more
clarification. I don’t know what you mean as a medical facility as such. If
you’re talking a private hospital, but operates as a corporation, then yes;
loan companies, yes; utility companies even. However, I wouldn’t go not paying
your utility bills just yet. We’re not there yet. Personally I wouldn’t go there. Now, the
other question was what about credit cards and loans, where I have actually
gotten money from them and I’ve used it? Don’t I have a moral obligation to pay
it back? Let’s talk about a moral obligation for a second, because when you
applied for that loan, your signature on the dotted line created the funds and
they gave them to you. That should have
been the end of it. That should have been the end of the transaction. You went
to the bank, you signed for it, and the money was essentially created at that
point and given to you. The bank unfortunately, Bob, can clarify all of this in
a much better way; in fact, I’ll give it to you now Bob. You can do it from
here.
Bob: You are the source of all value. The
whole system is built on your energy. They require your signature, so you’re
the one that is giving the value. They’re essentially creating money out of
thin air. It’s just the value that you give it. So, you’ve given the value,
they create the money and you spent it. Now who owes what? It is a done deal.
Chris: Could I actually throw something
else into the mix there, Bob, that’ll clarify, actually, the inequity of the
situation? What we need to remember and we all know this but we tend to forget
how it works, is that every time we sign something it gets monetized. So, let’s say you apply for a $50,000 loan of
some kind. Your signature goes on a piece of paper and they process it in
inverted commas and they say that they put the money in your account. What they
don’t tell you is that they turn around and re-sell that signature as a
derivative. In fact, what they do is group them together in large numbers and
create bonds out of them and resell the bonds. This is your mortgage-backed
securities as an example. Let’s look at two weeks after you take out that loan.
They give you that money. It doesn’t really matter if it is for a house or
anything. If you sign something, that is the important act in the whole thing.
Two weeks later, they will have taken your
signature and monetized it for a minimum of ten times the amount that you signed
for that they gave you. They will have that money sitting in their bank
accounts, so the balance two weeks later is…say you borrowed $50,000, that
probably turned around and made $500,000…and you’ve still got a debt. They
don’t ring you up and say “Hey Fred, we did really well. We monetized your
signature and we sold it off and we made $500,000 off of it, so we’ve got
plenty of money. Don’t worry about paying us back.” But, no, you don’t get that
phone call. They still expect you to pay the money and if you don’t, they will
come after your assets. You have to look at how far ahead of you they are,
simply by the fact that they stole your signature from you and made money from
it. This is how they make phenomenal profits. In this country here, we’ve got
four major banks. Every year they post some total between them of 16 billion
dollars profit out of 22 million people. Just how do they work? Just how does
that work? This is a rampant profiteering.
Bob: Then they ask for interest on top of
it.
Chris: Yeah. And when they come and take
your house off of you, they also get insurance, because they insure the whole
transaction to make sure they can double dip. They want to extract your assets
from you and collect money from the insurance company and they end up making an
absolute fortune. They make it out of one simple act. You put your signature,
your value, on paper for them. They’ve tricked you and lied to you. They take
it out and make a fortune on it. That’s how the system works. That‘s inequity.
Scott: Chris, could I add to that with a
brief example? If you go back to the original treasuries that used to bring the
money into existence and spend it on the bridges, roads and infrastructure and
that sort of thing, you think, oh yeah, that money that came out of thin air.
Now, the actual effort that was expended in building the bridge, I would say, is
the real value that comes from the people. So the money was just a piece of
paper, a representation of the value and effort that went into building that
bridge. So when the treasuries created that money, it was just representative
of the energy. Now, if that was stolen from the people by the private banks and
then you have to go and borrow that back when you were the original source of
that value, then that’s probably giving you a better idea as to where the fraud
is coming from. If you’re the original source of that value and those funds
from the effort that’s been created and put out into the community; you’re the
source; borrowing it from them is criminal.
Lisa: I just want to direct people. I did
put a link in the chat room to the “Wake Up World” article. That’ll answer a
lot of your questions too, because it explains the corporate structure, it
explains the birth certificate. It explains quite a few things and then how and
what The One Peoples Trust is and what it did in a really nice and concise
article. Something for you to share with others as well. It’s a brilliant
description, so I have put the link in the chat room. I’ll put it again now,
because it’s a very busy chat room. So, it is at wakeup-world.com and you will
find an article called “All Corporations Banks and Governments Lawfully
Foreclosed by OPPT”. Please go and read that if your understanding about the
banking process isn’t clear and if your understanding about what your birth
certificate is actually isn’t clear. Bob, do you remember on a radio show we
did last year I gave the Monopoly analogy when you come to my house?
Bob: Yes, I do.
Lisa: Should I repeat it now?
Bob: Yes, it was perfect.
Lisa: Okay, my house represents the planet
and I would say represent the cabal. I invite you and you make your own free
will choice to come to my house. When you walk in the door, I shut the door and
lock the door behind you. There is no escape and I say “Welcome, as long as
you’re here, you’re going to play Monopoly”.
And you say, “I wasn’t told I was going to play Monopoly. Why do I have
to play Monopoly? I don’t want to play Monopoly.” If I’m going to insist that
you have to play Monopoly, I have to do two things. I have to give you a token
so you can play on the board and that token is your birth certificate. I have
to give you some bank money to start you off. From that birth certificate, in
fact, a trust account is established. So, you’ve got your two things. But what
I don’t tell you is, firstly I don’t give you the rules to the game. You’ll
have to figure it out as you go. I don’t tell you that every time you pass Go,
you collect $200. I keep it for myself.
I don’t tell you you’ve got a get out of jail free card. You’re playing this
game of Monopoly based on the rules that you figure out as you go. I’m the one
with the instruction manual. I know exactly how it works. You will not leave
that board until you’re bankrupt, as is everybody who happens to walk into my
house.
