Appendix B: Movement Sources

1.   Movement web pages
Note: This is a short list of representative sites relevant to the movement. Given the nature of both the medium and the movement, the addresses change all the time, and entire sites may move from server to server. Many of these links may be broken by the time the reader looks for them, but a search at any of the major search engines (www.yahoo.com, www.excite.com. www.infoseek.com, etc.) will reveal a plethora of similar sites. Also, a number of the sites in appendix D will have lists of such sites readily available and categorized, not unlike these pages, only hotlinked, so as to be more convenient to use. Anyone interested in or threatened by the movement should regularly canvass the web, so as to see the movement's new developments. 
1.1   Patriots
The Patriot Knowledge Base
http://www.mo-net.com/-rklewis/pkbcontents.html 
Patriot's Place
http://www.apex.net/users/rooster/ 
The Patriot Page
http://azwest.net/user/slim/ 
The Freedom Page
http://freedompage.home.mindspring.com/ 
The Patriot
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/6627/ 
American Patriot Network
www.civil-liberties.com/
National Organization for Non-Enumeration
www.noneusa.org 
"Knobby"
www.knobbv.home.texas.net
Cascadian.com
www.cascadian.com/CRC

1.2   Militias
Militia of Montana
http://www.nidlink.com/~bobhard/mom.html
Central Ohio Unorganized Militia
http://www.infinet.com/~pandar/
Louisiana Unorganized Militia
http://www.orion-cs.com/freedomforum/
7th Missouri Militia
http://www.mo-net.com/~mlindste/7momilit.html
Arizona Constitutional Militia
www.constitution.org/mil/az/mil usaz.htm 
Central Michigan Regional Militia 15th Brigade Kent County 
http://mmc.cns.net
Georgia Constitutional Militia
www.constitution.org/mil/ga/mil usga.htm 
Information on militias
www.well.com/user/srhodes/militia.html 
Texas Militia Papers
www.constitution.org/mil/tmp.htm

1.3   Tax Protestors
Tax truth 4 you
www.taxtruth4u.com/ 
Curtis and Curtis Anti IRS defense
http://www.chase3000.com/pw/guyc/ 
Bill Conklin's Anti-IRS.com 
www.anti-irs.com/ 
IRS defense 
kato.theramp.net/royaVindex.html
Perfect Tax Avoidance Through Knowledge of the Tax Law 
home.erols.com/scambos/taxes.htm 
Taxgate.com
www.taxgate.com/ 
Scriptures for America
www.christianidentity.org/home.htm 
Posse Comitatus
www.posse-comitatus.org/ 

Appendix C: Movement Documents
Appendix C: Movement Documents
Following are documents taken directly from members of the movement. All documents included are included either with specific permission from the authors or as being in the public domain as a result of having been filed in court. Interestingly, when approached for permission, members of the movement were highly receptive to freely granting such permission, often suggesting that the researchers "read the constitution" and "teach those judges what real law is."
The documents included have been edited as little as possible in order to preserve as much as possible their true flavor. In some spaces formatting and serious spelling or grammatical errors may have been corrected. The reader should not hesitate to search the world-wide-web for more examples of the same, and readers should not doubt that new documents will appear as new ideas and strains of the movement erupt.
1.    Tactics

Have You Been Hornswoggled?56
Which Flag is Which? By Richard McDonald
The people of the United States actually have two national flags: one for our military government and another for the civil. Each one has fifty stars in its canton, and thirteen red and white stripes, but there are several important differences.
Although most Americans think of the Stars and Stripes (above left) as their only flag, it is actually for military affairs only. The other one, meant by its maker for wider use, (peacetime) has vertical stripes with blue stars on a white field (above right). You can see this design, which bears civil jurisdiction, in the U.S. Coast Guard and Customs flags, but their service insignias replace the fifty stars.
I first learned of the separate, civil flag when I was reading Nathaniel Hawthorne's The Scarlet Letter, published in 1850. The introduction, titled "The Custom House," includes this description:
From the loftiest point of its roof, during precisely three and a half hours of each forenoon, floats or droops, in breeze or calm, the banner of the republic; but with the thirteen stripes turned vertically, instead of horizontally, and thus indicating that a civil, and not a military post of Uncle Sam's government, is here established.
It took me two years of digging before I found a picture that matched what he was describing: my second clue was an original Illuminated History of North America (1860). If this runs against your beliefs, look up these two references.
History book publishers contribute to the public's miseducation by always picturing the flag in military settings, creating the impression that the one with horizontal stripes is the only one there is. They don't actually lie; they just tell half the truth. For example, the "first American flag" they show Betsy Ross sewing at George Washington's request was for the Revolution — of course it was military.
The U.S. government hasn't flown the civil flag since the Civil War, as that war is still going on. Peace has never been declared, nor have hostilities against the people ended. The government is still operation under quasi-military rule-
You movie buffs may recall this: In the old Westerns, "Old Glory" has her stripes running sideways and a military yellow fringe. Most of these films are historically accurate about that; their stories usually took place in the territories still under military law and not yet states. Before WWn, no U.S. flag, civil or military, flew within the forty-eight states (except in federal settings); only state flags did. Since then, the U.S. government seems to have decided the supposedly sovereign states are its territories, too, so it asserts its military power over them under the "law of the flag."
Today the U.S. Military flag appears alongside, or in place of, the state flags in nearly all locations within the states. All of the state courts and even the municipal ones now openly display it. This should have raised serious questions from many citizens long ago, but we've been educated to listen and believe what we are told, not to ask questions, or think or search for the truth.
NOTES
1. homswoggled: deceived. The term comes from the traditional image of cuckolded husbands wearing horns.óEditor
2. canton: The rectangular section in the upper comer of a flag, next to the staff.
3. The Scarlet Letter: An Authoritative Text, edited by Sculley Bradley, W. W. Norton, New York, 1978, pp. 7-8.
4. There is also a picture of the Coast Guard flag in Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English Language Unabridged, G. & C. Merriam Company, Springfield, Mass., 1966.
5. For more about the law of the flag, see "A Fiction-at-Law ...," in the printed version of Perceptions Magazine May/June 1995, Issue 9, page 11.
About the author: Richard McDonald is a California Citizen domiciled in The California state Republic. He does legal research and has his own site on the web. State Citizen's Service Center.

Gold-Fringed Flag Returned to Court
Last September, County Commissioners in Ferry County, Washington removed a gold-fringed flag from the courtroom because Commissioner Jim Hall said he was shown government documents proving that fringed flags are inappropriate. Commissioner Hall, who assured everyone that he doesn't subscribe to constitutionalist views, said the flag was removed to appease "anti-government constitutionalists," according to an article in Spokane's Spokesman Review.
After several months of fruitless negotiation, presiding Superior Court Judge, Larry Kristianson, threatened legal action against Hall, saying he could order the flag replaced and have Hall jailed if he got in the way. To avoid a confrontation that could have been "politically explosive" it was agreed that the judge would buy a new fringed replacement flag with his own money if the commissioners would promise to leave it alone. "No person is authorized to come into the court and take accouterments of the court without the court's permission," he said. [SOURCE: American's Bulletin, March '96]

Right Way L.A.W. Suggests: Quit Contracting for Traffic Tickets
You probably never thought of traffic tickets in terms of contracts to purchase certain goods and services. But according to Right Way L.A.W. reported in AntiShyster, they are part of a commercial contract. If you don't agree with the contract, it is absolutely essential to object to traffic citations in a timely fashion (within 10 days) using a "Refusal for Cause."
When a law enforcement officer writes a ticket (s)he is actually issuing a commercial instrument called a "citation," and the recipient of said "ticket" automatically becomes party to a commercial contract. The commercial instrument is actually a "confirmatory writing," an instrument defined in UCC 2-201 that defines a "product being purchased," which in this case is, fines and court costs. Right Way L.A.W. explains that anyone using International Monetary Fund (IMF) debt credit (Federal Reserve Notes) as a medium of exchange, is subject to the Uniform Commercial Code.
UCC 2-201 is called the "Statute of Frauds." It deals with the legality of contracts and says contracts for the sale of goods for $500 or more are not enforceable unless there is some "writing" indicating that a contract for goods has been signed between the parties. UCC 2-201, Subparend (2) says that if one of the parties objects to the terms of the confirmatory writing, their objection must be registered within 10 days after receipt or the contract stands. Don't wait for your court date to register an objection. It'll be too late under the UCC.
At this point, you may think that refusal to sign the citation would prevent entering into a contract. Not so! If you sign the citation, the action falls under UCC 2-201. If you don't sign, it still falls under UCC 2-201 because the 10 day period to object to the "writing" automatically goes into effect, according to commercial law. It is a maxim of law that law applies in spite of ignorance of it. Therefore, it is presumed that everyone who fails to object during the 10 day period agrees to all the terms of the contract. You're guilty by default.
Commentary: It's important to respond to every citation, notice to appear or other paper action of the government, so as to not support their presumptions and agree to the terms of their contracts by acquiescence and neglect. [SOURCE: AntiShyster, Vol 5, No.4; Reviewed by Esther Holmes].

