The cut and paste of the pdf file did not work very well. http://www.ecclesia.org/forum/uploads/bondservant/ALLCAPSP.pdfIt’s all in the NAMEAt the Christian Law Fellowship and Assembly, we’ve been repeatedly requested to publish ouraccumulated research concerning the use of all or full capitalized letters for proper names;i.e.,JOHN JAMES SMITHas commonly substituted forJohn James Smithin all courtdocuments, Driver’s Licenses, bank accounts, Birth Certificates, etc.Is this some special English grammar rule or style? Is it a contemporary American style ofEnglish? Is the use of this form of capitalization recognized by educational authorities? Is this anofficial judicial or U.S. government rule and/or style of grammar? Why do lawyers, court clerks,prosecutors, judges, insurance companies, banks, and credit card companies always use allcapital letters when writing a proper name?What English grammar experts sayOne of the foremost authorities on American English grammar, style, composition, and rules isThe Chicago Manual of Style. Their latest 14thEdition, published by the University of ChicagoPress, is internationally known and respected as a major contribution to maintaining andimproving the standards of written or printed text. We could find no reference in their manualconcerning the use of all capitalized letters with a proper name or any other usage. We wrote tothe editors and asked this question:“Is it acceptable, or is there any rule of English grammar, to allow a proper name to bewritten in all capital letters? For example, if my name was John Robert Jones, can it bewritten as JOHN ROBERT JONES? Is there any rule covering this?”We received the following reply from the Chicago Editorial Staff:“Writing names in all caps is not conventional; it is not Chicago style to put anything inall caps. For instance, even if ‘GONE WITH THE WIND’ appears on the title page all incaps, we would properly render it ‘Gone with the Wind’ in a bibliography. The onlyreason we can think of to do so is if you are quoting some material where it is importantto the narrative to preserve the casing of the letters.We’re not sure in what context you would like your proper name to appear in all caps, butit is likely to be seen as a bit odd.”Yes, it does appear “a bit odd” for governments, their judicial courts, and other legal entitiesincorporated within their legal jurisdiction to use this method of capitalizing every letter in aproper name.We then contacted Mary NewtonBruder, Ph.D., also known asThe Grammar Lady, whoestablished the Grammar Hotline in the late 1980’s for the Coalition of Adult Literacy. We askedher the following:“Why do federal and state government agencies and departments, judicial andOF TEXAS” and proper names of parties in all capital letters on every court document.The Elements of StyleAnother well recognized reference book we obtained wasThe Elements of Style, Fourth Edition,ISBN 0-205-30902-X, written by WilliamStrunk, Jr. and E.B. White, published byAllyn &Bacon in 1999. Within this renowned English grammar and style reference book, we found onlyone reference to capitalization located within the Glossary atproper noun, page 94, where itstates:“The name of a particular person (FrankSinatra), place (Boston), or thing (Moby Dick).Proper nouns are capitalized.”There’s an obvious and legally evident difference between capitalizing the first letter of a formalname as compared to capitalizing the entire name.The American Heritage Book of English UsageInThe American Heritage Book of English Usage, A Practical and Authoritative Guide toContemporary English,published in 1996, atChapter 9,E-Mail, Conventions and Quirks,Informality, they state:“To give a message special emphasis, an E-mailer may write entirely in capital letters, adevice E-mailers refer to asscreaming.Some of these visual conventions have emergedas a way of getting around the constraints on data transmission that now limit manynetworks”.Here is a reference source, within contemporary – modern – English, that states it’s of aninformalmanner to writeeverywordof – specifically – an electronic message, a.k.a. E-mail, in capitalletters. They say it’s “screaming” to do so. By standard definition, we presume that’s the same asshouting or yelling. Are all judges, their court clerks and lawyers shouting at us when they printour proper names in this manner? Is the insurance company screaming at us for paying theincreased premium on our policy? This is doubtful as to any standard generalization, eventhough specific individual instances may prove this to be true. We can, however, safely concludethat it would also be informal to write a proper name in the same way.Does this also imply that those in the legal profession are writing our Christian namesinformallyon court documents? Aren’t attorneys and the courts supposed to be specific, whereas theyformally write their legal documents within the “letter of the law”?New Oxford Dictionary of EnglishTheNew Oxford Dictionary of Englishis published by the Oxford University Press, 1998.Besides being considered the foremost authority on the British English language, this dictionaryis also designed to reflect the way language is used today through example sentences andphrases. We submit the following definitions:Proper noun(alsoproper name). Noun. A name used for an individual person, place, ororganization, spelled with an initial capital letter, e.g.Jane,London, andOxfam.Name.Noun1A word or set of words by which a person, animal, place, or thing isknown, addressed, or referred to:my name is Parsons, John Parsons.Kalkwasser is theGerman name forlimewater.Verb3Identify by name; give the correct name for:thedead man has been named as John Mackintosh.Phrases.2 In the name of.Bearing orusing the name of a specified person or organization:a drivinglicence in the name ofWilliam Sanders.From theNewbury House Dictionary of American English, published by Monroe AllenPublishers, Inc., 1999:namen.1[C] a word by which a person, place, or thing is known:Her name is