So, it just goes back to the question of
what happens when you apply for a loan or whatever. What you’re really doing
with that signature is you’re authorizing them to take it out of that fund,
that trust that was established for you with your birth certificate. Now, if
all being goodwill when you were born and that trust account was established,
you would have been named as a beneficiary and your needs would be met by that
trust. That didn’t happen, because by the time you were seven years old…just
like when anybody goes to (inaudible), once they’re gone for seven years,
they’re declared dead. When you’re seven, they declare you dead, unless you
step forward and make that claim. I’m here. I’m alive. I’d like access to my
funds to cover my needs and desires while I’m here. That doesn’t happen. So,
they turn around and they nominate themselves as the beneficiary. So, every time you do something with a
signature, you’re granting them access to that fund, that account, that trust.
Is that accurate? Am I explaining this well?
Bob: This is the system that has collapsed.
There's lots of information about how the whole system works, but it's
collapsed. It's done. It's over.
Lisa: I want to bring D out. D, the intel
about what may or may not happen this week.
D: Sorry, say that again, love, you're
breaking up a little bit. I didn't hear the question.
Lisa: The intel you've been getting of late
that may or may not happen this week and what the implications are for the
powers that were.
D: (chuckle) Wow. There's been a lot of
interesting stuff coming out this week. Most sources seem to be pointing to the
fact that the powers-that-were are going to push the new financial system
through this week.
Lisa: Now, this means NESARA and etal, yes?
D: Supposedly, yes. That opens the door to
a whole slew set of questions though. With other stuff that is going on right
now, when I jumped off the air there, I had to take a couple of intel calls.
There are things going on in the background that are, as I’ve been saying for
the last several weeks that are serious red flags for me, because we’ve always
been told that when the new system goes online that will go hand in hand with
the rollout of NESARA. Now, granted there’s a lot of questions about NESARA. Because
the reality of it is, as I’ve said before, the true absolute details of NESARA
are locked tight. We have certain details, certain things we’ve been told that
are part of NESARA. But in actual fact, we don’t have the list written out
there from A to Zed of exactly what it will mean. Having said that, there’s
certain things that are supposed to be involved in NESARA that make me question
what we are hearing, like I said, in the way of intel. It’s going to be very
interesting. I will have a lot more to say once they roll that system out.
Because once I watch and see what rolls out, I’ll be able to look and see what
it is and say “Okay, we have a problem.” They’ve said this in their so-called
announcements, but that’s not true. Or it is true and that’s not the way it’s
supposed to be according to the information we have to do with NESARA.
I’ll give you an example. The Supreme Court
met last week to rule on Obama’s birth certificate and several other things.
That ruling is supposed to be announced tomorrow. If that announcement comes out and they say
“Oh, umm, Obama could never have been President, because we’ve ruled that his
birth certificate is illegitimate and Social Security card, etc”…then you have
to sit there and go “Wait a second. If they’re using this as an excuse to pull
him out of the Presidency, that doesn’t sit with me.” That right there doesn’t
sit with NESARA. It’s kind of a “red herring”, right? It’s, okay, we’ll use
this right over here to distract the people and then we’ll set up a new
government. That’s not the way it should be. My understanding is that the
announcements should include the fact that there is a new interim government
and the reasons why. If the system rolls out and we don’t get that, then it
goes back to what I’ve been saying last week and a couple weeks before that as
well. We have a problem. Chris, you and I were talking about it on the call and
Lisa the other night.
Chris: Yes, the impression I’m getting of
this, D, is that the view of NESARA has been massaged for the current agenda. They’ll
pick and choose bits and pieces, because NESARA looms so large in some people’s
mind, provided they revalue the dinar, everyone will go “Ooh, they revalued the
dinar”, because there’s so many people waiting for that. They will say “Yes, this
is NESARA”, when actually it isn’t. It’s basically them, their last gasp attempt.
(Brian talking elsewhere) Yep, we can hear you, Brian; yep, you’re there man. It’s
an attempt by them to regain the leading hand. In martial arts terms, what
happens during an exchange is that one person is always slightly ahead of the
other and has a slight advantage in timing. It’s called “window”; you have a
slight window over your opponent. I think it’s a play to get a “window”, because
they know time is up. They’ve got no other options, because if this fails,
which it probably will, they’re stuffed. If they wait, they know the OPPT will
ultimately launch the CVACs and they are stuffed again. So, they are in a
checkmate position. This is my opinion, based on our discussion of the other
day and if anything has come up to kind of change that in the interim, please
let us know. That’s kind of the way I’m feeling about it and it really is a
last play for them that they’ve decided to try to do this. We’ll have to see
how this pans out for them, but if the lightworkers out there recognize it for
what it is which is a stuffed-up, manipulated version of the original NESARA. When
was it, D, 20 years ago? NESARA?
D: Hold on…you asked me to do math. That’s
not fair, Chris.
Chris: Just give a year. (chuckles)
D: In the 90’s.
Chris: So, even in the mid-90’s. So, it’s
at least 15years ago, 17 years ago. They’ve had plenty of time to play with it
and make it their own.
Bob:
You know this goes to like, how quickly was the whole Kona thing in Africa debunked? Even faster, the Sandy
Hook ? Now, we're debunking it before it happens.
