RSS

Dennis Craig’s Documents–#1

25 May

Sovereignty or Secession Rally in Austin, TX. ...

Dennis Craig has been a regular guest on my radio show over the past six or eight weeks.  We’ve talked about a number of subjects, but the central theme has been a series of documents that Dennis drafted and ultimately filed with the national government.

Dennis claims that as a result of his process, when his name comes up on government computer data bases, the government files now include a “DO NOT HOLD” notice.  As a result, Dennis claims to have had a number of confrontations with the police or other “authorities” who, upon checking Dennis in their federal data base, simply release him and avoid further contact.

Here are copies of email that have been forwarded to me discussing the validity and results of Dennis’ strategy:

Date: Sun, 29 May 2011 21:05:24 -0400

Subject: F.Y.I.: “Dennis Craig Bynum”

From: withoutprejudice1@gmail.com
To: alfredadask@yahoo.com

 This is a transcription of the Talkshoe conference call wherein they investigated the contents of the N.C.I.C. database concerning Me by way a law enforcement officer.  The following is what said detective reported to them concerning the name “Dennis Craig Bynum” on the N.C.I.C. (National Criminal Identification Center) database.  This is what Father-YHWH directed Me to accomplish.  This is why Father has prepared Me for this Time.  It represents His delivering Me from Babylon.  It also proves He’s-YHWH is still in full control.  Praise YHWH.
Dennis Craig.

———- Forwarded message ———-
From: Jay Scott ANDERSON <treenopie@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, May 29, 2011 at 6:21 PM
Subject: “DCB”
To: Without Prejudice <withoutprejudice1@gmail.com>FYI, I heard something like:”From what I’ve been told by law enforcement he is the real deal. I
asked a detective that I know to do an inquiry on that name. She
didn’t understand the code that came back so she had a more
knowledgeable colleague look at it and when he looked at it he went,
what is this guy royalty or something? The code that comes back is
similar to that of a foreign dignitary but it’s different. And she
would not say what exactly it’s saying. If it was a run of the mill
diplomat she would have no trouble telling me he has a status of this
code, that code whatever, but this code she would not talk about. He’s
someone we have no interest in and even if we wanted to talk to him
we’d have no interest in talking to him. And furthermore that this
status extends to the automobile he uses, that they have a description
of the automobile, a plate number but the same thing comes up,
basically, whatever the status or code is, basically it amounts to
hands off.”Be blessed.

Jay

Bear in mind that emails are merely evidence (actually hearsay), they aren’t proof.

Those of you who follow Dennis and/or his interviews on my radio shows, may want to download these copies of Dennis’ two primary documents as PDF files:

110525 DCB1

BynumDocument200702779b

Advertisements
 
 

Tags: ,

148 responses to “Dennis Craig’s Documents–#1

  1. jeff

    May 26, 2011 at 6:37 AM

    Is this all Dennis did to get his standing and be left alone to live his life a free man?

     
    • Adask

      May 26, 2011 at 7:25 AM

      No. Dennis did more. He also studied the law and political system for most of 30 years. These documents are a distillation of the most important points he learned during those 30 years.
      So Dennis did much more than merely draft these documents to achieve some measure of “freedom”.
      Some people will grab these documents, sign their names to something identical, and expect to be instantly “free”. That might work, but I doubt it. Dennis has done the “heavy lifting” by doing research for 30 years. But anyone seeking to use these documents will probably also need to spend 1 to 3 years of intense study to 1) understand the content of these documents; and 2) verify that the content of these documents is appropriate to his particular circumstances and needs.
      More than likely, each of these documents needs to be “tailored” by each individual to reflect that particular individual’s needs and circumstances. Those who try to use the documents without first attempting to achieve real understanding and without real “tailoring” to reflect their particular circumstances, may be disappointed by the results.
      These documents are not a “get out of jail free” card. They are an outline of a system of knowledge that, if you embrace it, may be sufficient to enhance or even secure your “freedom”.

       
      • aaronthepriest

        July 13, 2011 at 7:44 PM

        Dear Adask, can you please offer a starting point for the 1 to 3 year intense study to achieve real understanding of this subject. I’m a post tribulation christian, royal revolutionary under 1 Peter 2:9. Does that scripture confirm pursuing sovereign status? also what your view on Romans 13? I believe you man, however the only words i trust these days is the bible. Thanks for your hard work, help me out!

         
      • Adask

        July 13, 2011 at 8:47 PM

        I believe that all earthly sovereignty flows from God. “Sovereignty” is not a political status so much as a spiritual status. For me, my right to claim sovereignty flows from two authorities:

        1) Genesis 1:26-28: On the 6th Day, God made man is His image and gave man dominion over the animals. Under that religious principles, I can’t be an animal.

        2) Declaration of Independence: We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights. That endowment of “unalienable Rights” equates to the “divine rights” that were previously accorded to the “kings” of each European country. Those “kings” became “kings” by virtue of a coronation ceremony performed in a church. They were “sovereigns” because they and they alone received their “divine rights” directly from God; all else were subjects because they did not receive their rights directly from God. Our Declaration of Independence declared that ALL men (including European kings) were equally endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights. That Declaration of “endowment” constitutes a kind of universal coronation by means of which all “men” (not individuals, persons, citizens, human beings, legal fictions or animals) became “sovereigns” and our government thereby became our public servant rather than master.

        3) Chisholm vs. Georgia (A.D. 1793) also implicitly supports my claim of individuals sovereignty.

        4) I haven’t yet used it myself, but the A.D. 1783 Treaty of Paris (wherein the king of England recognized the sovereignty of the States–and the States were composed of the People “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights”) his been used by others as an authority to justify a claim of personal status as a “sovereign”.

        I agree with Romans 13:1–“Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God.” Within The United States of America, We the People are the sovereigns. We the People are the “governing authorities”–not the government. In the system devised by our Founders, We the People are the “governing authorities” (by virtue of receiving our “unalienable Rights” directly from God). Insofar as the existing, de facto “government” pretends to be our master and pretends that we are mere subjects, that purported government acts without any “authority” but rules by means of deception and/or our consent. It’s our purported “government” that violates Romans 13:1–not me.

        I don’t ever recommend that you “believe me”. I only hope that you’ll consider what I have to say and then do enough research to verify if what I’ve said is mostly true or mostly false.

        I can’t really “help you out” in the matter of sovereignty. I think it’s a matter of spiritual warfare and something that you will come to based not only on extensive study, but perhaps also calling by and revelation from our Father YHWH ha Elohiym.

        As for a “starting point,” I have no idea where I started. I just started my study and one thing led to another. If you are “called” to “sovereignty,” you’re starting point could be completely different from mine. It’s not a matter of where you start, so much as the fact that you do start, somewhere.

        Sovereignty is not a “get out of jail free” card. It is both a right to Liberty but also a duty to accept additional personal responsibilities. I doubt that “sovereigns” take Social Security benefits. Instead, they are independent and thus responsible for saving for their own retirement. Sovereigns accept full liability for their actions and therefore probably can’t use insurance or even corporations as devices for the conduct of their business transactions. In many regards, sovereignty has much in common with the New Testament mandate to “pick your cross” and follow the Christ.

        If people could fully understand the rights and obligations that are associated with becoming a sovereign, I suspect that most people might refuse to become “sovereigns”. I suspect that most people feel more comfortable as subjects who are without liberty, but also without much personal responsibility or personal liability. For the “subject,” there’s always someone to tell them what to do and the subject therefore need not engage in the sovereign’s requirement for constant thought and personal choice. Being a “subject” is somewhat comforting–like being a child. Being a “sovereign” is very challenging–like being a man.

         
      • aaronthepriest

        July 13, 2011 at 11:29 PM

        Thanks Adask, this war started along time ago… it’s all around us.. it’s spiritual..
        The war on crime.. THe war on drugs… The war on terrorism.. it’s all made up!

        God bless you, keep on building that ark!

         
  2. chris

    May 26, 2011 at 9:20 AM

    can you post any links, to dennis? I read most of the docs last night , the brunt of it seems to be he is negating improper procedure in adjournment , and having docs signed into law absent representitives, and nullifying them, Is that what you would take from this? I am continuing to read them in greater depth , but some of the archives are hard to see, and I agree with you , if you do not understand these docs, and the legal points, made they are worthless.

     
    • Adask

      May 26, 2011 at 9:58 PM

      I have no additional links to Dennis at this time. I’ll add some of the radio interviews with Dennis in the next few days.

       
  3. phillip

    May 26, 2011 at 12:52 PM

    Both files appear to be the same; please upload the second file. Thanks for your bright light upon the path.

     
    • Adask

      May 26, 2011 at 2:51 PM

      You’re right. I’ll change one of the documents as soon as my source provides a fresh copy.

       
  4. chris

    May 26, 2011 at 3:27 PM

    what did you think of my original synopsis?

     
    • Adask

      May 27, 2011 at 12:21 AM

      I don’t know what “original synopsis” you’re referring to.

       
  5. chris

    May 27, 2011 at 6:40 AM

    the synopsis, I was referring to was my original estimation that ,dennis was trying to negate , or void certain us titles or acts due to improper legislative adjournment, or documents , acts ,laws , being signed in secret,I was just trying to make sure I understood what was being put forth at all.
    thanks

     
  6. Adask

    May 27, 2011 at 9:48 AM

    I’d say you’re more or less correct (how’s that for taking a definitive stand?). You really need to ask Dennis if your “synopsis” accurately describes his purpose(s).

     
  7. chris

    May 27, 2011 at 3:24 PM

    I would not say that is very definite but that is ok, I saw the vid where they ambushed you and tried to lump you in with the guy that shot the police officers, you must be doing something right , because those are the tactics employed on ron paul everytime he gets on tv, the main stream media has lost their mind–good luck..and I realy enjoy your articles , don;t stop…

     
  8. dan

    May 27, 2011 at 4:43 PM

    Regarding the legality or lawfulness of Title 18 due to what Dennis is stating. The research I have done says that the Supremes have denied this allegation. This came from two different lawyers office that litigated it in circa 2006. This issue comes up on an internet search and the lawyers can be found there. Now whether it was because of no challenge to the “political jurisdiction” I don’t know.

     
    • Jethro

      May 28, 2011 at 4:53 PM

      dan, can you point to specifically to where the Supremes denied the allegation Title 18 was enacted improperly?

       
  9. dan

    May 28, 2011 at 5:53 PM

    In the following it has the names of the lawyers. Do a search on the internet of their names and give them a call. I don’t know if the decision ever got published.
    Prisoners argue constitutionality of U.S. criminal code
    For dozens of prisoners, attorneys Barry Bachrach and James W. Parkman, III, filed a petition today with the United States Supreme Court that challenges Public Law 80-772 (including Title 18, or the U.S. Criminal Code). Tens of thousands of federal prisoners prosecuted since 1948 may be affected by the Supreme Court’s response.
    “Public Law 80-772 is invalid,” Bachrach argued. “This is a case where numerous procedural errors occurred. The law is clear; an act of Congress cannot become a law unless it follows each and every procedural step as defined in Article I of the U.S. Constitution.”
    A bill originates in either the House of Representatives or Senate, but its exact text must be approved by a majority vote in both chambers. While Congress is in session, that text must be certified as having been passed in identical form by both Houses (or “truly enrolled”) and then signed by the Speaker of the House and President pro tempore of the Senate. After, the bill is presented to the President to sign into law.
    According to Bachrach, spokesman for the petitioners, H.R. 3190 was passed by the House on May 12, 1947. The resolution came before the Senate, but Congress adjourned before the bill could be passed. The Senate should have returned the bill to the House to be resubmitted to the Senate during a later session. Instead, during the following session, the Senate Committee on the Judiciary continued its review of H.R. 3190 and added a volume of amendments to the bill. The Senate passed “H.R. 3190 As Amended,” which was sent to the House for a vote. While the House agreed with the amendments, the members failed to vote on “H.R. 3190 As Amended.”
    According to the Constitution, valid business is conducted only when Congress is in session and a majority of members of both Houses are present. Yet, Congress authorized the House Speaker and President of the Senate to sign enrolled bills during an adjournment of indefinite length that began on June 20, 1948. This incomprehensible error was compounded when the Chairman of the Committee on House Administration mistakenly certified as enrolled the original H.R. 3190. Still more errors occurred: the House Speaker and President of the Senate signed the Senate’s “H.R. 3190 As Amended,” the bill was then misrepresented to President Truman as being enrolled, and Truman signed the bill.
    “Congressional journals clearly show that the House and Senate each passed two separate bills that were grossly different. According to the Constitution, this means that neither bill ever became law,” Bachrach said.
    “Under P.L. 80-772, U.S. district courts were given jurisdiction over all federal offenses. With P.L. 80-772 being invalid, however, the district courts clearly lack jurisdiction. The convictions and sentences of these prisoners are therefore void.”
    Countries having extradition treaties with the U.S. since 1948 and their citizens, who were turned over for trial in U.S. district courts, also may be affected by the outcome of this case.

    http://www.nocriminalcode.us (http://www.nocriminalcode.us/)

     
    • Michael

      May 31, 2011 at 10:31 AM

      Dan,

      Who cares about lawyers/liars? They are all part of a fiction so why even recognize them? Dennis has uncovered the truth and it has been used successfully with others, one being Charlie Miller. Do the research for yourself. Liars will never tell you the truth, because it keep the appearance of reality real for all those that will listen to it.

      We have a letter that basically says what Dennis says about title 18 is true, and it is from the bureau of prisons, Harley G. Lappin. I cannot post it though as it is in PDF and I cannot copy it.

       
    • Donald Blaine-Bailey

      June 16, 2011 at 2:37 AM

      To dan:

      I clicked on the link where your message ended and something came up in essence congratulating me saying I won something. I am confused as to why this link you gave only tells me this,i.e. that I won something.
      http://www.nocriminalcode.us (http://www.nocriminalcode.us/)

       
      • Adask

        June 16, 2011 at 12:01 PM

        I’m not sure what link you’re talking about. I checked the two Dennis Craig documents and the links appear to be functioning properly.

         
      • dan

        June 16, 2011 at 1:56 PM

        Donald, I’m not sure why that happened to you other than that seems to be how the internet functions sometimes. When I clicked on the link it came up with lawyer referrals which is not what I remember seeing nor the reason I posted the link back then.

         
  10. dan

    May 31, 2011 at 11:12 AM

    I agree with you about lawyers being jaded in their education of what is the truth. I was just saying that it has allegedly been adjudicated at the supreme court (US) level and the lawyers seemed to make the argument on the evidence Dennis is stating. I’ve seen the letter from Harley Lappin and first heard this evidence in the Down the Rabbit Hole video. But I have not heard of anyone winning with this argument. Do you have Charlie Millers case# or contact info? Believe me they (the feds) want to put me away for a victimless mandatory 15years and I want to find a remedy that is flawless if there is such a thing in such a corrupt system of just us..

     
  11. Dennis Craig

    May 31, 2011 at 2:27 PM

    Dan’s presentment above is correct in part. The part that is correct is that you can’t challenge the validity of the statute after you’ve made a “use” of it. The challenge must be made prior to prosecution in the original “Motion to Dismiss” or “Political Jurisdiction” challenge. Failing, up front, to challenge that statue gets you put in jail. In other words: a man can’t withdraw his sperm from the woman after she’s pregnant.

    Dennis Craig.

     
    • Eileen

      September 5, 2011 at 8:23 PM

      I believe if you use the statute as a plaintiff you could not then go back and claim it was not valid, but if an invalid statute is used against you as a defendant, that invalid statute is the basis of the court’s subject matter jurisdiction, and subject matter jurisdiction can be challenged at any time, even post-conviction. If the statute is invalid, so is the conviction.

       
  12. dan

    June 1, 2011 at 11:21 AM

    Dennis what info or insight do you have on “political jurisdiction” validity as I looked it up in my Anderson’s Law Dictionary and did not see it referenced as a type of jurisdiction.

     
  13. Dennis Craig

    June 1, 2011 at 12:29 PM

    Hi Dan,

    There’s actually two answers to your question. The first is within the appearance of reality they can’t see Reality. Their purported courts are prohibited from ruling on a political question: See Baker v. Carr (Circa A.D. 60’s) and “political question doctrine” in Black’s Law Dictionary. Only the executive branch can rule on political questions. Hence a proper political jurisdiction challenge causes a dismissal and never becomes dicta or stare decisis.

    The second is the system doesn’t want you to know, so they dance around “The political question doctrine” referenced above instead of “political jurisdiction”. In other words they turned “political jurisdiction” into the “political question doctrine”, supra.

    Also, if one is a sovereign (politically equal to the king of England- Treaty of Paris A.D. 1783) that sovereign is supposed to know that concept..

    In other words: the purported “United States of America” A/k/a “United States” is politically and commercially foreign or alien to Me and because it resides within the serpent’s appearance of reality I must not enter into legal relations with it, or forfeit My sovereignty and immunity.

    As I understand the overall issue, the “NEW WORLD ORDER’s” purpose is to bring about the collapse of those political Nation/States and their boundaries so that the perps can take over without restrictions of International Law established by those sovereign Nation/States A/k/a “The people”.

    Remember two important things: One, it’s all voluntary; Two; the whole problem revolves around three things , ignorance of sin, political ignorance, and territoriality. In other words “it’s all political and territorial”

     
    • Jethro

      June 1, 2011 at 3:32 PM

      Dennis, since the “United States” and its administrative divisions are a politically and commercially foreign “appearance of reality” on relation to you (which may serve as a defense if attacked) then where would you go for relief as a plaintiff? Is there not a single non-“appearance of reality” court in existence?

       
      • Dennis Craig

        June 7, 2011 at 1:37 AM

        Since law and equity, civil and criminal were combined together, there is but one court to address Constitutional issues. That is setting the court in Admiralty with Rule 9h. However, a tort or contract issue is all that can be heard. I’ve heard (rumor) that some interesting things are happening in “The Court of Claims”. I don’t have first hand knowledge in this rumored matter, only unconfirmed stories.

         
  14. Jack Torrance

    June 10, 2011 at 7:56 PM

    Would you please give me directions as to where I can find these documents that everyone is commenting about. I can’t seem to locate them on this blog. I thought they would be located with Dennis Craig in the category section. I know Alfred mentioned on the radio that they would be available on his blog.
    Thank you
    Jack

     
    • Adask

      June 11, 2011 at 3:16 AM

      On the home page, see the “Category” list on the right hand side. Scroll down the list of “Categories” until you find “Dennis Craig”. Click on “Dennis Craig” and you’ll be taken to the first page of the one article under his name. Scroll down to the bottom of the article and you’ll see two “links” . Click on each link. Download the two files.

       
  15. Charles

    June 25, 2011 at 10:08 AM

    Hello Dennis & Al,

    I am the man that initiated the N.C.I.S. (not the less comprehensive N.C.I.C.) inquiry as mentioned in Jay’s email above. Dennis did not request this, just as he said. Contrary to what was stated on the radio program at least I wasn’t initially looking to criticize what what others have asserted Dennis has accomplished, just merely that, had the inquiry yielded no results, I would have stated I found no evidence to support such assertions; either way I would still be a proponent of what Dennis states in his documents.

    There have been too many “gurus,” for lack of a better term, over the years whose success claims of various kinds couldn’t be supported with evidence. Too many good people have wasted time and energy over the years playing with numerous legal documents and processes that were probably ineffective at best, so I am delighted to have heard from the proverbial horse’s mouth what I reported on that conference call.

    Thank you, gentlemen, for sharing this knowledge with everyone and thus bring us that much closer to the remedy we seek.

     
    • Jethro

      June 25, 2011 at 6:25 PM

      Charles,

      Can you give any details on what ‘code’ the N.C.I.S. returned and what it means?

       
      • Charles

        July 12, 2011 at 2:24 AM

        Jethro,

        The following is the body of a recent email from the same Detective that ran the inquiry:

        “If Chris discussed with you the information on this person, hopefully he was able to inform you that he has a status which is very close to that of a Diplomat, I further investigated this unknown code our system gave out. I was informed that its a code usally restricted to Royal Families, Diplomats, and those who have paid fees to have Diplomatic Immunity. The code had an attached file that mainly states to us or any other agency, that this party is of (no interest) status. it also states for us not to (hold) or (question) this person. You might be interested to find out that if he was held by any agency wether it be us or others, the offending officer could be brought up on kidnapping charges. The other issue is that the offending officer could also be fined $1,000,000.00 or both., So trust me when I say that I or any other agent of this department will not be questioning or holding him for any reason. The State Department would be the agency filing the charges or asking for the Million Dollar fines.”

        This is about all I can get the Detective to reveal on the subject.

         
      • Adask

        July 12, 2011 at 9:59 AM

        I am always distrustful of anything I read. I don’t automatically believe anything anyone says. I am especially distrustful of anything that sounds too good to be true.
        But in response to Charles’ previous comment, my first reaction is “Dayahm!
        IF the detective is being properly quoted and IF the detective is not intending to deceive, then PERHAPS Dennis Craig has discovered the first real “door” out of this system.
        I reiterate: Dayahm!

         
  16. PatriotOne

    June 26, 2011 at 7:29 PM

    WORDS ON PAPER [wop]
    How can a Man (1) or group of Men (1) write words on paper [wop], hold the [wop]aper in front of any other Man (2), and then tell Man (2) that the [wop]aper gives Man (1) authority over Man (2)?

