Free news

FREE blog







Gun poll








14th Amdt

19th Amdt













Drivers License




horizontal rule


You Do Not Need To Pay For Traffic Tickets


You think you have to fight these tickets, and that is exactly what they want you to do... These Tickets and Notices are in fact Bills and therefore they come under the Bills of Exchange Act.

From the Act:

Bill of exchange
16. (1) A bill of exchange is an unconditional order in writing,
addressed by one person to another, signed by the person
giving it, requiring the person to whom it is addressed to
pay, on demand or at a fixed or determinable future time,
a sum certain in money to or to the order of a specified
person or to bearer.

These tickets or bills are just like a bill you might
get in a restaurant, and just like in a restaurant, they are in
fact offers and you have four basic options.

The first two will cause you to be in dishonor,
and in court, you almost always automatically lose. The
third will not result in dishonor, but will cause you to accept
their offer, which might not be in your best interest.

1. You can refuse to pay it through active rejection.
(You can dispute it and say “I am NOT paying this!”
Do this and you have created dispute without benefit
of discussion, and therefore you lose your Honor.
You lost before going to court.)

2. You can ignore it. (Imagine walking out of a
restaurant with a server tugging at your arm, you
totally ignoring them. Or you do a dine-and-dash.
Again this is a dishonor of an offer and thus creates
a conflict.)

3. You can pay it, but by doing that accept their offer.
(In the case of Violation Tickets this means you also
get a conviction registered against your name!)

The final option is the fourth option.

They have gone to great lengths to hide this option from
you, but they can’t stop you from using it once you know it
is there. So understand this: You do not want to dispute it,
as this will bring in the court. (You want to accept it and
make them be the ones desiring dispute.) You also cannot
simply ignore it, especially Appearance Notices. You want
to embrace the Rule of Law and keep your hands clean.
This means you need to know what the Rule of Law is.
Finally, you obviously do not want to pay it, especially since
as I will prove, the Bill is deception filled. Your fourth option
is this:

1. You can accept it, with conditions attached.

By accepting it and honoring the Bill, you cause them
to lose the ability to drag you into court. There is no dispute;
therefore there is no court, because court is a place for
those with disputes. Plus, the Rule of Law states that
disputes should be avoided and when they arise should be
settled with discussion, negotiation and then adjudication
in a court of competent jurisdiction. You are simply offering
to discuss this Bill and its particulars prior to paying it. You
have no intention of dishonoring it at all. Imagine you are
in the Restaurant again and you get an illegible bill, you
can’t read it so you ask what it says. You have the right to
do that, don’t you? Doing so is not a dishonorable act nor
does it cause dispute. “I’ll pay this Bill, just prove I ordered
and ate a lobster! Wait a minute, you don’t even serve
Lobster! What’s going on here! I want to speak to the

From the Bills of Exchange Act:

37. (1) An acceptance is either general or qualified.

General (2) A general acceptance assents without
qualification to the order of the drawer.

Qualified (3) A qualified acceptance in express terms varies
the effect of the bill as drawn and, in Violation Tickets and Appearance Notices Deconstructed

Freddy Freepickles’ list of Deceptive Words


Means to beg, plead petition, implore, entreat or request. The assumption it creates in court is that he who begs knows exactly what he is begging for, what he is giving up for it, he is acknowledging the authority to grant or he is creating it through transference and he is doing all voluntarily.


Legally, this means to accept a duty of service or a debt. It does not mean to show up or be present.


This is one of their trickiest. Legally it is synonymous with ‘may’ and can be used either as a directive or an imperative. The imperative creates an obligation; the directive merely defines conditions which have to be fulfilled in order for authority to be claimed. Often used with the word ‘application’.