D: Well, this is the thing, Bob. I was
actually talking about this with a couple of people today. You have a whole
slew of people, and I'm talking probably hundreds of thousands of people, who
are following the Iraqi dinar revaluation, the prosperity programs, the
prosperity packages and the various things like the St. Germain Trust and the
World Global Settlements, etc, the Collateral Accounts. If any one of them,
they could be the most complete, right-wing conservative person, if they're
looking at information on the Iraqi dinar revaluation for example, if you spent
any amount of time researching that over the last few years, you are going to
come across tons and tons of sites that talk not only about the RV, they're
also talking about NESARA. They're also talking about prosperity packages, etc
and all these global funds. So, even if they didn't want it to become educated
on these things, they have been. They have an understanding, even if they don't
want to believe it, they have a knowledge in the backs of their mind of the
various things they're supposed to have. And I said this yesterday.
Let's say that the new system rolls out
tomorrow. Everyone cheers, of course. There's going to be people cheering and
crying in the streets; the whole bit. "Oh my goodness. NESARA. We've been
saved. The evil cabal is gone. We're going to have money now." ...all of
this. Say that the announcements come out and they say "We've done this
and this is the reason why." , but let's face it, it's pretty white-washed.
If the day after that, people walk out of their home and they see chemtrails in
the sky, what are you going to think? "Wait a second. Why are there
chemtrails in the sky? Why is the GMO foods still in the stores? Why is the FDA
still doing everything they can to stop every natural health food, natural
medicine for all these diseases like cancer and AIDS, etc? Why is there still
commercials on tv advertising vaccines? Wait a second." Because these
people, whether they wanted to or not, have been educated at least to a certain
extent.
All these people in the Patriot movement,
same thing. They've been reading all these other sites. They have absorbed this
information. Quite frankly, if the cabal thinks that they can pull the wool
over people's eyes, they're about to be severely shocked. You might get people
dancing in the streets and cheering and going off to the bank to cash in their
Iraqi dinar, their Vietnamese dong and their Indian rupees, etc. But once that
high comes down, I give it less than three or four days. People are immediately
going to go "Well, wait a second. They didn't say anything about this.
They didn't say anything about 911. They didn't say anything about the strawman
accounts. They didn't say anything about the fact that the government's a
corporation. They didn't say anything about the fact that these big, mega
pharmacies, big oils; all these lobbyists have been buying out everyone. Well,
wait a second. what the...?"
Lisa: It's like we said in previous shows.
It's Slavery 2.0; just wrapped up in prettier packaging and the lease they've
got on you is a little bit longer than it is now. It's a distraction. Hopefully
too many people will not fall for it.
(several talking at once)
Chris: Sorry, D, I just wanted to throw in
something that you said the other day. That there's almost a bullet-pointed
checklist. If this is really NESARA, what should I be seeing? And what you
should be seeing is that the people running the banks the previous day
shouldn't be there anymore...tick or across. No, they're still there. The same
politicians are still there? Yes. Are we still seeing chemtrails? Yes. Have
they fully disclosed all of the skullduggery and scumbaggery that's gone on
over the last 20-30 years even? Forget about the previous several hundred. Even
in the last 10 years. Have they disclosed any of that? Yes or no. If you're not
seeing these things, then you're not seeing NESARA. You're seeing a polished-up
version to give us the same cage, the same cell, shinier bars, bigger screen tv
and colder beer, but it's the same cell and run by the same gangsters.
D: Yep.
Lisa: Guys, we do have a caller with a lot
of questions and I want to see if I can find him. Michael, is that you?
Michael (caller): Can you hear me?
Lisa: Yes, I can.
Michael (caller): Can you guys hear me?
Lisa: Yes, I can hear you.
Michael (caller): Yes, okay, all right.
Hey, thanks a lot for taking my call. Thanks for having this radio show; it's a
pleasure to listen so far. I'm glad you took my call, because I've only
recently become aware of the One People's Public Trust. So, I've only done my
research for about 24 hours now, but I've spent a considerable amount of time
learning about it. When I hear you guys talk, I guess have a basic
understanding of it, but I can't really keep up with the conversation too well.
So, I wanted to ask maybe a more basic question, with a simpler premise, if you
don't mind?
Lisa: Okay. Sure, I'm sure it will help
others. Go for it.
Michael (caller): All right. Well, just to
give a little background, I've spent the majority of my professional career in
the military. That was up until the middle of last year and then I got out.
Ever since I got out, I've really started to expand and elevate my awareness,
my consciousness and just become aware of just what an illusion the world is.
What that's led me to do is kind of go down the rabbit hole, pretty much like Alice
Lisa: (laughter) Everybody on this call has
got their middle name "Alice
(general laughter)
Michael (caller): You don't know where to
get your information. You don't know what to believe. I know that that's
fear-based and paranoia-based and all that. I know people say listen to your
Higher Self and try to tune into the information that way. It's really
difficult for me to do that. Can you just maybe explain to me and some other
people who might be having the same questions out there, why should we really
buy into this idea in such a way that we kind of sacrifice our reputations?
Because what you're really asking people to do is really...and what you've done
and I commend you for it...is really stepped out on a limb with this faith and
this belief that this is how we are going to realize our full potential.
Lisa: There's a lot of reasons for that;
there's a lot of reasons for that. I spent the last 15 years focused on this
2012 phenomenon and wondering what was going to happen after that. Wondering
what the world would look like post 2012. I deeply believed we were at the end
of an era, the end of an age. I wasn't at the fear point; I didn't believe that
the world was going to end. I did believe it was the end of a paradigm. There's
so much about what the One People's Public Trust has done, whether it's from
that legal framework that's dealing with the UCC, whether it's from a more
energetic framework, that just rings true to me completely. Like you, I've spent
years going down many different rabbit holes, trying different techniques and
technologies, processes, paperwork, the whole shebang...ultimately at a
dead-end. I had my moments of "Can this be true? Can this be real?" My
gut and my heart were saying "Yes" and my head was going "Sit on
the fence. Don't commit." But I
can't deny how this feels...ultimately. Everybody that I trust with their
intellectual understanding of this, with their legal understanding of this,
with their heart-based understanding of this, feels the same way.
