What a Long Strange Trip It's Been
This post will likely to be the last in a series that began back in August of 2021. First, a summary of events is in order. Follow the links for details, I will still respond to any comments you may leave.
Part 1 gave an accounting of how, after a year of reporting daily to our empty, "shutdown" office in full knowledge of all those "sheltering in place," I was directly ordered home by the manager of development. Five months later we got the office reopening notice, complete with all the arbitrary and meaningless mitigation mandates we've come to know and love, minus the mandatory vaccination.
Well, I dug in my heals and kicked off a legal process by serving my management and HR with a Conditional Acceptance of their nonsense. My manager was confused, and asked me what I hoped to accomplish with my "unprofessional" tantrum. I answered that I expect Siemens to refrain from inflicting any medical intervention upon me until all conditions of safety, viability, and lawfulness concerning said intervention, as put forth in my Conditional Acceptance, were satisfactorily addressed. In affidavit form. And that eventually, I expect the policy to be withdrawn. This is exactly what has happened: I have been in the office every working day since Thanksgiving, and have not once complied with any mandate; now all C-19 related measures have gone away.
In Part 2 I outlined the Common Law approach I was taking in forcing my corporate aggressors to back off. Though I had come across references to the Common Law in the past, it was only after mandates started popping up like weeds, that I looked into it as a means of challenging the lawfulness of such measures.
The Common Law is our law. It is the law for the people. It is the foundation upon which our founding documents are grounded. Despite all efforts by presidents, legislators, lawyers and judges to push us into a civil/statute/admiralty system of law, we are a Common Law nation. We are what John Adams called "a nation of laws and not of men." That is, no man can decide one's fate, only the law, following due process can determine such an outcome.
Part 3 picked things up after receipt of my Conditional Acceptance. There followed a Teams meeting with my manager and HR, ending in them reading me the riot act, and patting themselves on the back. The smug attitudes explain Miss HR's dumbfoundedness upon being served with a Courtesy Notice graciously giving her another five days in which to respond to my previous Conditional Acceptance.
Vaccinations got added to the mix in Part 4, causing a reset and redirection in strategy. I broadcasted through company e-mail why we did not have to submit to such a demand, and that I would work with anyone wanting to fight it. I got no takers. Nevertheless, I soldiered on. But now my guns were trained on the division CEO, CFO, HR, and four other enablers down the hierarchy. I also reloaded with a new Conditional Acceptance that specifically addressed the vaxx.
Part 5 takes us into November after receipt of the Conditional Acceptance and Courtesy Notice have been confirmed. With due notice having been given, and time to reply having expired, I serve the seven mandate bandits with a Notice of Default and a Notice of Estoppel. The day before Thanksgiving they each got a Notice of (personal) Liability and Fee Schedule and Demand to Cease and Desist, amounting to $100,000 per violation, per day, per person. Things seemed to go oddly quiet after that.
With the legal process in motion, I was girded for battle. The first confrontation is detailed in Part 6. It ended in a stalemate, but I did manage to lay out the expected code of conduct for any future conflict.
A truce is reached in Part 7. It was really more of an unconditional surrender on the part of management with me declaring that I would be coming into the office everyday, oblivious to any and all mandates. I was almost daring them to violate the served estoppel and set the fee schedule into motion. I did promise not to disrupt any more meeting with my maskless form, however.
Bluff Successfully Called
I'm proud to say that I have not wavered in holding to my declaration of noncompliance. Unfortunately, I didn't get to cash in on any violations of estoppel. But really, a payout was never the aim of the strategy. The aim was to take Siemens to the precipice (to borrow a phrase), and force them to back down, which is exactly what happened.
Admittedly, events unwound in my favor, with SCOTUS shooting down Biden's OSHA mandates being the most consequential. That said, the threat of personal liability for the breaching of any one of my inalienable rights did give Siemens pause, if only to regroup. But the counter attack never came. I revel in the thought of any anxiety I may have unleashed in the minds of my targets, gloat over the money spent on legal plottings, and chortle at the time wasted by lawyers. Maybe they learned something.
The mandates disappeared Monday without comment. The masks were simply gone. Ever the smart ass (not that I don't have just cause), I congratulated everyone on being allowed to breath oxygen again, and welcomed them back to the atmosphere. It seems that Siemens, like all other tyrannical organizations, has, as I told the group, decided for no discernible reason to swap a phony pandemic for a phony war.
Truly the fight never ends friends, but we should still take time to savor our victories. I won! I write that almost in disbelief. We won, Pedes. We faced down a Goliath. I read every comment made in the course of this series. I digested every question, concern, encouragement, accolade, and nay saying. I weighed the wisdom and considered the applicability of each. Some I acted on. Knowing that I had to answer to you, and that you all had my back gave me the courage and confidence to sally forth.
Fortified with the knowledge of who I am, drawn from my studies into the Common Law (a free man), and armed with its application, I was able to take the battle to my aggressors. And so, for four months I have walked proudly and defiantly, and above all, honorably, in the very den of the enemy. The experience has kindled a passion in me for the Common Law. It is a tool gifted to We the People. A tool most of the world does not have. With it, whenever we chose to stand against evil, we do not have to stand naked. For we have both the Law and the Lawgiver on our side.
God bless everyone.
Last night I attended a presentation hosted by the Commoner Law Group. The speaker was Rick Martin, founder of the Constitutional Law Group. Ostensively, the topic was about his experience with driving for decades without license or registration, highlighting his dealings with traffic cops and the occasional judge who operate a system that seeks to financially exploit us even as they deny us our freedom of movement.
And he has been quite successful: he mentioned three very pricey SUVs along his journey that had been paid for by three different Texas townships that each put him in jail for one night. He also listed 26 judges, more than a couple prosecutors, and a handful of police officers that he has put in jail. As we've been learning, going after the indemnity bonds was a particularly effective part of his wins.
The talk was fascinating and inspiring in itself. At one point he touched on what's in store for state and local officials for the incredible harm wrought by their unlawful COVID mandates. Though an expert in the Constitution and the Common Law, Rick is not a lawyer. Nonetheless, he has committed himself to fighting the tyrants who are bent on removing all individual liberties. And he puts his money where his mouth is.
