Select Page

Dragnet of False Remedies…over the edge, over again

by | Apr 28, 2010 | April 2010, Archived Material

This Mailbag item comes from weeks of doing New Conference Calls and listening to the Radio Ramblings of alleged “Paytriot” Remedies.    (OK,….I could’ve made this one shorter….but I am going to bury this issue, once and for all)

If you follow the so-called “Patriot Movement”; the last four months have produced more people, mostly men, that are making the same old tired and worn out mistakes of the past.   And, it’s all based on the same tired antiquated programming of false information.

So, yesterday, I received the following email from a “Radio Host”.

——-Original Message——-

Date: 4/27/2010 7:27:39 PM
Subject: Show Tonight
It’s hard to believe a week has past and it’s time for another internet radio installment of – I AM THE PEOPLE – with your host,me, Kurt Kallenbach.  Catch it tonight at 8pm Central time at:
Tonight I will again beat a not-so-dead horse.  The fact is, I will continue to beat it until it finally IS dead.  Please tune in and help me with this “horse.”
Before I tell you about this “host” and his “truly-dead” horse program; let’s be clear that this Mailbag Entry is not done for the purpose of slander or malice.   And, although I did attend the little radio “show”; and Mr. Kallenbach got very upset about me being in the chat room denouncing his program because of the blatant misinformation; it’s nothing personal, it’s business.

I am doing conference calls, and I am starting to go on radio….and I will be telling everyone listening, to avoid doing any documents that come from you and Dirty Uncle Sam.

And, the business of MATRIX SOLUTIONS is to provide the Truth, with PROOF; so we can create a solution.  You’re not gonna find a solution without knowledge of the facts and the Truth in your possession.   And there are two very ancient maxim that support this.  The first is; “let the truth be told, though the heavens may fall”.

Now, I have spoken with this “host” for going on five months.   He has been studying for one year, and now touts himself as an “expert” and that he is THE PEOPLE.   His big claim to fame is that he walked “from his little greenhouse in Indiana to the big White House in D.C.”

Well, that certainly helped me…what about you?  Do you think they rolled out the red carpet upon arrival?

I have spent hours on the phone explaining why this “host” and his teachers/gurus are wrong, and I have written volumes of email to backup that statement.   I have analyzed “his remedy” which he calls WITHDRAWAL OF CONSENT.   The document is utterly useless and if you see it, avoid it like the plague (unless, of course, you just like prison).  This WITHDRAWAL is contradictory at many points, and I have requested that the “host and his cohorts” debate me on this issue (or any other issue) in an open forum with a moderator to manage the session.

The “host and his cohorts” have refused discussion.

To explain the reasoning of this WITHDRAWAL document, the “Host: Kurt” assumes that he is returning to the original government of the U.S.A. because that is where his/your Rights are.   Kurt is wrong and if you believe like he believes, then please follow my email reply to the “Host: Kurt” as I prove to him that claiming to be a member of the original government of the U.S.A. makes you subject to the King of Britain.

Here’s where we pick up….

Kurt, Why don’t you do some real reading, and stop being so indignant?   I have challenged every single one of you to debate the issues and you won’t.   For ten years, I have watched people like you go to prison and lead others with you.
You “drive” down the road and get “tazed”.  I travel with immunity and by treaty agreements and I don’t get tazed.  (Yep, he got tazed during a traffic stop, according to his program.)
I am writing new constitutions and Charters. I then, waste my valuable time, to take your silly documents….and show you where they are wrong….and you still don’t listen.   And, you expect me not to say something.  I even call, and you don’t return the calls.  You have the phone number….you want to debate this “civilly”, then cue it up and lets go.  And, bring your partner there, as well.
Native State “Illionoisian”…..go read about Dan Benham.  He’s a friend of mine that got 6 years for claiming to be a “native state Michiganian”….and I tired my best to warn him.  And, he has/had you guys beat by light-years.
And, you expect me not to say something.????   None of you can prove me wrong.   Here, since you’re so fricking lazy….allow me to give you some research for your next program.

The Articles had several things wrong with them. Some are readily apparent, and some took a while to come to bear. The first thing that strikes you when you first read the Articles was the specific number, nine, mentioned in several places, as a minimum required to agree to things like the declaration of war or the admission of new states. As soon as one new state were added, that “nine” would no longer be the two-thirds it was intended to be, and to correct each instance would require the assent of all 13, 14, or however number of states. That is the apparent gaffe – the requirement that all changes to the Articles must be unanimous. Several attempts to change the Articles prior to the adoption of the Constitution had been held up by one state’s refusal to ratify.