Brian: The thing is about that too, Lisa.
What's the caller's name?
Lisa: Michael.
Michael (caller): Michael.
Brian: Michael. Everybody that's on this
call and the great majority of people that are listening to it, have been in
the exact same shoes you're in. Some of us have just recently stumbled on to
the One People's Public Trust. Some people have been following alternative
media for 15-20 years, like Lisa. We all know how you're feeling. One big thing
that we've done ever since we started these shows, ever since we've been
putting this information out there, we're not looking to force anybody to
believe it. It's everybody's personal free will choice to decide for themselves
what they want to and what they do not want to believe.
For anybody that's a dedicated truth
seeker, there's enough information out there regarding the One People's Public
Trust and all of the work that they've put out and they've done and all that
the trustees have done and all of us have done since then to go back and do a
significant amount of due diligence for you to say "Okay, I've gathered
the data. Here's what it says to me. This is now the conclusion that I'm
drawing." So, when you say "Is this something that I'm willing to put
my reputation on?" … no one’s reputations are at stake here. If you
believe in something and ultimately it doesn't end up being exactly the way
that you thought it was, no one's pointing a finger. If you're not worried about
anybody pointing a finger at you and saying "Well, you're wrong.",
then you really have nothing to lose.
I'm now coming to a point where I'm
announcing my involvement in all this to all my friends on Facebook that I've
known for years and to my family. I'm doing it from a place of not being
worried about what anybody has to say in regards to whether or not they believe
it. I'm not trying to force it down anybody's throat. I'm just letting people
know what I'm doing. If they decide to do their own homework and do their own
research and if they ever want to come to me and ask questions, I'm there. If
they're not interested whatsoever, that's okay too. It's an individual journey
for everybody. The only person that can make the determination as to how it
resonates for you, is you. You just being on this call and listening and
wanting to dive in and find out what rings true, that's that little glimmer of
all that you need in order to pursue it further, in order to figure out if this
is something that's ultimately something that you're going to believe or not.
It's your own free will choice.
Bob: Michael? It's going to force you to
ask a couple questions about yourself. About what is true for you. Does it seem
right that you should have to pay to live on Earth? Does that seem right to
you? If it does, then fine. That's what resonates with you. Does it seem right
that another human can say that I have authority to tell you how you should
eat, think, drink, when you're not harming anyone? Does that seem right to you?
What resonates with you? All we're saying is, this is who I AM. I AM free. I AM
complete and absolute. Nothing stands between me and my Source.
Chris: Indeed. Michael, Chris here. How are
you?
Michael (caller): Hey, Chris. How are you
man?
Chris: Good. You're hearing a really good
range of views here, from sort of spiritual to social. I was just going to add
in my two pence. If you analyze what's happened to you, is it clear to say that
your experiences in the military deconstructed your beliefs about how the world
actually works? Is that true?
Michael (caller): Oh, yes. Everyone gets
that same process of indoctrination.
Chris: Yeah, but you actually rejected
that. You found that that wasn't the explanation, because you looked around you
and the doctrine that you were fed didn’t match what you could see around you.
That's usually where this begins. Is that what happened to you?
Michael (caller): That is precisely what
happened.
Chris: Okay. So the difference between you
at the moment and the people that surround you, your family and friends, is two
things. Your paradigm compared to theirs has been deconstructed. You're seeking
to fill that vacuum with some truth. Now, they're not in that position at the
moment. Secondly, the information you've been gaining to fill that void inside
you, they don't have that either. It's almost impossible to go to someone and
(loud music noise)...interesting.
D: Sorry, guys, that was me.
Chris: It's almost impossible if you go to
a member of your family and you dump that on them, to them their paradigm is
completely intact. It gives them cognitive dissonance. It actually makes them
really uncomfortable and actually fearful. The greatest mistake that we make...we've
all made this...is to get really excited about something and start really
trying to sell it to your family and friends. You just can't do that. If
they're not ready, they won't even look down the telescope. Like the bishops
who wouldn't look down Galileo's telescope and just put him under house arrest
for the rest of his life. You just don't do that to yourself. As Brian
suggested, you can present the information to them and casually suggest it would
be worth their while to actually look into it themselves. If they really want
to argue the point and try and talk you down from what they consider to be a
high ledge on the edge of a building somewhere...and they will...you only have
to say to them is "Look, I've had a lot more exposure to really alter the
kinds of information compared to you. You want to take a look at it, a serious
look at it and we'll have a serious conversation about it. Don't, from your
position where you currently are, tell me that I'm wrong, because you and I
aren't in the same place. We have to agree to disagree."
I have a couple of relatives with whom I
won't discuss this. We clashed when it came to the point and I just said
"Okay, we just won't discuss this anymore." And I haven't and I won't
until disclosure takes place and they realize that in fact there was something going
on. That's unfortunate, but true. That's the kind of position you need to take.
But it doesn't mean you can't communicate things to them and try to introduce
little things that might introduce them to an alternative way of thinking. It
might not be the One People's Public Trust. It may be something completely
different. Chemtrails attracts people's attention, because you can point up in
the sky and say "That doesn't look like condensation to me. It's been
hanging there for four hours dissipating. That can't be water vapor." You
say that to a mechanic and he'll say "Yeah, probably not water vapor out
of the exhaust of an aircraft."
There is a whole variety of techniques, if
you like, strategies for introducing this material to people. You're taking a
very short, sharp trip. I've had about a three-four year trip. Lisa's been on a
20-30 year trip. The short, sharp trip is a wild ride...emotionally and in
every other way. Welcome and have fun with it.