    I do not care what treaty KING ‘wtf’ signed with non-KING ‘wtf’, Man (1) gets zero authority over Man (2), with or without words on paper.

    If [wop] is really that simple, and works as described/believed…

    By these words know all Men; ALL OF YOU’s SHALL BUILD ME A HOME, YOU ARE TO REPORT TO MY LOCAL BY MORNING, FAILURE TO DO AS I HAVE WRITTEN SHALL REQUIRE THAT ALL YOU’s THAT HAVE READ OR NOT READ THESE WORDS SHALL PAY TO ME A PENALTY OF 100 OUNCES GOLD BULLION

    The ONLY way [wop] works is because those writing [wop] also print money (more wop) that will buy a hungry Man food. Hungry Man will point a gun at peaceful Man for paper [wop] money.

    Why should any Man need to spend 30 years finding the [wop] that trumps another Mans [wop]?

    Did Cain disagree with Able’s [wop]?

     
  17. Mark McCoy

    June 27, 2011 at 5:38 AM

    Well, congratulations to Dennis for any success resulting from his documents, whether verified or not. I do have to agree with PatriotOne, however, that it is not “Words on Paper” that define our freedoms. I undertook a similar approach as Dennis at about the same time as he. I penned my Public Declaration of Sovereignty, Expatriation, and Dissolution of all Previous National and Political Allegiance in December of 2007.

    http://markmccoy.com/wp/public-declaration-of-sovereignty-expatriation-and-dissolution-of-all-previous-national-and-political-allegiance/

    The main difference between my Declaration and Dennis’ document is that I do not aver to, nor recognize or rely upon, any reference to US or State law or even their existence or relevance to my being a free, sovereign individual. If we are truly free or sovereign, why do some of us, like Dennis in this case, make reference to treaties, charters, ordinances, constitutions…. when all of that is unnatural and irrelevant to a man’s existence? They are nothing but, words on paper. I think it was Alexander Hamilton who even commented on the proposed Bill of Rights, saying that they are mere “parchment barriers”. Who cares what the Bill of Rights says? it does not touch my liberty. Nothing can touch my liberty. Only a man can touch another man and whatever “words on paper” he may use to justify his tyranny do not bind me in raising arms in defense from that man.

    Since my Declaration, I have been detained by Homeland Security when re-entering the country, have invoked it in a criminal proceeding and had the court take judicial notice of it, and have been pulled over, beaten and tasered (not to say that the beating was because of the Declaration).

    http://markmccoy.com/wp/2009/09/21/i-get-a-warm-welcome-home%E2%80%A6-land-security/

    http://markmccoy.com/wp/2009/12/02/all-charges-stemming-from-my-arrest-on-21709-have-been-dropped/

    The City of Collinsville, Illinois, who received a copy of my Declaration, issues a memo that identified me as a perceived threat.

    http://markmccoy.com/wp/2010/05/23/collinsville-perceives-self-defense-to-be-a-threat-of-violence/

    Now, what does all of that mean? Nothing. It is all words on paper. It is how I live in spite of the pressure from the State compelling me to live otherwise. I do not expect to produce my Declaration when my liberty is under assault and have the man magically bound from doing so. It is up to me to live by my conscience, and to do so peaceably and responsibly. All I hoped to achieve by my Declaration was to correct what perceptions someone may hold when justifying their tyranny against me. I took a reasonable approach to let those who believe I consent, know that I don’t; and any action taken against me is on their heads.

    I fail to see how Dennis’ 30 years of research is any proof as to the efficacy or validity of his arguments, but who am I to argue with another man’s beliefs? I just find it curious to see those who claim any sort of sovereignty to use arguments based on law that is the same tool used against us. I say, start with the man and build from there, rather than a man defining himself through man-made constructs.

    I existed prior to the United States, or any government. My first concept was that of self; and that self was later compromised by my mind becoming polluted with beliefs in man-made institutions that claimed any control over my life. if I am tearing at a fantasy based on a book, why do I resort to using a fantasy based on another book as my justification. Swapping one delusion for another is to end up living a delusion.

    Good luck to Dennis, and anyone, who merely wishes to be free; or more appropriately, recognize that most of what we possess is not knowledge, but an unwillingness to think.

     
    • Dennis Craig

      July 20, 2011 at 8:05 AM

      I find it sad that people have become so beguiled, bewildered, and confused by the appearance of reality that they end up rejecting both Reality and the appearance of reality. They end up trying to be a island unto themselves with their feet firmly planted in mid-air. Stated in other words, their being unable to identify on a consistent basis, reality, from the appearance of, they reject it all and stand for nothing, lost without firm ground to stand on. This becomes the ultimate victory of the serpent because he’s accomplished stripping this individual of everything.

       
  18. MIchael

    July 4, 2011 at 3:18 PM

    There is one thing Dennis and I can agree upon, and that is the foundation, YHWH’s Word. If your foundation is built upon self or anything else, you are bound to fail.

    I am part of the group Charles is part of that checked Dennis’ belief he may have been listed in NCIC as do not detain, do not hold.

    Like Dennis, I rely on my heavenly Father for protection and provision. No government in the world can protect and provide for me, but my Father can and does.

    I disagree with Mark that “most of what we possess is knowledge.” The problem is we lack knowledge, the kind of knowledge we need to be free (see Hosea 4:6). Once the knowledge is acquired, then we need the wisdom to use that knowledge properly. It does not mean we are to be confrontational or threatening, but wise as a serpent and gentle as a dove.

    We will get nowhere if we do not do it YHWH’s way.

     
  19. Dennis Craig

    July 4, 2011 at 4:48 PM

    Michael,

    Thank you for comments above. You’ve made it clear that you see, and Hear Our message. We’re humbled by your comments and take this opportunity to express Our gratitude, as at least some are Hearing, Seeing, and Perceiving the Message from YHWH’s messenger. You’ve made Our Day.

    “When My People, upon whom My Name is invoked, kneel and pray and seek My Presence and turn from their wicked courses, then I will listen, and forgive their sins, and will restore health to their land.” II Chronicles 7:14, Ferrar Fenton, The Holy Bible in Modern English (Pg. 979)

    Michael, you have turned this sad Fourth Day of July, A.D. 2011, into a good day. May Our father Bless and Keep you.

    Dennis Craig.

     
  20. Dennis Craig

    July 12, 2011 at 10:58 AM

    Yesterday, July 11, A.D. 2011, I visited the County Executive (Chief Attorney-for the Federal area being animated as Morgan County TENNESSEE) and conducted a brief conference in which the Executive-Hereinafter “Exec” verbally tested My express will and intent. I presented My Identification to said Exec in which he proceeded to copy said Id. He then told Me that he would distribute My Id to all police agencies within the County, and that I would not have any trouble with any of the agencies. He further said that if I was stopped that all I needed to do was present My ID and they would let Me go. He further asked where I was living so that no agency would come on the property and harm Me. When We finished said Exec took My right hand with both of his hands and said to Me “May God Bless You”.

    I, Dennis Craig, bloodline of Bynum (Baynham), Certify that the forgoing statements are true in substance and fact and are freely made without reservation and done in the Name of My Father-YHWH this 12th Day of July, A.D. 2011 so help Me YHWH.

     
    • aaronthepriest

      July 17, 2011 at 5:10 PM

      Dear Dennis, can you please give your view on Jesus Christ, i’m listening to you testimony on how God gave you the insight after prayer and gave his mark on your forehead, and how to get away from the beast system.
      John 14:6
      New International Version (©1984)
      Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father(YHWH) except through me.

      Just want to make sure we agree on the King of Kings were our sovereignty comes from only.

      To me your research is extremely important to the body of Christ and to America, thanks for your diligence.

       
      • Dennis Craig

        July 17, 2011 at 6:19 PM

        aaronthepriest said on Dennis Craig’s Documents July 17, 2011 at 5:10 PM and Dennis Craig responded with the following:

        I’m presuming that your name is Aaron, if you will provide Me with a phone number at My email location of “withoutprejudice1@gmail.com I would be glad to discuss this most important matter with you. However, My answer to your question has already been provided on Page 1 of 5 in paragraph 2 of Our “Declaration as to matters of Fact: domicile, allegiance, citizenship, Use of Public Money, In Sovereign Capacity Election of Remedy”. Forgive Me for what I’m about to say, but almost every question that has been asked by you and others has already been answered within the Documents in question or within the Radio Programs themselves. If people would study harder they might find that the answer to their question has already been provided. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. I reintegrate that the “appearance of reality” has permeated every facet of life as you understand it to be including your religious beliefs. That’s why Father-YHWH has provided Me with the knowledge and understanding because your very “Souls” are at stake. One can hear a lie a million times, but it’s still a lie even to the millionth time. It’s time to come out of the illusion, otherwise it will be to late.

        Dennis Craig.

         
  21. dennis bynum

    July 12, 2011 at 11:24 AM

    Way to go dad. I am proud of you. May our Father bless you.

     
  22. Nicklas Arthur

    July 12, 2011 at 11:54 PM

    I am glad that this works for you Dennis, but it is unlikely that this will work for many others. Rarely what works for one man can work as a formula for many others. The truth of the matter is that what ever works for a man is that which he owns. I’ve seen many 20, 30 and 40+ page travel documents and packages in my many years in this “sovereign” movement. I have come up with a ONE PAGE travel document which I do own. So rather than watch their eyes glass over with a thick packet of paper, I hand them one piece of paper which is only printed on one side, and they read it, no need to call for back-up, a supervisor or the legal department – the net effect being they become anxious to move on to their next catch, they leave me alone. Anyway I am enjoying the broadcasts. I always warn people when they consider duplicating my travel document, that it must be theirs and it must be true or they will be the worse off for it.
    http://wwfar.com/mp3s/CrossTheBorder/travel/

     
  23. Dennis Craig

    July 13, 2011 at 3:13 AM

    Hello Nicklas Arthur,

    Thank you for your input to the forum. Why don’t you post your “ONE PAGE” document so that the students can see the formula that your using. Many people out there are trying to learn. It appears that your a late comer by the comments made above but no offense is taken by them. I in fact use a NO PAGE document and get the same results that you imply. Tonight was Our eighteenth (18th) radio show and perhaps you could go to http://www.americanvoiceradio.com archives and for a small nominal fee be able to download all the programs and come up to speed so to speak and fully understand what is being attempted to be accomplished. We’re trying to save Our Nation/State of “The United States of America”, therefore dealing with a traffic stop is but a small facet of the over all problem We’re facing. How about joining Us in Our purpose after you have a better understanding of Our efforts. Either way thanks for your input.

    Dennis Craig.

     
    • Nicklas Arthur

      July 13, 2011 at 10:50 AM

      Mr Graig
      Just as you assume that I did not post my “ONE PAGE” document, but somehow missed the link to the posting at the end of my comment, every other assumption you made about me is also wrong.

      I am the man who talked Alfred into coming on the air on FirstAmendmentRadio.com 7 or 8 years ago and also hooked him up with his shortwave sponsor – Melody at DGScoin.com

      The Traffic Stop is very important to those of us that do not have royal status with the world (who likely will never attain such) and need to deal with the beast where the rubber meets the road.
      so here’s the link again: http://wwfar.com/mp3s/CrossTheBorder/travel/

      I have listened to your 18 shows and have been trying to disern exactly what you are about, you have clarified that with your answer, “trying to save Our Nation/State of “The United States of America”” I wish you well.

      And by the way the podcasts are free here: LibertyArchives.com
      peace
      Nicklas Arthur

       
    • John Corliss

      July 14, 2011 at 12:24 PM

      Could someone please give a list of dates of the shows that Dennis has been on so all of us that need to may be able to catch up. Thanks so much

       
      • Nicklas Arthur

        July 14, 2011 at 7:26 PM

        John, He has been Alfred’s guest over the last 18 weeks or so. You may just have to sort through the files yourself, If you come up with list-let us know here.
        http://libertyarchives.com/
        use the “files by date” button.

         
  24. Lloyd

    July 15, 2011 at 11:55 AM

    Response to Mark McCoy:
    Quote: ” if I am tearing at a fantasy based on a book, why do I resort to using a fantasy based on another book as my justification. Swapping one delusion for another is to end up living a delusion.”
    End quote.

    Mark, I believe you are missing a strategic point of battle, that is, if you hope to defeat the enemy you at least allow your opponent to believe that you are fighting him/her on their terms, albeit as a weaker vessel.
    Take note of the simple man named David, merely a shepherd, knew that if he was to kill Goliath he had to first allow the giant to think that David is coming at him with only a sling on the same terms as compared to a fully armored body.

    Note where David had the arrogant giant completely fooled during the entire process, by using the same armor in the shepherd’s favor in a skilled move of agility and precision.

    I believe that Dennis’s method as proved by the evidence provided is and will be further proven to be the successful and therefore the superior method.

    In short, how does one climb out of the rabbit hole? The answer is that, the surest way is: “the same way you came in except in reverse.”

    That I believe would be Sun Tzu’s answer as well, if he were alive today that is.

     
  25. Dennis Craig

    July 15, 2011 at 1:36 PM

    I, Dennis Craig, quote and make comment on the posting of Mark McCoy of June 27, A.D. 2011 at 5:38 A.M.: “Well, congratulations to Dennis for any success resulting from his documents, whether verified or not. I do have to agree with PatriotOne, however, that it is not “Words on Paper” that define our freedoms. I undertook a similar approach as Dennis at about the same time as he. I penned my Public Declaration of Sovereignty, Expatriation, and Dissolution of all Previous National and Political Allegiance in December of 2007”.

    I further quote to show where Mark made his fatal mistakes which brought about the abuse that Mark has suffered since the publication of his document referenced above on his posting. Mark shot himself in the foot two (2) ways, first he said he Expatriated (a concept borrowed from Lee Bropst). Expatriation is an admission of citizenship and can be accomplished by leaving the U.S. and going to a U.S. Embassy in any foreign country. At that Embassy renouncing citizenship and then being unable to return to the U.S. Therefore Mark’s so called expatriation is null and void, but the major defect is the admission of U.S. citizenship. As a U.S. citizen Sovereignty is an impossibility. The second witness on the first fatal mistake was the statement of “Dissolution of all Previous National and Political Allegiance” thereby providing the second witness to his admitted non-sovereign status. Because of these fatal mistakes Mark gets abused. Mark would be better served not showing these admissions to anyone, thereby avoiding the abuse he’s been receiving by showing his documents. There is no way that I’m aware of that Mark can repudiate his own conduct or confession. No where in My documents are any such confessions made.

     
    • Mark McCoy

      July 17, 2011 at 11:10 AM

      Well, Dennis, I did admit citizenship early on in my life, albeit ignorantly. I was correcting a history of actions and presumptions which gave rise to my being a “citizen”, so to “expatriate” as I intended it, was necessary. I am not bound to follow a procedure set down by any other when cleansing myself of that presumption of citizenship. The word, “expatriate” as I used it was in explaining my situation and not submitting to how any other may wish to define the word or process.

      I don’t see how my “Dissolution of all Previous National and Political Allegiance” has anything to do with how I present myself now. I did, in the past, act as though I possessed national and political allegiance. Unless you have never voted, been licensed, received a benefit… they the presumption follows. My Declaration is a correction of prior presumptions to that of being a Sovereign individual.

      What I have stated, by way of my Declaration, is not what caused my “abuse”. I have been left largely alone, despite admittedly disobeying every law presented to me, notwithstanding my being pulled over and beaten after a traffic stop. I dare say that you too would have suffered the same “abuse” as there was no interaction in presenting magic bullet papers to keep at bay would-be thugs. Are you saying that there is NO record of your previously claiming citizenship in any form?

      I’d like to know how my “expatriation” is null and void, since I make the determination as to what, if any, citizenship I wish to claim. If you are defining the process of expatriating as the government does, then yes, I did not follow their rules. As far as I am concerned, my expatriation became effective the moment I disavowed any external authority over me and refused membership in any political or national body. I will say whether I have expatriated or not, and those who say I have not must prove how I am what they claim I am.

      I do not see how your documents are any more effective than mine, or anyone else’s. Documents are just words on paper. It is the will and temerity of the individual to live according to their words, whether written or spoken. I owed no duty to tell anyone of my beliefs, but being a reasonable man and possibly having to do battle with those who believe I am of their ilk based on the trail of presumptions I have left in my wake, I felt if prudent to correct those presumptions and put them on notice that I no longer wish to engage in their delusion. If a man wishes to beat you then no paper will stop him.

      In making my Declaration, I did not rely upon any constitutional argument, statutory argument, Biblical justification, or anything else touched by the hand of man. Being a supreme being in my own life, I am in control of interpreting this world through my available senses and acting according to my conscience. To rely upon the reasoning of others, when such words are not of my mind, is to lay claim to beliefs professed by others. My beliefs are mine alone, and no one can use my words in accomplishing their ends when they do not know from where in my mind those words originate. I do not know YWHW, Yahweh, Jesus, the Founding Fathers, Constitution, Bible, or anything else offered to me by others who expect me to adopt their beliefs. I was born into this world ignorant and unaware. What I have come to know I know through my experience and what was imposed or presented to me I have disavowed in lieu of subsequent evidence to the contrary.

      My Creator has no name. There is no book or text that dictates how my life is to be lived. There is no authority over me. There is no document that will keep me safe. There is only me, and the world which I allow to permeate my psyche by way of my engaging it. There are many deceptions in life, and unless I can reason for myself or experience through living I must suspect everything. The word of “God”, or whatever you want to call it (YHWH or any other “spelling” of a name) does not live in the Bible. What I know as the “word” lives in me by my conscience and who is to say that what was written back then has any more validity than what I perceive the “word” to be?

      I may be a few years behind you in studying law, some 20 plus years by my count, but I have been studying myself for much longer, and in my opinion, that is all that matters. I am not defined by my Declaration, Bible, Constitution, or another. I am defined by me. I am free, sovereign, and beholding to no one. Whether my Declaration give you a false impression is not my fault. I know the intent behind my words, and more importantly, I know how I live this life and treat others notwithstanding other imposed systems of control. I am not only free to decide what I wish to believe in, but if I wish to believe at all.

       
      • Dennis Craig

        July 17, 2011 at 6:33 PM

        Mark, what I believe your failing to see and understand that those comments made in the caption of your documents represented a confession in which only you can attempt to repudiate. If I Am wrong please show Me the statutory provision created by Congress in which they have agreed to release from your own admitted liability to the “foreign private unincorporated implied charitable trust” that Congress is trustees for being animated as “United States of America” but doesn’t exist as a matter of Law, that you admitted to be in. How can you expatriate from something your not part of, and if you expatriated what statutory provision has Congress created that would allow you to repudiate your own confession and remain within the United States when they specifically say that such act can only be performed at a U.S. Embassy, and after performing the act you become a man without a country and are only allowed back in by application for a visa?

        Dennis Craig.

         
      • Mark McCoy

        July 18, 2011 at 5:50 AM

        Dennis,

        The confession I am making is that I, in the past, acted and represented myself to be something which does not exist, a citizen. I confess to having acted as, claimed to be, and derived benefits, from citizenship. No one put me in that position but me, and I need to permission from anyone to dissolve that error on my part but me. I do not need any statutory authority because it does not exist. Congress does not exist. The word “expatriate” was not the same word defined by Congress. I used that word with my intent and meaning within the context of my document.

        I am not in the United States. It is a fiction. It is not a place. No man can tell me what parcel of soil I may, or may not, occupy on this planet which rightfully belongs to no one, but which has been provided for our sustenance. Don’t you understand, my Declaration is a renouncement and refutation of that which I do not wish to voluntarily submit myself to. I did not re-enter the country, as there is no country. I am a man without a country for I have no need for a country. I do not need Congress’ permission to do anything.

        My caption, my words…. are mine and used in the context of my intention to cast off all the facades and deceptions involving government and any form of control. It begins with, and resides in, our minds. There are only people engaging in foolishness and fraud, claiming to possess power by virtue of being elected into superior positions of reason and morality. I want no part of the deception. My Creator did not provide me with a country. I was born with all the faculties and necessities I would need to live the term of my natural life. Nowhere in that plan do nations, oaths, governments, or laws become necessary for me to be the kind of reasonable, concionable, and peaceable man I choose to be.

        As far as Congress releasing me, they never had me. I had myself, held captive in their name under my own ignorance. I need only disavow them and they are undone. God did not create nations or governments. Boundaries are contrivances of man. I am free to go where I please. I need no permission to do anything. I did not expatriate from anything other than a prior presumption. I never belonged to anything other than what I allowed myself to belong to, therefore my “expatriation” was not necessary since there was no true government to begin with. However, for those who viewed my prior acts as being binding for their purposes of exercising control over me, my “expatriation” was not to remove myself from any allegiance to the government, but to deny it’s existence.

