I found the following pdf outlining law enforcement’s view of commercial redemption, a4v etc.


Clearly it sees people who don’t recognize ‘legitimate authority’ and file paperwork as a result as ‘terrorists’ (that blurring indicates a degree of desperation in wanting to close this debate down). It perpetuates the ‘sovereign citizen’ oxymoron fallacy and appears to reject the notion that the entire system operates in debt. However, it is useful for delineating some of the issues and assumptions in the debate.

The commercial redemption community’s view is, so far as I can determine to date, as follows:

A4V is founded on the commercial reality that, in the public, we dont ‘pay’ for anything, we exchange debt instruments. Governments secure a huge advantage by keeping the implications of this hidden from the general population. They operate a one way street whereby they can pledge us (our entire lives energy) to repay their debts to international bankers without offering anything in return (perhaps the occasional ‘social service’ e.g. Reclaiming Unclaimed Property). When we try to reclaim a small part of that which already belongs to us via A4V, which is just the normal, lawful, operation of commercial law we are told it is fraudulent. To the socially conditioned public, ignorant of history and commerce, it would, indeed, appear that way. However, the public are not told that if this activity is fraudulent then so must be the governments own commercial activities. Pursuing A4V helps to highlight this and the hypocracy of governments and their faithful servants, the judges, who respond to attempts to assert rights via lawful process with extortion, kidnapping and violence.

In future posts I will explore these issues further …