At one point the Texan let it slip that he was in a hotel in Michigan, and then proceeded to gave us some idea of what he was up to. Remember Marlena Hackne? She is the Michigan refugee from communist Poland who refused to close her Bistro on the say so of Gov. Gretchen Whitmer and her health director Robert Gordon.
Martin actually traveled to Holland, MI to help defend her from AG Dana Nessel, and got thrown into jail for 93 days for his trouble. It seems the judge was under the misguided impression that We the People are not allowed to work within our court system unless we are bar licensed attorneys.
Well, that sort of attitude rubs freedom loving people the wrong way. So he came back for round two. It seems that there are now multi-million dollar suits in place against, at a minimum, Whitmere, Nessel, and a state prosecutor. Based on what I know of the Common Law, I would assume the liability involved would be personal.
He did not give any more details, but it started me to thinking. After the first round of draconian lockdown, unlike the most notorious Dem governors, Whitmer did not inflict a second round upon us Michiganders. As the saying goes, things were quiet; too quiet. Maybe these suits explain her loss of interest in inflicting pain. It's also interesting that she has not mentioned COIVD, nor how she saved us all from certain death even once in her recent campaign events.
I'm posting this as a potential win, but also as an example of the path (along with some resources) that patriots might be able to follow to permanently bring down the daemons who have been haunting us for over two years.
The convoy leaves California on Wednesday, 23 February picking up tributary convoys as it moves eastward. If things parallel what we're seeing in Canada:
The flow of goods slows to a trickle. (Stock up everyone!)
DC, and possibly other strategic spots suffer gridlock.
Biden invokes the equivalent of the War Powers Act, i.e., martial law.
Bank accounts are frozen based on the mere suspicion of supporting terrorist truckers. (Stash some cash away, now)
Is this the cascade of events that finally gets the attention of all normies, and exposes all the tyrants behind the curtain? Asking for a friend.
Postmortem
If you're up on the latest, you know that on my first day back in the office since shutdown, I attended a meeting where all were required to be masked. I, of course refused. If you don't remember check out part 6, and part 1, part 2, part 3, part 4 and part 5 while you're at it! That set up a chain of minor events, which I relay here.
My breech of this corporate court resulted in the courtiers being scattered to the four corners of the office to continue on-line. Truly, it was as if I were infected with bubonic plague. Or perhaps something more dangerous, like the truth. Standing in the conference room abandoned, I felt relief that the confrontation had ended so quickly with retreat of the opposition. However, although the mission's objective of serving management with legal notices had been achieved, the evaporation of my captive audience felt like some sort of a defeat.
As I trudged back to my office I passed a few of the somewhat bewildered attendees now engaged in their hastily reconfigured conference, all unmasked. It struck me that I had in a sense freed them from their weekly ritual of submission. The equivalent of Orwell's morning hate, I like to think. If nothing else, my undercover agent and I had momentarily disrupted the corporate machinery with our monkey wrench dropping.
I got immediate feedback from my two fellow pure bloods of the religious exemption variety. They were both very positive, and consoled my misgivings over not delivering all the key talking points -- the game is long, and this was just the first round. After some back and forth we reached the conclusion that our management had been coached on how to handle me. My flaunting of their authority was accepted quite calmly, and the disbanding of the meeting done so seamlessly that they almost seemed ready for me. Other than telling me I had to have a mask on they were careful not to violate the estoppel, which neither had yet received notice of.
After a couple of hours of nothing much happening I went home. My ability to concentrate was pretty much nil, and I wanted to post the morning's events to GAW anyway.
The Morning After
I returned Tuesday morning, going out of my way to ignore all protocols. It was all for naught, since only three guys, including my confederate from the day before, were there. I have a lot of seniority, so none objected to my wandering the "common areas" unmasked. Even so, the two jabbed zombies sill masked up upon leaving their shared office, which was disappointing. To free someone, they first have to want to be free. To stir up their discomfort, and maybe heighten their level of cognitive dissonance, I would answer the questions they asked me in person, rather than over chat, leaning over them to point things out on the screen. They didn't ask any more questions.
There was some minor activity on the corporate level, however. I got an e-mail signed by one of the Agents target by my legal paperwork telling me that I had missed the vaxx disclosure deadline, and must take care of that. This should at least qualify as a violation of estoppel.
Holding Action
Wednesday I was by myself. Thursday it was just me and the 2nd level, my antagonist from part 6. He was in virtual meetings all morning with some breaks, but never came to visit me. There's no way he didn't know I was there -- he can see the entrance I came in through from his office, and has to walk by mine to reach the restroom, or go out to the parking lot. He left at lunch time.
Battle Plans
It was just me again on Friday. I was to have a year end performance review with my manager, who would be remote. Rather peculiar, since my termination is scheduled for 4 January. I spent the morning preparing a one page PowerPoint for him. I wonder if Siemens ever considered the loss of productivity their mandates would engender. Even if I didn't get a chance to present, the preparation would structure the material in my mind. End the end I didn't use it, but I was fully armed.
The slide contrasted Company Policy with Individual Liberty. The former being structured by Siemens and driven by federal agencies/Biden, and the latter structured by the Constitution and driven by We the People, typifying fascist governments and constitutional republics, respectively.
Whereas he and other managers had agreed or signed a contract with Siemens to uphold company policy, at 17 I had sworn an oath to defend the country and its Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic. The same oath taken by millions of men before me who died to preserve that promise of liberty. Unlike an agreement or contract, an oath is legally and morally binding. And is forever. My efforts would not cease.
I know the slide is crowded already, at least in words, but it also depicted a hierarchy of Law with We the People on top and Siemens on the bottom, six levels down under a 1998 charter of incorporation granted by the Oregon Secretary of State, who had sworn oaths to State and Federal constitutions. No person or entity can usurp another's Rights without due process of law, least of all a lowly entity of our creation!
I was using animations to bring these things in as I planned to speak about them. The final item was an overview of Siemens' last go around with Fascism under the Nazis/Hitler and their opportunistic use of slave labor. I knew about this, but didn't have any details until u/NanaQ45 pointed me to this Amazing Polly podcast.