         
  26. Nicklas Arthur

    July 15, 2011 at 2:49 PM

    There is just something that bothers me about filing all these documents with the “authorities” to notify them of my status. Would I not in fact be REGISTERING my non-compliance with the very ficticious entities that I am trying to throw off? That is why I have developed my one page document in leiu of all that. Only fictions can deal with fictions. I choose to deal with one man on the side of the road when necessary – AND I have not been molested. Warning: this only works for a man who Fears God and Keeps His Commanments and has come out of the beast system. http://wwfar.com/mp3s/CrossTheBorder/travel/
    These scriptures convey the mode by which I travel in the world:
    (Psa 17:8) Keep me as the apple of the eye, hide me under the shadow of thy wings,
    (Psa 36:7) How excellent [is] thy lovingkindness, O God! therefore the children of men put their trust under the shadow of thy wings.
    (Psa 57:1) Be merciful unto me, O God, be merciful unto me: for my soul trusteth in thee: yea, in the shadow of thy wings will I make my refuge,
    (Psa 63:7) Because thou hast been my help, therefore in the shadow of thy wings will I rejoice.
    I have found a hiding place, and it is in plain site.
    (Psa 32:7) Thou [art] my hiding place; thou shalt preserve me from trouble; thou shalt compass me about with songs of deliverance. Selah.
    He is faithful to those who Fear Him and keep His Commanments….. \o/ HaleluYah \o/

     
    • Adask

      July 15, 2011 at 5:11 PM

      I think your confusion concerning “registering” your documents with the very “authorities” you’re trying to “throw off” may be answered by the following PRESUMPTION: I (and others) believe that the existing system–especially at the state/territorial level–has power but no authority. They make up for that lack of authority by presuming your CONSENT to be regulated by the non-constitutional, administrative system of “this state”.

      Consent presumes CHOICE. Either 1) Yes, I do consent to regulated by the non-constitutional administration of “this state”; or 2) No, I do not consent to be regulated by the non-constitutional administrative of “this state”.

      If there is no CHOICE, there can be no CONSENT. Without CONSENT there is no genuine “authority”–only power (overt tyranny).

      Therefore, I believe the reason for this CHOICE is that, without your “consent,” it would be illegal and tyrannical for the gov-co of “this state” to subject you to its non-constitutional regulation. I believe that “this state” can only exist with your CONSENT. I believe “this state” can only function lawfully with your (presumed) CHOICE to be subject to its regulation.

      If “this state” didn’t allow for CHOICE, “this state” could not maintain the presumption that you and I have VOLUNTARILY CONSENTED to be regulated by non-constitutional administration.

      I believe that “this state” MUST therefore recognize your “choice” to NOT consent to be subject to the non-constitutional administration and regulation by “this state”.

      “This state” PRESUMES that we all consent to be regulated by non-constitutional, territorial government. “This state” has made it extremely difficult for us to effectively manifest our CHOICE to refuse to be regulated by “this state”. But I PRESUME that choice must nevertheless be present. If you can effectively manifest your choice not consent to be regulated by the non-constitutional administration of “this state,” and if you can give “this state” proper NOTICE of your choice, then I believe “this state” is obligated to recognize and honor your choice.

      All of this is based on my PRESUMPTION that the existing system (“this state”) has much power, but no constitutional AUTHORITY and therefore relies on each of us to individually CONSENT to be regulated by “this state”. If that presumption is false, then we are living in an overt, non-constitutional tyranny and there’s no point to sending paperwork to the Secretary of State. In that case, insofar as we seek to be free, we would need rely on firearms rather than paperwork.

      On the other hand, so long as the presumption that a choice–no matter how difficult to manifest–remains, we might be able to achieve our Liberty without violence.

      Dennis’ documents are believed to have successfully manifested his CHOICE to the the Secretary of State to not be subject to regulation by the non-constitutional administration of “this state”.

       
    • Dennis Craig

      July 17, 2011 at 6:40 PM

      Thank you Nicklas Arthur. In answer to your question of: “Would I not in fact be REGISTERING my non-compliance with the very ficticious entities that I am trying to throw off?” Answer: No where in Our Documents or within the process of serving said Documents were to so called “fictitious entities” ever recognized. Said Documents were served upon the Constitutional Offices and not persons within the “appearance of reality”.

       
    • Ambassador David

      May 27, 2013 at 10:05 AM

      Psa 115:7 They have hands, but they handle not: feet have they, but they walk not: neither speak they through their throat.
      Psa 115:8 They that make them are like unto them; so is every one that trusteth in them.
      Psa 115:9 O Israel, trust thou in the LORD: he is their help and their shield.
      I agree with brother Arthur, that if you speak to The State of Idolatry or The IRS or any such other Fiction conjured up from the pit of hell into ones imagiNation then you give them life,, in most cases.
      Exception would be if while speaking to a real person you say something like bring forth my Accuser so I can face them like a man as their U.S. constitution says I have the right to face my Accuser and My Bible says I have the Dity to face Thee Accuser, so we can determine if there actually has been any Damages and so I might settle with them whiler we ‘Yet Be In The Way with them’ before it becomes a State or Federal Case.
      Of course Our Proper Christian God given Name usually comes 1st,,,
      but the facing accuser, Injured Party is easier for bystanders to comprehend,, and that doesnt mean the right to face the accusers flunky but if the case is important enough for myself to have to be there then it should be important enough for my adversary to Appear.
      P.S. I nave been telling people that for the last 8+yrs after many years in courts and jails now and then, that apparently whenever a cop polls up my Name on his computer that it must say to So or do anything that turns them on but whatever they do dont bring me home with them.
      PPS Arthur, I met you once when passing through Fresno area with Embassy crew and have been very concerned for years about Randy Lee and crew and more recently about Kaweah crowd being villainized by anti defamation league and southern poverty gangs,,
      Please feel free or appreciated if you would dare to contact me at AmbassadorDavid@Hotmail.com, been feeling rather short on fellowship the last couple years as Our Lord seems to be intent on teaching me patience.

       
  27. Lloyd

    July 15, 2011 at 3:34 PM

    That’s a good and clarified response.

    My point with the “backing out of the rabbit hole” metaphor, is that instead of them (gov-co) slapping paper work on you, you the desiring soveriegn is slapping paper work on them, another words using their system in reverse to your benefit, all without them being able to out manevour you, because your “slingshot” is so skilled and talented that there is no way on earth that they can resist you, same as the shepherd boy, who through excerise of his skill perfected it to a point that made him lethal dangerous not only to lions and tigers, but to the biggest meanest baddest and most arrogant giant out there.

    Remember, the underlying power comes from Yahweh, who through our intellect and excerise of such, guides us through victory after victory.

    I recently fought (and WON God be praised) five (5) speeding tickets that an out of control cop slapped on me.

    I used the principle metaphor as outlined above, and politely, belligerently without harming anyone, backed myself out of the rabbit hole!!
    Was it easy? Absolutely not! Did it work? Well I have the record on paper: five (5) dismissals – five (5) $0.00 fines!!

    Praise be to Yahweh!

     
  28. dan

    July 15, 2011 at 3:40 PM

    I would like to express my disappointment with Dennis Craig for putting “traps or lies” apparently in a couple of places in his documents as revealed to us in his 18th appearance with Al. My reasons for this are biblical as well as he justifies his reasons for the traps as biblical. For 17 weeks he has been telling us that these are the documents used to establish his standing or character which apparently was not the whole truth. Is this how you act under the law of “love your neighbor as yourself”? It seems like the warnings of owning and understanding the paperwork before filing it are adequate to prevent people from using it as a carbon-copy to freedom. With that said, I still love Dennis and appreciate his time with intent of restoring freedom to the people.

     
  29. dan

    July 15, 2011 at 3:55 PM

    My question to Dennis regarding the validity of USC 18 being adjudicated by the supreme court is, Why can’t it be brought up post prison in light of the fact that subject-matter jurisdiction can be brought up anytime and attacked directly or collaterally to show it was lacking? This would seem to counter your reason of “the law was already used” by the time of post prison to substantiate the supreme’s ruling on the invalidity of USC 18 argument.

     
  30. PatriotOne

    July 16, 2011 at 11:52 AM

    “I don’t ever recommend that you “believe me”. I only hope that you’ll consider what I have to say and then do enough research to verify if what I’ve said is mostly true or mostly false.”

    What I am concluding from reading this thread is:
    1) Some government employees know that Thee People are maintained under perpetual arrest.
    2) Some government employees know that the forms forced upon Thee People (SSN, LICENSE) are the “things” that maintain the arrest.
    3) Some government employees refuse to disclose the truth that Thee People do not need to sign forms in order to sustain their lives.
    4) Some government employees, namely the POLICE, do not know that Thee People do not need to sign forms to maintain their lives.

    I can picture a GOVERNOR appearing on national TV – holding up 30 pieces of paper and stating;

    “”Jon Doe has filed these pages declaring his natural state of freedom. He has commanded “my” OFFICE to recognize his natural state, and my OFFICE shall honor and follow his commands. “My” OFFICE has forwarded Doe’s commands to every ‘state-State-STATE(‘s)’ executive agency/OFFICE informing “them” that they are also bound to Doe’s commands, and that they are, like me, personally liable, with and without their OFFICE, if “they” trespass upon Doe’s natural state of freedom.
    I will not disclose the contents of these pages to the general population because I wish to maintain “my” authority as GOVERNOR over the general population as they have given the authority to “me” without knowing they have given such authority.
    I, as GOVERNOR, have been served by Doe, and forced by Doe to leave him alone, and I as GOVERNOR am required to prevent all other government authorities from trespassing upon Doe. The rest of you are “my” servants until you, like Doe, file the proper papers.””

    5) “Our” government is actively and knowingly maintaining a lie as a means to enslave Thee People.

    How can this be the truth? and be maintained right out in the open?

     
  31. Nicklas Arthur

    July 16, 2011 at 1:35 PM

    I have listened to all of the Dennis Craig broadcast, I have read all of the Documents. I have heard all of the anecdotes. As unlikely as it all seems, it may very well be true. Notwithstanding my reticence at noticing the “authorities” of my beliefs and whereabouts unnecessarily I don’t believe for a moment that if I did the exact same things that I would get those same anecdotal results.

    Do the ‘authorities” actually have authority? Yes!
    Does their exercise of power exceed their authority when they presume that I am incompetent or in contract with them? Yes!
    Should I notice them in advance to prevent a supposed occurrence of excess? Why?
    Should I be ready to notice them whenever they approach me? Absolutely

    The Policing Powers do have authority from God because there are wicked men out there doing evil things everyday-and some of them even wear a badge or black robes. This reality is exactly why we need something more reliable than paper work filings. There is only one status that takes us out of “their” jurisdiction! That is the status of forsaking the world system and Crossing the Border into the Kingdom of Heaven, where all men Fear YHWH and keep His commandments. The Word says that you don’t know anything until you Fear God. That’s where we need to begin.

    The fear of man bringeth a snare: but whoso putteth his trust in the LORD shall be safe. (Pro 29:25)

     
  32. PatriotOne

    July 17, 2011 at 1:41 PM

    A few questions:
    Can a Man be a Man at 1:pm, and be a citizen at 2:pm through 2:30pm, then return to being a Man at 2:31pm?
    Can a Man exercise his citizen Rights when voting then return to being a free Man?
    After all, it seems that some will say that if a Man votes he surrenders his freedom “FOREVER”. But that can’t be.
    Did the ‘Founders’ create a document(s) that, if a Man participates, he enslaves his self as a citizen forever? I do not think so.
    A Man, in these uS of A’s, should participate in the political process in order to maintain a servant form of government. This would be Man acting like a citizen when necessary or when called (requested) upon to do so. When finished with the task of acting like a citizen (s)he returns to being a (Wo)Man.
    It would be the same as Joe is your neighbor, and Joe is also the GOVERNOR of The State. Neighbor Joe must ask you for permission to borrow your lawn mower, Joe CAN NOT put on the GOVERNOR uniform and confiscate your lawn mower if you refuse Joe the neighbor access to your mower. It could be looked at as a Man goes to work and is controlled by his employer, but only when at work. And if the employer becomes abusive the Man can walk out at any time. The employer can NEVER lay hands upon the Man excepting injury-damage-deprivation (Corpus Delecti) supported by evidence and facts and first hand knowledge. <- aren't these same things required by the employer/neighbor/stranger also maintained by the Constitution upon government employees/citizens?
    It seems that all things "created" by GovCo, SSN, FRN, ADIC, GED, DRIVER/MARRIAGE/BUSINESS LICENSE, are clever traps created by LAWYERS/LEGISLATURES, and only possible because Man has been forced into the FEDERAL RESERVE system.
    It seems that PRESIDENT LINCOLN paid TROOPS to arrest Men, offer them SOLDIER or death. These acts were the beginning of what we have today. Not forgetting that when the southern States vacated the united States, the United States of America changed and only the northern States remained as the United States of America.

    I don't want to leave my original intent of this post.
    Shouldn't a Man have the ability to step into and out of citizenship whenever he pleases? Into citizenship after being elected and only when acting within an office, while voting, when 'on the clock' as a government employee/ambassador/soldier – out of/without citizenship when he is in his home (shopping, playing) or visiting a National Forrest.
    Shouldn't Craig's papers of immunity apply automatically, surrendered only when choosing to act as a citizen, and when finished acting as a citizen immunity automatically returns?
    Is it against the LAW to work and earn a living being a Man and not acting as a citizen?

    This FRAUD that government employees have created really *%R^$*^(^&(&)%)% me off.
    How can the County Prosecutor accept Craig's papers, tell him to 'be with God', and then continue to confine the remaining People, and not be arrested for practicing slavery?

     
  33. Nicklas Arthur

    July 18, 2011 at 3:48 PM

    I’m still digesting that last show of admissions and confessions by Dennis. It is apparent that Alfred did not know about the supposedly intentional “traps” that were only admitted to after being discovered by the research of some of Al’s listeners. To all the suckers that tried this paperwork without discovering the “traps” – it was for your own good? Dennis’ call on Alfred’s general admonition to “not just copy the paper work” does not negate his omission. I think that this admission should have been made the first day. Because it was not, it calls into question everything presented and the presenter. What is the percentage of lie that is required to spoil the truth?

    Thou shalt not …put a stumblingblock before the blind, but shalt fear thy God: I Am the LORD. (Lev 19:14)

     
    • Dennis Craig

      July 19, 2011 at 6:29 PM

      I told no lies, I merely reworded the quotes (traps) maintaining the same meaning. A simple example would be “Mary went to town and bought a loaf of bread”, I changed it to “This loaf of bread was bought by Mary”. Same meaning, different words. The traps weren’t lies but rewording so to catch anyone stealing My intellectual Property. This was done 4 years ago. They were filed under the fictitious name of “Bennie Boop” and kept in a private file in the Recorders office without the Recorders room of records so no one could find them. I never intended to make them Public, and I’ve already explained within the shows why I changed My Mind about this fact. Since then I’ve almost died twice (in March of this year) and was diagnosed with acute calcium buildup in the brain and was given up for dead by the Medical association. I’m currently undergoing a non-medical procedure and am almost completely well. I forgot about the traps until Micheal refreshed My Memory. I could have said they were mistakes, but then I would be telling a lie. I now know first hand how the Messiah felt when He was crucified. Shame on ya’ll, but I forgive you. Now lets move on.

       
      • Nicklas Arthur

        July 20, 2011 at 2:31 PM

        “let God be true, but every man a liar”

        I cant imagine how I wronged you that I would need your forgiveness Dennis. It was to your shame that you “forgot” about your traps, therefore you who need to apologize and seek forgiveness. Not from me though, as I follow the biblical maxim above, I would not fall into one of those traps. Perhaps you should follow your own advice and move on-perhaps concentrate more on your own health. I wish you well.

         
  34. Darell Mckissick

    July 19, 2011 at 2:37 PM

    Very interesting stuff. I have read most of the documents, but not listened to any radio appearances because of the time constraint. Hopefully one day I will have time. I have bookmarked and will be looking here. Thanks Adam for all you do.

    Now for my 2 cents worth on the subject.

    Some time ago I read an article by someone claiming to be a former judge who provided the key??? to getting out of the “system”.

    Simply put, it is to identify yourself as a BENEFICIARY of the trust established by and through the Constitutions, fed and state.

    I also noticed in Dennis’ papers that the exact same declaration was made, that he was a BENEFICIARY of the trust, as opposed to an officer/trustee.

    It was suggested that if you ever got to court, identify yourself as the beneficiary and appoint the judge as trustee in the matter, along with a demand that he discharge whatever business they are trying to involve you in. making sure, of course, the court is of record.

    Whether or not that will work, who knows. But it seems to me that since the system HAD to be established as a trust, you can only be two things in relation to it.

    An officer/trustee of the trust, OR a Beneficiary. SSN’s etc just make you an officer/employee of the trust instead of a beneficiary.

    There is no way to be both simultaneously, unless you choose to do so in a PRIVATE trust YOU established. Apparently we are all assumed to be officers of the trust, while the court appoints itself as trustee to decide your punishment for acting improperly as an officer of the trust. It is presumed there only officers of the trust present, unless an injured victim is present to be the beneficiary. If not, The State is the presumed beneficiary for purposes of litigation.

    I don’t think that most of what is in Dennis’ papers is necessary. Less is more in some cases.

    Notwithstanding, when you “appear” in any of the corporate courts you are doing so as an officer of the corporation the court administrates on behalf of.

    I have researched things as thoroughly as time permits for the last several years. Still, nothing is totally clear. It appears, however, that the way to remove yourself from being an officer is to identify yourself as a beneficiary and let them disprove it. All Men are beneficiaries of the trust, all gov corp officers are trustees/employees.

    As officers hired by the trust, all officers work for the trust in a general nature (enforcing Trust rules against other officers) unless specifically directed by a beneficiary to handle a specific matter on their behalf. That places a fiduciary responsibility to YOU on the officer to act as trustee on your behalf, who can then be held accountable when that fiduciary duty has been violated. Furthermore, you can appoint multiple trustees and make one out of every officer that you encounter. Until such time as the matter has been discharged by the trustee(s), they are beholding to you and not the corp.

    I don’t think it is about claiming Sovereignty or that you are superior to the officers. It seems to be more about your relationship to the trust that is most important. As a beneficiary, you have the lawful right of Discharge, as debts can no longer be paid. The officer/trustee has an obligation upon your DECLARED and or written appointment to discharge it on your behalf.

    I know Adam got on the trust kick in the Anti-Shyster reports. I think that is the way to go. Appoint any and all officers standing against you as Trustees, giving each a demand to discharge the matter they have presented you with.

    Dennis, you have put in a lot of work and I commend you for it. But I think, at this time, it is nothing more than on which side of the Constitutions you place yourself. Officers have no rights, beneficiaries can do no wrong (outside of injury) and can not be held accountable for the officer/trustees actions and charges. The fiduciary responsibility lies with the officer, beneficiaries are Sovereign.

    Your papers accomplished that, and I think that is ALL they needed to do.

    All opinions are greatly appreciated. Our battle against evil is made harder because the evildoers do not recognize their own evil deeds. Fortunately, I know that God will not recognize them when the time comes.

     
    • Adask

      July 19, 2011 at 4:17 PM

      Hi Darrell,

      I basically agree with all you’ve written–except for one point: my name is not “Adam,” it’s “Alfred”.

      Thanks for writing.

      Alfred (not “Adam”)

       
      • Dennis Craig

        July 19, 2011 at 5:08 PM

        Thanks Adam!

         
      • Darell

        July 19, 2011 at 5:55 PM

        Sorry Alfred. I don’t know where that came from, but it will not happen again.

        Danny, I will make some time to try to listen to the shows to see what it clears up. Can you tell me the first presumption that throws it way off technically.

        As an aside, I also see that you have denied “allegiance” to the corp, which is also important, as allegiance is what creates a duty in the first place.

        I appreciate the fact that I can communicate with the likes of you.

        By the way, Adam and ALFRED are equal…neither exists.

        Thanks guys…

         
    • Dennis Craig

      July 19, 2011 at 5:06 PM

      Please take time to listen to the recordings. Your presumptions are technically way off point because you lack knowledge being disclosed in the Audio archives. The archives are available through the American Voice Radio archives for a nominal fee. Said individual recordings are free for a short time after the show airs. After a week from the previous show they must be obtained from the archives unless someone knows of another way to obtain.them. You might want to search the blog to see if someone can make them or has already made them available another way.

       
    • Mark McCoy

      July 20, 2011 at 5:45 AM

      Darrell,

      You say,
      “Some time ago I read an article by someone claiming to be a former judge who provided the key??? to getting out of the “system”.
      Simply put, it is to identify yourself as a BENEFICIARY of the trust established by and through the Constitutions, fed and state.”

      Why would I want to identify myself as anything other than a man? Why would I want to take on another persona, such as a beneficiary? I was not born a beneficiary, I cannot be made a beneficiary, I have to think I am a beneficiary and act as a beneficiary. As a man in a world of nature why would anyone want to engage in becoming another fiction? There is no key needed to get out of the system, All one has to do is not act as though they belong to the system.

      Furthermore:
      “It was suggested that if you ever got to court, identify yourself as the beneficiary and appoint the judge as trustee in the matter, along with a demand that he discharge whatever business they are trying to involve you in. making sure, of course, the court is of record.”

      “There is no way to be both simultaneously, unless you choose to do so in a PRIVATE trust YOU established. Apparently we are all assumed to be officers of the trust, while the court appoints itself as trustee to decide your punishment for acting improperly as an officer of the trust. It is presumed there only officers of the trust present, unless an injured victim is present to be the beneficiary. If not, The State is the presumed beneficiary for purposes of litigation.”

