There’s plenty of material you can read about the One People’s Public Trust movement in the post I wrote yesterday below.  I’m going to summarize for you why, in Dave’s opinion, there is a high likelihood this strategy will be successful.  I’m going to skip over the “intention” aspects and the spiritual overtones for the purpose of this explanation although those are actually more important than the tools themselves, those aspects are subjective and debatable.  I’m not not even going to elaborate on the legality of the documents because I’m not qualified and this post is based on an assumption that they were drafted and executed properly.
What I am going to address is the use of this movement as a negotiating tool, a strategic approach and a tactical weapon to neutralize overzealous government representatives.  It’s essentially a squeeze play where you are using the UCC filing to claim that the government and the too big to fail banks and the not too big to fail banks… failed.  Evidently the UCC has to be rebutted, from a legal perspective, and what government or corporate leader is going to be willing to stand up and say that the people didn’t bail out the government when it failed during the credit crisis? Not one that I can think of.
If you ask Dave, the assertions in the UCC are fairly vague and global in nature and the UCC isn’t what this is all about anyway, although it lays the cornerstone.  What is important about the UCC is that it creates a reference point that is recognized by the courts.  That reference point is then referenced in the Courtesy Notice and that is what gives the Courtesy Notice some sharp teeth when it comes to intimidation and potential behavioral influence on governmental and banking agents.
The government doesn’t use intimidation.  People who work for the government use intimidation.  You would be hard pressed to find a police policy manual or an IRS that condones the use of intimidation while at the same time you would have a hard time finding a middle manager at many of these institutions that doesn’t use intimidation on a daily basis.  Just take a look at this video from Adam and the Man and check out the un-civil servant at the 5:30 mark and you get a perfect example of the kind of intimidation that I am talking about.  Essentially the same thing happened to Dave just before I started blogging and it was the catalyst to get me started.

When a guy like the one in the video above receives the Courtesy Notice that references the UCC and clearly advises him that the organization he works for is insolvent, bankrupt, broke and otherwise no longer in business he’s going to respond accordingly.  He’s going to go to his boss.  He’s going to go to his co-worker.  He’s going to go to his lawyer.  He’s not going to know what to do because he’s going to realize that he is now personally liable for actions such as those depicted in the video which if you ask me clearly conveys a physical threat… but then again I’m not a lawyer or a judge.
The point is not to attack this guy for practically assaulting Adam with some legal solution against the government.  That won’t work.  The solution is getting the guy to think twice about doing something like this and when he receives the Courtesy Notice and researches it and discovers that it is a valid document referencing a valid non-rebutted UCC, then the guy is going to realize he is exposed.  He’s going to go to his boss and co-workers and say “Hey, that technique I have been using… the one where I protect my face with my hand and then get in other people’s faces and make them think I am going to arrest and possibly twist their arm and injure them because I provoke them into pushing me back… that technique… well I can’t use it anymore because people have cameras and I won’t have the protection of government TSA lawyers and government TSA insurance policies when I get dragged into court by the guy who sent me this Courtesy Notice.”
That’s what will happen.  I know it.  These people, like the TSA guy is just doing his job the best he can because the job is a ridiculous job.  He’s survived and climbed the ladder by perfecting his techniques and by creating a marginal personal exposure that he believes is covered by the uniform and everything that stands behind it… and it was… until now.  When a guy like this gets the Courtesy Notice in the mail or via email, he’s going to back down quicker than you can say “Simpson-Bowles means tested my pension plan.”
If someone at the top would stand up and deny the UCC by providing a proper rebuttal, then they could disable this movement, but that person would also be charged with treason.  Who do you know in government that is going to do that; President Obama or the Chairman of the private Federal Reserve Bank Ben Bernanke?  How about the person in charge of your local credit union?  I don’t think so.  No one in their right mind is going to stand up to the UCC filing and how they got it onto the books escapes me and frankly it makes me quite suspicious as to the core intentions, but more on those suspicions later.
Is this some sort of get out of jail, drive as fast as I want, don’t pay my property taxes solution?  I don’t view it that way.  Is this some way to shut down an overzealous TSA agent like the guy in the video above?  Absolutely it is.  I started noticing a pattern of behavior where the civil servant was become the uncivilized master.  That pattern was emerging everywhere I went.  Then one day I got pulled over for turning right on red and it cascaded into an amazing experience for me.  I’ll probably elaborate on it in another post.  It was at that moment when I realized that the government, at least from my perspective had gotten out of control.  If I had had that UCC Courtesy Notice available to me at the time of that experience I think I would have sent a copy to that police officer.
About two months after my experience with that officer, I read an article in the local paper on how that same office beat some perpetrator up in a restaurant parking lot when there were nine police officers already on the scene before that officer got there.  If I had sent the Courtesy Notice advising him of his personal liability for his actions, would he have beaten up that man at the restaurant?  Maybe not.  According to the local newspaper the entire brutality case was under investigation and we know how those investigations work out when you’re investigated by your own organization and Holder-Breuerian “ripple effects” are the primary concern.
If you work for the government there’s a decent chance that this new paradigm of personal exposure for your actions is going to become a reality.  There’s a decent chance that you’re going to get one of these Courtesy Notices and eventually they will be tested in court and if you believe for one minute that they’re going to restructure the entire Uniform Commercial Code because it is being used by citizens to intimidate overzealous government workers you’re dreaming.  The government will leave you hanging out there in the breeze in the same way that Means Testing your entitlement and retirement programs will leave your golden years wanting like a German trying to get his gold returned from the Fed.


The real significant aspect of this paper-based approach to accountability is the feedback loop that it will create.  These Courtesy Notices will be making their way through every imaginable administrative channel in an already constipated bureaucracy.  Their volume and frequency will build like a snowball until they become so heavy they can no longer be rolled.  A word like  “mesothelioma” settlements became  one of the most searched for words on Google because absestos became one of those snowballs that got so big it couldn’t be moved.  The same can be said about the tobacco settlement.  I can imagine that extending “courtesy” to a gentleman like the one that confronted Adam in the video becoming standard operating procedure.
This entry was posted on Tuesday, February 26th