From: David Wynn Miller Law Procedures Post Office Box 787 Brookfield, Wisconsin 53008-0787 1(414)466-3584 CONTACT: THE PHOENIX PROJECT: A LIGHT IN EVERY MIND!, V.19, N.2, 1997.12.02. Points Of Legal Genius: An Interview With David Miller RICK MARTIN: Many months ago, a local trusted and brilliant associate came into my office more excited than I had ever seen him. He was mumbling something about this fantastic "new" legal procedure created by someone named David Miller. Never heard of him. "This guy is REALLY HAVING AN EFFECT ON THE LEGAL SYSTEM," my friend exclaimed! Then came the audiotapes, the videotapes, and the constantly revised one-inch thick packages of new procedures by Miller. Whatever this guy was into, it took some serious study--that's FOR SURE! But then the name just kept popping up at the oddest times and more and more frequently. "There must be something to this", I remember thinking to myself. So, after some 15 hours of listening to audio and video presentations, I decided to call Mr. Miller. And when I did call him, many months ago, I was stunned at the level of knowledge, not just about law, that this man was able to clearly and convincingly articulate. David agreed, a few months ago, to an interview with "CONTACT", but as with any VERY busy individual, it took some time to actually nail down the time to conduct it. And so, after three weeks of daily calls, I was able to finally get through and here is the result of that conversation, which took place on November 18th. Rick: Let's start with "subject matter" vs. "procedure". David: Oh, ok, you want to take that subject right there. That's real simple. A subject matter is anything where a verb follows a noun: The judge said--the pen dropped--etc. Rick: Now, for our readers who have no idea what you do... David: Most readers have flunked English in school. Rick: Right. So, we're going to be giving them a whole new view of the legal system, and subject matter vs. procedure seems a reasonable place to start. David: Ok. Yeah, when you're dealing with the terminology between subject matter, you've got (lots of people in the background as David tries to find a quiet place to talk)--I've got a bowling alley of people around here. Rick: I know you're busy. David: The subject matter of a lawsuit is: the judge will deny somebody their constitutional rights. And so, the very first thing that an individual does is, he files a complaint and says, "The judge denied me my constitutional rights." The Judge above him goes, "Well, he's supposed to deny you your constitutional rights, and he's immune from what he does." In other words, any decision he makes is a judicial decision. So, you cannot sue anybody, from dog-catcher to President of the United States, for what they do. All public officials are immune from what they do. Ok? But they ARE NOT immune from what they don't do. Now, in order to become a public official, from a dog-catcher to President of the United States, you have to swear to support the Constitution of the United States of America. That is their contract with you to uphold your constitutional rights. But, what do they do? As soon as they take their oath and affirmation, they then hoist the yellow-fringe flag which is a foreign flag, and then they walk into a foreign jurisdiction, so they don't have to uphold the oath and affirmation. By definition, they've just surrendered their oath and affirmation into the hands of a foreign state. Now, the Constitution clearly says that, under Article IV, Sec. III, "No new state shall erect a state within a state." [The actual passage reads: New States must be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the Jurisdiction of any other State; nor any State be formed by the Junction of two or more States, or Parts of States, without the Consent of the Legislatures of the States concerned as well as of the Congress. ] This means, the word "state" means "condition of'. In all Nature, there is only one state that is a verb, "thinking", active verb of thinking. You can't put your hand on it, right? But it's a state-of-mind; mind meaning knowledge. In order for you to move anything, you must have knowledge. And with this condition of your mind or your thinking process, that's how all things get moved. So, when it says, "No new state shall create a state within a state, and you're in courtroom, the judge is a fiduciary of the courtroom. The judge is responsible FOR the color of law. He's responsible for order in the courtroom and the setup of the courtroom. So, because he's responsible for that setup, he's now responsible for placing the yellow-fringe flag in the courtroom. And, you know, a lot of times he'll come in and say, "Well, somebody else put that there." Well, you're responsible then to take it out and put in a Title IV, USC 1 flag. Rick: Which is what? David: A Title IV, USC 1 flag? Rick: Yes. For our readers who don't know. David: Alright. The flag of the United States. Rick: The so-called flag of peace? David: Well, it doesn't say flag of peace. It's described in Title IV, USC 1, as 1 to 1.9 dimension. Rick: I am recording this, of course. David: Yeah, I hope you do. I'd hate to repeat this. The picture of "U.S." Flags is at: . Rick: Subject matter vs. procedure. David: Yes. Now, when the judge, being of oath and affirmation, swears to support the Constitution of the United States and then puts up a yellow-fringe flag in the court, which has four colors, not three, he then violates five different sections of the law. The first one is Executive Order 10834, signed August 25, 1959, when Hawaii became the 50th state, which says that you can place nothing on the flag of the United States of America--that only a national flag which has a dimension of 12 X 20, shall have a yellow fringe placed on it. The second one is, Army regulations 840-S10, chapter 2-1 says, "The flag of the United States shall be kept in the highest honor." Subsection 2 says that it will be, according to Titles 4 USC 1 and 2, Army regulations 840-10, Chapter 2-3, gives the description of a national flag with yellow fringe on it. Section 2-5 says the flag of the United States of America shall be kept in the number one position; foreign national flags number two, President's flag of the United States will be number three, and state flags number four. 2-6 says, nothing may be placed on the flag of the United States of America. Army regulations 260-10 Chapter 8, and Army regulatins 840-10, Chapter 8-2 also states that an Eagle shall be used for the President of the United States ONLY in Washington, D.C., that no other person can place an Eagle on top of a flag pole without authorization from the President. The spear shall be for military court martials only. The ball shall be for military advertising or military recruiting. And the acorn shall be for a platoon or for patrol, in other words, military colors. Rick: Ok, I want to spend more time on the flag but before we leave procedure vs. subject matter, most people would go into a court and they would say, "John Doe harmed me. He ran into my car or he stole..." David: Right. That's impossible. Rick: "He stole something from me." Now, how is that different from the way you approach the legal system? David: I was hurt by John Doe. I was hurt is subject matter unto myself. I am not immune from what I can state as first-hand knowledge because I was there, right? Number two, "by" is a prepositional assignment of authority and it's in present tense. The word "the", if you look it up in Webster's says, it commands the noun or subject. "I was hurt by you or by the judge." Now, the word judge would become the noun or, "I was hurt by the Plaintiff--or, Plaintiff was hurt by the Respondent." How about that? Rick: I guess what I'm getting at, David, is... David: I'll finish it. Rick: Ok. David: Plaintiff was hurt by the Respondent. The Respondent has first-hand knowledge of the injury that Plaintiff was hurt. The Respondent has now, then, assigned the injury of the Plaintiff, and when the Plaintiff signs his name underneath the Respondent's, he becomes the second witness, as the Respondent becomes first witness and the Plaintiff becomes second witness, and with two witnesses saying that the Plaintiff was hurt by the Respondent, therefore the assignment becomes law and he gets charged with it. Because you have two witnesses that have first-hand knowledge that an injury took place. That's how that gets put together. Rick: Let's talk about what judges don't do and how you use procedure or errors in procedure to turn the tables, without even getting into subject matter. Can you talk about that? David: Yes, I just did. Alright. Rick: Ok, I'm out here, I'm twelve years old and I just picked up CONTACT and I don't know anything about this. David: Alright. When an individual wants to address or say somebody hurt them, they first have to create themselves to certify if they have been injured. But if they make the statement, "I was injured" or "Plaintiff was injured", then when they do the assignment of authority by the preposition "by" the Respondent", they are not saying what the individual did, they are assigning what they did. They sued him for what was not done. The whole point of this is: you cannot sue them for what they do, you sue them for what they DO NOT do. Everybody from dog-catcher to the president does not uphold their oath and affirmation. They can't hold the office. Nobody can get paid from the public, on the tax-payer rolls, unless they are of oath and affirmation. And the minute they take money from the government, they have to be under oath and affirmation. If they are not of oath and affirmation then they are embezzling taxpayers' money. It's as simple as that. And, you can get them for misapplication of public funds under Title 18.646 or 641. If they misapply documents, that's also an extortion of documents or extortion of money, extortion of rights. Extortion of rights comes under Title 18.872. Rick: Well now, obviously you're having an effect "out there" in the real world with this set of procedures. Divid: Oh, having a major effect, yes. Rick: Can you just give some examples of the effects you're having? David: Well, I was in court on Thursday in Stevens Point, Wisconsin and a young man, twenty two years old was falsely charged with a crime by a police officer because the police officer--first off--did not have a search warrant. He did not have a 4th Amendment search warrant to search the individual and search the car. And so, when he found it, he immediately filed a complaint and had the boy arrested without a 4th Amendment warrant; and he quoted a law that had nothing to do with the search. He quoted a law that had to do with weapons and the individual involved had no weapons, so he was using a misapplication of authority, misapplication of procedure, he violated his oath and affirmation, he violated a citizen's rights in that he was trying to extort his freedom. And then, the fine is $2,000 and a year in jail. And if the boy went to jail for a year the state would get $38,000 a year from the federal government to keep him in jail. So, this is BIG BUSINESS. Rick: Sure it is. David: And he would also destroy this young man's life, but they don't care; for $38,000 and a $2,000 fine, hey, they've got lots of people to destroy and business is good. Rick: Booming. David: Yes. They're building another new prison here in Wisconsin, even out in Brookfield. They just built a 5,800-bed one in Eau Claire, Wisconsin and it took them six weeks to fill it. You know, debtors' prison was eliminated in 1933, and yet, just about everybody in that prison is there because of child-support issues. And when they put people in jail for child support, they deny children their parents, so they further enhance destroying the family. People can't work while they're in jail. They can't pay child support. So the burden of supporting the family falls to the state. And we the taxpayers have to pay for the prisons, then we've got to pay to support the family because the man is in jail and he can't make-it's a negative productivity, 100 percent--negative on the children, negative on the mother, negative on the father, negative on the taxpayers. The whole thing is set up to destroy the American society, the way they're going. Rick: Now, some time ago there were a whole series of cases that were before the Supreme Court, is that right? I never heard the outcome of that. David: It's still sitting there. Every single case filed in the United States Supreme Court was filed under a Writ of Error, which is a Common Law Writ. Common Law Writs cannot be abolished. The Supreme Court is taking these Writs and they're sitting on them, because they will only hear Writs of Certiorari, which allows them NOT to hear them. In other words, they don't have to take anything that is a controversy. And because they're sitting on all these lawsuits, to me they're obstructing justice. Our suits have been up there fifteen months, and what they are doing is, every one of these lawsuits are suing a judge for constructive treason for surrendering their oath and affirmation into a fofeign state under the yellow-fringe flag. Rick: Right. David: But what does the United States Supreme Court fly? A yellow-fringe flag. So, in order to try the case and find the judge guilty of constructive treason, they have to find themselves guilty of constructive treason also. Rick: It will never happen. David: It's a Catch-22. They can't make it go away because it's a treaty violation under the Foreign Sovereigns Immunity Act of Title 28. 1605 and they have to hear the case because it's never been tested in the United States and they're the only court in the United States that CAN hear the case. Rick: What about taking it to the World Court? David: Well, that's the next step. First, we're going to take it to the Senate and legislature, where they also use the yellow-fringe flag. You know, in the original 13th Amendment it also says that no Titles of Nobility shall hold office, and yet 65 percent of everybody in the House and Senate are attorneys, Titles of Nobility. Rick: That's right. David: That's why they have to maintain the yellow-fringe flag jurisdiction, for the simple reason that it has to be a foreign state so that Titles of Nobility have a place to practice. Any law passed in the United States, the only votes that can be counted are those of Free Citizens, not of attorneys. If an attorney who is a Title of Nobility votes on a bill, that's a violation of the original 13th Amendment and Article I, Sec. 9, that says, Titles of Nobility of a Foreign State will not have jurisdiction over a Sovereign Citizen. Therefore, their vote is mute. So, legally, no attorney can run for office in the United States, and yet they do. Rick: That's right. Let's talk about Hawaii. David: Sure. Rick: Tell us what was going on in Hawaii. What did you do there? David: In Hawaii, the United States Government entered into a water--the Hawaiian Homelands Act of 1920. They made a deal with the Hawaiian people that we will give you housing and free water for life for $1.00 a year. But what they did is, they put the name in all UPPER CASE spelling, which is a Nom De Guerre, or a capitulation, making them dead on paper. This started in 1920. By 1939, 19 years later, they had every single name of the Hawaiians under the free-water lease and living in government housing for $1.00 a year. By 1959, 20 years to the day, August 25th, an Executive Order(No. 10832), the United States Government, with Eisenhower at the helm, made the statement that there are no living Hawaiians left in Hawaii. Under the Allodial Title of 1848, King Kamehameha Declaration, we hereby seize the Hawaiian islands for statehood as there are no Hawaiians left in Hawaii. Of course, Kauai went into a rage over this and from 1959 until the present day--well, May of 1996--the battle went on with 47 different Hawaiian factions fighting for the sovereignty of their kingdom back. In 1848, when King Kamehameha gave each husband and wife 5 acres of Hawaiian land as Allodial Title, he made the decree that if they are off the land for more than 20 years, it would then be free for settlement for whoever wanted it. Well, from 1848 to present, there are between 1200 and 1800 decendants for each one of those two people. So, it's--there are a lot of people declaring the same area. So then you've got--in May of 1996, when I went over to Hawaii, a very strange thing happened and you can ask around. This story is told all over the islands; it was witnessed by 12 Hawaiians and it happened on a Wednesday, about 6:00. When I got off the plane that evening, RJ went to get the car and I sat down at a park bench next to the curb there, and a female wild sparrow flew out of a palm tree and landed on my finger. For the next two-and-a-half hours I walked around with an adult female wild sparrow on my finger, chirping at me. This is a true story. Now, all of the people who were there were from the Kingdom of Hawaii, including a couple of the Chiefs, and they witnessed this take place. And I didn't need a law degree to go ahead and help to get into a discussion with these people on law procedures. They then brought to me this lease contract that they had all signed that wound up taking away their land. And, after looking at it, I made a comment to them. I said, "Well, this lease agreement looks quite binding except for one small detail, where is the Disclalmer of Responsibility under UCC-3-501-- that's the Uniform Commercial Code--for the intent of having your name spelled in all capital letters which makes you dead on a piece of paper? And if you're dead on a piece of paper, they have to tell you that the intent of putting your name in upper case was to kill you on paper so that they could disqualify your Allodial Title to the land under the Treaty from 1848 that King Kamehameha made on the Allodial Title. So they went ahead and drafted a Title 42 lawsuit and they filed it in the World Court in The Hague. On June 1, 1997, it was ruled that the United States has defrauded the Hawaiian people and they have been, on a case-to-case basis, transferring the land back into the name of the Hawaiians. Now, 95 percent of blood-Hawaiians, that's 25 percent or more, are in jail. The United States Government is practicing genocide on the Hawaiian people. If you get stopped for a broken tail-light, 5 years in prison; jay-walking, 5 years in prison; drunk driving, 10 years in prison; you get a disorderly conduct, 15 years in prison. I've got the Chief's son, out in Honolulu--one of the Chiefs there with the Nation of Hawaii--his son owns 6,000 acres of prime sugar cane land. And he also runs a coin dealership. He sold an antique coin from the Hawaiian Nation to a lady that lives in New York, in Honolulu, for $125. She then had to transfer planes in Denver, Colorado. When she was in Denver, she went to a coin dealer in the Denver airport and attempted to sell it. They offered her $25 for it. She then said, "Well, I paid $125 for it. It should be worth more because I brought it all the way back here to Denver." And, as you know, even if you were to buy silver bullion you pay $7 per coin, when you go to sell it back you get $4. So, she immediately went to the U.S. Marshal Service and filed a complaint that he was selling counterfeit coins. They flew out to Hawaii, arrested him, brought him back to Denver, Colorado, and in a mock trial where they gagged him and would not allow him to testify, they sentenced him to 30 years hard labor for counterfeiting because she couldn't sell the coin for a profit. Rick: What is that man's name? David: That was over a year ago and I can't pronounce those Hawaiian names. I know where he lives and I know the people getting in contact with him. But anyway, I'm going to be over there Jan. 2 through Jan. 12. Rick: Let's talk about the difference between Allodial and Rodeo Title. David: Alright. Allodial means "original" title. Rodeo means "to sit upon", just like you sit upon a horse. The word Rodeo Title was stricken from all record. They purged everything, in all documents that they could get their hands onto, removed the word Rodeo in 1947; because when people saw the word Rodeo, they thought they were getting Allodial Title, when in fact, they were only getting a Rodeo Title that sat upon the land. Under the rules of Eminent Domain, the United States Federal Government has never relinquished a single acre