      Really? Of what right do I have to appoint a judge as a trustee? We are assumed to be officers of the trust? Who cares what one presumes me to be? Let them presume. Are we to go scurrying through laws, regulations, constitutions…etc. every time someone presumes us to be something we’re not just so we can prove we’re not what they presume?

      I am not a beneficiary, an officer, a trustee…. There is no trust, no judge, no government. There is only a delusion perpetrated by men to keep other men under control and sap their wealth. I refuse to say I am anything other than a man; no citizen, beneficiary, American, patriot…. it is all nonsense. There are just varying levels of traps laid for the mind to keep you from realizing what you really are.

      Let any man appoint himself to be anything over me or claim I am something I am not. People are trapped in a game and they claim to deny it, but then emulate the very things that game defines in order to “free” themselves. I think not.

       
  35. Nicklas Arthur

    July 19, 2011 at 5:52 PM

    FIND ALL ALFRED W/DC FILES HERE FREE
    http://wwfar.com/mp3s/DC/
    COMPLIMENTS OF FirstAmendmentRadio.com

     
  36. Darell

    July 20, 2011 at 1:24 PM

    Hi Mark,

    I am quite aware of who I am. My post was in regards to dealing with the fraud if you are ever forced into it. The so-called courts do not recognize Men, no matter how much you bleed for them.

    They DO recognize beneficiaries and officers of the trust they administrate. Beneficiaries are protected by it, officers are penalized by it.

    My advice to be invisible, but sometimes the corp finds a target and there is no way out without being dragged into the Kangaroo system. That is where you should appoint, on the record, the judge and any other participants to act on your behalf. Place a fiduciary responsibility on them to honor their oath and your protections. Otherwise, they act in their own interest, which is not yours.

    When you are walking the streets as a free man, it is no problem to say you are not a beneficiary or officer or trustee. But when you get forced into their court, you had best position yourself as the one who will benefit from the outcome.

    There are a lot of good Men in jail right now because they claimed themselves to be free Men in a place where that means nothing. It’s all about the trust and which side of your are recognized to be on.

    Again, only even consider what I said as a possibility if you are FORCED to go into the den of vipers. Til then, say nothing and live free.

     
  37. C. Y. Smith

    July 20, 2011 at 7:00 PM

    Dennis Bynum from Indiana!!? I know of this snitch! WATCH OUT what you say or do around this guy! He’s jammed-up lots of folks!!! Best to just avoid any and all contact! He is a federal (FBI) informant (SNITCH)! That’s why, after the detective ran the N.C.I.C., there’s a “DO NOT HOLD” notice! And the order to “release him and avoid further contact!” “No interest!” “Hands off!” “Foreign dignitary?!” “ROYALTY?!” Man please! Can’t you guys see?! Slap yourself awake, take the blinders off and open your ‘intelligence’ (the third eye reveals) and ‘read between the lines.’ “But this code she (the detective) ‘would not’ (COULD NOT) talk about!”, or, say what exactly it (the ‘code’) is saying?!!!” Etc., etc. ??????????????????????!! Go back and read it now that your eye has been opened!
    WATCH OUT! YOU’VE BEEN WARNED!

     
    • Nicklas Arthur

      July 20, 2011 at 7:52 PM

      My thought exactly, seems a much more likely conclusion than the *wishful thinking* Royalty…

       
    • B. S. Smyth

      July 20, 2011 at 11:36 PM

      Anyone who knows Dennis, will know a trumped up reply when they see it. He’s no snitch to anyone, for any reason. This man stands up for his beliefs, and has devoted his life to them. He doesn’t deserve the snitch comment. It looks to me as if the person writing it is holding a grudge!

       
      • C. Y. Smith

        July 21, 2011 at 3:47 AM

        Whatever, blind fool! I have no grudge; however, I do despise janus-faced snitches! I know for a fact he is a f’in snitch and people he’s informed on and caused much pain! Many more people know of this scum-bag fraud and his two-faced, backstabbing deeds! He even has admitted it (his snitching), it’s well known. Can’t hide that kinda shit for long. That’s why he’s hiding out in the woods (“you got to move, child”) from his many victims, with police protection (watching his back), of course! Now, he’s claiming it’s just rumors/lies designed to discredit him (his greatness/vanity)!
        It’s TRUE! But, of course, you can stay in denial (blind) and believe what you want , for your own biased reasons.

         
    • Dennis Craig

      July 21, 2011 at 3:00 AM

      This individual, whoever, or whatever they think they are, or think they know, is apparently talking about some one other than Me, as My Name is not “Dennis Bynum” never has and never will. However, I have a son named by Me as “Dennis Craig; Bynum Jr. He does go by the Name Dennis Bynum. I didn’t name him that but that’s what he uses. I named him “Dennis Craig Jr., but he uses the first name and the Surname (Identity of Our Bloodline but not given at Birth). I don’t believe that My son is an informant of any kind to any body, however all children normally have secrets from their parents. I cannot say unequivocally upon My life that he is not, but I can say with good conscience that I don’t believe that he would do anything of that nature.

      However, I think I have a good idea who wrote this nonsense and appears that their purpose is to divide and conquer and attempt to discredit Me. This is to provide notice that their efforts have failed. Wouldn’t you concur “P.J. Brooks?

       
  38. Dennis B

    July 21, 2011 at 7:51 AM

    To whom ever gives a #@*^. I have known my dad for 46 years as of today. If anyone would know it would be me. I’ve never seen anyone with black suits and ear pieces show up at our door. What I have seen is a dad work his ass off to provide for his family which I am greatful. The acuzations of the above are an attempt to create a wedge between what my dad is striving to teach anyone willing to listen. Knowledge is power and he is trying to give you all that you can to try and better yourself. Now as for me, I am not and have never been. The closest thing I have become as per being any type of law inforcement was being the sherriff as a child playing cops and robbers. My life is God, Family and work and instead of playing rediculous statements like the above I suggest that you put these three in your lives as well and you wont have time to post bullshit.

    Get real and by the way, get God.

    Dennis Bynum, eldest son of Dennis Craig

     
    • enlightened

      January 2, 2012 at 11:41 AM

      Dennis Jr.

      I have not seen this man lift a finger to do for himself. I have personal knowledge of him spending alot of time attempting to find a girlfriend with money. I know and can prove he was spending 3-4 nights a week at a bar before I talked to the owner who I am well aquainted with about him. I also notified friends at the only other bar in the county of myconcerns. It is the way we live here. We take care of each other. I don’t know anyone that has Bible studyto “teach the Bible” to someone else then goes to the local bar. Everyone I know that studies the Bible doesn’t go to bars. If he is such a good father why isn’t his camper parked on your land. Didn’t your mother loose her land for not paying taxes???? I may be wrong is she your stepmother.? I have observed him being very abusivverbally to his exgirlfriend on more than one occasion. I myself was to be scared when he fired shots to intimidate but my gun is bigger and I am not going to allow him to scare anyone I care about. I grew up in the woods. I grew up using guns and living off the land. I know how to protect myself and my family. Your father is very good at twisting words and telling stories. Maybe you can give names of people and places to obtain proof of his actually doing what he claims to have done. I can disprove much of what he claims to be true.

      I will help you to understand we are not stupid hillbillies who you can push around. Your dad thought he picked a good place but he made a big mistake. He was arrested and he has a court date Jan 19 @830am. The entire community knows who and what he is. I will prove to him that I keep my word. Your father has words and abilaties but they do not appear to be from God. First to live in God then to want to share this with others thru scripture. How does he convince a person he is the only one who knows the truth????? I WILL NOT BACK OFF. You picked on the wrong people. Mr. royalty. I am not afraid just a little pissed. More to come

       
  39. Nicklas Arthur

    July 22, 2011 at 10:40 AM

     
    • Adask

      July 22, 2011 at 4:13 PM

      I doubt that there’s any other kind.

       
  40. Jethro

    July 25, 2011 at 10:41 AM

    Does anyone recall the date of the radio show in which Dennis and Al discussed the particulars of what was contained in the cover letter accompanying Dennis’ documents when they were served on the U.S. embassy in Canada? Also discussed was who the U.S. ambassador to Canada was then vs. who is there now.

     
    • Dennis Craig

      July 25, 2011 at 11:02 AM

      In response to the question by Jethro: “Does anyone recall the date of the radio show in which Dennis and Al discussed the particulars of what was contained in the cover letter accompanying Dennis’ documents when they were served on the U.S. embassy in Canada? Also discussed was who the U.S. ambassador to Canada was then vs. who is there now”.

      I offer the following comment!

      In My humble opinion and the fact that We haven’t completed the study course. Anyone that is unable to fabricate with their own words specifically what needs to be conveyed to the “Office of Ambassador”, and the subsequent directives to the “office of the Secretary of State of The United States of America” is yet unprepared to make such an act. I believe that this individual still lacks sufficient understanding to make this move. I further believe that this individual might run into trouble because of that lack of understanding. I would not advise anyone to perform an act that they don’t fully understand. People such as this often fail and then claim that the process doesn’t work. In other words, they falsly accuse the messenger because they were ill equipped to animate the position. Therefore, I present this warning so that this individual will proceed at his or her own peril. You have been Noticed.

      Dennis Craig.

       
  41. Jethro

    July 25, 2011 at 2:56 PM

    Thank you for your comment, Dennis. Is your opinion that I “still lack sufficient understanding” due to my question, and/or something else?

    When do you anticipate discussing the topic of service again on Al’s show?

     
    • Dennis Craig

      July 25, 2011 at 4:57 PM

      To ask the question is to answer the question. If you really understood you wouldn’t be asking the question, you would be performing the necessary requisites to accomplish the goal without hesitation. I’m here to help people learn, but they won’t learn if I do it for them.

      There is an old adage, that being, if you fed someone a fish dinner you’ve given them one meal, however, if you teach them how to fish, they’ll be able to feed themselves for the rest of their lives. I’m trying to teach you how to fish so that you can make it on your own. After all, I might not be present in this life tomorrow or a Month now, as everything is in Father-YHWH’s hands. If that were true who will feed you that fish dinner every time that your hungry?

       
  42. Jethro

    July 26, 2011 at 8:47 AM

    I believe you can relate to the diligent mindset: “If a board may need but one nail, I’ll use four to make sure.” So perhaps I have used enough nails, perhaps not. I’ll be assured I do when I compare what I have against “what works”. As you have generously offered to share that knowledge as to what works, if you see fit to discuss the topic of service again you will have an attentive audience of at least one.

     
  43. Greg

    July 28, 2011 at 8:54 PM

    Dennis i’ve tried to email you on more than one occasion, every time I get a delivery failure message. I am not sure what is going on, is your email exactly withoutpredjudice1@gmail.com ?

     
  44. Greg

    July 28, 2011 at 9:02 PM

    my bad, got it

     
  45. Dennis Craig

    July 28, 2011 at 9:47 PM

    yes

     
  46. joblessinusa

    August 6, 2011 at 8:39 AM

    BEWARE! A nice SWAT team can take you out in under a minute. No amount words nor paper will save you. A bunker mentality is just as fatal. Sit there with your gun and wait. They will STILL get you… GITMO anyone?
    LESS is MORE!

     
  47. Dennis Craig

    August 6, 2011 at 10:53 AM

    Another scare tactic artist invades this blog to scare the participants who study this revelation and I answer with the following assurance and promise of the Almighty Ever Living-YHWH: Himself through His Prophet Isaiah:

    “But all tools formed against you shall never succeed; You shall conquer all tongues that rise up in contention; The Lord’s-‘YHWH’ servants have this right from Me,” says the Lord-‘YHWH’ ” This is My promise of assurance and I’m sticking to it without your seed of deception to create fear amongst the students of this revelation. Quoted from Isaiah 54:17, The Holy Bible in Modern English by Ferrar Fenton

    REPENT sower of discord for there is a valid reason why you are as you say: “joblessinusa” Of ye of little faith, ye walk the path of destruction and your reward draweth nigh. REPENT while there is still time, for the wages of sin is death and by your conduct you are already counted amongst the walking dead. The humble servant and messenger of YHWH and His Kingdom on Planet earth has Spoken. Do you have ears to hear? If not crawl back into the hole in which you came from wicked one.

    Dennis Craig: Bynum, Ephrayim, Yishra-El, Elohim, Plenipotentiary of the Kingdom of YHWH on Planet Earth. Praise YHWH, Alleluia and Selah

     
  48. indio007

    August 6, 2011 at 7:13 PM

    Bunch of bunkum if you ask me.

    Padelford, Fay & Co. vs. The Mayor and Aldermen of the City of Savannah. 14 Georgia 438, 520

    “But, indeed, no private person has a right to complain, by suit in court, on the ground of a breach of the Constitution, the Constitution, it is true, is a compact but he is not a party to it.”

     
    • Adask

      August 6, 2011 at 11:49 PM

      The Padelford case was decided in A.D. 1854–14 years before ratification of the 14th Amendment. Padelford may have been true prior to the 14th, but is that principle still true today of 14th Amendment citizens of the United States?

       
  49. Dennis Craig

    August 7, 2011 at 8:13 AM

    What people fail to realize is that the quote above from the “Padelford” case is about an artificial entity being called a :”private person”, Said “private person” was not a Man and couldn’t make a claim on the Constitution, as said Express Trust didn’t incorporate or contemplate artificial persons within the Charter. Only Men are Beneficiaries to Our Constitution and qualified to make a claim upon it.

     
  50. Nicklas Arthur

    August 7, 2011 at 9:33 AM

    I pledge allegiance to The King of Kings
    and to His Kingdom come on earth as it is in Heaven.
    One Holy Nation under The Heavenly Father
    With Grace, Mercy and Justice for all.

    For me to make a claim upon the construct of men
    would be to make another allegiance…
    To trade my birthright for a bowl of pottage.

    America is the second beast of Revelation 13.
    http://crosstheborder.org/america

     
  51. Dennis Craig

    August 7, 2011 at 11:26 AM

    My hope and Prayer is that “The King of Kings” that you reference above is The One and only that Our Father-YHWH Commanded “shall be called Immanuel” pursuant to Isaiah 7:14. This commandment is further referenced in Matthew 1:23 wherein it states: “Now, this fulfills the Prophesy that a virgin shall (Command) conceive, bear a son and THEY shall (Command) call His name Emmanuel”. I further hope that your not deceived by the false substitute name “Jesus”. I can find nowhere within the purported “New Testament” that “The King of Kings” commanded be called “Immanuel” ever said or did any act whatsoever. This deceit represents the biggest act of deception since the serpent deceived “Eve” in the Garden of Eden. As I’ve said on the radio broadcasts, this deception permeates every facet of Our Lives which encompasses GOD, government, and religion. In other words, every reference to purported “Jesus” is suspect and challenged by Me as a humble servant of the Almighty Ever-Living-YHWH in which I call Yod-He-Wau-He, and others call Him Yahweh. I now sign off in My official Name and Title given by YHWH Himself.

    Dennis Craig: Bynum (Baynham), Ephrayim, Yishra-El, Elohim, Plenipotentiary of The Kingdom of YHWH on Planet Earth.

     
  52. Ooh.

    September 29, 2011 at 2:30 PM

    In the articles of confederation #11 was Canada taken in by this? secondly
    I was stopped by police and after 12 min. of discussion the officer gave everything back to me and asked me to compleat my paper work then remarked he wished never to stop me again !
    we all need to think on our feet.

     
  53. Dennis Craig

    October 2, 2011 at 9:08 PM

    My comment is a question. Did you use any of the concepts presented in Our Radio show and/or the paper work posted on Alfred’s Blog under this tread? If you did, please explain with the greatest detail possible so that others can benefit from your experience.

     
  54. Mark M

    October 8, 2011 at 12:43 PM

    Is there a copy of all these docs that are editable???

     
    • Adask

      October 9, 2011 at 1:44 AM

      That depends on whether you’re a vegetarian or not. (Joking–“editable” sounds like “edible,” see?)

      The only documents I have are those on the blog.

       
  55. Al Barcroft

    October 11, 2011 at 1:16 AM

    I have just read the list of blogs above. I was associated very closely with Dennis Craig Bynum for a considerable period of time. He has gone by Dennis Bynum, Dennis Craig Bynum, Dennis Craig, and Craig Bynum, from time to time, all to my personal knowledge. I doubt seriously that he is a federal agent, or in any way connected with the federal government other than by his own actions [just like most of those reading this]. It is my considered opinion that anyone who follows him will pay dearly for it. I did, and I lost my home of 30 years. Anyone who buys that the government has him listed as “royalty”, or anything close, is a fool. If he is that, ask him to show you his “sovereign passport” or other travel papers. Surely royalty can travel outside the United States — right??? If he has made some papers himself, he cannot get through an airport, royalty or not.

    Since my involvement with him, I have discovered that there is, in fact, a silver bullet. I have used it to stop criminal action against myself, my wife, and a number of other people. If properly applied, it does not/cannot fail, and it is simple.

    I find it sad and discouraging that out of all the e-mails, and all the remedies listed here and on other sites of this type; and, spread by hundreds of “gurus”, that which will save you is not even mentioned. So I’m going to tell you one time. I have nothing to sell, and I don’t want any of your money. I simply feel an obligation to share what I know. I don’t care whether any of you believe what I will tell you, but if you research it, you will not be able to dispute any part of it with fact.

    If you do not wish to be in the system, get out of it. If you stay in the system, you will be forced to follow the law of the system [CODE]; or, you will pay a dear price. That’s what’s called “voluntary compliance”. Nobody can force you to stay in the system because “constructive fraud” was the instrument used to get you there in the first place; however, if you do not call it constructive fraud, it will stand forever as proof of your voluntary compliance. Anytime you are brought into one of their “courts”, there is an overriding presumption that you are there under voluntary compliance, and that you are a citizen of the United States or other person under the jurisdiction thereof. If you do not properly rebut it, it will stand and you cannot win. Yelling you’re not does not rebut it.

    So, how do you “un-volunteer”? Simple – get rid of your social security number. That is the tie that binds. It is maintained only by citizens of the United States and other persons subject to the jurisdiction thereof. If you have it, you are in the system pursuant to the 14th Amendment, and the CODE does apply you and govern you. The courts of the States and of the United States have full jurisdiction over you regardless of how many of Dennis’ papers you file. No Man can be required to accept or be governed by the CODE because it is strictly for artificial beings. But, because our forefathers saw fit to give “We the People” the unlimited right to contract, we can contract ourselves into a state of voluntary servitude and become an artificial being in a commercial system. It’s easy to know if we have. If you have a social security number, or use one in any way, you have.

    But, you say you want to be sovereign. Sovereignty in America comes from only one source – you must one of the sovereign American People i.e. a direct descendant of one of the original “We the People” who were acknowledged as sovereign by the King of England in the Treaty of Paris [1783]. If you can trace your linage there, you can Claim sovereignty as one of the sovereign American People as soon as you get rid of the demonic number. If you cannot trace your linage there, you will have to swear to a lie or never be sovereign in America. Sovereignty is a matter of linage. Always has been, always will be. You either are, or you are not. But unless you claim it, you will never possess it.

    Now you ask how does that help you when you get drug into court. In 1976, the United States passed a CODE, 28 USC 1603-1611, called the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. It is the silver bullet. It is intended for use only by American sovereigns who have not become disabled by accepting a social security number and transgressing into the system [although others have been allowed to use it to hide its true nature]. Simply stated, it gives an American unencumbered by a social security number, immunity from the courts of the United States and of the States. When you are brought into court, you declare that you are immune pursuant to the FSIA, 28 USC 1603-1611 et al. The court will be forced to hold a jurisdictional hearing. You will present your evidence that you are not a citizen of the United States, rather one of the sovereign American People; and, after the U.S. Attorney tries to scare you into reneging, the court will find it has no jurisdiction, and any records which may have been held concerning you will disappear immediately. You know Dennis hasn’t done this, because by his own statements, they maintain records on him. They have no authority to maintain records on a sovereign, and they don’t.

    The draw back — once you do this you can never use a social security number again. This is the only way out of the system. I will not argue about this or defend it. It is accurate, and I used it and saw it used many times. It cannot fail if you cover your bases. Also, it is very simple. It requires one short document filed in the public record and the guts to stand up. Nothing more.

    By the way, this section of the CODE is the only section you can use because it removes yu from the CODE. For your information “without prejudice” is a remedy given by the Uniform Commercial Code, and using it is a benefit of the CODE and places you squarely in the CODE. I find it laughable [if it wasn’t so sad] to see these gurus trying to prove their position and standing using court cases and CODE. Just how ridiculous can you get, and how gullible are you for believing it??? If you’re sovereign, none of that applies to you.

    Al Barcroft
    albarcroft@leonardonline.net

     
    • Adask

      October 12, 2011 at 1:51 PM

      Yesterday, I received an email that read in part,

      “Al,
      “There is a man that wrote on Dennis’s blog about how Dennis is a fraud and how the FSIA is the only way to go.”

      The author offered to send me some information on the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. I replied as follows:

      “Hi,

      “I’d certainly like to see whatever documentation you have on FSIA. I’ve heard stories about FSIA for years, but I can’t recall seeing any evidence that the theory ever actually worked.
      . . . .