DianeDaniel.We can find absolutely no example in any recognized reference book that specifies or allows theuse of all capitalized names, proper or common. Is there any doubt that a proper name is writtenwith the first letter capitalized, followed by lower case letters?U.S. Government Style ManualIs the spelling and usage of a proper name defined officially by U.S. government? Yes. TheUnited States Government Printing Office in theirStyle Manual, March 1984 edition (the mostrecent edition published as of March 2000), provides comprehensive grammar, style and usagefor all government publications,includingcourt and legal writing.Chapter 3, Capitalization, at § 3.2, prescribes rules for proper names:“Proper names are capitalized… [Examples given are] Rome, Brussels, John Macadam,Macadam family, Italy, Anglo-Saxon.”AtChapter 17, Courtwork, the rules of capitalization, as mentioned in Chapter 3, are furtherreiterated:“17.1. Courtwork differs in style from other workonlyas set forth in this section;otherwise the style prescribed in the preceding sections will be followed” [bold emphasisadded].After entirely reading § 17, we found no other references that would change the grammaticalrules and styles specified in Chapter 3 pertaining to capitalization.At § 17.9, this same official U.S. government manual states:“In the titles of cases the first letter of all principal words are capitalized, but not suchterms asdefendantandappellee.”This wholly agrees with Texas Law Review’sManual on Usage & Styleas referenced above.Examples shown in § 17.12 are also consistent with the aforementioned § 17.9 specification: thatis, all proper names are to be spelled with capital first letters; the balance of each spelled withlower case letters.Grammar, Punctuation, and CapitalizationThe National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has publish one of the mostconcise U.S. Government resources on capitalization. NASA publication SP-7084,Grammar,Punctuation, and Capitalization, A Handbook for Technical Writers and Editors, was compiledand written by the NASALangley Research Center in Hampton, Virginia. AtChapter 4.Capitalization, they state in4.1 Introduction:“First we should define terms used when discussing capitalization:Full capsmeans that every letter in an expression is capital, LIKE THIS.Caps &lcmeans that the principal words of an expression are capitalized, LikeThis.Caps and small capsrefers to a particular font of type containing small capitalletters instead of lowercase letter.Elements in a document such as headings, titles, and captions may be capitalized in eithersentence styleorheadline style:Sentence style calls for capitalization of the first letter, and proper nouns ofcourse.Headline style calls for capitalization of all principal words (also called caps &lc).Modern publishers tend toward adownstyle of capitalization, that is, toward use of fewercapitals, rather than anupstyle.”Here we see that in headlines, titles, captions, and in sentences, there is no authorized usage offull caps. At4.4.1. Capitalization With Acronyms, we find the first authoritative use for fullcaps:“Acronyms are always formed with capital letters. Acronyms are often coined for aparticular program or study and therefore require definition. The letters of the acronymare not capitalized in the definition unless the acronym stands for a proper name:WrongThe best electronic publishing systems combine What You See Is What You Get(WYSIWIG) features…CorrectThe best electronic publishing systems combine what you see is what you get(WYSIWIG) features…ButLangley is involved with the NationalAero-Space Plane (NASP) Program.”This cites, by example, that usingfull capsis allowable in an acronym. Acronyms are wordsformed from the initial letters of successive parts of a term. They never contain periods and areoften not standard, so that definition is required.Could this apply to lawful proper Christian names? If that were true, then JOHN SMITH wouldhave to follow a definition of some sort, which it does not. For example, only if JOHN SMITHwere defined as ‘JohnOrley Holistic Nutrition of the Smith Medical Institute ToHolistics(JOHN SMITH)’ would this apply.The most significant section appears at4.5.3. Administrative Names:Official designations of political divisions and of other organized bodies are capitalized:Names of political divisionsCanadaNew York StateUnited StatesNorthwest TerritoriesVirgin IslandsOntario ProvinceNames of governmentalunitsU.S. GovernmentExecutive DepartmentU.S. CongressU.S. ArmyU.S. NavyAccording to this official U.S. Government publication, the States areneverto be spelled in fullcaps such as NEW YORK STATE. The proper English grammar style is New York State. Thisagrees, once again, with Texas Law Review’sManual on Usage & Style.The Use of a Legal FictionThe Real Life Dictionary of the LawWe refer toThe Real Life Dictionary of the Law. The authors, Gerald and Kathleen Hill, areaccomplished scholars and writers. Gerald Hill is an experienced attorney, judge, and lawinstructor. Here is how the termlegal fictionis described:“Legal fiction. n. A presumption of fact assumed by a court for convenience, consistencyor to achieve justice. There is an old adage: ‘Fictions arise from the law, and not lawfrom fictions.’ “Oran’s Dictionary of the LawFromOran’s Dictionary of the Law,published by the West Group 1999, within the definition ofFiction is found:“Alegal fictionis an assumption that something that is (or may be) false or nonexistent istrue or real. Legal fictions are assumed or invented to help do justice. For example,bringing a lawsuit to throw a nonexistent “John Doe” off your property used to be theonly way to establish a clear right to the property when legal title was uncertain.”Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of LawMerriam-Webster’s Dictionary of Law1996states:“legal fiction:something assumed in law to be fact irrespective of the truth or accuracyof that assumption. Example: thelegal fictionthat a day has no fractions —Fields v.Fairbanks North Star Borough, 818 P.2d 658 (1991).”This is the reason behind the use offull capswhen writing a proper name. The U.S. and StateGovernments aredeliberatelyusing a legal fiction to “address” the Lawful Christian. We say thisis deliberate because their own official publications state that proper names are not to be writteninfull caps. They are deliberately not following their own recognized authorities.In the same respect, by identifying their own government entity infull caps, they are legallystating that they are also a legal fiction. As stated by Dr. Mary NewtonBruder in the beginningof this report, the use offull capsfor writing a proper name is an “internal style” for what isapparently a pre-determined usage and, at this point, unknown jurisdiction.The main key to a legal fiction isassumptionas noted in each definition above.Conclusion: There are no official or unofficial English grammar style manuals or referencepublications that recognize the use offull capswhen writing a proper name. To do so isconsidered a legal fiction.The Assumption of a Legal FictionAn important issue concerning this entire matter is whether or not a legal fiction, such as aproper name written infull caps, can be substituted for a lawful Christian name oranypropername, such as the State of Florida. Is the use of a legal fiction “legal”? If so, from where doesthis legal fiction originate and what enforces it?A legal fiction can be used when the name of a “person” is not known by using the fictionalname “John Doe”. This is understood by all and needs little explanation. If you have no way toidentify someone, then the legal fiction John Doe or Jane Doe is used to describe an unknownnameuntilthe proper name can be identified.In all cases, a legal fiction is anassumptionof purported fact without having shown the fact to betrue or valid. It’s an acceptance with no proof. Simply, to assume is to pretend.Oran’sDictionary of the Lawsays that the wordassumemeans:1. To take up or take responsibility for; to receive; to undertake. See assumption.2. To pretend.3. To accept without proof.These same basic definitions are used by nearly all of the modern law dictionaries. It should benoted that there is a difference between the meanings of the second and third definitions with thatof the first.Pretendingandaccepting without proofare of the same understanding and meaning.However, to take responsibility for and receive, orassumption, does not have the same meaning.Oran’sdefinesassumptionas:“Formally transforming someone else’s debt into your own debt. Compare with guaranty.The assumption of a mortgage usually involves taking over the seller’s ‘mortgage debt’when buying a property (often a house).”Now, what happens if all the meanings for the wordassumeare combined? In a literal anddefinitive sense, the meaning ofassumewould be:The pretended acceptance, without proof,that someone has taken responsibility for, has guaranteed, or has received a debt.Therefore, if we apply all this in defining alegal fiction, the use of a legal fiction is anassumption or pretension that the legal fiction named has received and is responsible for a debtof some sort.Use of the legal fiction JOHN SMITH in place of the proper name John Smith implies anassumed debt guarantee without any offer of proof. The danger behind this is that if such anunproven assumption is made, then unless the assumption is proven wrong, it is considered valid.Please go no further until you understand and comprehend exactly what the above paragraphshave stated. If necessary, re-read the above until you have a full understanding of what isinvolved in the meaning of a legal fiction.An assumed debt is valid unless proven otherwise. This is in accord with the UniformCommercial Code valid in every State and made a part of the Statutes in each State. A legalfiction written with full caps – resembling a proper name but grammaticallynota proper name –is being held as a debtor for an assumed debt.What happens if the proper name,i.e.John Doe, answers for or assumes the legal fiction,i.e.JOHN DOE?They become one and the same. This is the crux for the use of the full caps legalfictions by the U.S. Government and the States. It is the way that they can bring someone intotheir fictional venue and jurisdiction that they have created. By implication of definition, thisalso is for the purpose of some manner of assumed debt.Why won’t they use “The State of Texas” or “John Doe” in their courts or on Driver’s Licenses?What stops them from doing this? Obviously, there is a reason for using legal fictions since theyare very capable of writing proper names just as their own official style manual states. Thereason behind legal fictions is found within the definitions as cited above. At this point, thisshould be very clear to every reader.The Legalities Behind Legal FictionsWe could go on for hundreds of pages citing the legal basis behind the creation of legal fictions.In a nutshell, a legal fiction in and of itself, such as the STATE OF TEXAS, can createadditional legal fictions.Fictions arise from the law, not the law from fictions. Take a moment tounderstand what that means. Legal fictions originate from any law that is used to create them,regardless of the fact that the purported foundational law is valid or not. However, a law cannever originate from a fictional foundation that doesn’t exist.The generic and original U.S. Constitution is a valid foundation document of treaty law havingbeen created between the individual state nations. Contained within it is the required due processof law for all the participating nation states of that treaty. Proper representatives of the people ineach nation state agreed upon it and signed it with their lawful seals. The federal government isnot only created by it, but is also bound to operate within the guidelines of Constitutional dueprocess.Any law that originates from the Constitutional due process is valid law.Any purportedlaw that doesnotoriginate from it is a fictional law without