The United States had no independent power of taxation, relying on the good faith of the states to pay bills sent to them for the maintenance of the national treasury. In several instances, such notices were ignored, and since the national government had no power of enforcement, there was little that could be done about the defaults.  (that would be defaults on debts to the KING)

The new nation was unable to repel the encroachments of the British on the borders set by the Treaty of Paris because the states would not pay the requested taxes. The Spanish similarly encroached unfettered on the southern borders of the United States.

The United States also had no power to regulate commerce between and among the states,leading to bitter tariff wars between themThis type of in-fighting did not help alleviate the economic depression that set in after the war ended.  (meaning that “they” could not even get along.   So, they went into depression and did not pay the debts.   They had “bitter tariff wars”.  What a “grand Union”.)

In January 1786, Virginia called for a meeting of the states at Annapolis to discuss the modification of the Articles. Only five states sent delegates. Disappointed, those who did assemble called for another meeting the following May. In the meantime, a popular uprising in Massachusetts, led by bankrupt farmer Daniel Shays, had started, and the United States found it had little power to put down the uprising. For six months, Shays and his rebels terrorized the Massachusetts countryside. His forces were finally broken up when they marched on a federal weapons depot. The slow reaction of U.S. Forces led to Congress’s endorsement of the May convention suggested earlier. The result of that convention was the U.S. Constitution.  (couldn’t even get ’em all to a meeting….and Shay Rebelled because he had to)

As George Washington said:

George Washington wrote to John Jay on 1 August 1786:

“Many are of the opinion that Congress have too frequently made use of the suppliant humble tone of requisition, in applications to the States, when they had a right to assume their imperial dignity and command obedience. Be that as it may, requisitions are a perfect nihility, where thirteen sovereigns, independent

disunited States are in the habit of discussing & refusing compliance with them at their option. Requisitions are actually little better than a jest and a bye word throughout the Land. If you tell the Legislatures they have violated the treaty of peace and invaded the prerogatives of the confederacy they will laugh in your face. What then is to be done? Things cannot go on in the same train forever.”

You got it, yet; Kurt?  Oh what a dumb question on my part?  No, you don’t get it…..because you can’t and don’t read…..because I know that I have sent this before.

Let’s see if you can read this:

The US Under the Articles of Confederation

Faults of the Articles

The Congress, overall, was absolutely ineffectual. The Congress had to rely on the states for its funding. Since it could not forcibly collect taxes, the states could grant or withhold money and force Congress to accept their demands.

Because it could not collect taxes, Congress printed paper dollars. This policy, however, absolutely wrecked the economy because of an overabundance of paper dollars, which had lost almost all value.

The several states also printed their own currency. This led to much confusion relating to exchange rates and trade; some states accepted the currency of others, while other states refused to honor bills issued by their counterparts.

(do you understand the word: confusion?)

Articles of Confederation

The Treaty of Paris (1783), which ended hostilities with Great Britain, languished in Congress for months because state representatives failed to attend sessions of the national legislature. Yet Congress had no power to enforce attendance. Writing to George Clinton in September 1783, George Washington complained:

(failed to do their jobs, eh?)

Congress have come to no determination yet respecting the Peace Establishment nor am I able to say when they will. I have lately had a conference with a Committee on this subject, and have reiterated my former opinions, but it appears to me that there is not a sufficient representation to discuss Great National points.

The Treaty of Paris left the United States independent and at peace but with an unsettled governmental structure. The Second Continental Congress had drawn up Articles of Confederation on November 15, 1777, to regularize its own status. These described a permanent confederation but granted to the Congress—the only federal institution—little power to finance itself or to ensure that its resolutions were enforced. The Articles of Confederation were weak and did not give a strong political or economic base for the newly formed nation. However, the articles did serve as the lead up to the much stronger and more agreed upon Constitution.

Although historians generally agree that the articles were a spectacular failure in terms of workable governance….

During the latter years of the war, most people were living in comparative comfort. Farmers found a ready market for their produce within the lines of the British and French armies. Blockade runners and the prizes from privateers added rich cargoes and merchandise to northern shops. Speculators went in debt in preparation for the economic boom which was sure to follow the war.