      “One other point: I was privy to the “deal” that was made between Al Barcroft (the man who claims Dennis caused him to lose his land) and Dennis back in A.D. 2009. The deal involved Barcroft’s 250 acre farm in Fannin County, Texas. I was a beautiful place probably worth about $1 million about A.D. 2007. But the IRS was after it. I presume the IRS had liened the property and Barcroft couldn’t sell it at any price to a conventional buyer. Whatever the reason, I know that Barcroft was going to simply abandon the property, and take whatever remaining wealth he had on his 92-foot boat (“The Great Escape”; alleged to have cost $3 million)) and head for South America.

      “Knowing that Barcroft was going to abandon the property, Dennis offered to buy it from him with 300 ounces of silver, and then fight the IRS for title to the land.

      “I was somewhat privy to this “deal” because Dennis was living on Indiana at the time and he needed someone on Texas to occupy the Barcroft property until the issue of ownership was settled in the courts. I was to be the “occupant” of the property, so I’m familiar with some of the details as I was a proposed participant for (I don’t recall clearly) most of 4 months during which time the “deal” was negotiated. I was only “somewhat privy” to the deal between Dennis and Barcroft because both parties wanted to maintain some privacy as to their actual contract and, according to Dennis, Barcroft didn’t trust me.

      “I was on Barcroft’s farm on two occasions after he and his wife abandoned the property. I helped with some of the cleanup of Barcroft’s home. Two things stick in my mind: 1) Although it was a very nice house, the carpets had to be pulled up off the floor and discarded because they were largely soaked in cat piss; 2) there were one or two filing cabinets filled with correspondence between Barcroft and the IRS. In those filing cabinets, I saw at least 20, maybe 50 unopened letters from the IRS. I don’t know what caused Barcroft to lose his land to the IRS, but I do know that you can’t fight the IRS and expect to win if you don’t even open the mail coming from the IRS.

      “The neglected condition of the house and the unopened IRS mail suggested to me that the weight of fighting the IRS for several years had finally worn Barcroft (and his wife) down to a point where they could no longer cope and simply wanted to get out–no matter what the cost. They were probably in a state of depression. It’s been a few years, but if I recall correctly, I remember Al Barcroft saying that his struggle against the IRS had so depleted him physically that he feared he was going to die within the next few months. So, apparently believing they could not beat the IRS, or at least believing that the stress of a continued fight might kill Al Barcroft, Mr. & Mrs Barcroft decided to make a run for it.

      “My point is that while Al Barcroft may be correct in claiming that the FSIA works, his allegations that Dennis caused him to lose his land appear false. Barcroft had decided to abandon that land and essentially leave it for the IRS before Dennis offered to buy it. Again, I presume the IRS had a lien on the property so Barcroft couldn’t sell the property for even 10% of it’s current market value. But when Dennis offered to buy it “within The State of Texas” and continue the battle against the IRS, Barcroft agreed to sell his land to Dennis for 300 silver dollars.

      “I never moved onto the property. Dennis remained on Indiana and various personal problems kept him from fighting in court for the property. Dennis therefore lost the property to the IRS. The IRS got the land and reportedly sold it to 3rd party for $600,000.

      “But everything I know about the original transaction between Dennis and Barcroft indicates that Barcroft had lost the property on his own (before Dennis entered the picture) and for reasons that at least partially involved Barcroft’s health.

      “Barcroft and his wife packed their bags and sailed off in 92-foot cabin cruiser sometime in A.D. 2009. Later that year he ran “The Great Escape” aground on a reef in Central America and sank his $3 million boat. See, http://edition.channel5belize.com/archives/29963 and http://edition.channel5belize.com/archives/27063 .

      “It’s rumored that Barcroft is currently residing somewhere in South America. It’s further rumored that Barcroft may have several more millions of dollars, so (although he lost a $1 million farm and a $3 million boat) he’s not hurting.

      “My point is that Barcroft’s allegations about Dennis causing him to lose his home appear to be false. His claims about FSIA, however, may be correct.

      “Again, I’ve heard about the FSIA theory for years. But I don’t recall seeing any evidence that anyone has used the theory successfully. Of course, just because I haven’t seen evidence of success, doesn’t mean that any number of successful applications of the theory may have taken place. Therefore, I would very much like to see whatever info you have that confirms FSIA’s effectiveness.

      “Thanks.

      “Al”

       
      • Al Barcroft

        October 12, 2011 at 5:37 PM

        Well, this goes to show how a little information can be totally misused and lead to a completely erroneous conclusion. First, I never said I didn’t trust you, Al. I said that you were printing misinformation that could cause people a lot of trouble. You may not remember it, but I said that to you when you were in Dallas. You told me you only posted what other people said, and that you did not research it or testify for it. That is exactly what I said to Dennis. I believe my assessment is still correct.

        About the only thing you got right in your blog is that I am not hurting for money. Thank the good Lord and the FSIA.

        The crock that you posted as firsthand knowledge is just that, a crock. You never talked to me during this entire time, so everything you got came from Dennis. Most of it is incorrect. First, Dennis never had 300 silver dollars, and he never paid me a cent for the property. If he says he did, he’s lying. Second, I was defending the property. The suit that I filed had been ongoing for over two years. I had won some battles in it, and lost some, but nothing was happening. Dennis, in his always arrogant style, convinced me that I would lose if I continued because I had not filed some of his “paperwork”, and that I didn’t have the standing to file some of it. I was tired, and my health was bad, and I had impending criminal charges looming over me. My agreement with Dennis was that he would save my property, and I would pay him $100,000 to sign it back over to me. We agreed.

        Once I had signed it over to him, he came up with more excuses than Cater ever had liver pills. Right off the bat he demanded that I make him a gift of $50,000 if I ever wanted to see my land again. He said that was the least I could do for all he was doing for me. I told him to come and get one favorable ruling in court and I would give him the $50,000 he wanted. He came and filed his paperwork. It took the court about 15 minutes to blow it, and him, out of the water. After that, the land was in his name, and I could do nothing. I did not leave the States until the matter was concluded. The criminal charges were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, and I left.

        I don’t know what happened to the house after I left. I do know it was several weeks before anyone from Dennis showed up. The house was not in the condition stated by you or Dennis when I left. It was a nice piece of property which I had lived in, maintained, and updated for the last 30 years.

        Now let’s look at what you said you knew firsthand [which you didn’t]. First, you were not “privy” to the “deal” between Dennis and I. You may have been talking to Dennis, but you never talked to me. I don’t know what Dennis was telling you, but unless he lied to you, you are lying now. You said that “everything I know … indicates that Barcroft had lost the property on his own before Dennis entered the picture.” That’s one problem with liars, they forget little details. If I had already lost the property, why would Dennis give me 300 silver dollars for it? Although that is also a lie, it’s part of what you put forth as fact. Is Dennis nuts? Okay, bad question.

        To show your total stupidity on the issue, you say, “… but I do know that you can’t fight the IRS and expect to win if you don’t even open the mail coming from the IRS”. That may be the most idiotic statement I’ve heard any of you would be patriots make. If you open a letter from the IRS, what would you do with it. If you respond, you have admitted jurisdiction [yes, even with Dennis’ famous “without prejudice” defense], and you have already lost. I don’t care what the IRS has to say. I am not within their jurisdiction – unless – I respond to their letters. So, thanks for making my point clear, and proving that I live by what I say.

        I still have several very large bank accounts in the United States, all of which they found during the trial to take the land. They tried to take them and cannot because they do not have a social security number on them. I own considerable land which came to light during the trial. I own oil and gas royalties which pay me hundreds of thousands yearly, and they found those during the trial. I have not filed a tax return or paid any taxes since 1989, and they know I am being paid large amounts. All criminal charges against my wife and me went away. What would you call success?

        One last thing for you to ponder. They claimed I owed $300,000 in back taxes. As you pointed out, money was not/is not a problem for me. Before I let them take my land, I would have paid off the lien. But when I tried, it didn’t belong to me, it belonged to Dennis who was not at all cooperative.

        I don’t blame Dennis, I blame me. But if someone had told me what I just told you before I did what I did, I would never have signed my land over to him.

        And just one personal question Al – have you ever done any of the things you presumably believe in? If so, what? Just a thought.

        As for proof that the FSIA works, you won’t find it in court records where most of the geniuses look for it. It won’t be there because the FSIA did work. There have been thousands of FSIA cases filed by Americans [I’ve been involved in well over a hundred]. Find one of them in the records. They don’t exist because the powers that be have no authority to maintain records on one of the sovereign American People. So go do it yourself, or stop whining and be a good slave. No one ever promised the path of Freedom is easy or without risk.

        You can believe what you want to, but if you follow the path laid out by Dennis, there won’t be a rose garden at the end. I have a wonderful life without any worry about the government. I wish the same for all of you.
        Al Barcroft

         
    • enlightened

      January 2, 2012 at 12:39 PM

      I like the way you stated that. My feeling exactly if you are out of the system using the system and threatening to sue others using the system are you really outside of the box? Give legal advice to others based upon your version of facts without giving proof of anykind to back it up. Dennis was arrested he says he was released without bail it seems suspicious to me I don’t believe him but I will make a call to the Bondsman who I am aquainted with just for fun. Dennis claims many things I know are false. The Morgan county mayordoes not have the authority to do what Dennis claims. I was in his office last Thursday and spoke with him. He is a christian man and I believe he wished him well and was glad to see him go as many others would be. I would like to know why Dennis feels he can do as he pleases meanwhile threatening me with lawsuit for defamation of character, child services and the sherrif. All I have to say is do your best ole boy. I have much knowledge concerning our local law enforcement and it is not anything close to being the same as anyplace else. Small county in the middle of nowhere our population is less for the county than any city in the state no one has time to fix this system you are part of it or you are the cashflow.

      Once you are accused here you are guilty nobody listens unless you have thousands for the best attorney. Many will not even touch a case here locals are part of the problem. I am going to enjoy watching Dennis’s education of Morgan County law. Picked the wrong spot to hide. Are you driving to court?? How exactly is it that you are entitled to rights if you deny having to abide by laws?? Careful I just heard illegals who had been here for many years are being deported and it has been stated they have no rights because they are not US citizxens. Also why is it Dennis that you feel you do not have to pay for services at hospitals that are required by law to treat you . Why are you in your mind exempt from obligations to pay for services rendered???? Everyone else must pay why are you diffrent ??? You use the law to get service and walk out. If you are what you say why aren’t you able to pay so intelligent and Royal and all knowing more than the rest of us???? Just wondered what your answere would be. Can anyone provide proof this man is what he says?? I have studied law for 10 years can I have a radio spot??? I will not make excuses that everyone else screwed up what I was doing. I do plan on writing a book someday.

       
  56. Dennis Craig

    October 12, 2011 at 11:26 PM

    On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 10:58 PM, overseer wrote:

    Hi Dennis

    Regarding the Al Barcroft posts on Adask’s site. I never did meet Barcroft, but I can’t understand why he is posting all these falsehoods regarding you (Dennis).

    I took Dennis out to the “Ranch” on his initial trip there, Alfred was with us, it was Feb of AD2009. The asphalt road up to the main house was full of ruts and potholes with weeds growing up through it.
    The place had obviously been abandoned – the kitchen was full of dirty dishes and spoiled food. Almost all the furniture was gone and what had been left was trash. There were cat dropping throughout the whole house, and the carpets reeked of cat piss. It was totally disgusting. A couple of weeks after you left, I took a crew out there to clean the place up. We tore out all the carpet and got most of the trash out of the house. The place still reeked and cat poop and piss, and despite spraying the rooms with clorox on my weekly trips there I never did get rid of the smell.

    More later
    Your Friend

    An email sent to Me by Our Ministry administrator.

    Dennis Craig.

     
    • Al Barcroft

      October 13, 2011 at 2:14 AM

      You people are precious. I hand you the keys to the kingdom, and all you can concentrate on is cat piss. I left in December, 2008. What happened between then and February, I cannot speak for. But what difference does it make what condition the house was in anyway? The place sold for $520,000 in a forced tax sale. What if there was no house there at all, there was still great worth. And what does any of that have to do with the fact that Dennis could not keep the IRS from taking it?

      There is no question but that Dennis had ownership of it, and all his paperwork and power couldn’t save it. Nobody is even denying that. It’s easy to understand why the Dennis apologists want to talk about a dirty house instead of the fact that nothing Dennis did worked. You would rather attack me for poor housekeeping [which is in itself a “falsehood”] than to look at the fact that nothing Dennis did worked. It never has worked and it never will work. It can’t.

      I made the mistake of trying to share with people who have lost all perspective. I won’t make that mistake again. I don’t need any of this. My life and standing as a sovereign is set. I can go anywhere and do whatever I want with no fear of government interference. I have all the money I need safely [if that is possible] in banks of my choice in accounts with no social security numbers attached. Can Dennis say that? Oh, I forgot, he doesn’t have any money to put in a bank. Why don’t one of you get Dennis to go with you to open a bank account without a social security number. Or maybe he can help you get a job without using a social security number. Why don’t one of you take Dennis on a trip that requires a passport. Oh, I forgot, he’s squarely in the CODE [without prejudice], and folks in the CODE must have and use a social security number.

      I had written all this off and put Dennis in my past for over 3 years until he managed to get my e-mail address [not from me] a few days ago and sent me an e-mail calling both myself and a friend of mine liars [Dennis had requested that my friend pull a background check on him to see what it said. He did, and Dennis was upset with what was in it]. In his e-mail to me, Dennis said my friend had lied and deceived me about his background check with the authorities because it actually show him to be royalty and a bunch of other BS, and that he was not a person to be messed with. He went on to say that anybody who slandered him would have a one million dollar lawsuit filed on them and prosecuted by the United States Department of State. Well, I call cat piss on that. Anybody who chooses to believe that will get just what they deserve. I hope that what I have said here constitutes slander [it might except truth is an absolute defense] because I have an extra million I would pay to see the State Department file a suit on behalf of the royal Dennis. So, Dennis, you’ve been called. Do it. I’d give several thousand just to hear you get anybody in the State Department to talk to you about it.

      In short, none of you have ever seen anything Dennis has done that was successful [and I don’t want to hear about traffic court]. That’s because nothing he has ever done works.

      For the rest of you, keep your head in the sand, shake your fist and yell you’re not slaves, then go use your slave number and perform you slave duties. I have a fishing trip to go on before I head down for a few weeks diving. Those who have eyes and cannot see, and ears but cannot hear. File all that BS paperwork, try to use it, and then try to figure out why you’re in deep dodo [or cat piss, if you prefer].

      I wrote to this spreader of misinformation because I felt a duty to help people who I knew were thinking about ruining their lives based on fantasies of an egotist. Just my way of giving back. I don’t feel that duty any longer.

      By the way, isn’t Dennis in hiding? How many of you has he told where he is? Kind of like Prince Charles, I guess.

      Over and Out.

       
      • B. J. Watts

        October 13, 2011 at 5:36 AM

        Dennis (do not hold/detain, the “Royal Dignitary) Craig Bynum, a.k.a. Dennis Craig, is in jail in Morgan County, Tenn! Got arrested for Driving Without a Licence, No Insurance, Improper Tag, (and Arrogance/Stupidity),etc. etc. after being pulled over while going to or leaving a Beer Joint/Bar!
        Guess they could be squeezing him for more quality information! (So, you guys need to step up the quality/value and quantity of info y’all are providing). They’ll do that (arrest) when not happy with performance/info’s not satisfactory and they want to motivate the “person” and remind them ‘who is the boss!’ Looks like the “ROYAL DIGNITARY,” ‘mister Untouchable’ got touched, and is very “TOUCHABLE!” Guess they forgot to check NCIC and ‘the code!’ IF YOU’RE STUPID AND LAME ENOUGH TO “FALL” FOR THAT LAME-ASS EXCUSE!!!

         
      • Dennis Craig

        October 16, 2011 at 9:31 AM

        Factually speaking, it was “no driver’s license”, “unregistered vehicle”, an “no insurance” which is something different than your report, and incidentally there were no citations issued. “Unregistered vehicle” means that My vehicle is not in their appearance of reality (purported Federal Republic of June 25, A.D. 1948) system. My neighbor drove My vehicle back to My domicile without question. The vehicle was guarded by two purported TN. Troopers until he got there to pick it up. They didn’t ask him who he was, if he had a drivers license, it didn’t have one of their plates on it and no insurance. But for some reason (unknown to you) said purported Troopers broke protocol and didn’t impound the vehicle and let an unidentified man drive it away, unimpeded, without their plate, or their insurance. Strange conduct, wouldn’t you say. I was literally thrown out of jail after 20 hours in their custody from the time of the road block stop, without an address, SS number, no surety, no bond money, no signature. More strange conduct, wouldn’t you say. There’s even more strange conduct on their part, but I’ll leave that to your investigative skills to find out. I’m sorry that you construe confidence, with arrogance, however I have no control of how your mind processes information and arrives at your perceptions. My confidence is based on the fact that My Heavenly Father-YHWH is in charge of all, you perceive that confidence as arrogance.

        I rely on Isaiah 54:17 “But all tools formed against you shall never succeed; You shall conquer all tongues that rise up in contention, The Lord’s (YHWH) servants have this right from Me, says the Lord (YHWH)” Page 476, The Holy Bible in Modern English, Ferrar Fenton, Destiny Publishing, Merrimac Massachusetts.

        This situation is not a bad thing, because things that will help Me, and others, will be learned from this experience. However, what you allege happened proves that I’ve been walking My talk, and talking My walk, can you say the same? Stupid you say, perhaps, but I think not, and as this thing plays out I guess we’ll all find out how stupid I Am or not. Bottom Line, and to My surprise, I’ve been given an opportunity to rise to a higher level in the knowledge that Father-YHWH has given Me. I assure you and others that all will benefit from this challenge that I face. Know this, I fear not, as My Father-YHWH’s in total control. Atheists and secularists probably believe that I’m stupid, but that’s because they don’t know My Father-YHWH. That’s their loss, not mine.

        Stay tuned!

         
  57. Adask

    October 13, 2011 at 1:39 AM

    Here’s my response to Al Barcroft’s most recent post. For clarity, I’ve highlighted all of Barcroft’s remarks with bold text. My responses are bracketed and in normal text.

    Well, this goes to show how a little information can be totally misused and lead to a completely erroneous conclusion. First, I never said I didn’t trust you, Al. I said that you were printing misinformation that could cause people a lot of trouble. You may not remember it, but I said that to you when you were in Dallas. You told me you only posted what other people said, and that you did not research it or testify for it. That is exactly what I said to Dennis. I believe my assessment is still correct.

    [My recollection of events that took place several years ago is not necessarily reliable. However, my recollection is that Dennis told me that you said that you didn’t trust me. I don’t recall you saying anything on the subject. You may have said something along those lines, but I don’t recall.
    In any case, I routinely warn people listening to my radio show to not believe any legal theories that I present. I’ve advanced that warning for years.
    If you read the articles I’ve written on my blog, you’ll be hard pressed to find any legal theory that I present that’s not peppered with words like “apparently,” “appears,” “if,” “if so,” “if that’s true,” “insofar as,” etc. I attempt make it clear in virtually all of my documents dealing with legal theories that they are only theories and are presented for the readers’ consideration, but not automatic belief.
    I present these theories as possibilities. Not as absolute truths.
    Thus, I, too, warn people that theories I present cannot be relied on.
    You might also note that I don’t sell any of my theories on my blog or radio show. The information I provide is offered for free. People can take it or leave it as they see fit.
    Because I don’t sell my theories, I need not present them as “perfect”. Because I don’t sell my theories, I have no incentive to lie. I present my idea as much as questions as statements. I’m essentially saying to my audience, here’s a theory that I think might be true—what do you think? And then I wait for the audience to help educate me. They send me email or comments on the blog that help me to confirm or refute some of the theories I advance. Because I’m not selling anything, I don’t have be defensive. I’m only after the truth. If you can show me where I’ve made a mistake, I’ll thank you for your information, and adjust my theory accordingly.]

    About the only thing you got right in your blog is that I am not hurting for money. Thank the good Lord and the FSIA.

    The crock that you posted as firsthand knowledge is just that, a crock. You never talked to me during this entire time, so everything you got came from Dennis.
    [Not true. You and I and Dennis talked in one or more conference calls over the telephone. I vaguely recall that there was more than one such conference call, but I looked in my files and found typewritten notes I took during at least one such conference call on December 27th, A.D. 2008.
    The notes are a little incoherent, because I can’t type as fast you and Dennis can talk. Nevertheless, when you see the note (reprinted below), I think you’ll agree that there are details in those notes that I could not have unless I got them from you.
    For example, as I vaguely remembered, you sold your farm to your wife so as to get it out from under liability to the IRS, then she sold the farm to a Panamanian trust.
    But according to my notes, that recollection was mistaken. According to the notes, you lost the property to your first wife in a divorce. Your first wife subsequently sold the property to your son. Your son sold the property to a Panamanian corporation called “Renhall, Inc.”.
    If my notes are correct, you couldn’t have lost the property to Dennis because you hadn’t personally owned it for a decade or more.
    If I recall correctly, I suspected back in A.D. 2009 that Renhall, Inc. was merely an alter ego for Al Barcroft. If Renhall was merely an alter ego for Al Barcroft, then it may be true that, technically, you still owned the land. But ownership was nevertheless registered in the name of Renhall, Inc.]