validity. Thus, the true test of anyAmerican law is its basis of due process according to the generic U.S. Constitution. Was itcreated according to the lawful process or outside of lawful process based on that constitutionaltreaty?Executive Orders and DirectivesFor years we have researched thelawfulbasis for creating full caps legal fictions and haveconcluded that there is no such foundation according tovalidlaws and due process. But whatabout those purported “laws” that arenotvalid and havenotoriginated from constitutional dueprocess? There’s a very simple answer to the creation of such purported laws that are really notlaws at all:Executive Orders and Directives. They are the “color of law” without being validlaws of due process. They have the appearance of law and look as if they’re laws, but accordingto due process, they arenotlaws. Rather, they are “laws” based on fictional beginnings and arethe basis for further fictional “laws” and other legal fictions. They are “regulated” and“promulgated” by Administrative Code, rules and procedures,notdue process. Currently,Executive Orders are enforced through the legal fiction known as the federal AdministrativeProcedures Act. Each State has also adopted the same fictional administrative “laws”.Lincoln EstablishesE.O.’sEighty-five years after the Independence of the united States, seven southern nation States ofAmerica walked out of theSecond Session of the thirty-sixth Congresson March 27, 1861. In sodoing, the Constitutional due process quorum necessary for Congress to vote was lost andCongress was adjournedsine die, or “without day”. This meant that there was no lawful quorumto set a specific day and time to reconvene which, according toRobert’s Rules of Order,dissolved Congress. This dissolution automatically took place because there were no provisionswithin the Constitution allowing the passage of any Congressional vote without a quorum of theStates.Lincoln’s second Executive Order of April 1861 called Congress back into session days later, butnotunder the lawful authority, or lawful due process, of the Constitution. Solely in his capacityas Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. Military, Lincoln called Congress into session underauthority of Martial Law. Since April of 1861, “Congress” has not met based on lawful dueprocess. Our current “Congress” is based on legal fiction no different than a proper name writtenin full caps is.Legal fiction “laws”, such as the Reconstruction Acts and the implementation of theLieberCode, were soon instituted by Lincoln and thus became the basis for our current “laws”. Everypurported “Act” in effect today is based on legal fiction, not lawful due process. Lincoln hasbeen called the greatest American Lawyer and his ingenious legal rule of America enforces sucha title.The abolition of the English & American common lawHere’s an interesting quote from the 1973 session of the U.S. Supreme Court:“The American law. In this country, the law in effect in all but a few States until mid-19th century was the pre-existing English common law… It was not until after the WarBetween the States that legislation began generally to replace the common law.” —Roe v.Wade, 410 U.S. 113.In effect, Lincoln’s second Executive Order abolished the recognized English common law inAmerica and replaced it with “laws” based on a fictional legal foundation,i.e., Executive Ordersand Directives. Most States still have a reference to the common laws within their present daystatutes. For example, in theFlorida Statutes (1999), Title I, Chapter 2, at§2.01 Common lawand certain statutes declared in force,it states:“The common and statute laws of England which are of a general and not a local nature,with the exception hereinafter mentioned, down to the 4th day of July, 1776, are declaredto be of force in this state; provided, the said statutes and common law be not inconsistentwith the Constitution and laws of the United States and the acts of the Legislature of thisstate.History.–s. 1, Nov. 6, 1829; RS 59; GS 59; RGS 71; CGL 87.”Note that the basis of the common law is an approved act of the people of Florida by resolutionon November 6, 1829, prior to Lincoln’s Civil War. Also note that the subsequent “laws”, as aresult of acts of the Florida Legislature and the United States, now take priority over the commonlaw in Florida. Since April 1861, the American and English common law was abolished andreplaced with legal fiction “laws”, a.k.a. Statutes, Rules and Codes, based on Executive Order,notthe due process specified within the generic Constitution.Applying it all to Current “laws”Title III,Pleadings and Motions, Rule 9(a) Capacity,Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, states:“When an issue is raised as to thelegal existenceof a named party, or the party’scapacity to be sued, or the authority of a party to be sued, the party desiring to raise theissue shall do so by specific negative averment, which shall include supportingparticulars.” [Bold emphasis added].At this juncture, it’s clear that the existence of a name written withfull capsis a legal fiction.This is surely an issue to be raised and the supporting particulars are outlined within this article.Use of the proper name must be insisted upon as a matter of abatement – correction – for allparties of an action of purported “law”. However, the current “courts” cannot correct this sincethey are based on fictional law and must use fictional names. Instead, they expect the lawfulChristian man or woman to accept their full caps name and become a fictional entity, just as theyare.Oklahoma StatutesDo the individual States within the United States follow suit? The requirement of proper names,including a mandate for correction when proper names are provided, is clearly set forth whenrelating to criminal prosecution in theOklahoma Statutes,Chapter 22, § 403:“When a defendant is indicted or prosecuted by afictitious or erroneous name, and inany stage of the proceedings his true name is discovered, it must be inserted in