Lisa: You know what the good news is,
though? There's a lot of rabbit holes you won't have to go down. There's a lot
of rabbit holes that the people around you who wake up tomorrow or next week or
next month won't even have to go down, because they will be irrelevant now. So
the learning curve is not as great, because people who wake up from now hereon
in are waking up in a new paradigm. They're waking up in the old paradigm and
trying to figure out how the hell to get out of it. They just have to orientate
themselves to the new one. That's a good thing. That's good news. There's a lot
that they will just not have to deal with and go through and try to get their
head around. It will be told to them in past tense.
Michael (caller): Is that part of the
tipping point that you guys have been talking about on your previous
shows?
Lisa: Yes, definitely.
Chris: One of the things that appears to be
somewhere in our nearer future, and I can't be any more specific than that
because I will not be putting any dates or specific time frames out there, is
when The One People's Trust commissioned the first CVAC, which is the
replacement assistance organization for the people, with that comes disclosure,
if it already hasn't happened. By disclosure, that's the information tipping
point we're talking about where Absolute Truth is laid on the table for
everybody to see. That means everything that's gone on. One of the differences
between what the cabal may try and roll out even in the next few days possibly
compared to full disclosure, is that it won't be full disclosure. It will be
just disclosing certain things, which will be very startling and have a big
impact, but not the whole truth.
Michael (caller): UFOs.
Chris: Exactly. You won't hear a mention of
those guys. You won't hear a mention of ...
D: I (inaudible) you won't hear that.
Chris: Beg pardon?
D: I guarantee you won't hear that. I just
don't see them rolling that out.
Chris: No, they will never admit to that.
So again, we're back to that checklist of what you won't see. Just to guarantee
to yourself that this is not the real tipping point. The real tipping point is
yet to come. One of the things that Heather has consistently said since the
very first time she went public, is that when this event happens, when there's
Absolute Disclosure, it will be everything. Everything for the human race to
decide its' future...on the table. You won't miss that one.
D: Absolute Data.
Lisa: Now, there also has been a call out,
quite a bit during today’s show and in the chat room as well, for information
on the CVACs. We’re not going to have time to go into them again today, so what
I suggest you do if you’re interested in more information on the CVACs, is go
back and listen to last week’s show. Did we do that on the Collective
Imagination or did we do it on OPPT-IN? We did a meditation actually; a bit of
a meditation with Bob describing a visualization of what the CVACs could look
like based on Chris’ understanding of them.
Caller: Hey, Lisa, before I get off, can I
just say one quick thing?
Lisa: Sure.
Caller: I just want to say thank you guys
for taking my call and thank you for putting this information out there. I know
it’s very overwhelming and I didn’t mean to make this a long conversation about
me. I hope that there’s a lot of other people out there who are feeling like I
am, who really just really experienced the same benefit that I did. Thank you
all so much for your perspective and for what you’re doing. Love and grace in
everybody’s direction and everybody in the world and just thanks. I’m grateful.
I’m grateful for all of this.
Lisa: You’re welcome! You’re welcome.
Brian: I got you man.
Lisa: I suggest you go back and listen to,
if you haven’t heard them already, this is our third OPPT-IN radio show. So go
back and listen to the last two, and have a look for the Collective
Imagination, which is also on Blogtalk. All the shows from this year. We
started it back up, I think, on the 8th of January. So that, D’s
been a part of, has been popping into that show, Heather’s popped into that show.
On the Collective Imagination show, we tend to talk more about the spiritual
aspects of it, the multi-dimensional aspects, and the questions that arise out
of the legalities that have gone on. So the OPPT-IN show, we tend to focus on paperwork,
procedure, the CVACs, the Courtesy Notice, the nuts and bolts of it. On the
following night, or following day, we open up to the bigger questions. We’ve
covered a lot of this in various conversations as well, so I suggest you go
back and listen to those recordings as well.
Caller: I’ll do that for sure. Thank you so
much.
Chris: Plus Lisa, there is a discussion
which I think is on the website, which we need to keep people pointing at. Our
initial discussion that we had about the structure of the structure of the
CVACs between you, Bob and I, it’s a longer recording with more detail about how
that structure, or how I see that structure anyway, and I think it’s pretty
close to the way that it works.
Lisa: Where is that? Is that up anywhere?
Chris: Well, I’ve passed it to various
people. I’ll check this afternoon to see who’s put it up and if it’s not up,
I’ll follow through and make sure it gets there, because it has got more detail
and it will be quite useful for people. Look if there’s one thing, one thing
I’d like to put out there, because the next time we discuss CVACs, I want to
really discuss this point. Most people recoil from the idea of these massive
amounts of proposed resources becoming available to everybody freely. They
think “Oh my God, everyone will party, party, party.” It’s a fear reaction that
virtually everyone that I’ve talked about it has. There will probably be some
in this audience who have sort of had that and passed it and some like Michael
who are just coming into this and probably thinking the same thing.
The CVAC funding will be available past the
point of disclosure, where we’ve had the big wake-up call. This will shift
people’s thinking, that’s point number 1. Point number 2, what I really think
we should focus on is “Okay, there’ll be a few train wrecks, fine, we can sort
that out. What about the things we can do with those resources?” If you’re in,
say, a town in America somewhere and there’s 30% unemployment, and maybe three
people sign up for the CVAC and have resources available, they could fix that
in a couple of months just by starting up public service projects, just by
funding community centers, or farms, or buildings for the homeless. That is
absolutely the things we should be thinking about. So, keep that thought in
mind. We’ll take it a bit further next time we talk about the CVACs. There’s
the end of my rant Lisa.
(laughter)
D: Well, you know the other thing that this
is kind of going back to what were talking about earlier Chris, is exactly that.