    Most of it is incorrect. First, Dennis never had 300 silver dollars, and he never paid me a cent for the property. If he says he did, he’s lying.
    [I have no direct knowledge of what was paid or how much was paid.
    If Dennis didn’t pay you anything for your land, did you just give it to him? That would uncommonly generous.
    On the other hand, if you weren’t the registered owner of the property but you sold it to him for anything at all, could that be construed as fraud?]

    Second, I was defending the property. The suit that I filed had been ongoing for over two years. I had won some battles in it, and lost some, but nothing was happening. Dennis, in his always arrogant style, convinced me that I would lose if I continued because I had not filed some of his “paperwork”, and that I didn’t have the standing to file some of it. I was tired, and my health was bad, and I had impending criminal charges looming over me. My agreement with Dennis was that he would save my property, and I would pay him $100,000 to sign it back over to me. We agreed.
    [I’m curious about how you fought and “won some battles over” the property if the registered owner was Renhall, Inc.. Were you Renhall’s U.S. representative? Was Renhall Inc. merely an alter ego for Al Barcroft? How did you have standing to have fought and won some battles over a property for which you were not recognized owner? Did the courts let you fight those battles as the mere occupant or renter of the Renhall property?
    I see that you did not simply give the property to Dennis for nothing, but instead entered into some sort of agreement whereby you would trust Dennis to fight against the IRS to retain the Renhall property, on condition that if he succeeded, you would pay Dennis $100,000 to return the property to you.
    If your sale to Dennis was conditioned on Dennis successfully defending against the IRS, then it’s apparent that Dennis did not satisfy the condition and the sale was never consummated. This suggests that you never sold the property to Dennis; that Dennis never owned your property or the Rehnall Inc. property—so I’m left to wonder why you blame Dennis for losing a property that you say he didn’t own, and neither did you? ]

    Once I had signed it over to him, he came up with more excuses than Cater ever had liver pills. Right off the bat he demanded that I make him a gift of $50,000 if I ever wanted to see my land again. He said that was the least I could do for all he was doing for me. I told him to come and get one favorable ruling in court and I would give him the $50,000 he wanted. He came and filed his paperwork. It took the court about 15 minutes to blow it, and him, out of the water. After that, the land was in his name, and I could do nothing. I did not leave the States until the matter was concluded. The criminal charges were dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, and I left.
    [I don’t understand how you could’ve signed property over to Dennis, if the property was owned by Renhall, Inc. If Renhall, Inc. was the recognized owner of the property, it’s unclear to me how you could ever have done anything to hold the land.
    Is it true that the “criminal charges” you refer to were filed by the IRS and then dropped because of your FSIA defense?]

    I don’t know what happened to the house after I left. I do know it was several weeks before anyone from Dennis showed up. The house was not in the condition stated by you or Dennis when I left. It was a nice piece of property which I had lived in, maintained, and updated for the last 30 years.
    [For me, that 250 acres was one of the most beautiful pieces of property I’d ever seen. Three stock ponds; one was 10 acres. You had a beautiful, brick house. A swimming pool. Half a dozen horses were on the property.
    I’ve never been fortunate enough to own anything like that. However, if I had owned that property, the IRS might have had to kill me before I’d abandon it. To this day, I remain somewhat amazed that anyone could walk away.
    I have no idea what the condition of the house was when you left. I know that when I was there—probably February or March of A.D. 2009—the garage was full of wasp nests (there might’ve 50 to 100); there were a couple of holes in the drywall walls; it was hard to find a room that didn’t stink of cat urine.
    There were four or five fairly large cages for raising animals outside the house, and also about six cages in one room at the end of the house nearest the swimming pool. It was my understanding that you and your wife raised exotic cats such a ocelots. I never saw any cats on the property, but the smell in the house was so pervasive, that it was easy to believe that a number of cats had lived in that home.
    The condition of the house did not appear to have degraded in the few weeks or months since you left. It was a beautiful home, but its internal appearance struck me as consistent with several years of neglect. Insofar as you were reputed to be reasonably wealthy, it struck me as strange that the interior of the house would be so neglected. If you had the money, you could’ve hired a maid—unless the weight of conflict with the IRS was simply grinding you and your wife into depression.
    On the other hand, if you didn’t have the money to hire a maid tend to your home, how and when did you acquire the several millions that you reportedly used to buy a 92-foot cabin cruiser and expatriate to Central America?]

    Now let’s look at what you said you knew firsthand [which you didn’t]. First, you were not “privy” to the “deal” between Dennis and I. You may have been talking to Dennis, but you never talked to me. I don’t know what Dennis was telling you, but unless he lied to you, you are lying now. You said that “everything I know … indicates that Barcroft had lost the property on his own before Dennis entered the picture.” That’s one problem with liars, they forget little details. If I had already lost the property, why would Dennis give me 300 silver dollars for it? Although that is also a lie, it’s part of what you put forth as fact. Is Dennis nuts? Okay, bad question.
    [I know that I’m sometimes forgetful–especially as I am a senior citizen. But forgetfulness does not prove that someone is a liar.
    For example, you claim that I was not “privy” to the “deal” and that I never talked to you. Again, as you’ll see from the notes below, either I was privy, or I conjured up the 751 words in the “notes” dated December 27th, A.D. 2008 just today. Given the details that are there in the notes that can presumably be verified or refuted, you have to ask yourself why would I go to such time-consuming effort to falsify a bunch of notes? What is my interest in doing this? Do you suppose I have nothing better to do than spend my time responding to your allegations and conjuring up false “notes”?
    If you think I’m so concerned about my reputation and being exposed as some sort of charlatan, that I’m willing to devote hours of my time to respond your comments and devise false “notes”—that makes no sense.
    I run this blog. If you post comments that offend me or expose me or aggravate the crap out of me, I can simply make them all disappear. Right now, I could delete all of your comments in less than 2 minutes. If I were a liar (as you suggest) why not simply delete your comments rather than go to all the trouble of trying to respond and create a false record of notes of one of our phone calls?
    My extensive response to your comments is pretty good evidence that I’m not lying. I might be mistaken about some things, but those mistakes are merely due to faulty memory—not intentional lies.
    I suspect that most people (including you) who read the “notes” (below) will probably agree that the notes are probably legitimate. Insofar as you are inclined to believe that the notes are a true record of a telephone conversation between you, me, and Dennis in December of A.D. 2008, then you’ll have to either admit: 1) that you lying in regards to this matter; or 2) you’re just as forgetful as I am.]

    To show your total stupidity on the issue, you say, “… but I do know that you can’t fight the IRS and expect to win if you don’t even open the mail coming from the IRS”. That may be the most idiotic statement I’ve heard any of you would be patriots make. If you open a letter from the IRS, what would you do with it. If you respond, you have admitted jurisdiction [yes, even with Dennis’ famous “without prejudice” defense], and you have already lost. I don’t care what the IRS has to say. I am not within their jurisdiction – unless – I respond to their letters. So, thanks for making my point clear, and proving that I live by what I say.
    [I disagree. You might be right about avoiding a court battle with the IRS if you return the letters they send back to them, unopened. Maybe. I’ve heard that argument advanced over the years. I doubt that it’s true, but I can’t say.
    However, your argument that you can stop the IRS by simply not opening their letters is absurd.
    You didn’t open a bunch of their letters. Did that stop the IRS from taking your land?
    If the strategy of simply not opening letters was enough to defeat jurisdiction, then all any of us “patriots” or even “foreign sovereigns” would ever need to stop government prosecutions would be a garbage can marked “Do Not Open File”. Every time they sent us a letter, we’d just put it (unopened, of course) in the “Do Not Open File”—and presto changeo!—the government’s case would disappear.
    Hey! We might be able to do the same thing with our utility bills or mortgage payments! Just refuse to open ‘em, and then we won’t have to pay them and the utility companies won’t be able to turn off the power and the banks won’t be able foreclose on our homes!
    What a brilliant strategy! We don’t need lawbooks or legal dictionaries. All we need is a garbage can where we can file our unopened letters!
    Boy, I can see why you foreign sovereigns are held in such high regard. You guys are really, really smart.
    And you really are a “foreign” sovereign, aren’t you? I mean you’re an American “sovereign” living in a “foreign” country (Guatemala?), right? ]

    I still have several very large bank accounts in the United States, all of which they found during the trial to take the land. They tried to take them and cannot because they do not have a social security number on them. I own considerable land which came to light during the trial. I own oil and gas royalties which pay me hundreds of thousands yearly, and they found those during the trial. I have not filed a tax return or paid any taxes since 1989, and they know I am being paid large amounts. All criminal charges against my wife and me went away. What would you call success?
    [It appears that you are a significant financial success. You former home is worth more than I could ever afford. I envy your success. But I can’t help wondering if the old cliché (“money can’t buy happiness”) might not be true.
    I think you’re a warrior. I think you like to fight. I think that after a couple of years or recharging your batteries in the relaxation of Central America (Guatemala?), you are eager for another battle and can’t find one in your relaxed locality.
    I think that might be why you’re trying to pick a fight with Dennis or me. I think you need the “action”. I think you might be sick of pina colladas and may instead be hungry to go a couple more rounds with the IRS or Homeland Security or somebody.
    Whatever your motive, it strikes me as odd that a man whose “oil and gas royalties” pay him “hundreds of thousands yearly,” would take time to fence with a couple of small-time “patriots” like Dennis and myself on a blog like this one.
    Is it possible that despite all your FSIA success, you can’t come back into The USA? Have you become something like a man without a country? Do you miss Fannin County? Do you miss Texas?
    Can you come back? Do you dare to come back?

    One last thing for you to ponder. They claimed I owed $300,000 in back taxes. As you pointed out, money was not/is not a problem for me. Before I let them take my land, I would have paid off the lien. But when I tried, it didn’t belong to me, it belonged to Dennis who was not at all cooperative.
    [Again, I don’t understand. So far as I know, the registered owner of the land was Renhall, Inc.—not Dennis.
    If Renhall, Inc. was merely your alter ego, and you actually owned the land through Renhall, Inc., how can you complain that Dennis allegedly owned the land when either Renhall, Inc. owned it, or you owned through Renhall?
    IF 1) the IRS lien was placed on your property before you ever entered into any agreement with Dennis; 2) you really had as much money you imply; and 3) all you had to do to keep a property worth $1 million was to pay off a lousy $300,000 lien, then 4) as my homies in duh hood might say—You be dumb, white boy.
    But I don’t think you’re dumb. I think you’re pretty shrewd. If so, it seems almost incomprehensible that you gave up $1 million in land that your mother had lived on, because you were too cheap to pay off a lousy $300,000 lien. Therefore, given the neglected condition of the interior of your house and the fact that you did not spend a lousy $300,000 to keep a $1 million property, I can’t help suspecting that you were not rich and didn’t have the “lousy” $300,000 needed to pay off the IRS lien.
    All of which raises a question as to When and How did you first acquire enough money to have paid off the $300,000 lien?
    If it’s true that you had the $300,000 all along needed to pay off the IRS lien, but chose to instead abandon the property and get into some sort of “deal” with Dennis to save your land for $100,000, you have nobody to blame for losing that land other than yourself.
    Are you telling me that you lost $1 million in land that your mother lived and presumably died on to save a lousy $200,000?!
    If so, one of two things would seem to be true: 1) you’re a fool who was too cheap to save his own land when he could’ve easily done so; or 2) you’re lying about having all the money needed to “easily” pay off the $300,000 lien.
    Maybe there’s a third possibility, but I can’t yet see it.
    Assuming either explanation (fool or liar) is true, it’s hard to believe you have much legitimate basis to accuse Dennis of being responsible for losing “your” property.]

    I don’t blame Dennis, I blame me. But if someone had told me what I just told you before I did what I did, I would never have signed my land over to him.
    [Again, how could you sign over land registered in Renhall’s name to Dennis?]

    And just one personal question Al – have you ever done any of the things you presumably believe in? If so, what? Just a thought.
    [Not too many.
    I published the AntiShyster from A.D. 1999 through A.D. 2002. It’s not a big accomplishment, but given my background was 25 years construction work, I take some pride in successfully publishing a magazine for 12 years.
    Of course, I did run for the Texas Supreme Court in A.D. 1992 and received 201,000 votes. Since I’m neither a judge nor a licensed attorney, that’s supposed to be illegal, but I found an federal law from A.D. 1870 that I read as authority to run and the state gov-co didn’t try to stop me.
    The IRS came after me about that time. I wrote one letter in response. I didn’t hear from them again for about 18 months. Then they called me at my job to ask when I was going to file a return. I asked when were they going to answer the questions in my letter? I didn’t hear from them again for 17 years.
    I built a group called “Citizens For Legal Reform” from a half dozen members in A.D. 1999 to an average of 325 members per meeting in A.D. 2006. We had one meeting with 800 people. We were the single biggest legal reform organization in the country. I was featured in the Wall St Journal, Washington Times, New York Post, Dallas Morning News, Newsweek, French radio, Norwegian TV and a bunch of other media outlets. I was flown out to New York to be on the Geraldo Rivera program. For a while there, I was a big fish in a small pond. It’s no beig deal, but I’m still proud of that. It’s pretty good for a man who spent 25 years in construction work.
    Lessee, I was threatened with Unauthorized Practice of Law about A.D. 2000. I stopped that with one letter. A friend of mine was threatened with the same charge about the same time. He fought the Bar, and the Bar won (it’s kinda like a song, see?). He was fined $10,000.
    I was arrested for two alleged felonies in A.D. 2002, extradited to Missouri, and held for 344 days in a level 5, maximum security jail. I was released in A.D. 2003 without ever being tried or even given a probable cause hearing. I had disclaimed my signature on the Waiver of Extradition in such a way that they couldn’t prosecute me—but I still didn’t have enough brains to compel them to release me. So I sat in the slammer until they just threw me out. It’s hard to claim 344 days in the slammer is a victory, but as a result of refusing to consent to their jurisdiction, I’m not a convicted felon. I.e., I stopped prosecution on two alleged felonies (potential penalty: 5 years for each count) without even getting into court. Maybe it’s common among “foreign sovereigns” to stop the prosecution of two felonies, but for me, that was a pretty remarkable accomplishment.
    Oooh, oooh! Then I was sued in A.D. 2006 for $25,000 a day ($9 million a year) by the Attorney General of Texas. I was the last of seven defendants. The case started in A.D. 2001. The charge was manufacture and distribution of a controlled substance (colloidal silver). The first three defendants (husband, wife and their corporation) spent $160,000 on one the best lawfirms on Texas, went bankrupt, divorced and fled Texas for parts unknown. Before they left, they sold some of their equipment and inventory to another man and the AG’s office added this new man, his corporation and trust as the 4th, 5th, and 6th defendants. He asked if I could help him, I said Yes. I volunteered to be fiduciary for his trust (so I’d have standing to speak in court) and the AG’s office added me at the 7th defendant. I was threatened with fines of $9 million per year. I read the relevant drug laws. With the grace of God, I realized those drug laws only applied to animals and devised a freedom of religion defense. The AG’s office went dead silent for five months. They came back with the chief administrative judge for Travis County taking control of the case and spent another five months trying to settle the case. We had two more hearings on jurisdiction, and haven’t heard another word from the AG’s office since A.D. 2007. After investing nearly $500,000 and 6 years in the case, the AG simply dropped it. To the best of my knowledge, I’m the first layman in over a century (first instance appeared in the A.D. 1906 Pure Food and Drug Act) to have read the drug laws and realized that they only applied to animals.
    Other than that (and a few traffic tickets), I haven’t had many successes.]

    As for proof that the FSIA works, you won’t find it in court records where most of the geniuses look for it. It won’t be there because the FSIA did work. There have been thousands of FSIA cases filed by Americans [I’ve been involved in well over a hundred]. Find one of them in the records. They don’t exist because the powers that be have no authority to maintain records on one of the sovereign American People. So go do it yourself, or stop whining and be a good slave. No one ever promised the path of Freedom is easy or without risk.
    [So, if there’s no proof that the FSIA works, are we to simply believe in that strategy because you (or other “foreign sovereigns”) simply say so? I am reminded of the “change you can believe in” advocated by our current fearless leader. We can believe in it because he says so–even though we don’t see much supporting evidence. That’s not working too well for Obama. How’s FSIA advocacy working for you without any proof?
    In any case, if the FSIA strategy works as well and as frequently as you claim, why don’t make that strategy available to others? If (as you write below) you truly wish everyone has a “wonderful life without any worry about the government,” and if FSIA is the one way to that “wonderful life,” why don’t you make that strategy available to “everyone”?
    If you’re concerned that folks are being misled by folks like me or defrauded by folks like Dennis, you ought to admit that the misleading and defrauding takes place in the absence of real knowledge. If you have the one real truth (FSIA strategy), why not make it available to all and thereby shut down all the pretenders like me and Dennis?
    As wealthy as you are, you don’t need to sell that strategy. Insofar as you’re out of The USA, I can’t see how you would be adversely impacted if the strategy was published to the American people.
    You could start your own blog or website and publish the FSIA strategy there. If it’s as good as you say, people will thank you—they’ll praise you—they’ll bless you for your assistance. Be a hero, Al. Help the American people that you’ve left behind.
    If you want, send a copy of the FSIA strategy to me and I’ll publish it on this blog. You could give those who’ve been misled by me or defrauded by Dennis a first chance to see and apply the FSIA. ]

    You can believe what you want to, but if you follow the path laid out by Dennis, there won’t be a rose garden at the end. I have a wonderful life without any worry about the government. I wish the same for all of you.
    Al Barcroft

    [Here’s the notes from a file entitled “081227 Property transferred to Panamanian Company”. This file constitutes my notes from a conference call between Al Barcroft, Dennis and myself on or about December 27th, A.D. 2008.
    It may be that some of the notes are only between myself and Dennis and Barcroft is only there for part of the time when the notes were taken.
    These notes were typed as people talked. The notes are therefore in a kind of “shorthand”. Many of the notes will seem incomprehensible to people who were not “privy” to the phone call and subject matter.
    Nevertheless, given the content and text, I think that most objective readers would conclude that these “notes” are probably pretty much what I claim them to be: a type-written series of notes taken based on a three-way conference call between Al Barcroft, Dennis and myself.
    Here we go:

    Property transferred ot Panamanian Company; DCB will buy property and assume $630K debt;

    If DCB stops IRS

    Front seat, spiritual partners transfer title to us. I have 50% interest. Held in harmony until the cows come home for both of us.

    I draft agreement with DCB
    Property put into trust, sold to Panamanian corporation, but Barcroft retains residency & control over property. IRS can’t serve Panamanian corporation.

    W/ Al Barcroft
    Phone call—
    No more IRS hearings; just trial.
    Trust is removed trice; had property; sold to son; son sold to Renhow; Renhow would sell to DCB;

    Trust purpose undisclosed by Al Barcroft.
    Nobody will try to collect

    IRS created under 26 USC 7805; which secretary created it; where was it created as federal agency? Magistrate ask USDA if he has anything to refute? “Yessir” (but produces nothing and offers no argument). Magistrate: Barcroft’s motion is denied without evidence.
    Renall, Inc.—purchased conditioned on a note. Renall owes $630K to the trust.
    Trust is true owner at this time.
    Trust if financing the property.

    1987 divorce; wife got property
    1990s current “wife” bought property from 1st wife.
    Second wife sold property to Al Barney
    Al Barcroft is trustee.
    Son bought property for $70,000 down, $630,000
    Roland Alvin Barney is a “player”.
    Al Barney DOB 12/25 (69 years old; from Michigan)

    Barcroft can collect $630K on insurance policy w/o us???
    25 acre corner piece permanently to DCB & AA. Lake access; two road access.
    Case has wrecked Barcroft’s health; aged 20 years in the last three years.

    Trial set for March.

    Two covenants; Isaac v Ishmael
    1.8.17 (terrtitorial) vs. 1…. (alternative)
    Barcroft property under Congress; defeat presumption; show property with The USA.

    Two or more witnesses; visual observation of location;

    Any contract over $500 requires contract.
    UCC 1-105, we set law within The USA.
    Contract w/ Renall is critical issue.
    What’s Renall’s right to sell the land without having paid the $630K it owes?

    I have to establish my residency outside the “United States” so I can’t be served as a defendant.

    Condition Precedent: Land is not “in the United States”. Land can’t be “in the United States”. Land not in 1948 28 USC 81-131, but nobody’s said so. At any point in the series of transactions, objection could be made. Agreement not under UCC “in this state”. Contract is under The USA.
    2 controls: Venue of property; venue of the Agreement.
    Declare venue and agreement under The State and The USA, and the objects are under objectives fo Preamble,

    Create evidence to refuts presumption that property/agreement is “in this state”.
    1851, limited liability act  “person” (fiction) legal person not subject to the common law.
    Julliard case, war money would be redeemed in specie
    1913 parallel money system established.
    20 years elapsed; agreement ex warranto until 20 years.
    1933, gold pulled under emgency, and new money system established.
    1948 This state
    1950 FRNs no longer redeemable in lawful money.
    1952 remove definitions of “citizenship” from The States
    PL 88-243, 244
    Silver removed slowly until A.D. 1970 (clad coins; 40% silver)
    1965 UCC sending letters to de jure Texas not TX (people did not object).

