Why is the SPLC So Terrified of “Sovereign Citizens”? (Part One)


By Vince Edwards

Here it is! The straight up skinny! I’m not sure anyone has broached this topic, and thus no one to my knowledge has put their finger on the exactly the catalyst which creates the desire to dehumanize people who identify themselves as “sovereign citizens,” and instead makes them another terrorist group that the world needs to destroy.

To begin with, I am not claiming to be a “sovereign citizen,” because that would be an ignorant claim. It would be based on something I heard from someone else, who heard it from a TV somewhere. What I am is simply: “one of the people.” When I say this in a court, I’m legally stating that I am a sovereign being. There are multiple US Supreme Court, as well as state supreme court rulings which support this legal conclusion. I would be more than overjoyed if ANYONE out there would like to debate me on any open forum if they disagree. Instead of course… I’m just another “domestic terrorist” you need to FEAR and DESTROY because God forbid, I might keep talking, posting stuff on my blog and making videos.

The only solution to ME is VIOLENCE (if you’re the bad guys). This is the purpose for the tragedy you just saw in Oregon. You can’t beat me in a court. You can’t legally go through the motions and prove your case! If you let me stay free, eventually you’re going to have to find a different, more productive occupation, because fewer and fewer people will be knocking on your places of business! If I survive, your very professions become OBSOLETE! The time for fear is over for us. I saw a nation wake up at the cost of one man’s life.

How many have sacrificed their lives for just the perception of freedom? Would you sacrifice yours knowing we are at the precipice of a Golden Age of Freedom? I will gladly pay that price if I know my human family will be okay, thanks in very small part to my sacrifice.

You CAN’T kill me though can you? If I sit here minding my own business, remaining peaceful, actually PREACHING peace and non-violence at EVERY opportunity, I’m UNTOUCHABLE am I not? Have we forgotten the lessons of Ghandi and Dr. King? The only way you could take my new HERO down was to turn off all the audio, and shoot him in the hip so he’d look like he was going for his (now proven) STOLEN gun! I’m confident that’s going to come out in the wash wait and see, but he’s not dead is he? He’s become more powerful than you can possibly imagine!

(Still speaking to the bad guys) Your only option, other than killing me is to surrender. The end game on either option is quite clear. The solutions in my opinion: are clear. They exist in a world without YOU. I’m not saying we need to destroy you. We need to change you. You’ll be required to change. If you don’t change: you won’t survive, REGARDLESS of who wins! None of this needs to be scary however. There is some ABUNDANTLY good news (in part two)!

…and now back to my “author” type “person.”

What makes “sovereigns” like myself a real, legitimate threat to the SPLC (it’s not people, can’t harm it, it’s just a piece a paper) is that we no longer require the services of it’s agents. We comprehend AND understand the law. We know how to exercise our rights in the most critical place we need to exercise them: In a court. Let’s bear in mind that the Southern Poverty Law Center is a corporation made up of BAR member attorneys. The BAR is a group of private corporations. Now let’s follow the money as we’ve been taught to do in this “truth” voyage: People who know the law that are willing to educate others are a threat to the entire legal monopoly that the BAR corporations are currently BASKING in.

In the constitution, you are guaranteed the right to “counsel.” It says nothing about hiring the services of an “attorney.” Nowhere in our founding documents does it imply that a group of subsidiary corporations were granted monopoly powers over “counsel” for any one of the people. Let’s discuss this in real terms: You’re an innocent man or woman who has been charged with murder. Who would you rather speak on your behalf, some stranger who has been completely desensitized by hundreds, thousands of cases which profoundly affect peoples’ lives, or your father, mother or best friend who is well versed in the law?

The answer is clear. Your brother or sister would be much more emotional (appeals to a jury) and spend far more time (only one case) in your defense than an attorney who has 100 clients on his retainer list. Yes, yes I know the “attorney” is experienced in the “law.” No I’m sorry you’ve been misled there as well, nothing an attorney does has anything to do with the law. Attorneys will flat-out tell you this! What they do is not about right or wrong. It’s about winners and losers. One thing should become crystal clear to you in this post:
If you hire an attorney: You’re a loser!

There are two different types of people in this society from all of my knowledge: parasites and producers. The parasites are folks who produce nothing, or not enough on their own and need to somehow get that from a producer in order to survive. The entire legal profession and everyone employed in it is comprised of parasites. Every politician is a parasite. Can you eat a “law?” Want to grab some salad dressing and munch down the Patriot Act written by some attorney? If politicians and attorneys did not exist would you be able to survive? You’d probably be not just okay, but a heck of a lot happier to boot!