thesubsequent proceedings, referring to the fact of his being charged by the name mentionedin the indictment or information.” [Bold emphasis added].American JurisprudenceIn general, it’s necessary to properly identify parties to court actions. If not properly identified,then judgments are void, as outlined in Volume 46,American Jurisprudence 2d, atJudgments:“§ 100 Parties– A judgment should identify the parties for and against whom it isrendered, with such certainty that it may be readily enforced, and a judgment which doesnot do so may be regarded as void for uncertainty. Such identification may be achievedby naming the persons for and against whom the judgment is rendered. Technicaldeficiencies in the naming of the persons for and against whom judgment isrendered can be corrected if the parties are not prejudiced. A reference in a judgmentto a party plainly liable, followed by an omission of that party’s name from the languageof the decree, at least gives rise to an ambiguity and calling for an inquiry into the court’sreal intention as reflected in the entire record and surrounding circumstances.” [Footnotenumbers are omitted; cites have not been reproduced; bold emphasis added]The present situation in AmericaA legal person = a legal fictionOne of the terms used predominantly by the present civil governments and courts in America islegalperson. According to them, just what is a legal person? We offer some definitions for yourreview:legal person:a body of persons or an entity (as a corporation) considered as havingmany of the rights and responsibilities of a natural person and esp. the capacity to sue andbe sued. —Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of Law 1996.Person. 1. A human being (a “natural” person). 2. Acorporation(an “artificial” person).Corporations are treated as persons in many legal situations. Also, the word “person“includes corporations in most definitions in this dictionary. 3. Any other “being” entitledto sue as a legal entity (a government, an association, a group of Trustees, etc.). 4. Theplural of person ispersons, notpeople (see that word). –Oran’s Dictionary of the Law,West Group 1999.Person. An entity with legal rights and existence including the ability to sue and be sued,to sign contracts, to receive gifts, to appear in court either by themselves or by lawyerand, generally, other powers incidental to the full expression of the entity in law.Individuals are “persons” in law unless they are minors or under some kind of otherincapacity such as a court finding of mental incapacity. Many laws give certain powers to“persons” which, in almost all instances, includesbusiness organizations that have beenformally registered such as partnerships, corporations or associations. –Duhaime’s LawDictionary.PERSON, noun.per’sn. [Latinpersona; said to be compounded ofper, through or by,andsonus, sound; a Latin word signifying primarily a mask used by actors on the stage.] ––Webster’s 1828 Dictionary.A person is basically an entity – legal fiction – of some kind that has beenlegallycreated and hasthelegalcapacity to be sued. Isn’t it odd that the wordlawfulis not used within thesedefinitions?Legal or Lawful?We feel that it’s quite necessary to also define what islegalas opposed with what islawful. Thegeneric Constitution is lawful. That fact has already been established. The present civilauthorities and their courts prefer to use the wordlegal. Is there a difference in the meanings?The following is quoted fromA Dictionary of Law 1893:Lawful. In accordance with the law of the land; according to the law; permitted,sanctioned, or justified by law. “Lawful” properly implies a thing conformable to orenjoined by law; “Legal”, a thing in the form or after the manner of law or binding bylaw.A writ or warrant issuing from any court, under color of law, is a “legal”process however defective. Seelegal. [Bold emphasis added]Legal. Latinlegalis. Pertaining to the understanding, the exposition, the administration,the science and the practice of law: as, the legal profession, legal advice; legal blanks,newspaper.Impliedor imputed in law.Opposed toactual. “Legal” looks more to theletter, and “Lawful” to the spirit, of the law. “Legal” is more appropriate for conformityto positive rules of law; “Lawful” for accord with ethical principle.“Legal” importsrather that the forms of law are observed, that the proceeding is correct in method,that rules prescribed have been obeyed; “Lawful” that the right isactful insubstance, that moral quality is secured. “Legal” is the antithesis of “equitable”,and the equivalent of “constructive”.2 Abbott’s LawDict. 24. [Bold emphasis added]Legal matters administrate, conform to, and followrules. They are equitable in nature and areimplied rather than actual. A legal process can be defective in law. This falls in line with ourprevious discussions oflegal fictionsand thecolor of law. To be legal, a matter does not followthe law. Instead, it conforms to and follows therulesof law. This may help your understandingas to why the Federal and State Rules of Civil & Criminal Procedure are cited in every courtpetition so as to conform tolegalrequirements of the legal fictions,i.e., the STATE OFGEORGIA or the U.S. FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, that rule the courts.Lawful matters are ethically enjoined in the law of the land – the law of the people – and areactual in nature,notimplied. This is why the lawful generic Constitution has little bearing orauthority in the present day legal courts.Executive Orders rule the landThe current situation is now this:Legalism has taken over the law. The administration of legalrules, codes, and statutes are now being substituted for actual law. This takes place on a Federalas well as State level. Government administrates what it has created through its own purported“laws”, which arenotlawful, but purely legal. They are legal fictions based on legally –fictionally – created authority. They are authorized and enforced by legal Executive Orders.Executive