The “Drake” States Sovereignty Documents Posted

As is heard in the opening minutes of my interview with Drake, I had strongly  requested that the States Documents which were filed with the World Court be released for public inspection  as an initial sign of some solid proof of due diligence. In conversations with my contacts, I had indicated that this type of proof would go a long way towards providing some assurrance that this was not all a “smoke and mirrors” media ruse. What I wish we could all see is the proof of service and certification of receipt by the clerk at the Hague, but for now, this goes a long way towards providing researchers with the pro forma basis for a legitimate action.


Right click to download documents 

Apostile 141 – Original Pennsylvania Apostile Document – PDF - 0.09 MB

Apostile Certification 140 – Notary Certification – PDF - 0.11 MB

Certification of Minutes 142-5 (Redacted) – PDF 0.35 MB

Notice of states in union 144 – PDF - 0.15 MB

Georgia Minutes 146 – PDF  – 0.10 MB

All Documents – Archive – ZIP - 0.71 MB

Naturally, cynics and scoffers will not be satisfied, nor is the presentation of any such documents conclusive proof of action, but I do feel that by releasing the redacted copy of the notarized original Pennsylvania Apostile that we now have a basis to assess the legal basis of the action, and some tangible evidence for the claims made by Drake in his interviews. I continue to press for more evidence to be released as the conditions allow, bearing in mind that it is likely people HAVE placed lives and fortunes on the line to initiate this process.

Patience, prudence, diligence, and discernment will all go along way in de-coding the information being presented. Clearly, Drake and his associates HAVE created a major meme on the internet. provoked much controversy and thought, as well as a fair amount of criticism. Persoanlly, I remain, in the best sense, a SKEPTIC:


 from Greek skeptikos, from skeptikos thoughtful, from skeptesthai to look, consider
1 : an adherent or advocate of skepticism
2 : a person disposed to skepticism especially regarding religion or religious principles
I also have sources who provide information to me in a way that is “coded”, so to speak, and there are many “puzzle pieces” that I have been processing which indicate that Drake is speaking for a very powerful group of present and former military, white hat financial, and government insiders to initiate “The Plan”. No one person or group has all the information. This is a multi-lateral approach birthed out of common interests and linked through etworks forged over many decades.
Look around you…pay attention to details. Ignore mainstream news and examine carefully “coded” communications. IF and WHEN the day comes that this “Plan” is initiated, the whole world WILL be watching. Also, understand that unless people are willing to risk…no liberation from this monstrous cabal is ever possible.
Randy Maugans




  1. "Clearly, Drake and his associates HAVE created a major meme on the internet." Yes, between Drake and David Wilcock's recent writings there is indeed a meme around this. I think we need to find a way to spread this information without being overly dependent on the sources of it. In other words, we don't want to be in the situation of being let down or discredited if "the plan" doesn't go as it's supposed to. The fact is, once a certain critical mass is achieved about the cabal and the present financial system, we won't need Drake, Wilcock, ETs or anybody else. As David Icke always says, it is mainly us guarding and enslaving each other. Once that stops, the tiny elite can't stay in charge anymore. I don't think we're that far from this critical mass, so we just have to keep going. And stay open about Drake and his plan, but don't make everything depend on it.

  2. Larry-
    You got the point I was trying to make about the meme and the activation of the larger collective consciousness. Drake would agree with you about not "needing" him, or David Wilcock. The expression of intention…is intentio. Some people do not like the package in which intention arrives (just read all of Margaret's comments). Some people like the metaphysical conspiracy layers of Wilcock, some will like the folksy, ballsy narrative of a former Vietnam Vet like Drake…some people like the IDEA of freedom, but, in fact, are freaked out because it means being responsible for their own destiny.

    Anyone who studies the events of the first months of this years should be able to start connecting the dots without any "insider" info. As Drake said, there is no "group"…there is a force that has mobilized through a number of efforts that are converging. It is our reality, we are creaotrs, we have to choose to participate…or not.

  3. From what I gathered he has noticed the International Court at Hague that the “original states” have now taken back the common law in the several states and that the military has asked if they could replicate this process so that certain individuals would be removed from office and jailed, and or executed. Wow really? I’m trying not to be pessimistic here, but a few inescapable thoughts were running through my head as I was listening. And I’m no expert, but I do know a few things based on my research.