The Federal System59
Three jurisdictions exist in the federal system used in this country. Each jurisdiction has separate and distinct responsibilities under the original constitutions.
A. The Federal Government (the United States).
1. Create laws to perfect the union created by the State governments to control commerce between states, national problems, etc.
2. Provide for the common defense of the Federal government, the state governments and the free states.
3. Promote the general welfare of all bodies and peoples by generating federal law to do this.
4. Create a body of law to control the employees of the Federal government (these were citizens of the United States). 
B. The State Governments (the several states).
1. Create laws to control the defense of the territory in which they are authorized to make laws.
2. Promote the general welfare of the area in which they govern in which the Federal government does not control by generating civil law to accomplish this.
3. Create a body of law to accomplish this. 
C. The Common Law States (the free states).
1. Create laws to control the security of the free state by organizing and managing the militia.
2. Promote the private welfare, establish privileges, generating private law for this purpose.
3. Create a body of law to control the people of the free states.
4. Assume all responsibilities of government not specifically given to state and federal governments. (Such as education, rules for militia membership, etc.) 
D. The effects of the 14th Amendment.
1. A body politic was created called "Citizens of the United States" in which any person could become a member by submitting to the jurisdiction of the United States (the Federal government).
2. These citizens became "residents" of the state governments for issues in that particular jurisdictional boundary.
3. A right now existed for the Federal and State governments to create a body of laws to control the people of this newly created "civil law" state.
Under the original constitution it was presumed that United States citizens where mostly those individuals who chose to participate in government service, their families and others who were free but not members of one of the common law jurisdictions.

Affidavit
Declaration of Truth
_____________________  state )
                                                     ) S.S.
____________________ county )
I, _______________________, the Undersigned, do hereby affirm the following, pursuant to James 5:12, "But above all things my brethren, swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath, but let your yea be yea, and your nay, nay; lest ye fall into condemnation."
First:
That I am ________________________; that I am over the age of twenty-one years, and am competent to testify to My first-hand knowledge of the facts herein, and that the statements herein made by Me are true of My own first-hand knowledge, unless otherwise stated herein. Yea.
Second:
Type a single fact here. Remember to not speculate, or go into long winded explanations. Keep your facts simple. Write in the first-person (I saw, I heard, I did, etc.)
Third:
Write as many paragraphs as it takes to make your point. Remember to stay on point, and keep it simple.
Lastly:
That I have made these statements for the purpose of giving notice to the public of the facts stated herein, and not for the purpose of waiving any Right or Immunity. I do hereby reserve all rights given Me by the One True God.
Witnesses:

__________________________________
_________________________________________
affiant
On this ___________ day of the _____________ month, in the year of Our Lord, Nineteen hundred ninety-six, in the Two hundred twentieth year of Our Independence, the foregoing document was affirmed before me, a Notary Public, by ___________________, in and for the county and state above written, and He did affirm to me that He is literate, and competent to make This Affidavit without the assistance of a Notary, therefore, no benefit was received therefrom.
_____________________________
Notary Public
My commission expires: ____________________________
Notary for __________________________________ county,
____________________________________________ republic
Prepared by:___________________________________
    Mail/Post location: _____________________________________

From: R. J. Tavel, J.D.
Subject: LPU: HOW TO HANDLE A ROADBLOCK
Date: Tuesday, March 25, 1997 10:50AM
How to handle a Roadblock the Libertarian Way:
Please fasten your seat belt and keep your head and hands inside the ride at all times!
1) Wait for the Officer to ask you a question. Then say, "Sir, can you please tell me if my answer to that question is voluntary or mandatory?
2) If Officer says, "Voluntary." Then you say, "I choose not to volunteer."
3) If Officer says, "Mandatory." Then you ask, "Sir, what will you do to me if I do not answer?"
4) If Officer responses, "We'll kick the **** out of you." Then you say, "Show me the law, statute, case, or whatever it is that makes it mandatory and then I answer." or perhaps you may say, "I refuse to answer on the grounds that I may incriminate myself." or possibly you may say, "My answer is XXX under threat of bodily harm, police brutality, etc... Depending upon the situation, these answers are a matter of personal taste, providing you have the time to waste and can take the punishment.
5) If Officer responses, "You won't get out of here till you do answer the question." Then you ask for meaningful assistance of counsel to help you understand the question. After all, don't all lawyers tell you that only THEY can understand the law and legal procedure? Hope you’re not in a hurry at this point. All roadblocks are a fishing expedition waiting to harpoon every vehicle that motors within their reach and as we all know fishing expeditions take a lot of time. So, be patient or become a patient.
6) If the Officer skirts the questioning issues and wants you to consent to a search, then you say, "No, get a search warrant and then I'll comply." Never volunteer anything and keep insisting on your right to legal counsel. You no more have to answer questions for a police officer than you do a complete stranger off the streets. The secret power behind the roadblock is that every driver is duped into consenting to be searched. Many folks don't challenge an invasion of privacy because they have nothing to hide, but you still have a right to challenge that invasion, even if you don't have anything to hide. Never consent to a search without a warrant, just say "No" to protect your rights.
7) If the Officer then asks you to exit your vehicle and handcuffs you at this point. Ask him if he is placing you under arrest and on what grounds? Very likely he's not placing you under arrest, he's only handcuffing you to make it safe for him to question you further and illegally search you and your vehicle, since you've refused. The point here is that the police must tell you if they're placing you under arrest and if so what for. And once again, do not answer any questions. Demand to get meaningful assistance of counsel and counsel of choice, since it is your right to have these at every important stage of police contact, including the arrest itself if that be the case.
8) Remember all the things you read about Mirandizing you first? Well, forget it! As long as they can get you to admit to anything or consent to anything, they can use it against you, regardless of whether or not you've been mirandized. Silence is golden.
9) As far as the actual mirandizing goes, if you're one of the lucky ones who actually gets informed of their rights, then when the Officer asks you if you understand your rights, you just say, "No sir, I need legal counsel to help me understand." Be a big dummy and exercise that right to have legal counsel present and/or that right to remain silent until so provided. Sometimes you have to act ignorant to play smart.
10) Overall, you need to have a good strong attitude. Use your head, control your emotions and most of all keep your mouth shut (except to assert your rights). Don't grovel, don't complain and don't ask for anything outside of your rights, because this gives them great satisfaction and will go in their report. Remember your goal is to get them to admit anything, perjure themselves, not follow the rules, suffer as much frustration and anxiety as possible and lose in front of their friends and the press. Their goal is to INTIMIDATE you and get you to offer consent, incriminate yourself, admit to everything, skip procedural details, and wavier all your rights.
Alas, the above information should help you obtain a heap of procedural errors to line up for "arguing technicalities" or appeals in the event you end up in waist chains or leg irons. In the event you just end up being harassed, you should have a fairly strong civil case for violations of your alleged constitutional rights.
When it comes to driving and personal privacy, roadblocks are the most dangerous things on the streets.
dwjohnstun@aol.com 
"Freedom begins when you tell Mrs. Grundy to go fly a kite." —Lazaurus Long
LPUtah
LPUtah — This message sent via listserver "lputah@qsicorp.com "
LPUtah — All messages are the sole responsibility of the sender.
LPUtah — Support: Jim El well, email: elwell@inconnect.com 
LPUtah
Sarah Thompson, M.D.
The Righter
PO Box 1185
Sandy, UT 84091-1185
http://www.therighter.com 
NOTE NEW ADDRESS!!

THE CODE PROJECT: A New School of Law
Introduction
A group of individuals have joined together to create a common law jurisdiction as defined in this information and reference material. The purpose is to create a self governing body of individuals which would be a true republic as described by Plato, modified by our Anglo-Saxon ancestors and mandated by the Constitution. The rules of this society are that the laws are made by litigation. The preexisting laws and principles can be found in the reference material. Other editions of the same works will not be useful as specific reference is made to page numbers, chapters, etc. The information enclosed is the beginning laws in this reformed republic. This information is provided so that students may start learning these laws to decide if they want to participate in this type of society.
The rules will limit the ability to join or ask questions until a student has the knowledge existing in these book.
1. Ongoing litigation is creating new summaries.
2. Litigation, contributions and questions on these principles are causing ongoing
modifications.
You may choose to learn common law by these methods:
1. Start learning the reference material and the enclosed summaries on your own and file a domicile proceeding. (This usually requires book purchases.)
2. Use the study course. (No books needed to start this.)
3. This system replaces all others existing effective January 15, 1998.
It is recommended that you obtain a 3 ring binder to keep these summaries in. New
address:
The Code Project
Non Domestic Mail
Suite 32
3527 Ambassador Caffery
Lafayette, La. USA 70503
Remember the information is a rough draft and subject to modification based on the results of ongoing litigation. Updates, new summaries and other material will only be sent if a self-addressed stamped envelope is furnished. Responses to questions and generally not intelligible and will probably seem confusing unless a study of this material is made and specific questions are directed to these references. The presumption is that a student is wasting time by not studying first.