 In particular, an acceptance is qualified that is( a) conditional, that is to say, that makes payment by the acceptor dependent on the fulfillment of a condition therein stated;( b) partial, that is to say, an acceptance to pay part only of the amount for which the bill is drawn;( c) qualified as to time; or( d) the acceptance of one or more of the drawees, but to of all.That is exactly how you are going to deal with these Violation Tickets and other Notices and you have every right to do so. Before we do that, we need to know what some of the words mean, because we are going to use that knowledge to formulate our questions later. You should start by realizing that words in Legalese often do not mean what they do in English.

Moreover, they also often have TWO separate and distinct and often contradictory definitions or senses.


Means to beg, plead petition, implore, entreat or request. The assumption it creates in court is that he who begs knows exactly what he is begging for, what he is giving up for it, he is acknowledging the authority to grant or he is creating it through transference and he is doing all voluntarily.


Legally, this means to accept a duty of service or a debt. It does not mean to show up or be present.


This is one of their trickiest. Legally it is synonymous with ‘may’ and can be used either as a directive or an imperative. The imperative creates an obligation; the directive merely defines conditions which have to be fulfilled in order for authority to be claimed. Often used with the word ‘application’.


Your name is like a label. Saying ‘My Name is John” is not the same thing as saying “I am John.”. The name designates a ‘person’ and that person is what the
government can act upon. If you are ever asked for a name for a ticket or notice, never say ‘My name is…” Say instead “I am…”


Legally, it is akin to an invitation, although if ignored or rejected you go into dishonor. It is really nothing more than an offer.


A human being and a ‘person’ are two very different things. A ‘person’ is ‘the legal subject or substance of which rights and duties are attributes’.

POBC (or Other Area of Authority)

THE PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA is not a geographical area. It is a legal entity or a fiction and human beings simply cannot exist within it. Our ‘persons’ however can.


The same as ‘must’. This word has two opposite legal senses. One is passive, the other active. Remember this, unless it says ‘obliged’ you aren’t. They will often try to use the words ‘must’ and ‘required’ to get you to fulfill the conditions which grant them power.


A society is a number of people joined through mutual consent to deliberate, determine and act for a common goal. Being a member of a society is a choice and just because you exist within a certain area does not mean you are obliged to join.


A legislated rule of society which has the force of law. Statutes only have the force of Law over those who through consent, are members of the society governed by the statutes. You will know them by the word ‘Act’.



Violation Tickets and Appearance Notices Deconstructed



Now at the time you get the ticket or notice, there are some things you do not want to do.

Do not give them a ‘name’. Tell them “People call me” or “I am...” Or something of that nature.

IF you can avoid signing it, do so. If they threaten you then sign it but FIRST write in “Non-Assumpsit, Without Prejudice, All Rights Reserved, and Under Duress”.

Ask them if they are giving you a ticket or notice. When they say ‘Yes”, reply “The word ‘give’ implies an acceptance on my part and I am not accepting any
gifts today. Thank You.”

What you want to be able to accomplish is to be able to claim that you did not accept or assent to the ticket or bill being presented. It’s a matter of
‘joinder’ and you do not want to create it. Go so far as to say “I do not wish to create joinder.”

Do not be cocky or a smartass; just establish the foundation you will build upon later. Ensure also that you get a card from the issuer of the bill.

The basic foundation is this: You did not give a ‘name’ and you did not assent to the presentation.

Now let’s take a look at both sides of a Violation Ticket and see what’s there.


Refers back to ‘tick’, which is a mark placed against a masters account by a servant. It implies a debt.

“A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.”

Now at the time you get the ticket or notice, there are some things you do not want to do.



Do not give them a ‘name’. Tell them “People call me”
or “I am...” Or something of that nature.
IF you can avoid signing it, do so. If they threaten you
then sign it but FIRST write in “Non-Assumpsit, Without
Prejudice, All Rights Reserved, and Under Duress”.
Ask them if they are giving you a ticket or notice. When
they say ‘Yes”, reply “The word ‘give’ implies an
acceptance on my part and I am not accepting any
gifts today. Thank You.”



On the face of the Tickets, you will find your name, usually spelled with all capitalized letters and with your last name first and then your given names last. I.e. DOE, JOHN ADAM instead of John Adam Doe. The capitalization indicates that they are dealing with your ‘strawman’ or nomde-guerre. It is not you the human being, it is your person, which is the legal subject or substance of which rights a duties are attributes. Do not worry if you do not understand this concept; as long as the person who issued the ticket doesn’t know, you can use this information to ask them questions which they will be incapable of answering.
You will also find that they will label you as either a ‘passenger’, ‘driver’, ‘pedestrian’, ‘cyclist’, ‘owner’ or ‘other’.

You should know that legally, a ‘passenger is one who has paid a fare to be on the conveyance. If you did not pay, you are not legally a passenger. Most Officers do not realize that and think that if you are on the train or in the vehicle
you are a passenger. Make them prove that.

You will also find the statement:

BELIEVE THAT THE ABOVE NAMED, AS, [ here they mention
and label you as one of the things mentiond above] on or about [then they
give details of time and location] DID COMMIT THE OFFENCE(S)
REGULATIONS: [Then they list various Acts]

If when the ticket was issued to you, you did not show Identification, they have no claim that there even is a ’person’ for them to act upon. They also act upon the assumption that you will not realize that all Acts only have the force of
law over those who hav consented to being governed. When you respond to them, you will raise this issue. It scares them. Unless the person who issued the Ticket knows what every word on there means, they are the ones who will end up ‘dishonouring’ the bill.

The most important words you will find on the Tickets are the smallest ones there. In super small type it states ‘IN THE PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA’. (or THE STATE OF, or THE COUNTY OF, THE MUNICIPALITY OF, etc.)

You will be asking them to provide proof that they even know what THE PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA is. If they cannot do that, they have no ‘reasonable and probable grounds’ to believe anything happened within it, do

These are the two biggest secrets you will be expressing to them with your questions.

1- THE PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (DESIGNATED ENFORCED AREA) is not a geographical area, it is a legal entity or fiction and no human being can possibly exist within it.

2-The ‘person’ named on a ticket can and does exist within TPOBC and therefore is not a human being. It exists in an association with you and you can end that association whenever you want. If you do... NO STATUTE OR ACT WILL HAVE THE FORCE OF LAW OVER YOU.

By asking them these questions, you put them in a position where they have to acknowledge the truth and thus abandon much of their authority, or they will have to acknowledge that they are ignorant of the law. Either way, you put them between a rock and a hard place. Remind them that ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking the law.

Chances are, they will not get back to you. Imagine once again you are in a restaurant, the server presents a bill, you ask some questions concerning the bill, they take it back and never return. Do you owe anyone anything? NO you do not. The Bill was presented, honoured and never re-presented. There is no Bill.

Read the example on the next page and use it as a template to create your own Conditional Acceptance. The system they use is simply not designed to deal with you exercising your right to Conditionally Accept.

Back of the Tickets:

On the back of the Tickets they tell you that you have three choices; ignore, pay or dispute. If you choose to pay, you are agreeing with them that you are guilty and a conviction is entered against your name. If you ignore, its the same thing, you are deemed to have accepted the bill and you have to pay. The third option is to choose to dispute and this is where they really trick you. If you accept this option, you are willfully stepping into dishonour. You have not exercised your right to discuss or negotiate and are jumping right into the dispute. Bear in
mind, that if you engage in that option, there will be two parties before the court, with only one wishing to dispute.

You have lost honour merely by WISHING FOR DISPUTE.

You have abandoned the rule of Law and there really is no sense going to court, for you have essentially already lost. What you want to do is extend an offer to discuss and have them reject that offer. They are then the ones ‘wishing for
dispute’ and thus are in dishonour. Realize that they are trying to create an adversarial relationship. They are your foe and antagonist. Lets say someone tried to get you to consent to fight and then said “You have to fight me and and the first thing you have to do is either bang your head against the wall or kick the
curb.” Why let your adversary dictate the way you will fight them? Clearly they will try to get you to do something that is in their interest and not yours.