If it’s going to be this amazing thing to see, to build this, I’m looking
forward to sitting back and watching this happening. The cabal, whichever face
it wants to wear, pushes out their new shiny, faux-covered, sparkly system. Here’s
2% of the truth to go with it as far as announcements. Then the CVACs get
launched with absolute disclosure. If you’re sitting back and going “Okay, on
this hand, I’ll get all my income taxes back. I won’t have pay income tax
anymore, but on this hand, I have the CVACs. On this hand over here I get all
these drips and drabs, bits of information, which are obviously not complete. On
the other hand, I have full and complete data. Hmmm. Which one am I going to
choose?”
Chris: Exactly.
Lisa: Well, I know which one I’m going to
choose. It’s a no-brainer for me.
Chris: Now, if you’re new to this and you
haven’t heard any reference to CVACs at all, it stands for Creation Value
Assets Centers, which a bit of an esoteric term which we’ll discuss the next
time we go over the CVAC information. It’s a new form of governance. We won’t
use the word “government”, because it’s not. It’s one where the people are
interacting with a group of public service servants who are actually entirely
committed and restricted to doing nothing but serving the people. No
politicians, just public servants committed to serving value to the people and
making sure that any part of a community that needs development for the people
is organized and carried out. That’s not sort of government that we have ever
seen on this planet with governments here. Fall into that old trap, old
language, that’s not the sort of structure we’ve ever seen on this planet
before. We’re going to be talking about it regularly. There’s a nice article on
“Wake Up World” which I think that Lisa mentioned earlier. That is “Wake Up…I
don’t know the website’s name, so I won’t even attempt to try it.
Lisa: It’s wakeup-world.com.
Chris: Okay. Good article there that
actually covers the whole range of the whole, sort of, scope of what the
People’s Trust is doing, including the CVACs. Now, it’s not hugely detailed,
but there’s enough principle there that you’ll get the hang of it. It’s not
something that we’re going to have to completely decide the structure of
immediately. It’s designed to be a rapidly evolvable system which the people will
direct. We won’t elect an authority, like the governments we’re used to, who
will then tell us what to do. We’ll be able to continually direct its progress
and its development in perpetuity. That means “forever”, folks. We like that.
Lisa: Yes, we do. Just got a couple of
things to cover off. We normally do a flash-mob. Honestly, we’ve been so busy
we haven’t even come up with a particular target for a flash-mob today. But one
of the things I’d like to put out there is, everybody who’s on Facebook, if you
go and change your profile picture to the “In” logo, then what we’ll be seeing is
those little “In” logos everywhere, all over Facebook. You can get it and embed
it in your emails and have it as your signature on your emails, with a link to
the Oppt-in website or the peoplestrust1776 website. Just get it out up there.
Change your avatars on whatever forums or any groups that you’re involved in.
Make it the “In” logo. Now the other idea that’s come up today is that article
that is from Facebook that is from that judge… is he a judge? Or a lawyer?
Chris: Apparently a judge.
Lisa: Apparently a judge? As we said, he
didn’t actually rebut anything. He just said “Oh I think this is rubbish” and
came back with nothing of any real value.
Chris: Exactly.
Lisa: I’m trying to put the link back in
again, if I can find it, and into the chat room. And asking to be specific, not
just “Is it all just general rubbish?” Just hit us with why and give us real
understanding about why.
D: The truth that the government is not a
corporation. Go ahead, we’ll wait.
Lisa: Yes.
Chris: Exactly. Now look, what I’m sitting
here thinking “Well, we need to get the people’s voices to bear on these
amateurish attempts at deflecting” and the best way I can think of is this; Ken
and Scott and I, one of the things we’re doing later in the week is going to be
setting up an email address where people can send questions to. Also what we’ll
get you to do is send samples, examples of deflections like this that you’re
getting, but with the contact details of people involved. The contact details
you put on the original Courtesy Notice for instance. That’s something where we
can get to them an email, or a fax or something, and that could be part of our
flash-mobbing. We will actually do some of those and also independently you
could do them any time you like. If they get tens of thousands of
communications of people saying “You better rebut this with specificity and
particularity, or you are in breach of trust”.
Bob: Ron, if you feel comfortable and you
want to share your details that way, we can certainly let whoever it is that’s
antagonizing know where we stand.
Ron: Yes. I do have the privilege of having
a wide audience of my own videos, so that if I make a video on it and post it
on my Facebook and my YouTube channel and everything, it will get pretty good
exposure. Plus added exposure of those that aren’t direct subscribers on
Facebook friends.
Chris: Yeah. I’d just like to say people
keep saying “What’s the enforcement?” At the moment, we are. We have to get
ourselves organized in the fashion we’re describing here, and the sooner we do
it, the better it will actually work for us. I’d also like to say this; Michael
who just phoned in, as an ex-military person, if you take a look at the filing
on the One People’s Trust website called “Military Orders”, you will see that
there is an opportunity for military to actually bond into the CVAC as public
servants and serve in that capacity when the CVACs are actually running. I’d
like to also bring that to the attention of any military people listening, or
ex-military listening, that when we go into that phase, that opportunity will
exist for you. Just how that will play out, we can’t tell you just yet, but I
want you to bear that in mind, because that’s written into the filings.
The other thing that is written into the
filings is this, and this is in the Declaration and Order, that the public
trustees have actually ordered that all of the One People assist them…the
trustee and any other public servants involved in the trust…in assisting on
carrying out the orders to close down the old system. So if you like, you can
actually take that on board. We’ve actually been officially requested to assist
the shut-down of the old system. That is what the Courtesy Notice is doing.
Bob: That’s not just military, that’s also
police officers, any law enforcement, even sheriffs, all of them; the whole
bunch.
Chris: Exactly. So, we are going to be our
own enforcement. It’s a matter of gathering our voices, getting organized, and
if some lawyers come back with the kind of ridiculous deflections we saw today
on Facebook, they’re going to hear the voices of the People. That energy will
send ripples up and down their system and they will ultimately fall silent, which
is what we require of them; to fall silent and stand down.