    Issue #1: If he would have read the Seventh International Convention of the Organization of American States held in Montevideo, Uruguay December 1933 which deals with RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF STATES, then he would have know that all he had to do is give Notice to Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Secretary General of the O.A.S and it would then be their job to give Notice to whom ever else.
    Issue #2: According to the history of the states, or the several states, what ever you want to call them, they were in fact Charters that were Granted by the King. Those Charters were then “allowed” by the King to become “sovereign nations” so long as they paid their monies owed. And we know according to the Doctrine of Suzerainty that the King maintained OVERLORDSHIP over these “several states”.
    See: Berle’s Self Culture p304 PDF. “When people desired to come to this country for the purpose of settlement, it was necessary for them to obtain permission from the government interested in that portion of the new country which they expected to occupy. The permits thus granted formed the basis of the new governments set upon this side of the Atlantic. Sometimes these permits were granted by the king to a company, whose members either sent out colonists to the new country or came themselves as colonists. Such permits were known as Royal Charters and were in reality a form of constitution granted by the king to the colonists, defining their rights and privileges. They usually outlined the form of government, providing for a governor and council. Sometimes these permits were granted to individuals called proprietors, and the governments set up by them were called Proprietary Governments. These proprietors in turn granted charters to their colonists, so that in general the government of charter colonies and of proprietary governments was very similar. In time, however, all but a few of the colonies lost or surrendered their charters, passed under the direct Government of the mother country (England), and came to be known as Royal Provinces. In the royal provinces the king could rule with greater freedom. He appointed the governor and the colonial judges, and everywhere except in Massachusetts, the governor's council also.
    Notwithstanding this, the colonists' retained no small measure of self-government.”

    Issue #3: Did he forget about the Hunter Miller's Notes where it states: “One thing only I must remind you of in point of form. When a treaty is signed between two Crowned Heads in order to prevent disputes about presidency, the name of the one stands first in one instrument and that of the other in the other but when the Treaty is between a crowned Head and a Republic, the name of the Monarch is mentioned first in each instrument. I believe if you will inquire upon this subject among the Corps Diplomatique, you will find this to have been the constant practice.
    Hartley replied as follows under date of September 1:

    The treaties are drawn out for signature as you have expressed it viz: giving precedence to the Crowned Head. The American Ministers never had a thought of disputing the priority or equality of rank & therefore I have had no occasion to mention the subject.” [British-American Diplomacy Treaty of Paris - Hunter Miller's Notes]

    Issue #4: So now that they are reclaiming the states back, are they also taking responsibility back for the original debt that was owed???
    On February 6, 1778, the United States entered into a Treaty of Alliance with France (8 Stat. 6). On July 16, 1782, they borrowed substantial sums from King Louis XVI of France, via an agreement signed by French Foreign Minister Charles Gravier de Vergennes.
    The Definitive Treaty of Peace 1783 Article 4
    Stated: “It is agreed that creditors on either side shall meet with no lawful impediment to the recovery of the full value in sterling money of all bona fide debts heretofore contracted.”
    The Articles of Confederation Article XII
    “All bills of credit emitted, monies borrowed, and debts contracted by, or under the authority of Congress, before the assembling of the United States, in pursuance of the present confederation, shall be deemed and considered as a charge against the United States, for payment and satisfaction whereof the said United States, and the public faith are hereby solemnly pledged."
    Constitutor: “In the civil law, one who, by simple agreement, becomes responsible for the payment of another's debt.” [Blacks Law Dictionary 5th Edition page 282]
    Constitutum: In the civil law, an agreement to pay a subsisting debt which exists without any stipulation in that it must be for an existing debt.” [Blacks Law 5th Edition page 283]
    Constitutio: “In civil law, an imperial ordinance, decree, or constitution, distinguished from Lex, Senatus-Consultum, and other kinds of law and having its effect from the sole will of the emperor. A sum paid according to an agreement.” [Blacks Law 5th edition page 282]
    Constitutiones: “Laws promulgated, i.e., enacted by the Roman Emperor…The emperor had this power of irresponsible enactment by virtue of a certain lex regia, whereby he was made the fountain of justice and of mercy.” [Blacks Law 5th Edition page 283]
    “‘Civil Law,’ ‘Roman Law’ and ‘Roman Civil Law’ are convertible phrases, meaning the same system of jurisprudence.” [Black’s 3rd p 332.]

    I could go on and on, but is that really necessary?
    The principle comes to this: that the States, in making the Constitution, intended to give up the power of self-preservation (sovereignty).” [Padelford Case 1854 pg. 35]

    What this means for me and you is that we MUST form a new and stop begging the old to change. It was never “our” state/government to begin with.

    "The 'sovereign citizen' movement is a loosely organized collection of groups and individuals who have adopted a right-wing anarchist ideology originating in the theories of a group called the Posse Comitatus in the1970s. lts adherents believe that virtually all existing government in the United States is illegitimate and they seek to "restore" an idealized, minimalist government that never actually existed. To this end, sovereign citizens wage war against the qovernment and other forms of authoritv using "paper terrorism" harassment and intimidation tactics, and occasionally resorting to violence." The "paper terrorism" typically involves "frivolous lawsuits, frivolous liens, fictitious financial instruments, fictitious automobile related documents, and misuse of genuine documents such as IRS forms; various frauds and scams." Source: Anti Defamation League website, http://www.adl.orq", Extremism In America,""Sovereign Citizen Movement
    Read DILLEY vs. DILLEY .


Submit a Comment

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

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>