Wishing dispute is one of the stupiest things anyone can do. Make them state that they wish dispute or force them to discuss it with you. The Officer who issued the ticket will not like that. Defending in court he or she will get paid overtime; dealing with a Conditional Acceptance they will not. Plus, if they do not deal with it, they ends up DISHONOURING THEIR OWN BILL and thus ends up having to pay it themselves.

Next time you get a ticket, try these actions:

1. Take the original and tell him you intend to honour it within 3 days.

2. If he demands you return the original, consider the bill not properly
and duly presented.

3. Ask before he gives it to you if he is giving you a ticket. When he
says yes, you have an agreement to take the original, not a copy.
They do not say they are giving you a copy of the ticket, they say
they are giving you a ticket. BIG difference.

4. To accept the ticket, lay your hands out flat and make him put the
ticket book in your hands. Do not touch the ticket until he is no
longer in contact with it. Anything less and the presentation is not
complete and he likely knows it.

5. Ask “You don’t mind if I conditionally accept this do you?”

6. Quote section 16 (1) of the Bills of Exchange Act. It defines a bill of
exchange and a violation ticket matches it exactly.

7. Ask him if he has the right to impose a copy of a bill when the original
of the bill has never been duly presented.

8. Quote this section: 55 (2) In particular, the title of a person who negotiates a bill is defective within the meaning of this Act when he obtained the bill, or the
acceptance thereof, by fraud, duress or force and fear, or other unlawful means, or for an illegal consideration, or when he negotiates it in breach of faith, or under such circumstances as amount to a fraud. Tell him he is engaged in a type of fraud by failing to understand the nature of the instrument he is presenting. If he does not give you the ticket and then claims in court that you rejected the ticket, he is guilty of perjury and it can cost him his job! Remember, he has not completed the presentation of the bill until it is in your control and possession and he is no longer touching it.


A violation Ticket is a bill of exchange according to the Bills of Exchange Act. (Section 16(1) BEA)


A bill returned to the issuer by you with merely a signature on it is evidence of a dishonoured bill. (Sec 98 BEA)


A copy of a dishonoured bill is evidence that the bill was presented, served and dishonoured. (Section 10 BEA)


The reason they impose the copy on you is because you failed to take the original! You can take the original, not a mere copy.


If the officer tries to stop you from taking the original, HE IS DISCHARGING THE BILL FOR YOU AND ENDS UP BEING LIABLE! (Sec 84 BEA.)


You have three days grace to honour the bill (original) once presented to you. (Sec 41 BEA)


If you sign a bill, it is assumed that you are a party to that bill and are liable for it. (Sec 35 (2) BEA)


You can accept the bill up to two days after it has been duly presented. (Sec 79(1) BEA)


You do not have to sign the ticket unless you intend to give it back to the officer dishonoured.


If the officer presenting the bill is incapable of accepting payment when offered, the bill is considered invalid.



horizontal rule

        United States v. Herrera , __ F.3d __ 05-3057 (10th
        Cir. (Kan.) Apr. 19, 2006).

        Search and Seizure (Administrative Automobile Inventory
        Search -Mistake of Fact - Exclusionary Rule - Good Faith
        Exception Inapplicable) .