Orders are not lawful and never have been. As you read the following, be aware of thewordscodeandadministration.For example, let’s take a quick look at the United States Census 2000. The legal authority forthis census comes fromOffice of Management and Budget(OMB) Approval No. 0607-0856.The OMB is a part of the Executive Office of the President of the United States. TheU.S.Census Bureauis responsible for implementing the national census, which is a division of theEconomics and Statistics Administration of theU.S. Department of Commerce(USDOC). TheUSDOC is a department of the Executive Branch. Obviously, Census 2000 is authorized, carriedout, controlled, enforced and implemented by the President, a.k.a. the Executive Branch of theFederal Government.In fact, the Executive Office of the President controls the entire nation through variousdepartments and agencies effecting justice, communications, health, energy, transportation,education, defense, treasury, labor, agriculture, mails, andmuch more, through a myriad ofExecutive Orders, Proclamations, Policies, and Decisions.All the U.S. Presidents since Lincoln have claimed their “authority” for these Executive Orders isgenerally based on Article II, Section 2 of theU.S. Constitution:“The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States,and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the UnitedStates; …He shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to maketreaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, andby and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other publicministers and consuls, judges of the Supreme Court, and all other officers of the UnitedStates, whose appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall beestablished by law: but the Congress may by law vest the appointment of such inferiorofficers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the courts of law, or in the headsof departments.”In reality, the Congress is completely by-passed. Since the Senate was convened in April 1861by Presidential Executive Order No. 2,notby lawful constitutional due process, the currentSenate is also under the direct authority of the Executive Office of the President. The Presidentlegallyneeds neither the consent nor a vote from the Senate simply because the Senate’s legalauthority to meet existsonlyby Executive Order. Ambassadors, public ministers, consuls,Federal judges, andallofficers of the UNITED STATES are appointed by, and under authorityof, the Executive Office of the President.The Federal Registry is an Executive functionFor the past 65 years, every Presidential Executive Order has become purported “law” simply byits publication in the Federal Registry, which is operated by the Office of the Federal Register(OFR). In 1935, the OFR was established by the Federal Register Act. The purported authorityfor the OFR is found within theUnited States Code, Title 44, at Chapter 15:“§ 1506. Administrative Committee of the Federal Register; establishment andcomposition; powers and dutiesThe Administrative Committee of the Federal Register shall consist of the Archivist ofthe United States or Acting Archivist, who shall be chairman, an officer of theDepartment of Justice designated by the Attorney General, and the Public Printer orActing Public Printer. The Director of the Federal Register shall act as secretary of thecommittee. The committee shall prescribe, with the approval of the President, regulationsfor carrying out this chapter.”Notice that the entire Administrative Committee of the Federal Register is comprised of officersof the Federal Government. Who appoints all Federal officers? The President does. Thisactalsogives the President the authority to decree all the regulations to carry out the act. This is quite amonopoly we’re seeing here whereby the Executive establishes, controls, regulates and enforcesthe Federal Government without need for any approval from the Senate. How could anyonepossibly call this lawful?In 1917, PresidentWoodrow Wilson couldn’t persuade Congress to agree with his desire to armUnited States vessels utilizing hostile German waters before the United States entered WorldWar I. So, Wilson simply invoked the “policy” through a Presidential Executive Order. PresidentFranklin D. Roosevelt issued Executive Order No. 9066 in December 1941. His order forced100,000 Americans of Japanese descent to be rounded up and placed in concentration campswhile all their property was confiscated.Is it any wonder that the Congress he legally controls did not impeach President WilliamJefferson Clinton when the evidence for impeachment was overwhelming? On that note, why isit that the lawyer-Presidents have used Executive Orders the most? Who but a lawyer wouldknow and understand legal rules the best. Sadly, they enforce what’s legal and ignore what’slawful.How debt is assumed by legal fictionsWe now refer back to the matter ofassumption, as already discussed, with its relationship tolegal fictions,i.e.THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA or JOHN SMITH. Since an assumption, bydefinition, implies debt, what debt does alegal fictionassume? Now that we’ve explored thelegal – executive – basis of the current Federal and State governments, it’s time to put all of thistogether.The government use offull capsin place of proper names is absolutely no mistake. It signifies aninternal – legal – rule and authority. Its foundation is legal fiction and the result is further legalfiction that is created, promulgated, instituted, administrated, and enforced via legal rule, code,statute and policy. Let’s just call them ‘the laws thatarebut neverwere.’Quisentitcommodum,sentiredebet et onus.He who enjoys the benefit, ought also to bear theburden. He who enjoys the advantage of a right takes the accompanying disadvantage — aprivilege is subject to its condition or conditions. —Bouvier’s Maxims of Law 1856.The Birth CertificateSince the early 1960’s, State governments – created legal fictions signified byfull caps– haveissued