Foreword
The goal of these summaries and this study material is to restart a common law society such as ones existing in this country in the last century. The method used is this:
1. A jurisdiction was formed in 1993.
2. The laws of the courts on common pleas existing before the civil war were adopted.
3. The members who submit to this system of justice are learning how to enforce these laws in government courts.
4. The old laws are now being modified by litigation and summaries to fit the needs of our present society.
The recreated jurisdiction will be a society of self-governing people. The base law will be the old common law rather than government law. 100 years of public law making has created a society that is contrary to our basic nature as a Christian nation. This process will allow this group of people to reject that which is unsatisfactory and retain laws favorable to our inherent nature.
This study should take about a year depending on the individual effort and ability. It works like this:
1. An individual who is working with this information will file a proceeding in Federal Court.
2. The response or results of the government court action is reviewed by the writers.
3. The summaries are then adjusted to prevent others from making the same mistakes.
4. The new information is then made available to those who desire to participate in the ongoing process.
The material is generally adjusted to prevent others from making the same mistakes in this manner:
1. Individuals are required to leam the common law from the books in the study guide before proceeding.
2. Common law judgments issue in accordance to these summaries, prior litigations and the books.
3. Successful litigation becomes part of the code.
The ability of new students to follow and understand this process is determined by requiring them to engage in litigation to become common law citizens. Litigators who can read, understand and use code are allowed to proceed. Individuals who can't are prevented and engaging in litigation or becoming citizens without the help of someone who is a citizen. The principal being adopted is that the members will not teach law to those who won't use these reference sources and/or these books.
The summaries are principles of common law, which control the subsequent actions of the justices who issue common law orders to enforce. The summaries represent very little new law but are simply a restatement (or gathering) of existing common law and principles as found in the study materials.
The summaries are simply an update of Blackstone's and Bouvier's to the law to this country and this particular jurisdiction. This is the primary information:
1. They are in order of the study courses and may be rough drafts.
2. Each is written and modified freely as required.
3. A written question may result in a summary.
4. Members (citizens) or law students are authorized to submit summaries without restrictions.
5. As common law rights and court cases are discovered the summaries are amended to conform with the best information available to the writers.
6. An ongoing court case, review by others, newly discovered books and joining with other jurisdictions may cause modification.
7. A summary may result from common rights established by individuals attempting to live by common law.
8. The wording may be updated from prior common law but the law or circumstances force change out of necessity.
9. The civil code (read government law) is construed to be in conformance to common law and the summaries are modified as civil code rights are found and litigated.
10. Modem technology causes minor changes.
Do not perceive that you will learn common law from this source. You will only be shown where the common law can be found. When you understand the process of how to change or modify these summaries you may start a citizenship action. The primary principles of English common law are found in Blackstone's Commentaries. Some of the laws of the United States of America and word definitions are found in Bouvier's.

Changing United States Citizenship
Corporations legally avoid United States income tax laws each and every day by changing domicile. This is done by lawyers creating a "paper corporation" in a place like the Cayman Islands. The paper corporation is then registered with that jurisdiction and the assets of the United States corporations "legally move" to the Cayman Islands while the plants and headquarters (the physical presence) remain in this country.
This process is called acquiring a foreign domicile. Foreign domicile simply means "legal home" that is not the United States. This legal right also exist for individuals who are now considered United States citizens. The following problems exist when the average individual attempts this:
1. It takes a trained lawyer who charges a very large fee to accomplish abrogation of US citizenship.
2. It requires a person trained in this type of litigation to resolve the resulting problems in the event of legal disputes.
3. Individuals may lose certain advantages that exist in an organized society (such as availability to public schooling, welfare, etc.).
To overcome these problems a group of people have joined together to recreate a "foreign jurisdiction" that existed before the United States was formed. This nation was called the United States of America. This foreign jurisdiction overcomes the problems of changing domicile in this manner:
1. It trains individuals in the manner of legally changing domicile under United States law.
2. It provides a legal system that creates documents to support this move or change of domicile.
3. It trains the individuals how to litigate these issues in United States courts.
4. It creates an organized society with laws to retain the advantages lost by abrogation of US citizenship.
The move to a common law domicile requires the individual to make the following decisions:
1. You must agree to abide by the laws of an organized society already existing that has different laws.
2. You must either become trained in law or join under the protection of someone who is trained since this society does not have enough lawyers at this time.
3. This implies you must be willing to spend a certain amount of time and money acquiring a legal knowledge of to help someone with your litigation.
The money amount is small compared to what you are required to pay under income tax laws. The time element is considerable but worth it when you consider that under United States tax laws you are probably paying over 35% of everything you make to support the society to which you are now a member.
The problem with starting a jurisdiction is that it requires a very large set of laws to litigate virtually anything. This was overcome by adopting the laws of the old jurisdiction. These old laws were called the "common law".
Article 4 of the Constitution mandates the government to give full faith and credit to every jurisdiction that exists. The founding members of the jurisdiction simply recreated the old common law state that was brought over from England to this country. This is the nation that formed our present government. This is the jurisdiction that is referred to in Amendment VII. to the Constitution of the United States. The legal right to perform the act of recreating (or creating) a common law state is written in Amendment IX.:
"The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
The legal reasoning is based on these points of law:
1. The common law jurisdiction was the method used by the settlers of this country to resolve disputes prior to the formation of the governments.
2. The people always retained the right to go to common law and resolve disputes (this is Article 1, Section 9, Clause 2 and Amendment VII.) even after governments and civil courts were formed.
3. The government was never given the specific right to form or organize common law jurisdictions. (Governments were only authorized to enforce common law judgments.)
The effect of these laws is that the people of this country have a right to be self governing if they simply learn how to live under these preexisting laws. This allows various societies to coexist (such as Indians and US citizens) provided that a "jurisdiction" (or state) exists in which differences may be litigated. This means if you want to live in a "foreign state" under "foreign laws" you must first learn the laws and then join the jurisdiction under which this can be done.
The laws of this recreated jurisdiction are based on these concepts of self government:
1. The primary laws are the Ten Commandments.
2. The judicial actions of the people living under and interpreting the Ten Commandments were called jury trials. (This is the jury trial protected in Amendment VII. - not a government jury trial.)
3. The body of law (the accumulated jury decisions) are the rules of laws of the state and is called "common law".
4. The government entity created by this common law society was called the United States.
5. The document controlling and limiting the power of this government body is called the Constitution.
Recreating a "common law" jural society that preexisted the government makes the people of that nation self governing.
The beginning laws of this recreated jurisdiction are currently evolving based on the fact that litigation is ongoing to re-establish this society. Individuals who have changed domicile under United States law are doing this litigation.
The college courses derived from this litigation will give you an explanation of how this type of law system works in conjunction with government court actions based on the litigation that is now ongoing. The books are being used to teach enforcement of common law judgments to those individuals who have the desire to be a member of a self governing society.
You may order the courses which will provide you with more information. This information is available based on the following principles:
1. The writers have undertaken this project for the purpose of teaching common law litigation.
2. You only need to read the enclosed materials before determining if you want more information.
3. They are copied originals in an 8 1/2 x 11 format.
4. Some of the material is under litigation and is modified as a result of ongoing court actions.
5. A list of study materials will be in the first mailing which will provide you with all of the information you will need to do your own research.
6. The first packet will give you enough information to determine if you wish to participate in this type of society and start learning its laws.
Think about this pledge and the fact that the government has banned it from the "public school" system:
"I pledge allegiance the flag of the United States of America and the Republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."
That is the republic which has been reformed. See Bouvier's law dictionary for the legal description and court cases about this nation.
You may request the first lesson from:
The College of Common Law
Non Domestic Mail
3527 Ambassador Caffery Box 32
Lafayette, La. USA 70503
Send a 9 x 12 self addressed stamped envelope. The postage cost is $1.20. A copy of the
first lesson shall be sent in the envelope you furnish if it is not with this packet.
The internet address for more information is:
www.mindspring.com/~bjrepro
Background - Effective January 22, 1999

Republic of Texas
AFFIDAVIT OF CITIZENSHIP INFORMATION AND DECLARATION
	Full Name	
Height:_______ Weight:_______ Hair Color:_______ Eye Color:_________
Sex:_________
Date of Birth:_______________ Address:___________________________________ city of
Domicile:________________________________________________
county of Domicile:________________________________________ district of
Domicile:________________________________________________
I, _______________________________________, hereby affirm the following facts are true,
Correct and complete, according to my personal first hand knowledge.
1.1 was born in city_____________________________,county____________________________
state/republic_________________________________,country____________________________
on date_________________________________.
2.1 currently reside in ____________________________________, County, Texas.
3.1 have no disabilities which would prevent me from making this affidavit.
4.1 am a sovereign, freeman character, who does and desires to operate and conduct my affairs
under the Common Law in the Republic of Texas.
5.1 have never knowingly, intentionally or voluntarily, become a citizen of any de facto nation or
corporate entity, and hereby revoke all powers of attorney with any State, nation or corporate
entity, towit, I hereby renounce any such citizenship. 
6.1 am not wanted for or under indictment for any crime in Texas or abroad under the Common Law.
7. This Affidavit is not made under threat, duress or coercion and without deception for purposes of evasion.
8. This affidavit is made pursuant to the General Provisions, Section 6 of the Constitution for the Republic of Texas, as amended August 29,1994.
9. If any part of this Affidavit is found to be fraudulent, it will be null and void and I will be
subject to prosecution under all applicable law. 
10.1 hereby attest that I will support and defend the Constitution and Laws of the Republic of Texas.
Date: _____________________    Citizen signature:_________________________________
Witnessed at Law by:
signature:_____________________________________
signature:_____________________________________
-FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY-
Affidavit received and recorded:___________________________ Name of recording
official:_________________________________
Property Identification Number:___________________________ Signature of recording
official:_________________________________