        A Kansas state trooper pulled over defendant's pickup truck
        to conduct a random commercial vehicle safety inspection
        pursuant to a state regulatory statute.  Defendant's pickup,
        however, was not a commercial vehicle subject to such random
        inspections, about which the trooper was mistaken. The
        defendant was unable to produce proof of insurance, and
        the trooper arrested him.  The trooper then conducted an
        inventory search, and discovered 23 kilograms of cocaine. The
        defendant was charged federally with possession of cocaine
        with intent to distribute.  He filed a motion to suppress,
        that was denied. He was convicted, and appealed. Held:
        Conviction reversed and case dismissed. Ruled: The traffic
        stop was not based on probable cause, or reasonable
        suspicion, and was not a valid administrative stop because
        defendant's pickup was not a commercial vehicle subject to
        random safety inspections .  Hence, the warrantless stop
        was unconstitutional. Moreover, the trooper's mistaken
        belief concerning the statutory regulatory scheme did not
        save the stop, search, and seizure because the trooper
        had no lawful authority to make the random inspection and
        there was no reasonable suspicion or probable cause. Thus,
        the good-faith exception did not apply.

horizontal rule

There are reportedly some 86 million Americans who are not paying income taxes. Now just think if a good portion of those Americans woke up to the facts of the DMV non-disclosure regarding what is a motor vehicle and what is not a motor vehicle.  As an example of the power of the people, let's take the case of the CB radio issue back in the 70's. The FCC was trying to get all truckers to get a license for using CB's. The truckers flat out refused and simple did not volunteer to get the license that they were trying to enforce. United together the truckers won! Read this short article below.


In 1977 the FCC introduced an addition 17 channels to make the current 40 channels that are available today. Also, in 1977 the FCC discontinued the license that was needed to operate a CB station. A license is not needed as long as you operate and follow the rules and regulations of the FCC. Here is a good story I found: Tales of CB woe at the hands of the FCC


Once people wake up to the fact that all acts are truly voluntary, then people will truly realize their power. As it stand right now, when someone goes down to the DMV and registers their car to get a title and plates, the unknowingly convert the car into a motor vehicle and in doing so, a commercial carrier. Here is the proof. This is taken right from the WISCONSIN TITLE & LICENSE PLATE APPLICATION.



Certification. All parties certify with their signature that to the best of their knowledge the information and statements on this application are true and correct. The prior owner's odometer statement has been shown to the applicant and a copy of this completed application including odometer statement has been furnished the applicant. COMMERICIAL CARRIERS - I further certify knowledge of applicable federal and state motor carrier safety rules, regulations, standards and orders, and declare that all operations will be conducted in compliance with such requirements.Then there is a big X and a place to sign.



Now, I know people will say, well I am not a commercial carrier and that doesn't apply to me. Guess again folks, There wasn't a check off place for an exclusion to that certification and it was that way on purpose. The STATE could have one application for people with cars and another for commercial carriers, but they DO NOT.



Here is why: JUST FOR FUN, can anyone magically find the definition of just the word "passenger" in any State Motor Vehicle Code? Hint: you won't find it! That is because this would expose the trickery the DMVs have played on people's ignorance to get them to voluntarily register their non-passenger private autos as "motor vehicles".



"driving" and "operating" are commercial terms and are being used to designate such activity on unknowing people via the statutes (not laws) whom then are only recognized as a "person" (legal entity) so that the government entities (corporations) can tax, regulate and control.



Definition of "driver" from Bouvier's Law Dictionary 1914 ed., Pg. 940

One employed in conducting a coach, carriage, wagon, or other vehicle



Definition of "passenger" from Black's Law Dictionary, Fourth Edition, Pg. 1280. One carried for hire or reward, as distinguished from a "guest" who is one carried gratuitously...



Definition of "motor vehicle" in the U.S.Codes is: 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. TITLE 18 > PART I > CHAPTER 2 > § 31(6)



Definition of (10) Used for commercial purposes.— 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. Link: Definitions in U.S.C.



Do you charge anyone for sitting in the car while you take them to school, to the shopping mall or travel in the car anywhere for that matter? So what are WE going to do about it?