birth certificates to“persons”with legal fictionfull capsnames. This isnota lawfulrecord of your physical birth, but a legal fiction as signified by the use of the full caps. It maylook as if it’s your proper name, but that’s impossible since no proper name is ever written in fullcaps. The Birth Certificate is the government’s created legal instrument for its legal title ofownership, or deed, to the personal legal fiction they have created just for you.One important area to address, before going any further, is the governmental use of older datastorage from the late 1950’s until the early 1980’s. As a “leftover” from various Teletypeoriented systems, many government data storage methods used full caps for proper names. TheIRS was supposedly still complaining about some of their antiquated storage systems as recent asthe early 1980’s. At first, this may have been a necessity of the technology at the time, not adeliberate act. Perhaps, when this technology was first being used and implemented into themainstream of communications, some legal experts saw it as a perfect tool for their legal fictions.What better excuse could there be?However, since local, State and Federal offices primarily used typewriters during that same timeperiod, and Birth Certificates and other important documents, such as Driver’s Licenses, wereproduced with typewriters, it’s very doubtful that this poses much of an excuse to explain fullcaps usage for proper names. The only reasonable usage of the older databank full caps storagesystems would have been for addressing envelopes or certain forms in bulk, including paymentchecks, which the governments did frequently.Automated computer systems, with daisy wheel and pin printers used prevalently in the early1980’s, emulated the IBM electric typewriter Courier or Helvetica fonts inbothupper and lowercase letters. Shortly thereafter, the introduction of laser and ink jet printers with multiple fontsbecame the standard. For the past fifteen years, there is no excuse that the government computerswon’t allow the use of lower case lettersunless the older data is still stored in its original form,i.e.full caps, and has not been translated due to the costs of re-entry. But this does not excuse theentry of new data, only “legacy” data.In fact, on many government forms today, proper namesare in full caps while other areas of the same computer produced document are in both upper andlower case. One can only conclude that now, more than ever, the use of full caps in substitutionthe writing a proper name is no mistake.When a child is born, the hospital sends the original, not a copy, of the record of live birth to theState Bureau of Vital Statistics, sometimes called the Department of Health and RehabilitativeServices (HRS). Each STATE is required to supply the UNITED STATES with birth, death, andhealth statistics. The STATE agency that receives the original record of live birth keeps it andthen issues aBirth Certificatein the name of the child’sfictional person, as signified in full caps,i.e. JAMES SMITH.cer·tif·i·cate,noun. Middle Englishcertificat,from Middle French, from Medieval Latincertificatum,from Late Latin, neuter ofcertificatus,past participle ofcertificare,tocertify, 15th century.3:a document evidencing ownership or debt. —Merriam WebsterDictionary 1998.The Birth Certificate issued by the State is thenregisteredwith the U.S. Department ofCommerce – the Executive Office – specifically through their own sub-agency, the U.S. CensusBureau, who is responsible to register vital statistics from all the States. The wordregistered, asit is used within commercial or legal based equity law, doesnotmean that the full caps name wasmerely noted in a book for reference purposes. When a birth certificate isregisteredwith theU.S. Department of Commerce, it means that thelegalpersonnamed on it in full caps hasbecome a surety or guarantor.registered. Security, bond. —Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of Law 1996.Security. 1a: Something (as a mortgage or collateral) that is provided to make certain thefulfillment of an obligation. Example: used his property as security for a loan. 1b:“surety“. 2: Evidence of indebtedness, ownership, or the right to ownership. –Ibid.Bond. 1a: A usually formal written agreement by which a person undertakes to perform acertain act (as fulfill the obligations of a contract) …with the condition that failure toperform or abstain will obligate the person …to pay a sum of money or will result in theforfeiture of money put up by the person or surety. 1b: One who acts as asurety. 2: Aninterest-bearing document giving evidence of a debt issued by a government body orcorporation that is sometimes secured by a lien on property and is often designed to takecare of a particular financial need. —Ibid.Surety. The person who has pledged him or herself to pay back money or perform a certainaction if the principal to a contract fails, as collateral, and as part of the original contract. —Duhaime’s Law Dictionary.1:a formal engagement (as a pledge) given for the fulfillment ofan undertaking.2:one who promises to answer for the debt or default of another. Under theUniform Commercial Code, however, a surety includes a guarantor, and the two terms aregenerally interchangeable. —Merriam Webster’s Dictionary of Law 1996.Guarantor. A person who pledges collateral for the contract of another, but separately, aspart of an independently contract with the obligee of the original contract.