The topic of slave labor put an idea into my head that I would like to polish up and use against the maskers. The masking of slaves is an ancient practice. It was an overt sign of ownership and submission. It was also a means of denying them communication (not to mention oxygen) and dehumanizing them. "Dear manager, still think masking is only about a virus?" Limit this to just the American experience of slavery, which all leftist know is the only slavery worthy of condemnation, and you have a perfect argument for claiming all masking is racist. Has anyone made this argument? I would love to know more.
Happy Ending
At least to the week, that is -- the war wages on. I was ready when the call came in. We exchanged greetings, and talked over current status. Before the review started I told him that I would be working almost exclusively from the office, and that I would not be complying with any mandates. I hastily added that I would not be attending any meetings in-person, to both his and my relief! My point had already been made, and all legal requirements satisfied.
He then launched into a very favorable review, even though I have been distracted for much of the last quarter in criticizing and circumventing Siemens policy, and crafting a way to crush it. Even threatening to take down a few of the main actors. It was so favorable that I got a decent raise and a $2,500 bonus! I joked that after combining the raise with Biden's inflation I would only be down by 6%! Always good to end on a humorous note.
Another Siemens Pede in a different division informed me that he received a late Friday e-mail saying that given the recent Biden/OSHA court loses, his division was suspending the vaxx mandate for the time being. He (I presume) thinks that it came out so late to avoid interfering with any weekend jab plans some employees may have had. Gonna be some pissed off workers. Don't know if this announcement had anything to do with my review. Managers would get notice before us honest folks. Whatever, I'll take it as a sign that I am fighting the good fight. Signing off until next time...
Beachhead established!
At last, some local action in the continuing saga. For the history, and some of the rationale for my approach, check out these posts: part 1, part 2, part 3, part 4, part 5
In our last outing
After consolidating the various mandated medical interventions floating in at different times into one Conditional Acceptance. I sent it off by e-mail for answer/rebuttal to the CEO and six others. The CEO was targeted as the Principal, and the CFO, HR Head and four of his HR henchmen as Agents. They never attempted to rebut, because to do so would give the game away. Instead I got a response that brushed aside the communication with some amusement on the part of corporate lawyers.
This was followed by a Courtesy Notice to all, giving them another week to answer. This time the response was more stern and a bit bullying, informing me that I had best comply.
Next were a Notice of Default and a Notice of Estoppel sent together. To these I got silence. A week later I sent a Notice of Liability and Fee Schedule and Demand to Cease and Desist. Again, complete silence. See part 5 to get a summary of the contents of these notices.
All of the paperwork has also been sent by registered mail to the CEO. Receipts have been received back for only the first two.
Assessing the Situation
The famous Gandhi's stanza is:
First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win.
It may be wishful thinking on my part, but there are signs that we're at the last line. Except maybe it would more accurately read, "Then they look for better lawyers."
Besides the sudden silence where there is a legal and moral duty to reply. The 26 November deadline for me to enter my vaxx status has come and gone with no comment. Maybe they will just assume I'm unjabbed without trying to confirm it, and let me go at the beginning of January.
Lastly, they are giving out exemptions like candy -- 100% of the people I know who applied have been granted one. It's a tiny sample, but for something that was to be available only "under rare and very limited circumstances” it seems like a high hit ratio.
One fellow got his exemption for a New Age, wacko religion. They don't seem to grant them for Constitutionalists, however.
Bringing the Fight to the Enemy
My legal strategy relies on proof of notices being given at every step. It's worrisome that receipt of the most important pieces have not yet been acknowledged: the ones that inform my aggressors that they are in default, and thereby have been estopped from inflicting any medical interventions upon my person; and the one that lays out their personal liability at a rate of $100,000 per violation, per day, per person.
Has the mail room been instructed to not accept any mail from me, or to sideline it somehow? USPS claims that there was a delivery attempt on 24 November. Tracking says that they would try again on the next business day, but that hasn't happened yet. Is this just a holiday slowdown?
I assume that the papers made it through to at least one of the seven addressees, and that a conversation has been generated, and maybe a little worry. I decided to wait no longer, but to fire a warning shot. I've been treated as a leper long enough.
I'm goin' in! (to the office)
D-Day was scheduled for this morning. Development holds a weekly status meeting on Mondays with about 20 in attendance. These have been video conferences for 18 months. With the office reopening, a handful of people have been attending live. I seldom watch once signed in, because I just can't take muzzled grown men sitting around a conference table seriously. Not to mention straining to understand all the muffled voiced. The symbolism of submission and slavery is too strong to stomach.
The plan was to provoke an incident, or maybe even a violation of estoppel, and in the process get the three unreceived legal notices into the hands of the two manager who would be present.
Every page of every documents contain this footer, "Notice to principal is notice to agent; Notice to agent is notice to principal." Legally, this means that when one person in the chain gets the notice; they all get it. My thought was to circumvent the "no notice received" gambit that seems to be at play right now at HQ.
I met with my fellow exemption holding pure-blood over the weekend to plot. He had been to a couple of the live meetings, so was able to lay out enemy positions around the table. He hates it, but volunteered to go into the breach along side me. The plan was for me to come in once the meeting had started, and the recorder was rolling to sit with him on my right. I was to work in the topic of the legal paperwork when challenged over my non-existent mask and deliver it to the aggressors through him. Apparently, one can't properly serve their own notices. Testimony of service is much stronger if it comes from a third party.
The Landing
I had been dreading this confirmation for weeks. Now it was at hand. The fact that I am in the right filled me with resolve, but it was a sleep delivered epiphany that really steadied me. The path I was anticipating was a take-no-prisoners struggle to the bitter end while taking flak from all, but I was shown another path: I wouldn't be marching into a camp of enemy warriors, but into a playground of indifferent cowards. Most have no love for the masks, but are too afraid, or can't be bothered to fight. I didn't have to fight those, because at some level they want to be free. I merely had to show them the way.
With that view of the terrain, I arrived at the office an hour before the meeting. I kept a low profile, because I did not what to shoot before seeing "the whites of their eyes." I exchanged greetings with the development manager, RR, in an external hallway just before the meeting; him masked, and me not, so it wasn't a complete surprise.
I logged on to the meeting from my desk, and started a recorder. I gathered the papers to be served and waited until everyone was in their place. There were more than planned, so the ideal position was already occupied. I wandered in to the den of zombies to a few greetings. The last available seat put me next to my manager, JJ, with one person between me and my spy.