You can begin by simply pulling out the copy of the Title and License Plate Application that you signed and reading it. It surely will be different in "your" State, but the premise is the same. Then you can NOTIFY the STATE DMV that there has been a mistake, and you wish to correct it. They will probably ignore your request so then you need to send the next notification using a notary or two witnesses. This is just one more step in taking back our freedoms and right to travel.  ALWAYS DO YOUR OWN DILIGENCE !



horizontal rule

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Lic for jop list
Date: Sun, 2 Oct 2005 09:21:46 -0700
From: Cory Palmerton <[email protected]>
To: Charles Bruce, Stewart <[email protected]>

Texas Driver's License
       Here is how the Appelate Criminal Courts of Texas have answered
this request:
       "The court has held that there is no such license known to
Texas Law as a  driver's license." (Frank John Callas v. State, 167
Tex. Crim. 375; 320  S.W. 2d 360.)
And."We have held that there is no such license as a driver's
license known to  our law." (Claude D. Campbell v. State, 160 Tex. Crim. 627;
274 S.W. 2d 401.)
       And.An information charging the driving of a motor vehicle
a public  highway without a driver's license charges no offense, as
there is no such  license as a driver's license known to the law."
(Keith Brooks v. State, 158 Tex. Crim. 546; 258 S.W. 2d 317)
       "There being no such license as a "driver's" license known to
the law, it follows that the information, in charging the driving of
a motor vehicle upon a highway without such a license, charges no
offense." ( W. Lee Hassell v. The State, 149 Tex. Crim. 333; 194 S.W.
2d 400)





Rick Stanley

Constitutional Activist

Phone: 303-329-0481

E-mail: [email protected]


We the People Scoop 04/02/05 ** Special Edition **



** Visit the website: **

** Like the Scoop? Forward it to everyone you know! **


MEDIA RELEASE: The origin of the driver's license.

STANLEY NOTE: All of the state driver's license statutes are similar. The Supreme Court long ago declared the right to travel is a basic Constitutional right, not a "privelage" to be "given by government". The driver's license is for commercial and hired vehicles only. Americans continue to be conned. The IRS Income Tax. The Federal Reserve CORPORATION. The courts. The 9-11 cover-up by government. The list goes on and on, into every aspect of our lives. America suffers.

Live FREE or Die!

Rick Stanley

Subject: The Origin of the Driver's License

The Origin of the Driver's License


Remember there were several before this, 1905 and 1909, Read the Stork case





A 1925 Act Creating Driver's Licenses for those Engaged in Transportation for Hire.




Passed At The





An act to impose a license fee for the transportation of persons or

property for hire or compensation upon public streets, roadways and

highways in the State of California by motor vehicle; to provide for

certain exemptions; to provide for the enforcement of the provisions

hereof and for the disposition of the amounts collected on account

of such licenses; to make an appropriation for the purpose of this

act; and to repeal all acts or parts of acts in conflict herewith.

[ Approved by the Governor May 28, 1925. ]

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

Section 1. The words and phrases used in this act

shall for the purposes of this act, unless the same be

contrary to or inconsistent with the context, be

construed as follows:

(a) The phrase "railroad commission certificate" shall

be construed to mean a certificate of public convenience

and necessity granted or issued by the railroad

commission of the State of California, authorizing a

common carrier by motor vehicle to operate under the

conditions prescribed by said commission, and shall

include all amendments to or changes in such certificate

which may be made by said commission.

(b) The word "operator" shall include all persons,

firms, associations and corporations who operate motor

vehicles upon any public highway in this state and

thereby engage in the transportation of persons or

property for hire or compensation, but shall not include

any person, firm, association or corporation who solely

transports by motor vehicle persons to and from or to or

from attendance upon any public school or who solely

transports his or its own property, or employees, or

both, and who transports no persons or property for hire

or compensation, but all persons operating freight

carrying so exempted shall be required to obtain from the

state board of equalization and to display exempt emblems

in the manner herein provided.