Bob: Another thing I wanted to say is; I
agree with D wholeheartedly, the time for secrecy is over. The time for
transparency has arrived. So, any of you who are out there and listening, and
you have information, come forward. This is the time for absolute disclosure, because
it’s going to get disclosed anyway.
Chris: One thing to remember is disclosure
is never going to come from the government. I’m sure D would agree with that.
D: Not full disclosure. Nope.
Chris: Exactly. It’ll be what’s convenient
at the time for them. So it’s going to actually come from us. It’s time to
think about how you might go about that.
Lisa: I just want to briefly, because we’re
running out of time, I want to talk a little bit about tomorrow’s show because
it’s going to be big, people. A document, which I’m not sure if it’s gone
public yet or not…
D: No, it hasn’t been publicized yet.
Lisa: It hasn’t, it hasn’t. But we can talk
about it. It is another one of the filings, UCC filings by the One People’s
Public Trust. What it means for us, not just 3D boots on the ground, but what
it means for us spiritually, I’m still finding the words to express because
words are so inadequate. If through this chat room in particular, we’ve been
asked a lot questions about the multi-dimensional aspect of all of this. Could
I explain the multi-dimensional aspect of the UCC? Could I explain the
multi-dimensional aspect of the Courtesy Notice? For those who didn’t hear last
week, on last week’s Collective Imagination show, I shared a vision that I had
a couple of days before that about, I called it my “beast” vision. If you get
the chance, I would recommend you go and listen to that before tomorrow’s show,
because I think it will add a great deal of context for what we’re going to
talk about. So if you go to Blogtalk radio, look up the Collective Imagination,
and look for last week’s show. I think that’s where I shared it, wasn’t it?
D: The other thing, I was just going to
jump in is…and I still haven’t had a chance to listen to the whole thing, I’m so
far behind on listening to all the different shows…is the interview that
Heather did with Mel from Freedom Central. Even if you can only listen to the
first 10 minutes of that, Heather has some very important information that she
gives that is foundational to that filing, that UCC filing we’re talking about
tomorrow.
Lisa: (confirmative response). So, to
clarify, there is an interview with Freedom Central, with Mel Ve, and it’s just
herself and Heather. It was only put online yesterday or the day before perhaps.
D: Yesterday.
Lisa: Yesterday. So listen to that. Those
are the two things I would really recommend that you listen to before
tomorrow’s Collective Imagination show, because it will give a great deal of
understanding and context for what’s coming tomorrow.
(confirmations from Bob and Chris talking
over each other)
Chris: It is a big one, folks. I have to
say this; when the three of us realized what was going on, it left Lisa in
tears, Bob speechless, and me blithering. (group laughter) It was like
“da…da…da”.
D: But you blither so nicely, Chris.
Chris: Thank you, D, thank you.
Brian: Lisa…go ahead…go ahead, Chris.
Chris: No, I was just going to say, if you
have existential questions “Why are we here? What are we doing here?”… you
better listen to this show.
Brian: Hey, Lisa,
just couple of quick announcements from me, because I know we’re coming up on
the last 13 minutes. We’re looking for a few specific volunteer categories for
the ground crew that we’re putting together. We now have a volunteer button on
the OPPT-IN website. We’re looking for anybody that knows how to use Microsoft CRM
(Custom Relationship Management). We’re using the Microsoft CRM to organize all
of the volunteers, as well as organize all the various projects that we’re working
on. So, if you have Microsoft CRM experience, go in to the OPPT-in.com site,
click on the volunteer button and then the skill field, put CRM in there
and send it over. We’re looking for people who know how to customize these
Microsoft CRM, a very robust tool. Also, web developers that know
Wordpress Development.
One of the things I’m working on right now
that’s going to go live on America Kabuki …and I know that D’s going to share
it and Kauilapele blog is going to share it as well…is an open letter to the
media, specifically radio. I just did the Morning Brew radio show last
Wednesday, which is a syndicated talk radio show that’s every Wednesday at 9:AM
Pacific time. I’m going to be going on again this Wednesday, with a host named
Gwen Caldwell. We covered a lot of the OPPT basics there as well. We’re
uploading the video to put on the blog tonight. We’ve been invited back every
week. There was over a million people listening, representing ten
different countries. When I talked to Gwen after this show, she said that in
listening through the live stream on her blog, she saw a couple of IP addresses
for a few foreclosed banks. So, there’s a lot of people that aren’t
too happy about what we’re doing, listening to this very call and that goes
with the territory.
What we’re going to be putting out here
tonight is the open letter to the media, which is going to be basically a
pledge to try to get on more radio shows with some of our radio team. Anybody
can download this. It’s going to have links to the Courtesy Notice, as well as
links to our original Press Release. Really what we want everybody to do is go
download it and send it to all your local radio stations and media outlets
and online media outlets and newspapers and blast it out there. Our
biggest piece of arsenal and ammunition right now is awareness. The more people
out there that we let them know about what’s going on with One People’s Public
Trust, everybody sharing it, the faster we’ll be able to get this spread across
the world. So, go to the americankabuki.blogspot.com or D’s blog,
removingtheshackles.blogspot.ca. Right, D?
D: Well, actually the new site is now up
(chuckle) … removingtheshackles.net is the new site which we are now using,
pretty much solely, except it just went down about a half an hour ago, and
we’re trying to figure out why.
Brian: Okay, perfect. So there you go.