MEMO ON SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER
When you review Public Agencies Opposed to Social Security Entrapment v. Margaret M. Heckler, 613 F. Supp. 558 and the subsequent appellate proceedings, you'll be entertained to know that as early as the late seventies, government employees, not to mention private citizens, were surrendering out the social security program. The Congress wrote a statute to force them in, claiming an interest in the public welfare, but the government lost. Hundreds of thousands of public employees during the mid 1980s successfully liberated themselves out of this fraudulent scheme.
Social security is a government benefit administered by the United States within its territories. It began with FDR's "New Deal," the political platform upon which he was elected to office only a few years after the stock market crash of 1929. In true form of government creating a need for itself, FDR and his banker cronies from Great Britain engineered the crash of '29 and you'll find this proved adequately in the Appendix to the Congressional Record of 1940.
"It was told to me by a heavyweight American financier before the crash came
that the crash was coming, that it would be permitted to run to the danger point,
and that when the danger point was passed it would be reversed by measures
carefully prepared in advance to meet the situation.",
Appendix to the Congressional Record, 1940
After the Social Security Act of 1935, the governors of each state of the union were extorted into participating in this scheme under threat of an enormous tax imposed by the United States. Their submission allowed them to defer this burden onto the citizens as we see it in operation today, that was the "Deal." They may withdraw at any time but they'd lose their subscription to monopoly money. Federal Reserve Notes.
I have a letter from my congressman which admits that he can find no law requiring anyone to either use or apply for a social security number as a condition of contract in America. It took me seven months to get this confession and he even lied to me on one occasion, but recanted when he learned that I knew better. Part 301.6109-l(c) of the Code of Federal Regulations states that if someone is going to pay you money, then he must ask you for a social security number. If you refuse, he is required by regulation to tell you that you must give him one and that it's required by law. Obviously, it's not required by law but he is required to tell you that. In other words, the regulation requires him to lie. After you refuse to disclose a number for the second time, his next obligation is to attach an affidavit to any statements he's required to file using your number stating that he's fulfilled his requirement to ask you for a social security number.
In other words, when it comes to disclosing a social security number, no one, absolutely no one, can require you to do it just so he can meet his own filing requirements. Please review Greidinger v. Davis, 988 F.2d 1344. The social security tax is a mandatory tax placed only on the receipt of wages. If you're not earning wages, you have no social security tax liability.
I have held three jobs in the past four years without having to submit any social security number or sign any federal forms and without paying one federal income tax on my pay. I currently have a checking account, insurance, three drivers licenses, a passport, one credit card, various telephone services, mail service, and an apartment lease, all with no social security number. I've never had to file a lawsuit to enforce my right to contract without a social security number.
A client recently brought a case to me where the IRS wanted to penalize him thousands of dollars for several tax returns in which he claimed his children as dependents while they had no social security numbers. They still have no numbers and I encouraged him to keep it that way and educate his children about this fraud. This is what we found:
Prior to August 20th, 1996, Section 6109(e) of the Code required disclosure of social security numbers for dependents claimed on tax returns; however, it was repealed on August 20th, 1996 (Pub. L. 104-188, Title I, § 1615(a)(2)(A), Aug. 20, 1996, 110 Stat. 1853)
Prior to December 19, 1989, there was a $5 penalty for failing to supply the TIN of a dependent claimed on a tax return. This appeared under Section 6676(e) until it was repealed on December 19th, 1989:
"Penalty for failure to supply TIN of dependent
If any person required under section 6109(e) to include the TIN of any dependent on his return fails to include such number on such return (or includes an incorrect number), such person shall, unless it is shown that such failure is due to reasonable cause and not willful neglect, pay a penalty of $5 for each such failure." 
Repealed. Pub. L. 101-239, Title VII, § 7711(b)(l), Dec. 19, 1989, 103 Stat. 2393
The Problems Resolution Officer is having a fit because she's going to have to abate the penalties because there's no law to enforce them!
Here is the current statute relating to deductions for dependents having no SSN: 26 USC § 151
"(e) Identifying information required
No exemption shall be allowed under this section with respect to any individual unless the TIN of such individual is included on the return claiming the exemption." 
As of January 6th, 1997, there was no monetary penalty for not using an SSN for your children when claiming them as dependents on a tax return. The penalty statute of $5 was repealed in December of 1989 and the "6109 (e) requirement" was repealed in August of 1996. In essence, the time between 1989 and 1996 in which the "requirement" was a statute, was not enforceable because the penalty statute was not in force. It seems now that the only "penalty" is not being able to claim your children as dependents. I would encourage everyone doing this to refuse to get your children a number just to claim them, as it would be equivalent to selling them to the government, or putting a price on their heads. There's a good chance you shouldn't be signing a Form W-4 or filing a tax return anyway.

2.   Briefs/Filings
Earlier sections of this book dealt with the interaction between members of the movement and those involved in the day-to-day operation of courts. One cannot effectively appreciate the friction that exists in that juncture without seeing the types of things those members of the movement actually try to DO in the courtroom (constitutional driver's license anyone?). Following are a few examples, not only of things done in "real" courts, but also things that members of the movement do in their common law courts and then try to have ratified officially by filing them in a "real" court.
County of______________________________
OFFICE OF THE CLERIC
____________________________________, Michigan