(c) The term "registration certificate" shall include

any and all certificates of registration of a motor

vehicle issued by the division of motor vehicles of the

department of finance of the State of California, or by

any governmental body within said state under which the

laws of the said state may have power or authority to

register and certify to the registration of a motor

vehicle for operation within said state.

Sec. 10. All acts and parts of acts in conflict herewith

are hereby repealed; provided, however, that nothing herein

shall be construed as affecting or repealing the

provisions of an act entitled " An Act providing for the

supervision and regulation of the transportation of

persons and property for compensation over any public

highway by automobiles, jitney, busses, auto trucks,

stages and auto stages; defining transportation

companies and providing for the supervision and

regulations thereof by the railroad commission;

providing for the enforcement of the provisions of this

act and for the punishment of violations thereof; and,

repealing all acts inconsistent with the provisions of

this act, " approved May 10, 1917, as amended.


Fifty-Second Session



An act to amend sections 1, 2, 3, 4, and 11 of an act entitled "An

Act imposing a license fee or tax for the transportation of persons

or property for hire or compensation upon the public streets, roads

and highways on the State of California by motor vehicle and

providing that this act shall take effect immediately," approved May

15, 1933; to add sections 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 112, 15, and 21 to said act;

to renumber and amend sections 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13, 14, 16, and 17

of said act; to repeal sections 10 and 15 of said act; relating to the

taxing of operators engaged in the transportation of persons or

property upon the public highways by motor vehicle and providing

that this act shall take effect immediately.

[Approved by the Governor June 30, 1937. In effect immediately]

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

Section 1. Section 1 of the act cited in the title

hereof is hereby amended to read as follows:

Section 1. The words and phrases used in this act

shall be construed for the purposes of said act, unless

such construction be contrary to or inconsistent with the

context thereof, as follows: ( in part )

(a) The term "operator" shall include all persons ingaging

in the transportation of persons or property for hire or

compensation by or upon motor vehicles upon any

public highway in this State, either directly or

indirectly, but shall not mean or include the following:

(1) Any person transporting his own property in

his own motor vehicle; provided however, that any

such person making a specific charge for such

transportation shall be deemed to be an "operator"


(b) The term "person" shall include any individual,

firm, copartnership, joint adventure, association,

corporation, estate trust, business trust, receiver,

syndicate, or any other group or combination acting as a

unit and the plural as well as the singular number.

(c) the term "motor vehicle" shall include all

automobiles, trucks, tractors, or other self-propelled

vehicles used for the transportation of person or

property upon the public highways, otherwise than upon

fixed rails or tracks, and any trailer, semitrailer,

dolly or other vehicle drawn thereby, not exempt from

registration fees under the laws of this State.


Have a great day --


He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.

He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our People, and eat out their substance

"The rights of the individuals are restricted only to the extent that they have been voluntarily surrendered by the citizenship to the agencies of government." City of Dallas v Mitchell, 245 S.W. 944

Richard James, McDonald


Join our Citizenship Educational program

(818) 703-5037 voice




jewn McCain

ASSASSIN of JFK, Patton, many other Whites

killed 264 MILLION Christians in WWII

killed 64 million Christians in Russia

holocaust denier extraordinaire--denying the Armenian holocaust

millions dead in the Middle East

tens of millions of dead Christians

LOST $1.2 TRILLION in Pentagon
spearheaded torture & sodomy of all non-jews
millions dead in Iraq

42 dead, mass murderer Goldman LOVED by jews

serial killer of 13 Christians

the REAL terrorists--not a single one is an Arab

serial killers are all jews

framed Christians for anti-semitism, got caught
left 350 firemen behind to die in WTC

legally insane debarred lawyer CENSORED free speech

mother of all fnazis, certified mentally ill

10,000 Whites DEAD from one jew LIE

moser HATED by jews: he followed the law Jesus--from a "news" person!!

1000 fold the child of perdition


Hit Counter


Modified Saturday, March 11, 2017

Copyright @ 2007 by Fathers' Manifesto & Christian Party