There’s the site. So, in the meantime, she has her blog. Also, I just got a
text from Aaron/Erin. If we want to do a flash mob to close up this call, PBS has
1.2 million Likes. You can click on the highlights; it’s facebook.com/pbs. Click on the highlights filed in the middle
of the page below their profile picture and change it to “posts by others”. We
can blast PBS right now. It’s supposed to be “by the people for the people”, so
what better place to go on Facebook to do a quick flash mob before we close
this out.
Bob: Another thing I
wanted to mention. Any musicians out there who want to sing about this whole
thing? I love music, so get all the creative people out there who want to put
together some sort of song or tell us about who you BE. Put it out there.
Brian: Perfect.
Lisa: We can pick someone who’s
been putting it in the chat room quite a bit. We can pick an OPPT-related video
on YouTube next week and like it, comment on it, share it. We’ll pick one
and everybody can just share that one video and make it go viral.
Brian: Perfect.
Lisa: There’s probably a couple
hundred thousand people listening to this call right now, so that’s a lot of
“likes” and it gets attention.
Chris: Yep, well, I’m sitting on
the Facebook page talking in a message here on PBS, “I’ll see all you guys over
here”.
Brian: (chuckle) Awesome. So…facebook.com/pbs…for
anybody who wants to get in on the fun.
Lisa: Bob, Seraph just sent me
a message saying that he’s written a song called “BE”. (laughter) So,
he’s a step ahead of you there.
Bob: Good job. I can’t
wait to hear it.
Lisa: Excellent. Okay, last few
minutes, guys. D, is there anything you want to say before we close out
the show?
D: Not really, this has been a
great show tonight. All I say is to everyone, keep your eyes open. Watch
media, because there’s a lot of stuff coming out in the media right now. Keep
your eyes peeled. Keep that open mind when you hear those announcements start
rolling out, as to what they’re not saying.
(Mama Cat gives a feline
affirmative “meow”)
Lisa: Exactly. Now this is
something they have been trying push out since before Christmas. So, if they
finally get it out this week, good luck to them. Bob?
Bob: Yes. (laughter)
Lisa: Any closing
comments?
Bob: I just wanted to thank
everyone for their awareness and their BE’ing, because I have never seen
anything move like this so quickly. I’ve never seen the willingness of people
come together in such a way. It’s profound. It’s awe inspiring. All of you are
awesome, amazing, thank you.
Lisa: Agreed. Chris?
Chris: Well, I just I want to
echo what Bob says. Thank you guys for being here. You’re here because you know
that something is wrong with the world. You’ve got a gut feeling that this is
the vehicle through which We the People can fix this place. That’s actually why
I’m here. I didn’t get a chance to say that to Michael before, but that is
the bigger picture. We have to stay the course. The resistance we’ll get
from the system to the Courtesy Notice; it’s completely expected. We just stay
the course. We’ll play them at this game. At some point, we’ll be stepping
through the doorway…together.
Lisa: We are the ones that
we’ve been waiting for. We always have been. And Ron, I know you’re still
there, so I want to thank you for calling in.
Ron: You’re welcome, Lisa.
Lisa: Thank you for your input.
Keep us posted on your situation and we can certainly come together and support
in this, sending Courtesy Notices to those relevant people.
Ron: I will let you know after
tomorrow night’s meeting, about a week from tomorrow, for the show that night,
as we discussed before.
Lisa: Yes. That will be
lovely. Alright, thank you once again. Brian, I just wanted to make sure
we covered all the updates on the OPPT-IN website. At the top of the page
on the right hand side, you’ll find a volunteers’ button. That has all the
fields necessary for you to fill in if you are in a position to volunteer some
of your time and energy towards this cause. (laughter) We have the Courtesy
Notice there on the front page. We have resources, documents, the audio description,
which as I said is a two-hour discussion; Scott, Ken and Chris fully explaining
the Courtesy Notice. If it’s not on the website yet, it will be shortly. Anything
else?
Brian: I think that pretty much
covers it. A good call to action is for people to go download this open
letter to the media. There’s so many different media outlets. Our focus with
the ground crew is to utilize the resources that we have to bring exposure to
the story on a global scale. The momentum is already there. No one on this call
is going to argue that the momentum isn’t there. We have over 200,000 people
listening to this call. We had over a million people on Wednesday morning.
We’re going back every Wednesday to discuss OPPT and that‘s just the
start.
So, if you’re compelled, I’ll
echo something Heather always says in the chat room. She says “It’s all
done. Everything is done. Checkmate. It’s over. But the people just
don’t know it yet.” The more volunteers and the more willingness people
have to go out and share this information. It doesn’t take long to do a little
bit of research, figure out who your local radio stations are and local newspapers
are, put all the emails into a blast and fire it out. It’s already
written. All the links are there, all the information is there, so the
more support we have and the more people put this out there for all to see, the
faster we get to where we want to go. Grab you popcorn and sodas, ladies
and gentlemen, because the party is already started. It’s only going to get
more fun from here. Halleluiah!
(Several people talking at
once.)
D: Biding time.
Lisa: Absolutely. What a year
this is going to be. Once you’ve got your head around these Courtesy Notices
and you understand what you’re doing and you can stand in that space and you
know who you are and you know who they are, start sending them out there. We
want a couple hundred thousand of them in the system. This is about
educating each other. That’s what this Courtesy Notice does. So the
more police, the more bank employees, the more council employees, the more
government employees, that get educated on where they really stand right now,
the better. The quicker the better. Love you all. It’s been an
amazing couple of hours. I look towards to having you back again tomorrow on
the Collective Imagination Show. It’s at 12:00 PST time; it’s at 8:00 EST time.
I think that’s right, isn’t Bob?
Bob: Yep.
Lisa: Please tune in,
because we will be discussing that latest document and what that really means.
So, thank you again everybody. See you tomorrow.
D, Bob, Chris, Brian: Goodnight.
Bob: Good night, John-boy.
(laughter all around)
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.