COMMON LAW VEHICULAR JUDICIAL NOTICE CONSTITUTIONAL DRIVERS LICENSE

THE UNDERSIGNED Common Law Citizen___________________________: hereby Certifies, by Rights
Secured under provisions of the Constitution of the United States of America, the Constitution of the several states. Common Law, Nature and Laws of Natures GOD, that these Rights are retained in FEE SIMPLE ABSOLUTE, and held and protected with special regard to Rights designated and/or set forth as follows: ALSO NOTE Rights and Property are ONE AND THE SAME THING-by the Honorable Justice LOUIS BRANDIS U.S. SUPREME COURT. NOTICE AND ADVISORY OF RIGHTS CLAIMED INVIOLATE:
1) The Right to TRAVEL FREELY, UNENCUMBERED, and UNFETTERED is guaranteed as a RIGHT and not a mere privilege. That the Right to TRAVEL is such a BASIC RIGHT it does NOT even need to be mentioned for it is SELF-evident by Common Sense that the Right to TRAVEL is a BASIC CONCOMMITANT of a FREE Society to come and go from length and breath FREELY UNENCUMBERED and UNFETTERED distinguishes the characteristic required for a FREE PEOPLE TO EXIST IN FACT. Please See SHAPIRO vs. THOMSON, 394 U. S. 618 . Further, the Right to TRAVEL by private conveyance for private purposes upon the Common way can NOT BE INFRINGED. No license or permission is required for TRAVEL when such TRAVEL IS NOT for the purpose of (COMMERCIAL] PROFIT OR GAIN on the open highways operating under license IN COMMERCE. The above named Common Law Citizen listed IS NOT OPERATING IN COMMERCE and as such is thereby EXEMPTED FROM THE REQUIREMENT OF A LICENSE AS SUCH. Further, the ____________________________ state, is FORBIDDEN BY LAW from converting a BASIC RIGHT into a PRIVILEGE and requiring a LICENSE and or a FEE CHARGED for the exercise of the BASIC RIGHT. Please SEE MURDOCK vs. PENNSYLVANIA, 319 U.S. 105, and if________________________, state does ERRONIOUSLY convert BASIC RIGHTS into PRIVILEGES and require a License or FEE a Citizen may IGNORE THE LICENSE OR FEE WITH TOTAL IMMUNITY FOR SUCH EXERCISE OF A BASIC RIGHT. Please see Schuttlesworth vs. BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA, 373 U.S. 262. Now if a Citizen exercises a BASIC RIGHT and a Law of ANY state is to the contrary of such exercise of that BASIC RIGHT, the said supposed Law of ANY state is a FICTION OF LAW and 100% TOTALLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL and NO COURTS ARE BOUND TO UPHOLD IT AND NO Citizen is REQUIRED TO OBEY SUCH UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAW OR LICENSE REQUIREMENT. Please see MARBURY vs. MADISON, 5 U.S. 137 (1803), which has never been overturned in over 194 years, see Shephard's Citations. Now further, if a Citizen relies in good faith on the advice of Counsel and or on the Decisions of the UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT that Citizen has a PERFECT DEFENSE to the element of WILLFULNESS and since the burden of proof of said WILLFULNESS is on the Prosecution to prove beyond a REASONABLE DOUBT, said task or burden being totally impossible to specifically perform there is NO CAUSE OF ACTION FOR WHICH RELIEF MAY BE GRANTED BY A COURT OF LAW. Please see U.S. vs. Bishop 412 U.S. 346 . OBVIOUSLY THERE IS NO LAWFUL CHARGE AGAINST EXERCISING A BASIC Right to TRAVEL for a regular Common Law Citizen NOT IN COMMERCE on the common way Public HIGHWAY. THAT IS THE LAW!!! The above named Citizen IS IMMUNE FROM ANY CHARGE TO THE CONTRARY AND ANY PARTY MAKING SUCH CHARGE SHOULD BE DULY WARNED OF THE TORT OF TRESPASS!!! YOU ARE TRESPASSING ON THIS Common Law Citizen!!!
2) The original and Judicial jurisdiction of the United States Supreme Court is ALL actions in which a State may be party, thru subdivision, political or trust. This includes ALL state approved subdivisions and/or INCORPORATED Cities, Townships, Municipalities, and Villages, Et Al. Please see Article 3, Section 2, Para. (1) and (2), U.S. Constitution.
3) The undersigned has NEVER willingly and knowingly entered into ANY Contract or Contractual agreement giving up ANY Constitutional Rights which are secured by the CONSTITUTION, the SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND. This Common Law Citizen has NOT harmed any party, has NOT threatened any party, and that includes has NOT threatened or caused any endangerment to the safety or well being of any party and would leave any claimant otherwise to their strictest proofs otherwise IN A COURT OF LAW. The above named Citizen is merely exercising the BASIC RIGHT TO TRAVEL UNENCUMBERED and UNFETTERED on the Common public way or highway, which is their RIGHT TO SO DO!!! Please see Zobel vs. Williams, 457 U.S. 55, held the RIGHT TO TRAVEL is Constitutionally PROTECTED!!
4) Conversion of the RIGHT TO TRAVEL into a PRIVILEGE and or CRIME is A FRAUD and is in clear and direct conflict with she UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND. LAWS made by any state, which are clearly in direct CONFLICT or REPUGNANCY are UNCONSTITUTIONAL and are NOT WITH STANDING IN LAW AND ARE BEING CHALLENGED AS SUCH HERE AND THEREBY ARE NULL AND VOID OF LAW ON THEIR FACE. NO COURTS ARE BOUND TO UPHOLD SUCH FICTIONS OF LAW AND NO Citizen is bound to obey such a FICTION OF LAW. SUCH REGULATION OR LAW OPERATES AS A MERE NULLITY OR FICTION OF LAW AS IF IT NEVER EXISTED IN LAW. No CITIZEN IS BOUND TO OBEY SUCH UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAW!!!!!
5) The payment for a privilege requires a benefit to be received As the RIGHT TO TRAVEL is already secured it is clearly unlawful to cite any charges without direct damage to the specific party. Nor may a Citizen be charged with an offense for the exercise of a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT, in this case the RIGHT TO TRAVEL. Please see Miller vs. UNITED STATES 230 F2d 486. Nor may a Citizen be denied DUE PROCESS OF LAW or EQUAL PROTECTION UNDER THE LAW.
6) The undersigned does hereby claim, declare, and certify ANY AND ALL their CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS INVIOLATE from GOD and secured in THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION and the CONSTITUTION OF THE state wherein they abode as a SOVEREIGN, COMMON LAW CITIZEN existing and acting entirely AT THE COMMON LAW, and retains ALL BASIC RIGHTS under the CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, NATURE AND NATURE'S GOD AND UNDER THE LAWS OF GOD THE SUPREME LAW GIVER.
7) ANY VIOLATOR OF THE ABOVE CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE AND CLAIM IS CRIMINALLY TRESPASSING UPON THIS ABOVE NAMED COMMON LAW Citizen and WILL BE PROSECUTED TO THE FULLEST EXTENT UNDER THE SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND. BE WARNED OF THE TRESPASS AND THE ATTACHED CAVEATS. ALSO TAKE CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE, IGNORANCE OF THE LAW IS NOT AN EXCUSE!!
SIGNATURE OF THE ABOVE NOTED Common Law Citizen is signed_____________________________
WITNESS___________________________ Date_________
WITNESS___________________________ Date_________
or
NOTARY PUBLIC_______________________ MY COMMISSION
EXPIRES__________________
Form below use for County Clerk state of MICHIGAN COUNTY OF_______________________
1, _________________________________________, CLERK of the County of
___________________________________________, thereof do hereby certify the
Citizen above named has sworn to the contents of this document and that same is TRUE AND CORRECT. IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, I have hereto set my hand and affixed the SEAL of said CIRCUIT COURT, at the City of _________________________________, MICHIGAN this
___________day of________________________, AD._____________
_________________________________________________________Deputy County Clerk for
_________________________________________________________COUNTY CLERK

[Eds. NB: note the capitalization and placement of the commas in a militiaman's name. Often they will take exception to allcaps for their name ("JOHN QUINCY DOE," not "John Quincy Doe"] or take similar exception to the absence of a comma between their "given" name and their "surname" (this fails to adequately represent their "Christian name," i.e., "JOHN QUINCY DOE" is significantly different from "John Quincy, Doe." This plays a hefty role in a militiaman's challenge to a court's jurisdiction, as seen in the following 2 documents.]

ABATEMENT-Taxes
Letter Rogatory Re: CLTLR-__________________________
Article in; Article TV, section one "Common Law Abatement" for publication by our clerk upon default of named respondents thirty days after verified proof of due service Affidavit by writ of supervisory control 
From: Office of Clerk of Court
Common Law Supreme Court for ______________________________ Republic
Division of the Courts'-Original Jurisdiction
For the People In and for _________________ county, __________________ state
united states of America
Please communicate via mail with above Court: Office of Clerk of Court
[Address]
NON-DOMESTIC
To: Clerk of the United States Tax Court
400 Second Street, NW
Washington, DC 20217
Re:______________________________________________
accusing
UNITED STATES TAX COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
supreme Court Docket Number:
CLTLR-___________________________________
Dear Court Clerk:
I, ________________________________, duly authorized supreme Court Justice hereby makes this affidavit of necessity under our law of descent through our law of nations in our peculiar venue and jurisdiction presenting this public notice of commercial disclosure to abate all nisi prices process commenced by the aforementioned federal corporation through its agents, said commencement having been induced by actual fraud and construction of cause. I hereby testify to:
One In matters concerning a NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY be advised a presentment was tendered but of necessity the said presentment was not in due form in our peculiar venue, therefore refused as a fraud under routine of commercial dishonor "without recourse."
Second In matters concerning a INCOME TAX EXAMINATION CHANGES be advised a presentment was tendered but of necessity the said presentment was not in due form in our peculiar venue, therefore refused as a fraud under routine of commercial dishonor "without recourse."
Two matters of fraud:
____________________________, sui juris in law, a native born Caucasian, a "state" in fact by the
special character of the party, invoking all unalienable God given Right of Inheritance in Law has chosen to proceed in my own right, obligation and power to choose the Applicable Law, within the proper territorial application in which I was born, waiving none presents the following to wit:
__________________, COMMISSIONER and ___________________, DISTRICT
DIRECTOR acting without scope of her authority as agent for the INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE has issued unlawful process against me, under presumption of commercial entity or public policy limited liability addressed to _______________________, said presumption of fraud.
(Complainant) hereby makes notice of commercial dishonor to the legislative assembly created tribunal and its agents to abate the above described NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY on the following grounds:
One) said NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY against (Complainant) was presented into my hand on the ______ day of the _________________________ month of ___________ year Anno Domini. I am noticing the legislative tribunal executive court to abate the instrument so that said instrument in present form cannot be used to further damage me.
Two) that the instrument presented to me is evidence of misnomer or mistaken identity. Said instrument is against a fictitious name, ________________________. My name, a Christian name is ________________________________under Rules of English. My family name is ___________________, the first letter capitalized. My name is not on the instrument. The TIN/SSN associated with my name is incorrect and doesn't belong to me.
Three) the accuser must bring process against me under a lawful writ in my Christian name. The primary purpose of this abatement is to correct insufficient matters in law, therefore my real name is my sui juris venue.
Four) this is by due notice an abatement in proper forum, a plea in bar in our King's bench under no titles of nobility. It is properly abated in our one supreme Court. You, the respondents, have only thirty days to answer.
Five) by this matter in abatement (your term) the burden of proof shifts upon your nisi prius tribunal to disprove your elements of fraud.
Six) said UNITED STATES TAX COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA WASHINGTON D.C. must abate the matters of NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY UNNUMBERED, identified by TIN __________-_____-__________ or file a written response within thirty days of receipt of this Common Law venue (non-statutory) abatement, showing why the abatement should not be imposed in Law by our Court of first and last resort. All matters in Law must be supported by documentation.
Seven) failure to timely answer this supreme Court abatement will constitute a default by our declaratory judgment ex parte of necessity, subjecting said respondents to civil and criminal causes of action in this one supreme Court. You will become subject to your own contractual punishment: under your United States Codes Title 42, 18, 28, 19, 5 et al. Also under Private International Law for criminal conversion of private securities. A supreme Court lis pendens hage already been duly served and recorded in and for _____________________ county in our country of _______. Your response should be marked with the Sheriffs cause number mailed to our location in care of_________________________. One In matters concerning an INCOME TAX EXAMINATION CHANGES, misnomered to one ____________________ (The problem here is ALLCAPS – complainant objects to their use) teste meipso this _______ day of the _________________ month in the _______________ year, Anno Domini
Thank You,
__________________________________________________
(Complainant) 
supreme court Justice
__________________________________________________
Clerk of "Common Law Supreme Court"
__________________________________________________
united states of America country of ___________________________ (Organic)) SS Affidavit of Return/Service ___________________________ county, (de jure))
I, ______________________________________, Special appointed Marshall, hereby attest and acknowledge that I did serve upon the above named party by contract via Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested.