    Property by inference, not by law, has been bet for the private notes of the United States. Because people never said No. Therefore can’t be by LAW  taking.
    Lawyers, economists, in favor of transfer of goods and services from rich to poor had to escape takings clause. Welfare transfer mechanism to get around taking clause.
    But they can’t specifically take from Bob to give to Jim 

    We have to have contract that controls venue of the thing and of the agreement. Then the assumption is that we take in good faith. If we think there’s something wrong without

    Barcroft never denied residence, money, citizenship  liability based on legal relations. He only claimed FSIA. Has DL, passport, bank account, SSN, etc.
    Contract in public record, self-sustaining with seals, signature, The State of Texas must defend the title

    Transfers into this state were achieved by deceit and therefore estoppled. If we allege deceit, they must assume burden of proof. Fraud must be proved by the injured party. Deceit has to be disproved by the perpetrator?? Ongoing the. Alleging deceit puts burden of disproof on them. Deceit to induce you to surrender a right.

    Can a system operating by DECEIT claim in good faith that it has not tried to find a way around the takings clause? They rely on the deceit to get around the takings clause.

     
    • Al Barcroft

      October 13, 2011 at 12:34 PM

      Okay, so you make some good points. As I said in the beginning, I do not intend to get into a defensive position concerning the FSIA. Research it yourself, and decide for yourself.

      First, I don’t think anyone reading this really believes in the line of BS that Dennis puts out. If you do, so be it. I don’t.

      Second, you make strong points about my exaggerating my worth. I have no need to do that to you. You raised the issue, not me. I have nothing to prove to you or anybody else concerning the state of my finances. I simply pointed to them as a means of showing you that there is a way to have money and property in the United States without worrying that it would be seized. Take it as you will.

      Next, you make a point about my not paying off the lien. Here, I may sound a little like Dennis with excuses. But there were criminal charges pending against me. My defense was based on the FSIA. To be in covered by the FSIA, I could not have a social security number. To pay off the lien, I had to admit the debt because it had a social security number attached. I was more interested in being free than in keeping the land. If that makes me a fool, so be it.

      The land was in Dennis’ name at the end. You can verify that through the Federal Court Records in the Eastern District of Texas. They actually served him to seize it. If it had been in the name of an alter ego of mine, I could have paid it off at the end. Actually, I could have paid it off anyway, but it would have been in Dennis’ name, and he had already lied and reneged on our deal. Been done once, but not again.

      You question whether I could have paid the lien off. How do you think I bought a 3 million dollar boat [your figure, but correct] in January, 2009? They don’t sell those on the easy payment plan.

      You suggest that it would take a fool to leave a piece of property like the one in Fannin County. You should see my place now. I have a very nice guest house. You are invited for a visit.

      Your notes are not accurate. Maybe Dennis told you some of that, but to suggest that I have an SSN is totally ludicrous. I have no memory of the other issues in your notes, but if they are as reliable as the SSN note, they are totally made up.

      Al, I really don’t have a problem with you. I knew all along about a lot of the things you have done. I’ve actually always admired you. But you seem to have hitched your star to Dennis. I had put him behind me without so much as a slur, but he couldn’t leave it alone. After almost 3 years, he had to send me an e-mail lording over me again. He had to tell me that he is “royalty”. I know him to be a scoundrel. I should have never been sucked into this thing again, but I was, and I apologize for any undue remarks I may have made about you. I do not apologize for anything I said about Dennis. In fact, I could add a lot more. Anyone who has spent any time with him knows I’m right. You should know. He’s still spewing out the same line that has hurt many people before.

      As for coming to the United States, I stay there between 2 and 3 months a year. In a few days, I will be up for 3 weeks. As I said, I go where I want and do what I want. As far as being a Man without a country, I’m probably the only one reading this blog who has a country. Those with social security numbers certainly do not have a country – it has them. My passport is one that I got without a social security number, and by swearing that I am one of the sovereign American People. I did not say I was a citizen of the United States, nor did I sign anything with that on it. The State Department is required to furnish sovereigns with travel papers. It was a duty assigned them.

      You are right about one thing. My health has gotten much better and I wouldn’t mind another fight – but not against you. I would really love to help other people who want to enjoy the Freedom I’ve found. To that end, I am currently helping several people, some with criminal indictments, to free themselves of the demonic system. When I come to the States, I always spend time in the Federal Courts, so they know I’m there.

      I do not intend to answer any more allegations or defend my position again. Those reading this can draw their own conclusions. I will entertain only positive questions. Write whatever you want on this or any other blog, but I am through.

      Al Barcroft

      ps. By the way, thanks for not erasing my comment.

       
      • Dennis Craig

        October 13, 2011 at 3:47 PM

        Please stay tuned and don’t go away People as I’m preparing a response to this attempted assassination of My character by the one and only Great Escape Artist Albert Barcroft.

         
      • Adask

        October 16, 2011 at 7:38 PM

        I have no gripe with you, either, Al. My only point was that I disagreed with some of your comments.

        I, too, don’t want a fight with you. I hate these pissing contests. They consume enormous amounts of time and energy, and don’t usually generate much of reward other than, eventually, everyone’s bladder is finally exhausted.

        Thanks for the invite. I doubt that I’ll have the resources to make the trip, so feel free to make your guest house available to whoever else shows up.

        I’ve thought about expatriation. There’s more than a little aggravation involved in trying to sustain this kind of struggle. Fatigue can get to you. But I doubt that I’ll ever escape this fight. I’m pretty much here for the duration, or my duration, whichever comes first.

        God bless you and yours.

         
  58. Nicklas Arthur

    October 13, 2011 at 10:01 AM

    Well this is fun! NOT I’d druther Al just got back to being AL and stop treating this man’s paperwork as if it were the Word of God. File your papers and the Beast will wave its magic wand over them…. You’d have better chance of turning into royalty by kissing a frog. Wednesdays are just no fun anymore.

     
  59. Adask

    October 13, 2011 at 7:22 PM

    Dennis,

    Al Barcroft said he’s done with this squabble. That’s a good thing. I hate all of these damn pissing contests. If Al doesn’t want to fight with me, I surely don’t want to fight with him.

    If you’ve got something that needs to be said to clarify or dispute any previous allegations against you, go ahead and say it. But, while your term “Great Escape Artist” is clever and perhaps intended only to amuse, it also has the potential to insult and reignite a conflict that may have now be laid to rest.

    Say whatever you think has to be said, but try to avoid including statements that might insult or inflame.

    Everyone needs to “play nice” . . . as much as possible.

     
  60. B.S. Smyth

    October 14, 2011 at 3:04 PM

    I feel upset at the way Dennis is being treated. He has worked hard to turn his life around. His relationship with YHWH is genuine, and extremely strong. Any of his close friends will be able to attest to this. How unfair that anything else is being suggested.

    Dennis has given so much of himself to be on this radio show. It has cost him physically as well as financially, but his desire to help others is to be commended. Why would anyone want to do to him on a public forum, what has been published in the past few days? It is down right cruel.

    I admire Mr. Adask for all the work he has done to prove truth. You are a wonderful man, Mr. Adask, and you obviously see all the goodness in Dennis. It’s there, I have seen it, and I can tell you have as well. Bless you for defending him. Unfortunately the man that made all these claims didn’t even want to listen to situations that led up to them, so things could be cleared up. Dennis is then left holding the bag, wondering how he can defend himself. What an injustice.

    Why can’t people just give Dennis the respect to believe as he chooses? Is he bad simply because someone doesn’t agree with him? Can we all be a bit more respectful in trying to figure things out without acting out?

    Dennis is a good man. I love to listen to him on your show Mr. Adask, and I think you and he make a heck of a team. Thank you for all you do help people.

     
    • J. W.

      December 2, 2011 at 12:00 PM

      This “praise” (et. al.) of Dennis Craig Bynum (a.k.a. “Dennis Craig”) by the pseudonym “B. S. Smyth” (et. al.) is in fact being made by the same “Dennis Craig Bynum” using this pseudonym, as well as other pseudonyms used to make posts to foster the deception of interest, support and praise, to fool and motivate people with the illusion of a ‘carrot of something to gain’ to elicit or entice (fool) others to participate in his B.S.

       
  61. Dennis Craig

    October 15, 2011 at 6:17 AM

    First of all, I wish to set the record straight on these matters raised by an individual from My past named Albert Barcroft-Hereinafter “Barcroft”. I previously allowed Myself to get in a pissing contest on this blog with a student and placed My friend Alfred Adask-Hereinafter “Adask” in an involuntary position of having to end that pissing contest as if he had nothing better to do. As you will recall Adask did an admirable job concerning that task. We now come to a second pissing contest initiated by Barcroft after My sending an email concerning a statement that Barcroft made to Me just before he made his “Exit” from Texas to somewhere in South America. That original statement was that he purportedly had an attorney and/or judge friend look up My Name in the computer data base and it came back that I purportedly had no special or un-ordinary status or capacity on relation to the purported Federal Republic appearance of reality System of June 25, A.D. 1948. At that time I was unable to prove otherwise so I let the matter rest until I could obtain credible information to the contrary. In the meantime Barcroft made his Exit from Texas and I lost track of him. Recently I received an email that had Barcroft’s name as a recipient of said email and I sent the following email to that name and email address that I suspected was Barcroft’s:

    On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 8:40 PM, Without Prejudice wrote:
    Hello Albert,

    This is to let you know that your attorney friend that purportedly went on the computer and purportedly did a background check on Me as “Dennis Craig Bynum” lied and or deceived you on the results. There have been two background checks that have been made by purported law enforcement and on both results came back as “Royalty”, “Diplomat”. “do not hold”. “do not detain” “don’t even talk to him”. Any purported officer or agent that would detain Me against My will is subject to charges of “kidnapping” with a Million dollar fine prosecuted by the State Department of the United States. I thought you should know. Attached is a copy of the Identification plate on My vehicle. I have no drivers license, no insurance, and I hold full and complete title on My vehicle with a contract of Bill of sale, adjudicated and signed by a Probate Court Judge in Alabama. I presented My documentation to the County Exec in this Area and he distributed same to all agencies and told Me that I would not be bothered. Some of this can be verified on the following blogsite: adask.wordpress.com, scroll down the right hand column to the subject matter of “Dennis Craig”. A copy of My paperwork is also posted there for all to review. Alfred and I have broadcasted 27-1 hour radio shows explaining the process and all programs are archived for review at http://www.americanvoiceradio.com. We broadcast on Wednesday night at 10:00 P.M. Central at the indicated web site.

    Hope everything is going well for you,

    Dennis Craig.

    Afterwards I received the following email from Barcroft in which I have bolded and underlined certain statements for purposes of your attention on relation to this discourse, as follows:

    From: Albert Barcroft
    Date: Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 1:28 AM
    Subject: Re: F.Y.I.
    To: Without Prejudice

    Hello Dennis,

    Good to hear from you. Everything here is going very well. Thanks for your wishes.

    As for your statement about my “attorney friend”, if you are talking about anything that happened after we last talked, I don’t have a clue what you’re talking about. While I seriously doubt the veracity and reality of your claims, I know of nobody checking you out. When you made it clear that you did not wish to talk to me anymore, I went my way and have hardly given you a thought. I have not talked to anyone about you. I saw all I needed to see in the way you shut the government down on the land. I’m sure you have a whole bevy of excuses of why you couldn’t even slow them down, but I don’t care to hear them as I saw, and suffered from, the results. Whatever else you do, and whatever ridiculous claims and assertions you make, makes me very little difference.

    If you are talking about what was pulled up on you by an attorney during the trial on the land, that was not a lie. I saw it with my own eyes. I know — I should believe you and not my lying eyes, right?
    Why don’t you get a copy of the background check on yourself that is available through the Department of Public Safety [I just got mine, it’s easy to get]. I guarantee it does not mention “royalty” or “diplomat” or any of that other crapola you put out. As for your “Million dollar fine prosecuted by the State Department of the United States”, WOW. I would really like to see a copy of your Diplomatic or Sovereign passport issued by the same State Department that will take on your legal battles [in fact, I have a full apology ready as soon as I see it exists]. In fact, I’d like to see anything in writing pertaining to any of your claims from any governmental agency, office or court higher than a county court. By the way, if the government prosecutes on kidnapping, it is not a fine that stands as a penalty. Sounds good though. You should probably keep using it.

    As for me, I have successfully used the FSIA to rid myself of the criminal charges brought against me shortly after we last talked. I understand the process completely, and it doesn’t take all that crap that you put out. All of my bank accounts and property are safely covered under the FSIA, God is looking over me, and I have few worries.

    You certainly are powerful, but with all that power and royalty, why are you broke?? I’m sure you have loads of excuses for that too. I know I gave you nearly a million dollars worth of land [it was sold by the government for $700,000 in a tax sale], and you couldn’t hold onto it. I just hope you don’t screw up too many people who actually believe your fairy tales. But then there aren’t many of those, are there?

    Live long and prosper, Al

    ps. I even bought into your God connection claim for a while too. WOW!

    After the foregoing email I forwarded both emails to Adask so that he would be aware of Barcroft’s response to My email as follows:

    ———- Forwarded message ———-
    From: Without Prejudice
    Date: Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 1:57 AM
    Subject: Fwd: F.Y.I.
    To: Alfred Adask

    Alfred, I received Barcroft’s email address and sent him the following: ‘Shown above’

    I received the following in response, WOW ‘Again shown above’

    After sending the foregoing emails to Adask, I called Adask and he and I discussed the emails and Barcrofts’ apparent desire to start a pissing contest. I decided not to respond because of the statements bolded and underlined above because Barcroft made it clear that he didn’t want to have any discussion and that his mind was closed on the matters.

    After showing you the above, I comment, I never cease to be amazed at how someone like Barcroft accuses someone else for what he himself is guilty of. In the past he had a reputation of saying what he meant and believed what he said. I held great respect for him because of that. I intend to show that for some unknown reason to Me he no longer appears to conduct himself in the previous manner described above in this paragraph. This conduct may be attributable to old age, or various and sundry illnesses such as Alzheimer’s, Dementia, etc., or just outright hatred and vindictiveness because of his own conduct and conscience. Most so called Americans have been trained to blame the other guy instead of looking in the mirror at the real enemy.

    Adask has already devoted much time to this matter and I affirm those matters as expressed by Adask within this matter concerning Barcroft. I add the following facts that should provide a close on this subject of My character assassination by Barcroft.

    Fact # 1. Public Record Document-Hereinafter “P.R.D.” Number 200900078, of 7 Pages, Dated January 13, A.D. 2009, Titled “Contract of Bill of Sale Conveying Allodial Title To Land on Texas”. This document is signed by someone named “Kyle Renhaw” representing the foreign corporation styled “Renhaw Inc.” This document is authenticated by some official from the South American country of Belize. This document states that I paid Renhaw Inc. 300 specie coin Dollars of Silver by weight of Money of The United States of America for approximately 200 acres of Land on Texas.

    Fact # 2. Public Record Document-Hereinafter “P.R.D.” Number 200900140, Dated January 27, A.D. 2009, Titled “Contract of Bill of Sale Conveying Allodial Title To Land on Texas”. This document is signed by “Albert Barcroft” representing himself. This document was authenticated by a Notary from Texas. This document states that I paid Barcroft 50 specie coin Dollars of Silver by weight of Money of The United States of America for approximately 50 acres of Land on Texas.

    Both of the above referenced documents are available for inspection at the Office of Recorder, The County of Vermillion, within the incorporated Territorial Boundaries of The State of Indiana. The following information is provided for your inspection at the:

    Recorders Office

    Lori Porter

    LORI A PORTER

    Lori is in her second term as the Vermillion County Recorder. She is assisted in the Office by her 1st Deputy, Marjorie �Marge� Hennis and a part time helper, Sarah Hathaway. Lori and Marge together have over 28 years experience in the office.

    The primary function of the Recorder�s Office is to maintain permanent public records submitted for recording. These recorders are the legal basis for determining ownership of real property. These documents, called instruments, include but not limited to: mortgages, deeds, easements, liens, military discharges, subdivision plats, leases, public and private bonds, personal property, and powers of attorney.

    It is the duty of the recorder to see that each instrument meets the essential requirements for recording. Each instrument must be scanned and indexed into a computer system and then microfilmed for archival purposes. The county recorder prepares and furnishes official copies of any record or instrument when requested.
    The recorder is a member of the county commission on public records, which has authority over the preservation or disposition of all public records maintained by the county.

    Documents Available on Line: Doxpop Recorder
    Property Fraud Alert: Doxpop Fraud Watch
    Certified Assume Business Name Form: Download Form
    Vermillion County Recorder Fee Schedule: Click Here

    Vermillion County Recorder
    255 S Main St., Room 202
    P O Box 145
    Newport IN 47966

    Phone: (765) 492-5380 (Office)
    FAX: (765) 492-5381
    Lori: (765) 492-5382 (Direct)
    Marge: (765) 492-5383 (Direct)
    Email Us

    Office Hours:
    Monday � Friday
    8:00 AM to 4:00 PM
    Excluding major holiday’s

    In summary, both documents reveal that I bought the Land in question which Barcroft appearing to also to now speak for Renhaw Inc., now denies and states that I paid nothing, and if his current allegations were true, would invalidate said contracts for lack of consideration, which would then mean that there was never any contract(s) of which I could perform any act concerning said Land from the beginning.

    Now, based on the Public Record Barcroft is either Lying now on the matter, or he was lying back then. Barcroft can’t have it both ways. If necessary, it would be somewhat difficult for Me, but I believe that it can be proven by the U.P.S. record keeping system that two boxes weighing the combined total of the 350 specie coin Dollars were delivered by said U.P.S. in the time frame around the Contracts referenced above to an address that Barcroft was maintaining at the time.

    I’ve seen the tactic used in the court system wherein an attorney would catch someone on the witness stand in a lie and then say “were you lying then, or are you lying now”. I’ll rely on the Public Record and if you choose to investigate the facts provided herein at the source referenced above I believe that you’ll come to the proper conclusion in this matter concerning Barcroft’s attempt to assassinate My character. Thank you for your consideration.

    Dennis Craig.

     
    • Al Barcroft

      October 15, 2011 at 9:46 AM

      Well. Dennis, you are certainly good at double talk and evading the issue. You’ve even come up with a way to “prove” that you gave me 300 silver dollars. We both know what you sent me and why you sent it, and that you are totally misrepresenting what happened. I’m really glad you did that, because it totally clears up any problem I may have had calling you a scoundrel.

      But, as I said earlier, I don’t intend to continue this. As of now, I have done what I felt an obligation to do — give the people listening to you a look at the other side of the coin. They might now want you to produce something that actually worked on anything other than a class “c” misdemeanor. But that is up to them. They might even want to hear your list of excuses why your “royalty” couldn’t save the land that got handed over to you, and how it took the United States District Court less than 15 minutes to dispose of your royalty and all your “paperwork” [a matter of record]. They can believe that, for some reason, I came out of the closet after 3 years to spread lies about you. They can believe what they want.

      If any of them ever have more than a traffic ticket to defend against, I hope they consider the FSIA instead of a convoluted mess of “without prejudice” paperwork that cannot/will not work on anything the other side really cares about. But, that too, is their decision, and they will reap the rewards or suffer the consequences, whatever they may be.

      Finally, when the State Department of the United States sues me on your behalf, have them send me an e-mail, and I will happily give them a way to serve me. If would be worth much more than a million dollars to find such a remedy. If I haven’t “slandered” you, let me know what I need to do, and I will comply. Until then, I have nothing more to say to you.

      Have a good life, Dennis.

       
  62. TJ

    October 17, 2011 at 11:39 PM

    I have been reading this blog and listening to Dennis on the Adask show for some time now. I have read posts regarding Dennis and have seen his predictable responses. I cannot sit by and remain silent any further so here is my personal account of my experience with Dennis. You can blindly follow him if you wish but you should pause and take caution. What you are about to read is my personal opinion of Dennis based on my short friendship with him.

    A close friend referred me to Dennis Craig about a year ago. I am not new to any of this material and have had many experiences over the last 10 years on my own.
    I am always learning more and my friend told me that Dennis was a very interesting and knowledgeable man. I was referred to Dennis and started speaking with him regularly on the phone. He was very intriguing to listen to just as he is on the radio show. He has great passion for what he teaches.

    After the first few conversations with Dennis I called my friend and told him that I was not sure if I could continue. Dennis was such an abrasive man. He was arrogant, rude, and pretty obnoxious. I stuck with it because I had already used some of the methods he spoke about successfully under certain situations years before on my own. I was intrigued so I continued my quest for knowledge.

    Dennis and I talked regularly on the phone and I am pretty blunt so I told him I thought he was extremely difficult to get along with. He toned it down a bit and as I got to know him he became much more friendly. He invited me to his home for a week of personal training. I traveled across the country and spent a week with him.
    On a few occasions we butted heads and it was very uncomfortable but we got through it and became friends.

    Dennis constantly spoke about his heavenly father teaching him all he knows. He said that father trained him for 6 months and imprinted his thumbprints into Dennis’s forehead.