—Duhaime’s LawDictionary.It’s not difficult to see that a State created birth certificate, written with full caps in the name of alegal person, is a document evidencing debt the moment it’s issued. This is how it works: Onceeach State hasregisteredthe Birth Certificates with the U.S. Department of Commerce, the U.S.Department of the Treasury – also a part of the Executive Office – then issues Treasury Securitiesin the form of Treasury Bonds, Notes, and Bills using the birth certificates as sureties orguarantors for these purported Securities. This is based on the future tax revenues of thelegalperson. This means that the bankrupt corporate U.S. can guarantee to the purchasers of theirsecurities the lifetime labor and tax revenues of all Americans as collateral for payment. Theysimply do this by converting thelawful nameinto alegal person.Legally, you are considered a slave or indentured servant to the various Federal, State and localgovernments via your STATE issued and created Birth Certificate in the name of your full capsperson. The reason this Birth Certificate was issued is so that – exclusively – they hold the title ofbirth to yourlegal person. This is compounded further when one voluntarily obtains a driver’slicense or a Social Security Identification number. They own even your personal and private lifethrough your STATE issued marriage certificate issued in the names of legal persons. You haveno Rights in birth, marriage, or even death. They hold the sovereign right to all legal fiction titlesthey have created.Our current problem is that we have voluntarily agreed to their system of legal fiction law bysimply remaining silent – a legal default – and not taking claim to our own Rights. The legal rulesand codes enforce themselves. There is no court hearing to determine if those rules are correct.Their “law” is self-regulating and self-supporting. Once set into motion, their “laws”automatically come into effect provided the legal process has been followed.Cujusquereipotissimapars principiumest— The principal part of everything is in thebeginning.The various bankruptciesThe legally created fiction called the UNITED STATES is bankrupt and holds no lawfulConstitutionally mandated silver or gold – coin and bullion – to back up or pay their debts. Forexample: all privately held and federally held gold coins and bullion in America was seized byExecutive Order of April 5, 1933 and paid to the creditor, the private Federal Reserve BankCorporation (FRB) under the terms of bankruptcy.Congress – still meeting under Executive Order authority – confirmed this bankruptcy through theJoint Resolution to Suspend The Gold Standard And Abrogate The Gold Clause, June 5, 1933 inH.J. Res. 192, 73rd Congress, 1st session, Public Law 73-10. Within this 1933 Public Law, itstates in part:“…every provision contained in or made with respect to any obligation which purports togive the obligee a right to require payment in gold or a particular kind of coin orcurrency, or in an amount in money of the United States measured thereby, is declared tobe against public policy”.In 1950, the corporate U.S. declared bankruptcy a second time, whereby the Secretary ofTreasury was appointed as “Receiver” of the bankruptcy in Reorganization Plan No. 26, Title 5USC 903, Public Law 94-564, Legislative History, page 5967.The only asset the UNITED STATES has, in order to pay their bankruptcy debt since 1933, isthe people themselves. But, if the UNITED STATES openly declared this, the people wouldnever allow their labors and future to be collateral to this bankruptcy debt. Consequently, theylegally pledge the future labor and tax revenues of Americans, by and through the full capsfictionallegalpersonsthey have created, as collateral for credit – loans – to pay daily operationalcosts and the ever increasing debt.Full caps legal personv.the lawful beingJust who is the full caps person,i.e.JOHN JAMES SMITH? He’s the legal fiction thegovernment created to take the place of the real being,i.e.John James Smith. ThelawfulChristian name of birthright has been substituted by a legal fiction created by the government. Ifthe lawful Christian name answers as the legal person, the two are recognized as being one andthe same. However,if the lawful being refuses acceptance of the legal fiction, the two areseparated. Therein lies the simple solution to the entire matter: refusal by the lawful Christian toaccept or answer for the legal person.How did this happen? A result of the federal government bankruptcies was their creation of alegal fiction known as THE UNITED STATES as a part of their legal reorganization. EachSTATE was also converted to their respective fictional legal person,i.e.THE STATE OFTEXAS. Legal fictions can create further legal fictions, such as corporations or any otherfictionalpersonseasily identified by being written with full caps. Once this was accomplished,the entire process was set into motion.All areas of government, including the purported courts of law, are currently authorized by, andoperating as, legally created fictions. For example, the CIRCUIT COURT OF WAYNECOUNTY or the U.S. DISTRICT COURT can only recognize otherlegal persons. This is whyyour lawful name is never entered in their records. It has been substituted with the legal personwritten with full caps. Jurisdiction in such legal fiction courts is only with other legal fictions –persons. The only jurisdiction a lawful being can enter into is alawfulconstitutional court – acommon law venue. The “catch 22” is that lawful courts no longer exist. Onlylegalcourts areavailable to Americans.The purpose and reason for the government use of proper names written in full caps is nowrevealed. The only way to counter this is for lawful Americans to stop accepting the use of thesubstituted legal fiction the State has given them. Every document now issued by anygovernment addresses the person written in full caps. Lawful Americans must insist that they arenot that legal fiction and refuse to accept it. By joining together and doing so from the locallevel, each community will begin to upset the legal order. Lawful Americans must begin todemand lawful government and lawful courts. The legal fictions can only come to an end whenthe people refuse to use or recognize them.The only way to restore lawful government in America is for the people to refuse the privilegesof the legal government now unlawfully in place. We’ve all been duped and the billboard wasright before our own eyes. The use of full caps to write a proper name is absolutely no mistake.