The vice-versa is obviously not true. Without people to grow the food and deliver it to their store, parasites could not offer a proportionally insignificant amount of labor energy for those goods. At the end of the day it’s not about money, it’s about LABOR. People do not get this. What’s valuable is the labor energy of the people. Your time is such a precious commodity isn’t it? I literally cringe at the thought of people working 50+ hours per week in order to improve the quality of their lives, by roughly ZERO. It doesn’t just sound like it: That’s slavery!

There are so many things that the individual can do to divorce themselves from the problem (being a parasite) and become a part of the solution. I’m talking about the solution that eliminates the money system and evokes an age of honor where the good do not die young and society really works for the betterment of everyone in it. I’ve cried over John F. Kennedy who I never got to know in my lifetime. I recently have shed a few tears over this Oregon situation and quite possibly one of the bravest patriots of our time: Lavoy Finnicum. I don’t know how many people were possibly roused from their slumber by this great man, but I think there’s a mass of people who are ready for the awakening. Well I’m here to pull the covers off your head and tell you to WAKE UP!

KISS stands for “keep it simple stupid (or more politely Susan or Sam)” and if it’s “not simple, it’s not a solution” as my friend and fellow freedom educator Dean Clifford likes to say. Essentially what the Bundys, Lavoy and others were doing in Oregon was to inform people that they were not required to abide by commercial codes (which includes BLM “laws”), they had in fact been TRICKED into private contracts, because they thought they needed these agreements in order to exercise their guaranteed rights! In these agreements they waived those rights in return for certain “benefits” as well as a few duties and obligations, such as following commercial codes. Keep in mind while researching this issue: nowhere in the “violations” against the Bundys and others will you find the word “law.”

Lavoy and the Bundys were encouraging people to revoke these contracts based on a clearly held maxim of law: One must have full knowledge of a contract in order to be legally bound by it. It does not matter what’s in the fine print, or that you didn’t comprehend the legal-ease. There must be a “meeting of the minds” to have a valid contract. If the INTENT of all parties is not CLEAR, it is a voidable contract. Until you void it however, you are presumed to have a full understanding. How else can someone know you didn’t know if you don’t tell them?

I should probably here clarify what a “right” is. Most people in the truth movement don’t seem to know. This is the core fundamental problem we face in the so-called “truth movement.” When one discovers some deep truth about how our society works they usually stop there. For example “The Federal Reserve System is not federal” or “politicians supply absolutely NO benefits to the people.” Everyone wants to think they’ve FINALLY arrived at the answer! What I’m stunned to realize about these very same people is they can believe the US government was complicit in 9/11, that a group of private bankers was granted carte blanch over the nations money supply in 1913 (during Christmas break when most of congress was home), but for some reason, most I’ve spoken to cannot believe they were actually tricked into operating a for-profit legal construct (a corporation) all their lives, FOR FREE.

A right is something you possess, which you can exercise at your “inclination,” that means “if you feel like it!” You do not need permission. You do not need to pay for that right (in the case of a license). It cannot be taken from you, except in the remote case that 12 of your peers unanimously disagree with you. It does not matter what their codes are. If one being on that jury believes your declared right is just, it is protected! Most people are not even aware that they get to pick their own jury! Yes that’s right, you can ask prospective jurors questions. You can quiz them. If they can’t tell you which amendment has the word “militia” in it (for those who have actually read 2A) they are not your peer! A peer is someone who is relatively equal in knowledge, societal status and so fourth. It would not be a very impartial jury if 12 winos or bag ladies sat in judgment of a billionaire (unless of course they were “conservatives”), nor should a bunch of politicians ever sit in judgment of you!

Secure in the knowledge of our rights, able to “leap tall buildings in a single bound” and “of the brave,” can you perceive the threat we “represent” as individuals, each ONE of us, to the STATE and all the parasites who are dependent upon it? I know the word sounds like a swear or insult. It is not. It is a noun describing something which is dependent on something else to survive. It’s a fact. It’s indisputable. It’s also equally indisputable in our society, and EVERY society in history that the PARASITES were and are now the problem! Once one accepts those facts as truth (if one is even willing to hear that truth) there is only one question left to answer as one looks in the mirror:

Am I a producer, or a parasite?

To be continued. I’m about to make a few more enemies. I apologize in advance for any offense.

2-6-2015 10-13-51 AM

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: