Two Mothers Impossible & Child Laundering by U.S.

My aunt tried to write and say my son has two mothers now.

No, he does not and there is no such thing.

There is one mother, and I consider my aunt to be his guardian for now. She is not his mother anymore than the United States is or was his mother when they kidnapped my son and stole guardianship from me.

When the State of Washington claimed to be his legal guardian, were they his mother? No.

Neither is Holly Avila.

I am the mother, there is one mother, and there is no such thing as two mothers.

I read about many wives today in the Bible, randomly, but nowhere, throughout history, has anyone ever dared assert "Two Mothers".

Impossible.

I randomly opened up the Bible and first read about marriage in the resurrection and the question asked of Jesus, if a woman has 7 husbands, whose shall she be in resurrection? Then, I randomly opened up my Bible again and it fell to Solomon and his 700 wives. 700 wives and 300 concubines. And he loved them all very, very much.

Sorry, but you can have a billion "wives" but there is ONE mother.

I am the mother.

There are caregivers, babysitters, nannies, mother's helpers, guardians, guards, custodians, and trustees.

There is no duality in mothers.

Just as there is no duality in which country you give your allegiance to.

I do not believe in The Holy See having dominion over The United States of America through their agents and cohorts. It is impossible to pledge first allegiance to The Holy See as a member of the Catholic church and then claim to do other non-members justice in another country.

As for mothers, there is no requirement of "allegiance", but is a fact, that God gives children to parents. Children are not born to two mothers and there is no such thing as having two mothers. If someone want to use that title for themselves, it's improper. Step-mothers are called "step-mothers" because they are not the same thing as mothers. They are a step back and are psuedo-mothers, not mothers in fact.

Anyone assuming care of a child may be called a "guardian" but they cannot actually replace or dual as "mother" or "father". Period.

I was given this land as my inheritance from my father.

Am I to share it with any other?

No.

I.e., my son is my inheritance, given to me by God.

I do not relinquish my property rights.

The land was stolen.

The law views children as property of parents they were born to. If my property is stolen from me, under color of law, that property is still mine. A new owner is a fraudulent owner and owner in name only.

Should I agree that John Kaempf is the owner of my property, which I inherited and belongs to only me, with only my name on the title? simply because he steals it from me and then tries to affix and attach his name?

John Kaempf has no more right to my land than he does to my child.

He could steal my papers and have the entire government assist him and put me in prison and use judges to restrain me from proving my claim, but that does make him the rightful owner.

If I produce proof that the land was originally mine and it was never sold to him on any voluntary basis, he is required to return it.

He cannot sit on my land, like a squater either, and then tell me, "Well, we both own it. You owned it first and now I own it so we both do and we'll share it."

Sorry Charlie.

MY LAND. MY SON.

Had I, at any time, agreed to give up my land or property rights, then the government or another owner could claim to have the rights.

Any property transfered to another party in commission of a crime, must be relinquished to the legal and original owner.

So John Kaempf could even steal the land, and then hand it to the FBI and U.S. government and put a bunch of fellow church members who are Judges as sentries on the property. That's called illegal transfer of property.

Trying to launder the deed, is not legal.

You could take money and transfer it to other hands in the same way and it's called "money laundering".

Do you know why they call it "money laundering?" Because it's an attempt to make dirty money look clean.

Taking a property illegally and then trying to sell it legally to another owner, is a form of money laundering or transfer of assets and it is typically dealt with in racketeering lawsuits.

The law states any property acquired through commission of crimes, and then transfered (even legally) to other owners, must be returned.

So. As laundered money is returned to the rightful owner regardless of sale and documentation, so is laundered property.

Children are considered property of original parents. You can steal that property from a parent through illegal means and crime, and sell that property and seal it with a Judge's seal, and it's invalid because the property must be returned to the original owner.

Child laundering.

Isn't it great to have such a Noble Giant as this country?

If the selling of a property is legal, after the sale, that's it. It cannot be undone. However, if it was an illegal transaction, that transaction is null and void and the property sold to the new owner or "moved" or "transfered", must be returned.

The U.S. doesn't tell people in RICO cases, "Okay guys...okay...you get HALF and we'll take HALF." They also are not so stupid as to make the claim that "We have two owners here."

There is no such thing as two winners. Not unless they agree to share the winnings,if there is one award, that goes to the rightful owner or winner unless the one who has won agrees to split it.

I haven't agreed to transfer my property, lease it, or fucking split it.

FUCKERS

Do you fucking hear me? Because you'd better listen up.

I haven't agreed to transfer Oliver, lease Oliver, or split Oliver.

(It is 12:47 p.m. at the moment. I heard the song crimson & clover come on and danced to it and then grabbed the Who's Who book and opened randomly, feeling fucking triumphant over U.S. criminals that are trying to child-launder my son. I opened to a painting of: "Scourge in hand, Jesus overturns a money changer's table.")

Which affirms I filing RICO.

I don't care if somone thinks an adoption is final. It's not final, and neither is any final transfer of property when the person robbed has raised objection over objection about the theft of property and crimes committed in the kidnapping. And then I have evidence of being illegally held hostage and otherwise restrained and drugged from fighting in court to stop this from happening.

FUCK Judge Shea. You are fucking going down asshole. He and his courthouse in Washington illegally obstructed my filing for preliminary injunction to block termination of parental rights.

Long before that, they colluded to have my son kidnapped from Canada, with help from Canadians they'd already set it up with.

If this fucking FBI does not prosecute Judges as they are required by law to do in this country, then I guess I will have to leave and acquire money for fucking this country over somewhere else first.

FUCK YOU

If the FBI had obeyed the oath they took and prosecuted when I first reported judicial crime, my son never would have been taken from me.

Unless they "change", they are culpable as principles to crime.