The challenge came right away. That's when I got off what I think was the only unrushed line (I haven't watched the video yet):
"My need for masks pretty much evaporated after 5th grade."
"You have to wear one, don't be disruptive."
"According to whom?"
"Siemens policy."
"I've noted before that Siemens has no lawful authority over my body."
I refused to mask again, babbling a bit about masks being medical devices that had to be prescribed by a physician, Siemens being incorporated by the state of Oregon, which is beneath We the people, and how they couldn't violate the Constitution, etc.
I hadn't wanted to get into details in a defensive way, but a shut down was looming. I had anticipated having the police called, but I hadn't considered that the meeting could simply be disbanded with the attendees scattered to their work spaces, and continued on-line.
I admit I panicked, and tried to get everything out at once. The impending shut down and my anxiety were making it hard to deliver nice one liners -- real life never follows the script. Instead I kind of just rushed on. But I managed to pull myself back together enough to be able to deliver the coup de grace:
"The authority of Siemens is the subject of an ongoing legal process. Siemens and all agents have been estopped from inflicting any medical interventions upon my person. The details are in the legal paperwork, you really need to know the legal ramifications before you take any action."
I then quickly held up the docs one-by-one, naming them before passing them to my confederate through an intermediary. RR wanted to know if these came from the HR head. "No, these form the basis of the legal case against him and others."
Despite the glitches the mission was a success! All five notices were served on RR with everything being recorded. I ended up giving copies directly to JJ, since he was on my immediate left.
I was too keyed up to focus on the meeting, or anything else. I waited and hour after it ended for a visit from the bosses, but nothing came. I stayed an hour before heading off for the safety of home.
Next Steps
I plan to keep going to the office until there is no reaction, or I am shut out. JJ usually only comes in on Monday, RR maybe twice a week. And I'm sure both, after consulting with higher ups are going try to talk some sense into me.
JJ is a good guy. He was instrumental in building the company before it was acquired, so is very vested. New to management, he was miffed with the Siemens vaxx mandate. I think he's feeling conflicted, and is experiencing some shame. At other times as this has unrolled he has tried to reign me in, but not this time. He didn't say one word to me, or come talk to me afterward.
RR is bit more cold, but still a good guy. He was actually very reasonable, although wrong, with me today. He was the first employee of what was a startup, so super vested as well. However, he is a true Branch Covidian.
In my rambling I did try to warn them that they don't want to get swept up in this. And also that when things turn, as the courts are doing to Biden, that Siemens will cut them loose. That they would leave managers hung out to dry when birds come home to roost, just like they did when they switched from working with the Nazis to working with the allies to put Nazis away. I'm sure this came off as the ravings of a madman, but I really don't want to suck these guys in.
I doubt I'll attend another meeting live anytime soon.
A peer-reviewed article by two of Stand Up Michigan stalwarts who work in Industrial Hygiene, OSHA compliance and Personal Protection Equipment that disects the recent OSHA ETS
Here are a few highlights:
On November 12, an Appeals Court reaffirmed the stay on the Biden Administration’s push for this mandate, therefore, no employer in the United States is legally able to cite OSHA's recent ETS as justification for forced vaccination, testing, or mandating face coverings in the workplace, neither is any individual state OSHA agency. This stay applies nationwide, not just to the states covered by the 5th Circuit Court.
Until there is an approved ETS, there is no standard. Where there is no standard, there can be no enforcement.
There is no statutory authority to implement this type of ETS as OSHA does not get their guidance or orders from the Executive Branch.
Perhaps the strongest argument against the grave danger and necessity requirements, however, are the fact that infectious diseases are not recognized “workplace hazards,” so OSHA does not have jurisdiction or authority over infectious disease control measures.
OSHA’s role is workplace health and safety, not infectious disease mitigation strategies or public health policy. Infectious diseases are not considered workplace hazards and OSHA has no jurisdiction or authority to control the spread of infectious diseases. This is within the scope of Health and Human Services and public health officials, not OSHA.
Another concern is the overreach of asking employees to disclose their vaccination status. One of the most misunderstood aspects of HIPAA and protected health information (PHI) is that it only applies to healthcare settings, which is false. Any employee who handles another employee's protected health and private health information or that of any customer or client, is subject to annual HIPAA training and has a "right" to know said historical medical information... Asking an employee their vaccination status is considered PHI. To do so without being fully HIPPA trained and certified puts the employer at risk of violating privacy laws and opens the employer up to lawsuits.
One major area of misunderstanding is in the area of liability. We hear all the time that OSHA won’t punish an employer if an employee is injured due to the vaccine. This is not at all true. Employers, you need to understand your risk of liability for requiring employees to utilize any medical device (masks are considered medical devices) without proper oversight and training, or to take any experimental vaccine that is still under emergency use authorization (EUA) and has not been tested for safety or efficacy (the Covid-19 vaccines are still in stage 4 testing phases and still under EUA), or any vaccine as a condition of employment for that matter. The injuries and deaths associated with these vaccines are too great to be ignored, yet employers are 100% liable for the injuries and deaths sustained if they are received because of a condition of employment.
Safety and health is never a one-size-fits all approach. In addition, the main rule of public health policy-making is to consider the best control measure for the problem that does not violate the public’s civil liberties.
To summarize, it doesn’t matter which agency is being threatened, targeted, and weaponized. It is all the same. The Executive Branch of our government does not have the authority to simply tell a regulatory agency, hospital system, doctors, or healthcare workers, schools, etc. to do what they order them to do in an attempt to implement their own edicts.
Business owners and schools must be informed on the extent of all of this so they are not complicit in the illegal promulgation and enforcement of self-proclaimed mandates that only create greater harm to their employees and customers, and students and staff, but they also need to understand the increased risk of liability they have to their employees, staff, and students if they DO enforce any mandate that creates an injury or illness above first aid.
Things are coming to a head, Pedes and starting to move again. For the history, and some of the rationale for my approach, check out these posts:
part 1, part 2, part 3, part 4
A QUICK RECAP (If you don't want to bother with the links.)