Mail# _______________________this Letter Rogatory, Common Law Abatement. 
Date

___________________________________________________
Special Appointed Marshall

ABATEMENT-General
Respond to: [First Middle, Last Name], sui juris
Common Law supreme court for _________________
[First Middle, Last Name], sui Juris ) Docket Number: _______________
(Demandant,) (Part One against,) Non-Statutory Abatement
NON-STATUTORY ABATEMENT By (First Middle, Last Name], sui juris
In the matter of: Oregon Uniform Citations and Complaint Summon(s) re: Dated: _ SEPTEMBER, __, No.__, No. __, No. __, Dated: _ OCTOBER __, No. __, No. ___, apparently sent to "[FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL LAST]" (sic); which citation bears no lawful signature, which citation bears no seal of a real court; which Citation No.___ alleges that "failure to carry or present a license" is a "crime," not an infraction.
In the matter of: Form letter re: Dated: ______ October ______ alleging a NOTICE TO APPEAR (sic), alleging "DOCKET #: No.______, ______, ______, (sic), alleging "$332.00" fine/bail (sic), apparently sent to "[FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL LAST]" (sic); alleging "ARREST" (sic), which form letter bears no lawful signature, which form letter bears no seal of a real court;
In the matter of: Form letter re: Dated: _______ alleging a NOTICE TO APPEAR (sic), alleging "DOCKET #: ________ (sic), alleging "$_________" (sic), apparently sent to "[FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL LAST]" (sic); alleging "ARREST" (sic), which form letter bears no lawful signature, which form letter bears no seal of a real court;
To All and Sundry Whom These Presents Do or May Concern:
INTRODUCTION
This is a non-statutory abatement issued pursuant to Common law rules applicable to such cases, against "CITY OF _______ MUNICIPAL COURT", a created de facto
legal fiction, possibly a corporation and its agent, the "PERSON OF __________"
(sic), located at "CITY OF ______ MUNICIPAL COURT" (sic), _________ and DEPUTY _______, ___COUNTY
SHERIFF'S OFFICE, ____________which are imposing provisions of a contract
counter to public morals, in the Nature of a praemunire.

Part One of this matter shall be known as Non-Statutory Abatement and contains the following documents titled:
1. Non-Statutory Abatement; and,
2. Verification.
Chapter One
Return of Papers and Averments
Please find enclosed the following mailed items:
Citations (five) and form letters (two) to "[FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL LAST]" (sic). All papers were received, but are not accepted.
These items are refused for cause without dishonor and without recourse to me, and are returned, herewith, because they are irregular and unauthorized, based upon the following to wit:
COMES NOW, [First Middle, Last Name], sui juris, a Free and Natural ______, a private Christian, grateful to Almighty God for my Liberty, and humbly Extend Greetings and Salutations to you from. Our Creator, Jesus, The Christ, and Myself by Visitation, to exercise Ministerial Powers in this Matter, to return your papers, which papers were received, but not accepted.
Mark my words:
First:
Mark: Your papers do not have upon their face My full Christian Appellation in upper and lower case letters, nor, do the additions in the compilation upon the items, herewith returned, apply to me; and,
Second:
Mark: Your papers allege violations of a law, foreign to My Venue, which, no Oath, Promise, or law attaches Me thereto; and,
Third:
Mark: Your office is not established in the Oregon Constitution; and, 
Fourth:
Mark: Your papers have no foundation in Law; for the reason, they are not from an office recognized by We The People or the General Laws of Oregon; and,
Fifth:
Mark: Your papers lack jurisdictional facts necessary to place or bring Me within your venue;and,
Sixth:
Mark: Your papers are unintelligible to Me; based upon the following. They are not written in Proper English; being such, they fail to apprise Me of the Nature of any matter alleged, if in fact your allegations have any foundations; and, 
Seventh:
Mark: Your papers fail to affirmatively show, upon their face, lawful authority for your presence in My Venue; and,
Eighth:
Mark: Your papers fail to affirmatively show, upon their face, the necessity for your entry upon My Privacy; and,
Ninth:
Mark: Your papers fail to affirmatively show, upon their face, your authority to violate or disparage Me in any way; and,
Tenth:
Mark: Your papers have no Warrant in Law and are not Judicial in Nature; and, 
Eleventh:
Mark: Your papers are not sealed with authority recognized in Oregon; and, 
Twelfth:
Mark: Your papers are not lawfully signed by hand, in ink and fail to show from whom they issue and thereby do not establish any nexus between Myself and your office; and,
Thirteenth:
Mark: Your papers fail to disclose any legal connection between Myself and your office; and,
Fourteenth:
Mark: The foreign venue, "STATE OF _______" (sic) is not recognized as a judicial district in this sovereign republic as the word "OF" in the phrase "STATE OF ______" (sic) denotes belonging to or coming from. In both cases, the "STATE OF _______" (sic) is an inferior entity, if it exists at law at all, and is being used by you for malicious and vexatious purposes; and
Fifteenth:
Mark: Your papers are "incomplete and defective", upon their face, due to insufficient Law.
Sixteenth:
Mark: Your papers indicate a method of "paying" your alleged debt which is in conflict with the only supreme law in this republic, specifically article XI Section I of the _______ Constitution.
Chapter Two:
Returned Papers are Not Judicial First:
WHEREAS, pursuant to constitutional due process requirements, the Criminal Code of the State of __________, approved the First day of May in the year Eighteen Hundred Sixty Five A.D., and the Constitution of________ Article VII amended, approved the Eighth day of November in the year Nineteen Hundred Ten A.D., "_______, CITY OF ________ MUNICIPAL COURT" (sic) employee is not a State Judicial Officer having power to issue orders or judgments of any kind; and
WHEREAS,"_________" (sic) agent for "CITY OF ___________ MUNICIPAL COURT" (sic) posing to act judicially, and in collusion with ________ and the ________ COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE, has in fact set upon the highway in disguise for malicious and vexatious purposes under color of law and without authority from We The People on ________ republic; that said agent is in fact appointed under the authority of the Governor of the STATE OF ______ acting under military rule and the bankruptcy receivership of the International Monetary Fund and/or the Federal Reserve Board with its agents the Treasury Department and the Internal Revenue Service acting under non-Constitutionally-compliant hypothecated authority and as such, said agent of the Governor,"__________ ____", and said agent of the entity "CITY OF___________ MUNICIPAL COURT" (sic) are not Judicial Officers of this republic or nation and have no power to issue orders of judgment of any kind and WHEREAS, returned papers concerning an attempt to unlawfully impose a contract, imposes upon My Right of Privacy; and
WHEREAS, My Privacy is a Constitutionally secured Right; and
THEREFORE, returned papers concerning an attempt to unlawfully impose a contract, are harassment and a public nuisance.
Second:
WHEREAS, the "CITY OF ________ MUNICIPAL COURT" (sic) is attempting to use a form of money inimical to public welfare according to the standard set by the ______ Constitution, of November 9, 1857, Article XI, Section 1, said Article continuing to today, and, the Constitution for the united states of America, at Article 1,Section 10; and
THEREFORE, the threatened unlawfully imposed contract is contra bonos mores. Third:
WHEREAS, returned papers contain the corporate name: "STATE OF _________", which terminology, to Me, is vexatious as I know that anything which is "OF" something is not the thing itself, that the word "OF" has about it the meaning of "belonging to" or "coming from", and is therefore sorely confusing and is obviously not an entity which has any lawful standing at law; and