    I think I am a pretty good judge of character. I have an excellent memory and I am constantly monitoring what people say compared to their actions. Most of my close friends have integrity and I monitor people I deal with to see if they are for real.
    With Dennis there were many warning signs but I put them on the back burner and gave him a chance.

    Dennis spoke about his belief that he had a do not detain order on his file. He told me he based this belief on the behavior of men of purported authority who he exposed to his paperwork whenever he was confronted. I can understand this. Dennis is very convincing and intelligent but then so was Charles Manson and other infamous men who needed followers. I pressed the issue with Dennis and asked if he had any direct proof that he had a do not detain. He said he had no proof. I have a friend that told me he could find out if I gave him Dennis’s full name. I asked Dennis if I could run a check on him and Dennis seemed very interested to find out. The search did not show any do not detain/do not hold order. Nothing came back. I am not sure if it would anyways but we tried and there was nothing. I found it disturbing when Dennis started appearing on the Adask show spouting off that he in fact had a DND and was recorded as “royalty”. I contacted Alfred Adask and told him that Dennis had told me he had no proof of this. Alfred is a good man and he makes it clear on his show that Dennis purportedly has such protection. Listeners should not assume anything Dennis says is truthful. Again, he is entertaining and is certainly intelligent and passionate but my personal experiences with the man indicate that he has little or no integrity and his motives are unclean.

    It is not my intention to hurt or damage Dennis in any way but I feel that saying nothing about what I know in my heart is wrong. I will not get into any great detail.I am just giving my personal opinion to warn people not to follow Dennis or anyone like him blindly.

    It is my personal opinion that Dennis is a sociopath and an egotist. He is not a rich man by any means and from what I have gathered has not earned a living for the last 30 plus years. He was lucky to have a woman who took care of him. He relies on donations here and there but if your donation is not enough he will make it very clear in his cleaver ways in which he always refers to his heavenly father as the one that will judge. Knowing what I know now I cannot help wonder just who his heavenly father is but I always think of that movie “The Devil’s Advocate” whenever I hear Dennis preach about “father” on the Adask show.

    Dennis needs a flock. He needs followers. He needs to be needed in my opinion and he will say and do anything to defend himself if challenged. I am reading his opinion of Al and from my experience I highly disbelieve anything Dennis says about Al. Actually Dennis’s opinion of Al based on my experience with Dennis tells me that Al must be a man of great honesty and integrity otherwise I do not think Dennis would respond the way he has.

    While with Dennis for a week he praised his heavenly father and he actually attacked me on a few things because he did not believe I was in concert with gods laws on some issues. He was probably correct but when I witnessed some of his behavior that was in complete violation of these same laws I became suspect. Dennis was teaching me so I just went with the flow and continued to stockpile these little discrepancies.

    We had become what I thought were good friends and Dennis said he wanted me to carry on his research and teach others in case he were to die. He copied many personal documents and cases and gave them to me to hold in confidence which I have done and will continue to do even though I no longer trust or respect him.

    Dennis believed his status of purported protection made him somewhat of a Teflon Don yet while traveling in the car he showed personal concern on a certain road where police were known to lay in wait. I found this a bit odd from a man that was supposedly untouchable. The discrepancies would get larger as time went on.
    Again, I will not get into details. I do not want to damage anyone with my writing but I am aware of behavior and purported facts from my own personal experience with Dennis and from trustworthy close sources about Dennis that to me represents criminal acts on his part. I confronted him with these incidents. His response confirmed in my mind that he was guilty. I told him I did not feel comfortable being his friend any further and I did not even want to have any contact with him. He got very ugly and called me names with his abusive verbal temper.

    Dennis had agreed to do some paperwork for me for a fee. The fee was $600. After months of waiting I only had a half page of work from him. I had donated about $5000 to him in all for his teachings and he was always hinting for more. Of course it was for the continuance of the father’s good knowledge. By now I had learned it had nothing to do with my god, maybe his god is actually the serpent he speaks of.
    I told Dennis we were no longer friends and that I wanted my $600 back. He told me that I was breaking the contract by not letting him do the project and that he would not refund anything. Of course I was breaking the friendship and that meant that I could not accept anything from him anymore. I told Dennis he could keep the $600 if he felt that way. He made it clear he was not going to refund the money and it was also clear after months that no work would be done. I was grateful to get him out of my life for such a small amount. I felt relieved.

    When I was at Dennis’s home being trained he asked if I would refill his Skype Phone account with my debit card. It was only about $35 and he reimbursed me in cash for the charge from the monies I paid him for his teachings. It was supposed to be a one time charge. I charged it using his PC and did not authorize any further charges. A year later after our dismantling of the friendship I was charged again for Dennis’s Skype account. I emailed Dennis but he did not reply so I reversed the charge. Dennis missed a radio show that week on Adask. I assume that is because he had no funds to pay Skype. It kept being charged to my account by Skype and I had to cancel my debit card.

    These incidents coupled with an incident where I believed Dennis stole the life savings from a woman in her 70s was too much for me. My belief that he had done this to a woman and left her for dead repulsed me and I could have nothing to do with Dennis as a friend or even in business.

    At one time Dennis asked me if I would help promote him around the country. He wanted to give seminars. I told him he was not marketable. He was rude and had a bad temper. He could not yell at students all over the country. He agreed to tone it down and from what I have heard on the Adask show he has controlled himself pretty well. The real issue with Dennis’s proposal was that he wanted me to be his manager. I did not think I should make any money from his knowledge. I wanted him to have all monies from whatever his teachings brought. I also did not know what to tell people the fee was for his seminars. Dennis would always refuse to give an amount. I did not help promote him and I am thankful I didn’t.

    I believe Dennis believes much of what he says. I believe he is a sociopath, an egotistical maniac, a racist, a male chauvinist and maybe even a white supremacist.
    I once asked him if he was a white supremacist based on some of the things he said and information he sent me. His answer was cryptic and he justified his response with bible sections. I believe Dennis could be very dangerous if cornered in the right situation.

    From what I have recently gathered, Dennis is hiding out somewhere and is very careful in telling others where he is located. Someone that is royalty and has a do not detain should not behave this way.

    Judge for yourself. Don’t take my opinion but please be careful in taking Dennis at face value by blindly following him.

     
  63. Becky

    October 29, 2011 at 11:18 PM

    Hello Dennis this is your neighbor. Arrested by the Tennessee Highway Patrol you said you were unarrestable. I was with the neighbor who picked up the pickup you were driving. The key was underneath the frount tire I don’t recall guards just for your benefit. You left a bar and were stopped and arrested. The charges were Driving without a license,no registration,and no insurance. You were arraigned you will get copies of the arrest warrents not citations. You are a bold faced liar. I know you went to court for arraignment, the papers you filed claiming you don’t need a license because you are a diplomat are quite funny. Everyone who drives in the state must have a drivers license even if they are a diplomat. In order to be a diplomat you must have a recognized country with a government. If you are exempt why did you use someone elses tags when you first came here and he was contacted by the police for your actions while using his tag (without his knowledge) He will tell the truth. Why did you need someone to purchase a tag for you so your truck would appear legal. Truth I can prove. If you are a diplomat as you claim why wasn’t the tag you have registered to your vehicle as diplomat tags are.You had your own tag made why can’t we all live in our own made up country??? I would love to have you deported to your country where is it??? You are a self centerd egotistical man who is going to soon find out you are not royal anything. Now was it that you choose to streach the truth or tell your version as you see it. Morgan County Tennessee Wartburg it is afterall public record. Go cry to William no one else cares. The nightmare just began. I am not slandering you you have caused my friends much greif because of you this could be the end of one of my friendships I will hold you fully responsible.

     
    • Dennis Craig

      October 30, 2011 at 3:00 PM

      Ah-ha another Pisser trying to start another pissing contest. Becky?? Is this the self same Rebecca (Becky) Williams-Draper that has spent the last couple of years trying to keep from going to prison for the purported County’s charges of the manufacture and intent to distribute meth or other drug’s? Does your hearsay attempt to vilify Me take your mind off your own troubles? Wouldn’t your time be better spent trying to recover the thousands of dollars and other valuable property confiscated by YOUR purported County sheriff. If you were someone of upstanding character I would defend your hearsay allegations but based on the source, if in fact it’s you, I’ll not waste My time. However, would it help you if I were to call YOUR sheriff and inform him of My first hand knowledge of your smoking pot in My presence. Perhaps that would give you something else to do besides trying to vilify Me with your hearsay diatribe.

       
      • Jim Watts

        October 30, 2011 at 7:23 PM

        “call sheriff and INFORM him (?!) of her smoking pot?! “in your presence?!” (Laughable, but) = admitted “SNITCH!!!” Case closed, people!!! LOOK OUT!!!

         
      • Dennis Craig

        October 31, 2011 at 5:36 PM

        The following response is founded upon this Scriptural premise as follows: “Thou shall not bear false witness” Thank you Mr. “Jim Watts” as you have just proved that you are the one that needs to be watched because you in fact intentionally perverted what I asked-a question, as follows: “However, would it help you if I were to call YOUR sheriff and inform him of My first hand knowledge of your smoking pot in My presence. Perhaps that would give you something else to do besides trying to vilify Me with your hearsay diatribe.” You perverted a valid question, which was not a threat, but for the recipient to ponder when they’re throwing stones at glass houses, into a corrupted perversion of the truth of what I in fact asked, as quoted above. Perhaps you’ll find something more productive to do in the future.

         
      • Rebecca Draper

        December 6, 2011 at 12:21 AM

        It is in fact me Mr. beedy eyed troll. You call anyone you think you need to. I will protect the people I love and that is what I have done. Leave the dogs alone I know the eye is dead and it was done to make Tootie fearful. You take advantage of good people who believe your manipulative poor little me I’m sick act. You are the only person I have ever heard ask someone to Bible study and in the next breath say GD. I always believed people who teach the Bible should first live the word he uses to enhance his life and wants to share this gift with others. Mr. Adask I am confused about this blog for the simple reason that I am telling the truth. I have watched this man abuse his last girlfriend verbaly, constantly until I myself told him to shut up. He hones in on people who have good hearts and this is where I got involved with him. I went to visit a friend who convinced his wife to allow Dennis to move his little 5th wheel camper home onto her property. He had nowhere to go she agreed reluctantly because she is an angel at heart. She fell apart a few weeks ago and told me how she felt about Dennis. She will verify all I am saying. I have never liked the man I feel he is evil thru and thru. I have protected her from Dennis harrassment and finally her husband (not registered legally) is starting to see. I could not believe he had encouraged her to sign her property over to Dennis. IT WILL NOT HAPPEN. Dennis pays $60 a month rent including water and electricity. He pays ten dollars toward the phone internet wireless service. Anyone who signs their property over to someone else should know it is no longer theirs DUH!! Want to give it away go for it. I am protecting people I love from loosing everything! That is what friends do no matter what. Mr. Adask are you sure you know what this man is really about are you like him. I believe God almighty is on my side because I am doing what is right for my friends Dennis call whom ever odd you want to call the law on me when you are royalty and above the law. Yes our sheriff is a big disapointment next election he will be gone. We do not need your kind harming our way of life. Friends help each other everyone I know who believes in God does good for others. You had to move because where you were staying you caused trouble, you used the mans license plates on your truck without his knowledge. He almost went to jail oh by the way we are checking to see if there may be warrants in effect in Nashville. They now know where to find you. To everyone else I apologize. Send him money he will enjoy spending it because he deserves it more. I have been here in Morgan County all my life we are known for our ways. I have many friends and family where are yours Dennis. I have been charged I am within my rights to have a loaded weapon on my property. The law here really is what they say it is money is the root of all evil. I would much prefer to be found guilty of something I have not done than have anyone think I am associated with you. If you dare threaten to call Child services again I will really get upset. Do not mess with my children EVER. Momma always said don’t pick a fight you cant win. But if you must fight you have to win. I will never stop until you leave you bring bad to our space. You are in my space. Dennis Game On.
        I am telling the truth and I will prove what you are. I can prove you are a liar.
        Mr. Adask I am in the phone book call me since my name is Rebecca Lorraine Williams Draper (Becky) to my friends Bitch to the rest. Dennis worst nightmare just leave.

         
      • JCD

        December 6, 2011 at 3:43 AM

        Not that it matters and seems to be way off topic, I would like to respond to some incorrect hearsay allegations or (traps), made by Mr. Craig.

        Yes, charges were made, not 2 years ago, but nearly 5 years ago.

        The sherrif did not confiscate any money

        The case is now in the state supreme court, although it’s not for manufacture or intent to distribute meth or other drugs.

        If you were to call the sheriff ????

        My 2 cents. It’s not what the law is, it’s what is the law here ?

         
  64. PatriotOne

    October 30, 2011 at 1:56 PM

    Ladies and Gentlmen please,
    It is not necessary that Man prove He is King over Himself, it is necessary that the government actor (employee) prove “IT” has authority/ability/jurisdiction to arrest/detain/confine/fine, that “government” is the King and thee People are “its” subjects.

    I truly wish that Al would interview Marc Stevens -No State Project (visa versa). Together they are seeking the same goal, Freedom. The liars and thieves have left Al alone because of ‘Man or other animal’, government employees lie confronted. Marc seeks Corpus Delecti, the necessary elementfor jurisdiction/case.

    I believe The Constitution is only a ‘contract’ upon those that are elected and/or employeed under it, who have taken an Oath contract.. That without the Constitution the States , and government employees, do not exist. That the United States and The State of _________ are nothing more than words on paper, fictions, animated by Men and Women who use threats of violence and guns to exercize assumed authority over People, assumed authority that does not exist within the words of the Constitution or State Constitutions.

    It is not necessary that Man prove he is free, it is necessary that ‘government employees’ prove that Man is their slave.

     
  65. chris

    October 31, 2011 at 8:07 PM

    this is what is wrong with the movement…alfred has allowed, and not censored comments, but it is counter productive…

     
    • Adask

      November 1, 2011 at 12:43 PM

      I allow a variety of comments and criticisms to make clear that nothing on this blog is presented as if it were the infallible word of God. None of the articles or assertions on this blog are perfect. All are subject to challenge.

      However, I have been remiss in allowing some comments that are personal attacks on authors (or even on those who also comment on this blog) moreso than comments on the validity or invalidity of some of the assertions in any particular article.

      There’s a very vague “line” in determining whether a comment is mostly a personal attack, or an attempt to warn people that an author or “commentator” morality is suspect and therefore that writer’s assertions should or should not be believed.

      I’m just beginning to have this problem on this blog in a serious way. I haven’t made up my mind as to how I’ll handle it, but I’m sure of this: the personal attacks have to stop. This blog does not exist as an “arena” for individuals to work out their private grudges and animosities. If you have something to say about the article, fine. If, in the future, you have a personal attack for the author, that attack will probably be deleted. If you have both something to say about the article and a personal attack on the author or commentator, I’ll have to call ’em as I see ’em. Some I’ll allow. Some I’ll delete. We shall see.

       
      • Rebecca Draper

        December 6, 2011 at 12:41 AM

        Mr. Adask You need to know who this man is . He is a very good con man who believes he is royalty. My friends have treated him like family. He has never offered to do anything for them when they had problems as we all do. He expects to do as he wishes without thought of others. I promised Tootie I would help her even if it cost me the friendship of her husband. It was as if Dennis had him brainwashed. He was willing to ask her to loose everything she had. Would you risk your wifes home by signing it over to Dennis. The property is hers or Dennis would probably own it now. I have proof . I can give Names and numbers to verify all misinformation he has posted. The County Executive, DA, and County attorney think he is a lunatic. He is going to be charged and we will catch him driving again. We just want him to leave here. Please find him a place to go. William believes he is blessed to teach him the scripture. Do you believe he can hang out in bars, abuse others mentally and only think of himself drink smoke. This is not a man blessed by God I have many churches praying this situation will be resolved by God soon for all of our good.

         
  66. MIchael

    November 1, 2011 at 9:53 AM

    I am in agreement. Unlike the so-called PTB, we are constantly attacking each other. It is no wonder why this movement is stuck in the mud. My dog is bigger than your dog, my house is nicer than your house, I’m better than you are. This is what the so-called PTB love, divide and conquer. And we wonder why this movement hasn’t gotten any further than it has?

     
    • Adask

      November 1, 2011 at 12:58 PM

      The only thing that holds the “PTB” (Powers That Be) together is bribery. They are all in it for the money. They are all bought and paid for like so many common whores. The system we fight against is able to bribe it’s members to support it because that system ultimately controls the production of fiat currency. If the PTB were unable to print its own currency, it would collapse. I.e., if we returned to a gold/silver based monetary system, the current PTB would vaporize.

      The patriot movement is, for the most part, unruly, asocial and unorganizable because no one is trying to bribe us. Most of us speak from passion, even misguided passion, rather than an ulterior motivation to make a fast buck. On the one hand, that disorganization is a strength (it’s a leaderless movement and thus hard to attack). On the other hand, that disorganization is a weakness–because it’s leaderless, it’s about as unfocused as the current “Occupy Wall Street” demonstrations. Lots of energy, but not much focus.

      That’s OK. Sooner or later the quality of knowledge will rise to a reliable level and a definite “focus” will be found.

       
  67. palani

    November 9, 2011 at 8:02 PM

    Dennis reported several weeks ago on your shortwave broadcast that he had a court event scheduled. Any followup on the outcome?

     
    • Dennis Craig

      November 9, 2011 at 8:31 PM

      Send Me an email to “withoutprejudice1@gmail.com” and I will forward the recording of the radio show that answers your question(s). Thank you.

       
    • Becky Draper

      December 8, 2011 at 6:28 AM

      Dennis has a court date of January 19 2012 in Morgan County at 8:30 am. I will keep you posted. Unless he moves then I will no longer have an interest in what happens.

       
    • JCD

      December 8, 2011 at 6:38 PM

      At this time, Mr. Craig is still on the docket for 8:30 am on Januaury 19, 2012, at the Morgan County courthouse

       
      • william

        December 14, 2011 at 6:01 PM

        Time tells,now you all can set back and watch what happens, if things are the way you say, I am sure you will let us know.
        Dennis Craig, here in after DC, can stay as long as he wants to. His knowlege goes far be on,,,,,,,,, your {worldly} understanding. YHWH, put him here for reasons. DC is my brother, and friend. He stays, come hell or high water.

         
  68. enlightened

    January 26, 2012 at 3:46 PM

    Well friend The water is getting deep and hell is a place I have no desire to see. If he is so wise why is he living off of your wife. I told you a while back and stand by my word he is plain and pure evil. It is painful to know you would put him above everyone including your wife. He will learn I never give in when I am helping a friend. I am sorry to loose a friend he will hang your ass out to dry to save his he is so much smarter and wiser than everyone else. Did he define friend. I don’t think he has ever been a friend to anyone. A friend betrayed is not a good thing. I pray that I have not been a fool to think you were a friend. That has changed though it only makes me want to protect others from you both. Anyone who wants to be like him is seriously confused. I will say I told you so wait and see.

     
    • Kate Bynum

      January 26, 2012 at 6:56 PM

      enlightened

      Ignorance is always swift to speak.

      …Let every man/woman be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath.
      James 1:19b

      P.S. She who throws dirt loses ground!

       
  69. MIchael

    January 26, 2012 at 5:46 PM

    Matthew 7:1 “Judge not, that ye be not judged.” Dennis and I have certainly not seen eye to eye, but I have learned from him. YHWH is the only judge, not man. Enlightened, why do you do what is reserved for God alone? If you believe Dennis is an enemy of YHWH, why not pray for him instead of judging him?

     
  70. 4950l

    February 4, 2012 at 9:03 PM

    can any one tell me where it was that had an artcile about an undisclosed name, maybe a judge I started reading it now I can’t find it. E-mail me at powerprincess43@gmail.com

     
    • Dennis Craig

      February 5, 2012 at 12:43 AM

      I’m sorry but We have no idea what your talking about.

       
  71. Kate Bynum Rigsby

    May 22, 2012 at 8:55 PM

    Searching for Harold Harmless. Please contact me in regards to a friend of yours that you offered a ride to Washington, DC.
    kate@catoninetail.com

     
  72. Cheeky Monkey treehouse design

    July 21, 2012 at 7:51 PM

    There’s no such thing as security. There never has been.

     
  73. Kate Bynum Rigsby

    November 12, 2013 at 10:24 AM

    Hello,

    I doubt that many of you knew that I had Dennis Craig brought back home. We had his memorial service 10-27-13. It went more than well. It was a beautiful service. Couldn’t have been any better with a hired fancy clergyman. Son Eddie did the best job!. He broke down and cried, had to stop for a few minutes. Four of us wept that I know of, his three children that were there and me. As expected there were ten people attending, two grandchildren, three children, a daughter- in -law, two of our old 6th street neighbors and me. We were surrounded by tall tree’s covered with beautiful fall colored leaves, with very limited openings of light shinning through when we turned our helium filled balloons loose. We watched as each pastel balloon followed the light and made it’s way into the clear blue sky floating toward the high heavens above. Son Eddie prayed for Dennis’ two older children that they might find their way back into our family again, that family is all you really have here on this earth. I believe Dennis heard and watched all and loved his services. It was a trying day, however, son Shawn and I feel at peace now.

    Kate

     

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s