The Siemens office reopening policy included screening, masking and potentially testing. I responded by electronic and registered mail with a legal Conditional Acceptance letter giving ten days for the HR facilities flunkie to respond. She forwarded it to a HR legal flunkie who told me in a conference call that company lawyers said she didn't need to answer any conditions. So after two weeks I followed up with a Courtesy Notice giving her an additional five days. That pissed her off, "I already told you..." Shortly afterwards, a mandatory vaxx notice from the head of HR popped up in our e-mail boxes. Accordingly I send him his very own new and improved Conditional Acceptance.
Three days later a vaxx policy update came down from on high signed by the CEO, CFO, and HR head. Rather than continue on the other paths, I consolidated everything into yet another Conditional Acceptance that I e-mailed to all, and register mailed to the CEO. Since suits under Common Law are always person-to-person I named the CEO as Principal, and all the others as his Agents. After two weeks I sent him a Courtesy Notice with a five day extension. The CEO never responded -- he pawned that duty off on the HR head who only ever reiterated policy, and would get a little testy when I countered with a sprinkling of facts.
REJOINING OUR STORY IN PROGRESS
This moves us up to early November. Tracking the Biden E.O.s, our vaxx deadline was changed from 8 Dec to 4 Jan with a demand that individuals send in their vaxx status by 26 Nov. Religious and physical exemption applications were also stressed. Exemptions were first put forth as being something that would be rarely granted. At this point I think they are trying to limit the damage -- 100% of the folks I know who applied (3 out of 40 some) received one. I even got an e-mail about my accommodation not yet being received. Could be because I never requested one. Here's my response:
Thanks M,
The only accommodation I need to request is from my Creator. Siemens has nothing to do with that. Besides, I already have an accommodation that should satisfy Siemens, it’s known as the 1st Amendment to the Constitution for the united States of America. Something all you Agents of this unlawful action are violating, along with the 4th , 5th , 6th and 14th Amendments.
And let's not forget your violations of all ten points of the Nuremberg Code, which forbids conducting medical experiments of human subjects without their consent. Siemens got away with only paying financial damages for collaborating with the Nazis; many more people are awake to what’s going on this time around, and the evidence is plentiful.
Cordially,
As you can see, I'm not interested in asking for my rights. Instead, as a free man, I am asserting them. But I did get one more Agent to add to my list of enablers. The thing people who apply for these exemptions (and I know many) are missing is that by doing so, they are signing a contract. Whenever you sign a contract you are signing away some liberty, even if you are unaware of it.
This is a classic trap that has been employed by TPTB against We the People since forever. We all do it out of ignorance. By signing this particular contract, the exemption appeasers are agreeing with the premise that their company is entitled to dictate their health care and impose medical interventions whenever it suits them. Can anyone say, "Booster number six?"
I got confirmation that the Courtesy Notice to the CEO was delivered on 12 Nov. A week later I sent out Notices of Default and Estoppel. Here's the cover note:
Dear Mr. H.,
As you have failed to respond to my Conditional Acceptance in affidavit form I am sending you a Notice of Default, and Notice of Estoppel. Going forward I fully expect you to refrain from trying to force unwanted medical interventions upon my person.
Sincerely,
Here's the meat from the Default:
Therefore, this NOTICE is to inform you of the fact that you are in DEFAULT due to your failure to perform a legal duty where you had a legal and moral obligation to speak. This NOTICE serves as prima facie evidence of your "SILENCE" in this matter, pursuant to U.S. v. Prudden, 424 F.2d 1021 (1970) and U.S. v. Tweel, 550 F.2d 297, 299 (1977).
BE IT FURTHER KNOWN, that your lack of timely response and failure to rebut my claims in affidavit form serves as your acquiescence and tacit agreement that the factual declarations I set forth are true, correct, and not misleading, and are binding upon you.
And the Estoppel:
Thus, a fraud has been committed upon me, pursuant to U.S. v. Tweel, 550 F.2d 297, 299 (1977), thereby initiating the DOCTRINE OF ESTOPPEL BY ACQUIESCENCE, pursuant to Carmine v. Bowen, 64 A. 932 (1906), to wit, "One's 'silence' may invoke doctrine of ESTOPPEL by acquiescence," which is now in full force and effect upon you and Siemens Industry Software Inc.
BE IT FURTHER KNOWN, that you are hereby estopped from any and all future actions, challenges, or counterclaims against me concerning this matter. Any violation(s) of this ESTOPPEL will be construed, at the very least, as a "tortious" act against me for which I will then have a lawful claim against you. Proceeding beyond this point strips you of any "Immunity," real or imagined, making you personally liable to me.
Finally, yesterday I sent out a document entitled Notice of Liability and Fee Schedule and Demand to Cease and Desist. This was fun, especially coming the day before Thanksgiving! I hope my aggressors read it with joy in their hearts. Here's the cover, short and sweet:
Dear Mr. H.,
The last set of legal documents sent you included a Notice of Estoppel. This final document, a Notice of Liability and Fee Schedule and Demand to Cease and Desist informs you of the personal liability you and your agents will bear, and the damages you and your agents will suffer should you choose to violate said Estoppel.
Merry Christmas, bitches,
Okay, that last bit should actually read "Sincerely,"
And here's the bit from the Liability Notice I am most proud of. I was struggling to clearly hook the legal obligations that public officials operate under into the hides of corporate officers. What I hit on was the 'color of law', which I'll explain after the passages:
YOU WERE WARNED through the aforementioned NOTICE OF ESTOPPEL BY SILENCE AND ACQUIESCENCE that you will be held personally liable for any violation. Such will be construed as, at the very least, a "tortious" act against me for which I will have a Lawful claim and cause of action against you pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. See United States v. Price, 383 U.S. 787 (1966), to wit, "To act 'under color' of law does not require that the accused be an officer of the State. It is enough that he is a willful participant in joint activity with the State or its agents."
In depriving me of my constitutionally secured rights, privileges, or immunities through forced, unwanted medical interventions under the guise of Executive Order 14043 and the resulting OSHA Emergency Temporary Standard 29 CFR 1910, Subpart U, you are in fact, acting jointly with the State. Furthermore, since neither proclamation is in actuality, a law, you are doing so under color of law, thus making you subject to suits at Common Law under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and criminal prosecution under 18 U.S.C. § 242. The staying of the OSHA ETS by BST Holdings, LLC v. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (2021) makes your deprivation of my rights even more egregious.
Color of law is typically used against police who hassle, order, or arrest a person based on some law that is not in fact a real law. (Mask mandates come to mind). In U.S. vs Price it was used to prosecute 18 defendants, only three of whom were state officials, for the murder of three young civil rights activists. It is the basis of the movie Mississippi Burning.
A lower court had released the private 15 from any legal action. This ruling by the Supreme Court overturned that when it found that though not public officials, each of the private 15 was "a willful participant in joint activity with the State." The county sheriff and six civilians were convicted on that basis. Corporations doing the bidding of Biden are certainly in joint participation with the State, which is acting on the basis of no law. Such officers can be brought to heel both civilly and criminally. The criminal penalties range up to life in prison and death.
Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, ...shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results, ...shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results, ...shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
But here is the absolute juiciest part of the Notice of Liability:
YOU ARE ALSO HEREBY NOTIFIED that any continued action against me shall incur a fee and bill for damages at a rate of $100,000 US Dollars per day, per man or woman involved.
YOU ARE THUS HEREBY DEMANDED TO CEASE AND DESIST IMMEDIATELY. Any violation of this NOTICE AND DEMAND is your activation and acceptance of the above fee schedule. This NOTICE AND DEMAND is enforceable from the date of notice.
Let's see, 7 Agents times $100K is $700K a day. At that rate it will only take a few weeks to set me up good.
As of tomorrow my vaxx status will be late. That will probably kick off a violation or two. I plan to go into the office next week for the first time since reopening; without mask, screening or hand cleaning. That should provoke something as well. Maybe I'll be able to add a few more Agents to my suit? I could live with a cool million a day.
Happy Thanksgiving to all!
Sorry for the lag in continuing this series. A flurry of activity and shifting targets have kept me off balance, but now I'm bringing my guns around to aim for the top. For the history, and some of the rationale for my approach, check out these posts:
And now, on with part 4...
Two weeks ago, Siemens (no sense being discrete at this point) escalated their demands of medical interventions by notifying all US employees that they must be injected by 8 Dec. This came from the US head of HR. I pivoted away from my pending legal challenge to concentrate on this new threat. I reworked my previous Conditional Acceptance of the masking and testing mandates to object to the forced injections and fired it off to HR before the end of business. I got a canned response within an hour.
For some reason, this new policy was not brought up at the following Monday's status meeting, even though we always discuss policies that might affect any one of us. So on Tuesday, I dropped this bomb on every employee in our unit across the US, including management (~30 people):
.
To my fellow U.S. workers,
Since Wednesday's announcement from K.O. did not come up as a topic in this morning's development huddle, I bring it up now -- it is too important to dismiss. No matter your personal feelings or situation, I suggest that you read my entire note. Failing that, at least absorb the next block. Especially if you have, or hope to have children:
[warning: plagiarized GA meme]
If you don’t stand up,
your children will Inherit a world
where they won’t be able to.
That’s actually the conclusion. Read on for the details.
So what qualifies as "vaccinated?" Currently it's one, or two injections. But that could easily become three, like it has in Israel. Or maybe four, like Singapore is considering. Clearly we're on a slippery slope here. And once the slide starts, what’s to stop Siemens from imposing any medical interventions on any employee, anywhere, at any time? Eventually, maybe even on family members? (As a Louisiana health provider is already doing.)
A technocratic future of medical tyranny lies along this path. It does not need our consent; it requires only our silence. People really need to be thinking past the mandated December 8th deadline. Because, rest assured, that will not be the end. We've all watched "two weeks to flatten the curve" morph into two years.
It’s plain to see that this is not about your health. It has never been about your health. K.O. admits as much in the second paragraph of his announcement: Jabbing us is about keeping the government funds flowing. He couldn’t be more blatant. Or more disrespectful to us as human beings.
Well, I’d like to ask K., just how much, in terms of employee liberty and bodily autonomy, is he willing to pay to keep that seat at the federal feeding trough? Do bean counters conduct a risk (for the employees) versus benefit (for the company) analysis in order to decide?
One can't help wondering about the PR impact of a German company violating all ten points of the Nuremberg Code forbidding medical experimentation on humans? (And the vaccine is experimental, since it's only available under Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). The FDA "approval" is for a product that is not yet even being manufactured! The only way you can comply is by injecting a non-approved drug.)
For those of you considering the exemption route. I wish you luck, but they will only be available "under rare and very limited circumstances." Should you get one, you can bet that it will be yanked the moment the bean counters decide it’s to their benefit. And you won't have a leg to stand on, because you will have already tacitly agreed that Siemens has authority over your body. Be sure to keep the following in mind as you're filling out the application: A free man does not ask for his rights. He asserts them.
Finally, you do not have to make a Faustian bargain with Siemens. You can fight. There is so much wrong with want they are trying to do to us. To get an idea, see the attached Conditional Acceptance I sent to educate Mr. Owens on this. My conditions enumerate some of the many ways he is being unlawful, and violating state and federal laws. At the very root, however, is the fact that Siemens has zero lawful authority over your body. As a free man or woman, you are its sole sovereign.
I don’t know what supposed variant we’re at, but I can guarantee that the last variant is totalitarianism. This is the hill to die on. The choice is stark: you die on your feet, or you live on your knees. My choice is made.
You all need to make yours. I suppose many already have. If not, take heart: if you have questions, want a sounding board, want to take action, or consider legal options, feel free to contact me in confidence at <private_e-mail> or at <private_phone>.
--corrbrick
(Note that the use of "you" and `"your" is meant to personalize, not to cast blame or shame.)
Disappointingly, only one person contacted me, and that was only out of curiosity. But over the ensuing week, six people communicated their displeasure with the policy to me.
While this was going on, a follow up to the new requirement, complete with an FAQ to "guide" us in rolling up our sleeves, came through. This one was in the name of the US CEO, CFO and the same HR head. Another change in target!
When the Monday meeting rolled around, management explained how they weren't trying to hide anything, it's just that this is the way things are, so why spend time on it. Siemens can do whatever they want. I objected, saying that it needs to be brought out so people don't feel isolated, which I'm sure is the reason for keeping things mum. And that a company cannot violate law, or trample on our natural and protected rights.