These dreams vanished in the economic depression that followed the war…Political unrest in several states and efforts by debtors to use popular government to erase their debts increased the anxiety of the political and economic elites which had led the Revolution. The apparent inability of the Congress to redeem the public obligations (debts) incurred during the war, only aggravated a gloomy situation.

Congress could not levy taxes and could only make requisitions upon the States. Less than a million and a half dollars came into the treasury between 1781 and 1784, although the governors had been asked for two million in 1783 alone.

When John Adams went to London in 1785 as the first representative of the United States, he found it impossible to secure a treaty for unrestricted commerce. Demands were made for favors and there was no assurance that individual states would agree to a treaty. Adams stated it was necessary for the States to confer the power of passing navigation laws to Congress, or that the States themselves pass retaliatory acts against Great Britain. Congress had already requested and failed to get power over navigation laws. Meanwhile, each State acted individually against Great Britain to little effect. Debtor’s problems came to a head in Shays’ Rebellion in Massachusetts. The idea of a convention to revise the Articles of Confederation grew in favor.

Why revise?  Because it wasn’t working.  They were not paying the debt.   Did Washington mention: “disunited States” are in the habit of discussing & refusing compliance with them at their option…If you tell the Legislatures they have violated the treaty of peace and invaded the prerogatives of the confederacy they will laugh in your face.   Guess who wasn’t laughing ??…..THE KING.


It isn’t enough to draft a Declaration….Bonehead.  You have to “run a government”, Kurt….or you lose it.  They didn’t pay the debt…..they went into bankruptcy….which is where you are when you keep claiming “their government”.  Why don’t you do some real research?  Either that, or pay their debt to the King and shut up about it.   It’s your claim.

America Under the Articles of Confederation

Achievements. The replacement of the Confederation with a stronger national government created by the Constitution suggests that national government under the Articles of Confederation was a failure.   (no shit) If they failed “to give such a tone to our federal government, as will enable it to answer the ends of its institution,” the states would be responsible for “annihilating the cement of the confederation, and exposing us to become the sport of European politics.” …Madison hoped would provide “a republican remedy for the diseases most incident to republican government.”

It only gets worse….oh mighty “Host: Kurt”.

The Writings of James Madison. Edited by Gaillard Hunt.
James Madison, May 7, 1787. Vices of the Political System of the U. States.

3. Violations of the law of nations and of treaties. From the number of Legislatures, the sphere of life from which most of their members are taken, and the circumstances under which their legislative business is carried on, irregularities of this kind must frequently happen. Accordingly not a year has passed without instances of them in some one or other of the States. The Treaty of Peace–the treaty with France–the treaty with Holland have each been violated.

The causes of these irregularities must necessarily produce frequent violations of the law of nations in other respects.

1. Failure of the States to comply with the Constitutional requisitions.

2. Encroachments by the States on the federal authority.

4. Trespasses of the States on the rights of each other.

5. Want of concert in matters where common interest requires it.

6. Want of Guaranty to the States of their Constitutions & laws against internal violence.

7. Want of sanction to the laws and of coercion in the Government of the Confederacy.

8. Want of ratification by the people of the articles of Confederation.

9. The multiplicity of laws in the several States.

10. Mutability of the laws of the States.

11. The injustice of the laws of the States.

Come on Kurt.  Please debate me on this.

You’re a self-professed American claiming the Declaration and the government formed under Articles of Confederation. So, tell me whyyou violated your Agreements on the Treaties.  I mean, I have seen that “Withdrawal of Consent” and you are clearly claiming that you are under that government….which, in fact…NO LONGER EXIST, and they agreed to that FACT back then.

By the way, have you read all of these:

In attempting to limit the power of the central government, the Second Continental Congress created one without sufficient power to govern effectively, which led to serious national and international problems.
Congress could not force the states to adhere to the terms of the Treaty of Paris of 1783 ending the American Revolution, which was humiliating to the new government,

Now, about the “never have done anything” that you made on the Radio

….when you file admiralty claims in federal courts, file paperwork at the Supreme Court, sent papers to the UN, sent claims to the World Court….let me know.

And, as far as helping people…..wanna do some three-ways with folks I’ve helped to stay out of prison?

I am doing conference calls, and I am starting to go on radio….and I will be telling everyone listening, to avoid doing any documents that come from you and Dirty Uncle Sam.

Ok, “truth-seekers”.   Like I said….coulda made it shorter.  But, do you n0w understand that it’s not a government that you can return to.


Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

© Copyright 2020 | Associated with MSNetwork Community | All Rights Reserved.