WHEREAS, returned papers contain the extraneous numbers "_______", yet showing no lawful day, month, or year, which terminology to Me is confusing, for the reason that I reckon time in years of Our Messiah, Jesus, The Christ, but not by any mark of the beast number alleged as assigned to Me by any one or any person; and
WHEREAS, returned papers contains the meaningless numbers and letters of No.___, ___, ___, said numbers and letters being sorely vexatious as these numbers appeared on papers handed me and which were immediately refused for good and lawful cause and said papers are now "dead" for any commercial or other purpose, and, therefore, referencing these numbers can only have been done for malicious, capricious, arbitrary and immoral purposes; and
WHEREAS, provisions of the peoples moral law forbids Me use of the corporate STATE OF ____ since it has no lawful standing; and
WHEREAS, provisions of the peoples moral law forbids Me use of said numbers and papers and said reckoning of time; and
THEREFORE, returned papers contain scandalous matter all to My harm. Fourth:
WHEREAS, pursuant to The Political Code of_____, approved the First Day of May in the Year Eighteen Hundred Sixty Five A.D., previously mentioned "CITY OF ______ MUNICIPAL COURT" (sic), a created de facto legal-a corporation and its agent the "PERSON OF _____" are legal persons subject to the jurisdiction of
this state as are DEPUTY _____, _____ COUNTY SHERIFF'S
OFFICE, P.O. BOX ____, ____, ____, ____; and
Fifth:
WHEREAS, I have no contract with, and "__________" and _________ were both personally served with "ACTUAL AND LAWFUL CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE" of the fact that I have no contract with the STATE OF _________, and I have no contract with you, and neither the STATE OF _______ nor you have a valid power of attorney to act for me in any manner whatsoever, yet you, in violation of the law, in contravention of the public morality and the peace of the community and the tranquility of We the People, did knowingly enter a plea of "not guilty" on my behalf in some manner which is not within your power or scope of any assumed or alleged authority. This act you performed without any lawful authority and in addition, if you were to have some actual authority over said matter, which you do not, your action constitutes practicing law from the bench, an act which is punishable by a multitude of means.
Sixth:
WHEREAS, ______, ____ COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE and your agents in the _________ COUNCIL including but not limited to ___________, CITY ATTORNEY, have threatened me, a Citizen of the republic of_____ with arrest, incarceration, impoundment of my vehicles, and liens against my property because of a knowingly illegal action on your part: ______ code atl33.080 specifically prohibits such actions, even if you had authority to act against me, which you do not.
Now, therefore:
I am returning all of your papers, and shall, henceforth, exercise My Right of Avoidance; for the reason: they are irregular, unauthorized, defective upon their face and utterly void, malicious, slanderous and libelous, and are, herewith, abated as a public nuisance. There appear to be no factors which would warrant adjustment of the Abatement, due to a Conflict of Law.
Chapter Three:
Ordering Clauses
Pursuant to The Code of Civil Procedure: of ____, promulgated on the Thirteenth day of December, in the Year of Our Messiah, Jesus, The Christ, Nineteen Hundred Eighty, ____ 67, wherein it does say, that: "'Judgement' as used in these rules is the final determination of the rights of parties in an action; judgement includes a decree and a final judgement entered pursuant to section B or G of this rule. 'Order' as used in these rules is any other determination by a court or judge which is intermediate in nature."
Said "CITY OF ________ MUNICIPAL COURT" (sic), a created de facto leqal fiction, possibly a corporation and its agent, the "PERSON OF ________", (sic) shall abate the matter of "CITATIONS & FORM LETTERS" as referenced above, or file a written response within thirty (30) calendar days of the release of the Non-statutory Abatement, showing why the Abatement should not be imposed. Any and all written response must include a detailed factual statement and supporting documentation. Failure to respond in the time prescribed, herein, will result in a Default and default Judgement and subject Defendants to Civil and/or liabilities in pursuance of International Law and The Law of Nations.
All remittance of this instant matter should be marked with the Court Docket number, and mailed to the following location:
[First Middle, Last Name], sui juris [Address]
Any other alleged remittance from you, not marked exactly as indicated above, will be returned to you unopened and marked "NO SUCH ENTITY," or "DECEASED PERSON", and so shall it be done without obligation on My part and without recourse to Me on your part.
Wherefore;
Until this Conflict of Law is resolved, I wish you to do the following, to wit;
First:
Obtain process issued, under seal, from a Court appertaining to a bona fide _____ Judicial Department; and
Second:
That said process be based on sworn Oath or Affirmation from a competent Witness or Damaged Victim; and
Third:
That said process bear My full Christian Appellation in upper and lower case letters, and in addition, thereto, sui juris, and, must be handled and personally served upon Me by a Marshall for the Common Law Supreme Court for _______. There is no need for Me to communicate until process is legally served.
I, [First Middle, Last Name], sui juris, a Private Christian, a Free and Natural person, will, henceforth, maintain My Right of Privacy and exercise My Right of Avoidance and stand upon the grounds set out above.
Sealed by the voluntary act of My own hand on this ____ day of the ___ month in the Year of Our Savior The Messiah Jesus The Christ, nineteen-hundred ninety-__, Anno Domini, in the Two-hundred and _______ year of the Independence of our great nation.
With Explicit Reservation of All Rights, Without Prejudice
Attachment: Original papers of:
In the matter of: ________ Uniform Citations and Complaint Summon(s) re: Dated:
______, No.____, ____, ____, apparently sent to "[FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL LAST]" (sic); which citation bears no lawful signature, which citation bears no seal of a real court; which Citation No.______ alleges that "failure to carry or present a license" is a "crime," not an infraction.
In the matter of: Form letter re: Dated: __ October, ___alleging a NOTICE TO APPEAR (sic), alleging "DOCKET #: No.____, (sic), alleging "$332.00" fine/bail (sic), apparently sent to "[FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL LAST]" (sic); alleging "ARREST" (sic), which form letter bears no lawful signature, which form letter bears no seal of a real court;
In the matter of: Form letter re: Dated: ____________ alleging a NOTICE TO APPEAR (sic), alleging "DOCKET #: ________________ (sic), alleging "$____" (sic), apparently sent to "[FIRST MIDDLE INITIAL LAST]" (sic); alleging "ARREST" (sic), which form letter bears no lawful signature, which form letter bears no seal of a real court;
Common Law supreme court for ______ (_____ County)
[First Middle, Last Name], sui Juris ) Docket Number: ______________
Verification
IN WITNESS, Whereof, knowing the law of bearing false witness before God and men, I solemnly affirm, that,! have read the annexed Non-statutory Abatement and know the contents thereof, that the same is true of my own knowledge, except as to the matter which are therein stated on my information or belief, and as to those matters, I believe them to be true, materially correct, complete and certain, relevant and not misleading; the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help me God.
Scaled by the voluntary act of My own band On this, the eighth Day of the First Month in the Year of Our Messiah, Jesus, the Christ, One Thousand Nine Hundred Ninety-Six..
L.S.___________________________
With Explicit Reservation of All Rights, Without Prejudice
Let this document stand as the truth before God Almighty, and let it be established before men accordingly as the Scriptures saith: '...In the mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established."--2 Corinthians 13:1
WITNESSES: WITNESSES:

MOTION FOR DECLATATORY JUDGMENT by
Dan Meador	
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

Dan Meador, et al,

Plaintiffs,
Vs.
H. Dale Cook, et al,
Defendants.	]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]
]	

Case No. 97-CV-33-H

Authority: 29 USC §§ 2201 & 2202	

MOTION FOR DECLATATORY JUDGMENT
Now comes Dan Meador, Sui Juris, a Citizen of Oklahoma state, one of the Union of several States party to the Constitution of the United States, to petition the court for declaratory judgment under authority of 28 USC §§ 2201 & 2202.
To one degree or another, matters at issue have been addressed in pleadings entered into various controversies in the United States District Court, Northern District of Oklahoma by one or more of the complaining parties, with attorneys in the office of the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Oklahoma serving in plaintiff or defense posture, since approximately October 1995. The cases have included a 1995 criminal indictment against the Moores and Mr. Gunwall, 1996 indictments against the Moores, Mr. Gunwall and Mr. Meador, and the instant matter, the case having been filed in the Tulsa County district court. State of Oklahoma, then removed to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma. Pleadings addressing matters relating to United States District Court venue, jurisdiction, etc., application of law, the character of the Internal Revenue Service, the necessity for there being a taxing statute which identifies the service, transaction or object of tax, particulars concerning the legitimacy of documents, and a multitude of other pertinent matters have been entered into each case. To date, attorneys in the office of the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Oklahoma have evaded core constitutional questions, have failed to address the character and jurisdiction of the Internal Revenue Service, application of Internal Revenue Code taxing authority, etc., in all forums, but instead have relied on accommodation of judicial officers in the United States District Court and other courts. Of particular significance, counsel for the defendants and other attorneys in the office of the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Oklahoma have failed and refused to produce documentation necessary to establish United States plenary jurisdiction in Tulsa County, Washington County, and Kay County, Oklahoma, one of the several States party to the Constitution of the United States.
In order to resolve the long-standing and continuing controversy, it is necessary to petition the court for declaratory judgment which determines rights and legal relationships, application of law, and facts which may be judicially determined. The relief sought in the instant matter is remand of the case to the Tulsa County district court, where the trial of causes may be conducted in compliance with provisions of Article III § 2.3 of the Constitution of the United States and under such provisions of Oklahoma fundamental law as are applicable.
Matters for judicial declaratory judgment are set out as averments, as follows:
1. The United States District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma, as opposed to the district court of the United States created under chapter 5 of Title 28 of the United States Code, is an Article IV territorial court of the United States which does not have judicial authority relating to the Union of several States and the people at large as conveyed in Article III of the Constitution of the United States.
2. United States District Court authority extends only to outer boundaries of lands where the United States has properly secured jurisdiction within one of the several States in compliance with provisions for establishing United States jurisdiction as set out in 40 USC § 255; (1) the United States must acquire title to land, (2) the State legislature must cede jurisdiction, and (3) the United States must formally accept jurisdiction, with the statutory requirement stipulating, "Unless and until the United States has accepted jurisdiction ... it shall be conclusively presumed that no such jurisdiction has been accepted."
3. The statutory-legislative Article IV United States District Court imposes bills of attainder whenever it deprives the de jure American people of life, liberty, or property, said bills of attainder prohibited in Article I, Sections 9 & 10 of the Constitution, and contrary to substantial due process assurances of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.
4. Removal authority articulated in 28 USC § 1346(b) is vested in the Article HI district court of the United States, not the Article IV United States District Court (definitions, 28 USC § 451; text of § 1346(b)).
5. The removal may be made when the Attorney General certifies that the officer or employee was performing within the lawful scope of his duties (28 USC § 1346(b)), and such certification must "conclusively establish scope of office or employment for purposes of removal" (26 USC § 2679(d)(2)).
6. In the event that said certification does not conclusively demonstrate that said officer or employee of the United States was performing within the scope of his lawful duties, "the action or proceeding shall be remanded to the State court." (28 USC § (d)(3))
7. There is no authorization at 28 USC § 1346(b) or in the Federal Tort Claims Act for the "United States" to serve as substitute defendant for actors or agents of the "United States of America".
8. The Administrative Tort Claims Act is an administrative law act, it is not a judicial act which falls in the scope of the "arising under" clause, cognizable as "law or equity," at Article III § 2.1 of the Constitution of the United States.
9. The United States, via the United States District Court, does not have general jurisdiction in Kay County, Washington County, or Tulsa County, Oklahoma, but may exercise authority only with respect to lands in any of these counties where the United States has acquired jurisdiction in compliance with provisions established by statute in 40 USC § 255 and Oklahoma cession laws, particularly with respect to 80 O.S. §§ 1, 2 & 3 (see also, 18 USC § 7(3)).
10. The "United States", not the "United States of America", is authorized to acquire lands in Oklahoma and other Union states party to the Constitution of the United States (40 USC § 255; Oklahoma cession laws, 80 O.S. §§ 1, 2 & 3).
11. There is no proof of United States jurisdiction in record either in the instant matter or in the Moore-Gunwall or Meador cases, supra, prosecuted in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma, with the "United States of America" being the prosecuting party of interest.
12. The "United States", not the "United States of America", is authorized and named as plaintiff in civil matters at 28 USC § 1345, and defendant at 28 USC § 1346, and where criminal matters are concerned, the injured or prosecuting party at 18 USC § 2.
13. United States magistrate judges are former national park and other commissioners (28 USC § 631-639) who are authorized to hear misdemeanor cases in United States jurisdiction (18 USC § 3401), within the framework of regulations which utilize the United States magistrate system (28 CFR, Part 52.01 et seq., 32 CFR, Part 1290.1 et seq., and 43 CFR, Part 9260.0-1), and are not authorized even to take pleas in felony matters (Rule 5(c), Fed.R.Cr.P.).
14. Summonses and warrants issued by the United States District Court may be executed only in United States jurisdiction (Rule 4(d)(2), Fed.R.Cr.P.).
15. The Federal Bureau of Investigation is an administrative agency in the Department of Justice, with authority to investigate Title 18 U.S.C. crimes committed by officers and agents of United States Government (notes, 28 USC § 531, § 535).
16. Civilian Federal law enforcement agencies have general enforcement authority in the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, or the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (28 CFR, Part 65.70(d); P.L. 98-473 of Oct. 12, 1984, Sec. 609N(3), 98 Stat. 2104).
17. The United States may exercise general police powers in the Union of several States party to the Constitution, by way of the militia, only in the event of invasion or civil uprising (Article I § 8.15 & Article IV § 4, Constitution of the United States).
18. The Internal Revenue Service, successor of the Bureau of Internal Revenue (T.O. 150-29, 1953), is an agency of the Department of the Treasury, Puerto Rico, operating in conjunction with Puerto Rico Trust #62 (Internal Revenue) (see 31 USC § 1321 & 26 CFR, Part 301.7514-l(a)(2)(v)), and has jurisdiction only in Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, American Samoa, Guam, and other authorized areas of the world outside the continental United States (E.O. 10289, first issued Sept. 17, 1951, 16 F.R. 9499, last revised by E.O. 11825, Sept. 9, 1987 via E.O. No. 102608, 52 F.R. 34617; T.D.O. 150-42 (1956); 26 USC § 7701(a)(12)(B)).
19. The "1040" number does not designate or identify an Internal Revenue Code statute which identifies the service, transaction or object of any given tax prescribed in the Internal Revenue Code.
20. The "1040" tax reporting form is a voluntary form used to secure special refunds (26 CFR, Part 601.401(d)), and the form has no legal effect as it does not meet Paperwork Reduction Act requirements for an Office of Management and Budget number, does not disclose whether information requested is voluntary, necessary to secure a benefit, or mandatory, and does not reflect an expiration date (44 USC §§ 3501 et seq.).
21. Income tax prescribed in subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 (Vol. 68A, Statutes at Large), as amended in 1986 and since, is premised on the Public Salary Tax Act of 1939, and is mandatory only for officers, agents and employees of the United States, and officers of corporations, as defined at 26 USC § 3401(c) & (d).
22. The original "Income Tax" implemented approximately with ratification of the Sixteenth Amendment in 1913 was repealed via the Internal Revenue Act of November 23, 1921.
23. The present so-called "income tax" prescribed in Subtitle A of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 is an excise tax against privileges and benefits derived from government employment, with "wages" and other United States source incomes        ^& providing the measure of the tax, they are not the object of the tax. (Congressional     ^y Record - House, March 27, 1943; 26 CFR, Part 31.3101-1)
24. Paymasters and other designated agents of Government agencies are the "persons liable" for withholding, reporting and paying taxes prescribed in subtitles A & C of the Internal Revenue Code (26 CFR, Parts 31.3403-1, 31.3404-1, & 601.401).
25. Internal Revenue Code Subtitle F administrative and judicial authority are not effective until Title 26 of the United States Code is enacted as positive law (26 USC § 7851(a)(6)), and said Title 26 has not been enacted as positive law (26 USC § 7806(b)), so Subtitle F statutes such as § 7212 have no legal or lawful effect.
26. There are no general application legislative regulations published in the Federal Register relating to any Title 18, United States Code offense charged in United States of America v. Kenney F. Moore, et al. Case # 96-CR-82-C, or United States of America v. Dan Leslie Meador, Case # 96-CR-l 13-C (18 USC §§ 2, 371, 1341, 1503 & 1504; see Parallel Table of Authorities and Rules, located in the Index volume to the Code of Federal Regulations, authorized at 44 USC § 1510 & 1 CFR, Part 8.5).
27. The corpus of both the Moore-Gunwall and Meador cases prosecuted in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma (96-CR-82-C & 96-CR-l 13-C), was alleged interference with administration of United States internal revenue laws, with 26 USC § 7212(a) being the key statute, this statute being in Subtitle F of Title 26, United States Code, said statute having no legal or lawful effect until Title 26 of the United States Code is enacted as positive law (26 USC § 7851(a)(6)).
28. The only legislative regulations published in the Federal Register in compliance with the Federal Register Act at 44 USC § 1505 for "interfering with administration of internal revenue laws" at 26 USC § 7212(a), are under Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms administration (27 CFR, Parts 170,270,275,285,290, 295 & 296) (charge in United States of America v. Kenney F. Moore, et al. Case # 96-CR-82-C).
29. So far as the Continental United States is concerned (Union of 50 States), Congress has constitutionally delegated authority to prescribe punishment for counterfeiting securities and current coin of the United States (Art. I § 8.5, U.S. Constitution), treason (Art. in § 3.2, U.S. Constitution), and variously in Amendments promulgated since the Civil War, for prosecution of civil and voting rights violations.
30. The Separation of Powers Doctrine, framed in the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, and Article n of the Articles of Confederation, prohibits the United States from exercising powers not delegated by the Constitution.
31. At Art. III § 2.3, the Constitution of the United States provides that crimes will be tried by jury in the State where the alleged offense arises except when not within jurisdiction of any given State.
32. None of the alleged offenses in United States of America v. Kenney F. Moore, et al. Case # 96-CR-82-C, or United States of America v. Dan Leslie Meador, Case # 96-CR-113-C (see listing in items numbered 14 & 15), qualifies as counterfeiting securities or current coin of the United States, treason, or voting or civil rights violations.
33. The "United States of America" is representative of (a) the President as Commander-in-Chief of the military in the Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico, or (b) the "Central Authority" or "Competent Authority" in the framework of private international law (28 CFR, Part 0.64-1), such law administered in United States maritime jurisdiction.
34. The "United States of America" is not cognizable as a constitutionally authorized party competent to prosecute crimes against the de jure American people in the Union of several States party to the Constitution.
35. The second paragraph of 18 USC § 3231 preserves authority of the laws and courts of the Union of several States party to the Constitution of the United States.
36. Both Moore, et al and Meador cases, supra, were maritime actions prosecuted in legislative-admiralty courts of the United States, with all named and unnamed defendants where the instant matter is concerned being actors in support of such actions (26 USC § 7327 > 26 CFR, Part 403 > 33 CFR, Part 1.07).
37. General application regulations published in the Federal Register which authorize removal from courts of the several States under authority of 28 USC § 1346(b) relate only to Department of Defenses civil and military personnel in the framework of their respective lawful duties, and prisoners who seek administrative tort remedies for being deprived of access to legal material and counsel (28 CFR, Part 543 & 32 CFR, Parts 536 & 842).
By my signature, under provisions of 28 USC § 1746(1), I attest that to the best of my current knowledge and understanding, all matters of law and fact set forth herein are accurate and true.

Dan Meador Date
P.O. Box 2582
Ponca City, Oklahoma 74602
405/765-1415; FAX 405/765-1146
Notice of Service
I attest that on the date this instrument is filed, a true and correct copy will be hand delivered to the office of the United States Attorney for the Northern District of Oklahoma, located at the Federal Courthouse in Tulsa, Oklahoma, for counsel for the defendants, Ms. McClanahan.

Dan Meador Date
P.O. Box 2582
Ponca City, Oklahoma 74602
405/765-1415; FAX 405/765-1146