Well, that topic got shut down pretty quick. I then went on to say that someone will need to pick up my projects, because I have zero motivation to spend any time on them, nor do I really care. The only Siemens related matter I'm concerned about at present, is preparing my legal case against Siemens US. Again I got shut down, but at least folks know who the lightening rod is.
The way things stand now, I reached an agreement with my manager to check-in for a half hour, three times a day over the next three weeks to provide expertise, and to lend a hand. The rest of the time I will spend on my case, all with full pay.
Today I am combining the two actions (mask & vaxx) into one, and will be sending it off to the CEO, and everyone down the line. This cover letter is a bit tougher, because only the lawyers are reading the documents. I don't think the aggressors realize just what they stand to lose personally. This should help them see it a little better, and maybe to start to doubt what they are doing:
In response to your Follow up on Siemens' COVID-19 vaccine requirement, I will accept the guidance put forth in the associated DI SW US COVID-19 Vaccine Mandate FAQs and the previous Office Reopening FAQs, provided that you satisfactorily address the conditions in my attached Conditional Acceptance, point-by-point and in affidavit form.
That is, I will comply only after you have accepted responsibility under your full commercial liability: that I will either suffer no harm, or will be financially provided for in the event of any side-effects; that you are complying with applicable state and federal laws (e.g., USC Title 21 § 360bbb-3); that you are respecting my human rights as protected under the 1st, 4th, 5th and 6th Amendments; and that you have the lawful authority to impose medical interventions on me. Otherwise, I am under no obligation to participate in these measures.
This notice serves to consolidate previous notices already sent to others. There has been a flurry of activities with regard to medical interventions of late. As the chief promulgator of these measure, you are now the principal of my legal action. Those acting on your behalf to instigate the measures that have become known to me are included as agents. I have copied them on this e-mail.
As participants in the roll-out, instigation, implementation, and enforcement of said measures, each company officer needs to appreciate that they will be held responsible in their personal capacities for any financial, physical or emotional injuries I may suffer as a result of following any "guidance" made under threat of termination.
--corrbrick
Going forward there should be no more resets of the timeline, since I'm now at the top. Future reports will be focused on the unfolding of the current actions.
Our story so far:
- My office received a corporate reopening plan at the end of August.
- The plan mandated masks and testing, but no vaxx "at this time."
- In early September I let the named HR contact know that I would comply if she could satisfy my conditions.
- They were laid out in a Conditional Acceptance (CA) that identified her as the principal in a Common Law action (see Part 2 for details).
- The CA gave her ten days in which to respond, and was sent by both electronic and registered mail.
- Being named in the policy (making them agents), I copied my group's president and head of development.
Let's pick things up on the Saturday after the positing of my CA:
I checked my company email and found a note from my immediate manager who was dismayed by the surprising lack of trust and openness my action displayed. Management was also mystified as to why I was objecting, since returning to the office was voluntary.
I laid any communication breakdown at corporate's feet. By parroting the government’s 24/7 “be afraid, be very afraid” mantra, and imposing top-down controls instead of treating us as adults who can make decisions for ourselves, they have done their level best to make us fearful of the world and of each other. Officially closing offices and sending us off to hide in our basements a year after the various state lockdowns, had illegitimacy written all over it. Why then? What were they not telling me? Was I being manipulated? Why should I trust anything they say?
Laying these mandates on us with two days notice with no discussion, and without seeking comments certainly didn't inspire trust. Does corporate think masking us will somehow restore esprit de corps? How do muffled voices emitting from obscured faces not hamper communication, stir mistrust, feed fear, and continue to isolate?
The policy itself is unlawful, and excludes those not willing to undergo medical interventions. I added, that if JD has been paying attention to the pandemic rollout, he knows that “two weeks to flatten the curve” has no end. I can't say what supposed variant we’re on, but I can guarantee the last variant is totalitarianism. I made clear that I was standing on principle, and expected the policy to be dropped. That this is the hill to die on. We left it at that.
I returned after a week of vacation to see a Teams meeting scheduled for that Monday morning between myself, JD, and HR legal (HR facilities had forwarded them my email). In the meeting, CC at HR acknowledged having received my CA, and having had it reviewed by their lawyers. She said that they had gotten many inquires, complaints, and challenges with regard to their policy. The lawyers had informed her that company policy was perfectly legal, and there was no reason to address my conditions.
Of course I objected. Besides being unlawful toward bodily autonomy, skirting anti-discrimination laws by claiming to follow CDC guidelines, and making office attendance voluntary (for now) is deceitful. The existence of such mandates excludes me from participating in day-to-day office activity in the same way that removing wheelchair ramps keep the physically handicapped out.
I added that there is no real science behind the CDC's rules, only scientism. I started to bring up the dozens of news pieces, journal articles, and technical papers I had collect on just this one aspect of the so-called pandemic when JD chimed in that CC wasn't in a position to judge the merit of these. Basically admitting that the company doesn't care about the facts.
And so it rolled. CC spent most of the remaining time restating company policy, and making it clear that if I was not going to wear a mask, I could not be in the office. Contradicting that stance, she proceeded to offer information about requesting a medical or religious exemption. I couldn't help but answer, "I'm not interested in asking anybody for my rights. As a free man, I am asserting them." It bounced right off her. She gushed on, bizarrely to my mind, about how great it was to live in a society where we can have such differences of opinion, and still work together.
That's were it ended, at least in the minds of CC & JD. Well, yesterday was the expiration of the extended deadline for the CA. So on Friday afternoon I sent CC a Courtesy Notice (CN) informing her that because she had not yet answered my CA in proper “affidavit” form, nor rebutted its items on a point-by-point basis, her reply up to now is insufficient and has no lawful merit or value.
But hey, maybe this was a simple oversight or misunderstanding on your part. So I am magnanimously giving you another five days in which to respond.
Well, I got an email back in less than an hour. CC was clearly befuddled. She stressed that I had already been told how it was going to be during our meeting, that there is no room for negotiation, and HR doesn't have to answer any stinkin' conditions. I just chuckled, because she has set herself up for default, a notice for which I will be sending out at the end of next week.
Stay tuned for part 4, Pedes.
I discussed sending out a conditional acceptance concerning our company's reopening policy to HR in part 1 of this series of reports. Some folks (@Passthatwrench, @redhawk @WillowMinxy) were interested in seeing the document, which I will present in this post.
For starters, this is based off the work of The Commoner Law Group out of California. I have no connection with the group other than watching their videos, participating in some live sessions, and having downloaded two of their Medical Freedom Packets that sell for $15 each, and which I promised not to share. You will need to do the same if you decide to take this approach. Accordingly, I will only be able to give generalities here along with the parts I wrote myself.
The policy I am objecting to contains the usual "new non-normal" mandates, but not the jab. At least not yet. Because of that I omitted the vaxx specific conditions from my final document. Below is its form with my [comments]:
CONDITIONAL ACCEPTANCE
With regard to the [company] Mask and Vaccination Guidance sent to [location] employees on August 25, 2021, wherein you stipulate I must undergo the medical intervention of wearing a face covering, and may further need to submit to the interventions of COVID screening and COVID testing in order to resume my duties as a [company] employee at the [location] office, I conditionally accept your offer to do so upon proof of claim of the following points:
[The idea is that you will do what they want, once your conditions are met. The conditions first and foremost, let them know how their actions are immoral and/or unlawful and/or nonsensical. You're educating them, and giving them a chance to back out.]
[The conditions are usually phrased in the negative, and really can't be answered without admitting to violating your rights and/or acting unconstitutionally and/or breaking the law.]
#. Upon proof of claim that these mandatory requirements are not made under threat, duress and/or coercion of potential discipline and/or termination, and further;
[If they agree, then they are saying that their mandates are completely optional. If they disagree than they admit to stomping on your person as a free human.]
...
#. Upon proof of claim that mandating different office masking rules for vaccinated and non-vaccinated is not a violation of my rights under the 4th Amendment of the Constitution for the united States of America, and further;
[The lead up to this established my right to privacy in the Bill of Rights and state law (you have to do the research for your state).]
...
#. Upon proof of claim that by mandating me to undertake these medical interventions, whether they are under an EUA designation or full FDA approval, that you are not practicing medicine without a license and in violation of Michigan Compiled Laws § 333.16294, and further;
[Screening, testing, Masking & injecting are all medical interventions, and in most (all?) states can only be done by a physician.]
...
[Commoner Law came up with 41 conditions, after omissions and additions, I ended up with 27.]
Your timely response within 10 days of receipt of this CONDITIONAL ACCEPTANCE, must be in affidavit form, under your full commercial liability, rebutting each of the points of the undersigned, on a point-by-point basis, that the facts contained therein are true,correct, complete, and not misleading. Declarations are insufficient as declarations permit lying by omission, which no honorable draft may contain.
[In closing, you give them time to respond, but specify the form of the response, and tell them why. Otherwise they could just respond with the policy. Not being used to dealing with free men reclaiming their birthright, that's probably the way they will respond anyway, if they respond at all.]
[If they don't respond in time, or not in the proper form, or not at all, then they are in default. We follow up with a Courtesy Notice to give them a few more days, then a Notice of Default, and finally a Notice of Estoppel, which warns them that continuing on this path will result in them committing "tortious" acts against me, in their personal capacity.]
[If they don't back down, then at some point in the process it will become necessary to appear in your county court for an ex parte hearing. That means that only one side (you) will be making an appearance. This of course is the most frightening part, but once you become conscious that you are doing the right and honorable thing the fear abates.]
More to come...
Eight years ago we were a smallish software shop with a killer industrial product. After two buy-outs we are now a fairly independent group in an international corporation. Worldwide, offices have been empty for a year and a half. Refusing the new normal, I had to be kicked me out of our office and forced to work from home about a year later.
The reopening announcement and policy reached me on Thursday for the following Monday. It contained all the usual mandates, but harsher on the unvaxxed. Though encouraged, no mandatory vaxx were being demanded "at this time." With JoeBlow's latest dictates, who knows?
Yesterday I sent a Conditional Acceptance of this policy through registered mail to the point person in U.S. human resources, as well as e-mail copies to her as the principal, and to the group's president and our head of development as agents with a replay deadline of ten days.
This is a legal document, but no lawyers are involved. They deal in statute law, this is common law and is all constitutionally based. It is the law for us commoners. No reply within ten days (in affidavit form!) and they are in default. The expectation is that they will blink first, but if not, then it's on to court for a stop order.
My manager is a really good guy, and sharp. I have a lot of respect for him. Same can be said for the development manager, but he is a true Branch Covidian. I don't know about the president, but I do know that his religion will not let him get jabbed.
Today my manager called to talk about my "letter." I insisted on referring to it as legal document, and that I couldn't talk much since it is now a legal matter. That gave him a bit of a pause, then he let me know that management felt blindsided, and was wondering what had happened to the openness in our team.
Well, I was kind of blindsided by their "guidance" with only four day's notice that did not solicit any comment, or provide for any exceptions. And as far as openness is concerned, the mother corp can take full credit for destroying that. It has done its best to make us fearful and distrustful of each other, and resentful of its treatment of us. Now it expects us all to pull our teams back together by putting us in the same space, but socially apart mind you, and masked and muzzled? Is continued heavy handed, ineffectual measures its idea of how to instill loyalty?
He then tried to convince me that returning to the office is voluntary, so I could simply ignore the rules. True enough, but their existence actually excludes me from the office, which is blatant discrimination. I told him what was being foisted on us was a slippery slope -- by accepting this, corporate will be able to force any medical intervention (and screenings, testing, masking, and injecting are medical interventions) on any employee, anywhere, at any time. Eventually, maybe even on our family members. Why not? What's stopping them? Well, I'm stopping them.
He acknowledged all that, but was confused by what I hoped to achieve with my conditions. I said that if they can answer them satisfactorily, then I will comply. But since they won't be able to satisfy any of them, I expect the policy to be retracted. I could tell that he was somewhat stunned by my audacity, but it felt like he was silently on my side.
Doesn't matter who's with me though, because I am 100% committed now. I admit that I was having doubts yesterday: I wanted to send the e-mail by noon, but put it off until 4:15 before rushing to the post office to sent the letter, err... legal document. Now that I've taken those steps, and battle has been joined, I feel great. I am filled with the strength of righteousness. Please pray for me, pedes.