of land to a private citizen in the United States. As I've traveled in 47 cities in 59 seminars, I've had people come to me at every seminar with Allodial Titles which they believe from the 1830s, 1850s, 1880s, 1890s, I mean old stuff, original paper, original parchment! And they're all written with the preposition "to", t-o: in future tense, which means they never had jurisdiction over the land in realtime. And every single document was signed giving the Circuit Court Judge of that area jurisdiction over the land under the Eminent Domain Rule over the land and water rights. So if they wanted to put a railroad through, they could. If they wanted to build a road there, they could. If they wanted to take the oil reserves underneath the land, they could, or the water rights to sink a well; anything in the public's best interest or Eminent Domain, they could come in and take anything they wanted. Rick: Now, is that also true with land patents? David: You bet. I have never seen a land patent yet written in "present tense" jurisdiction--they're all in future tense, which never gave it jurisdiction in real time. Now, another thing is, trusts. There are over 25 million trusts in the United States, and since I released my technology on trusts, every single trust brought to me is between 20-25% across the board, every single word written is fraudulent--it's written in the wrong tense. It violates the rules of English, and attorneys are responsible for writing these trusts, and the attorneys are giving themselves or the judges or the IRS, full jurisdiction over every trust written. So, you're talking about $40 trillion worth of trusts in the United States that are vulnerable for the IRS to seize. And since March 1, 1997, they've been hitting about $l00 billion a week in trusts. Rick: The area I want to concentrate on for our readers--and trusts are an important one--has to do with Native American Treaties. The general areas I'd like you to speak about are: government land patents, Native American treaties, and Allodial Titles. Is there a way to recover "original" ownership? David: No, everything that is written is written in future tense. People can only use the land while they're on it. And until the government wants it, that's all they can do is just keep working the land. When the government wants to take it, they can move these people off the land any time they want because it was only given to them in future tense. It was never given to them in real time with real time jurisdiction. Rick: So all of these tribes who have been wronged by treaties, have no recourse? David: Well, there was no intent from the government or Disclaimer of Responsibility, and under the International Rules of Contracting that dates back 10,000 years, the condition of a treaty or a trust has to be--there has to be a disclalmer for the true intent, otherwise there is a fraud established. Not only that, every treaty written is written on separate pieces of paper and under Maritime Law a staple does not enjoin a treaty. A treaty must be bonded, the paper must be bonded together or on a continuous scroll in order for it to be valid. A treaty cannot have any borders around it, under the Rules of Four Cornering, the Rules of Bracketing, or the Rules of Boxing; which, all three of them, remove the document from the paper, which means there is no treaty on the paper that they are declaring. The written words are now stricken. When I was in the Republic of Texas and I was doing my seminar, the Republic of Texas came-this was just six weeks ago--they showed me the Treaty of 1834 with England giving the Republic of Texas their sovereignty. Every single page of the treaty had a border put around it, which removed it from paper and under the Rules of Four Cornering, there was no treaty. Further, the treaty was written with the preposition "to" heavily laden, pushing all of the conditions of the treaty into future tense, which means the treaty never existed in realtime. Therefore, Texas belongs to the United States Government and the Republic of Texas never had any jurisdiction to exist. And, you know what? They didn't like what I said but they could see the fraud on the original parchment that they brought me, after I explained it to them, and since 1834 they never knew it. No one in the United States ever discovered those frauds. They were always there in plain view. Rick: Well, if you were given a choice, if one were given a choice of the type of land to try to secure for some semblance of sovereignty, what would be the most ideal? Would it be an Allodial Title? Would it be a Land Patent? What would it be? David: Anybody seeking to get an Allodial Title or Land Patent on their land so that they, 100 percent, own it so that they don't have to pay taxes on it, the government would very shortly come in, either plant marijuana or drugs on the property, and then seize the property under the drug laws, put the people in jail, and then put it back into the United States. And I see it happen every day. People call me EVERY DAY with complaints that, "I have an Allodial Patent and I just had my land seized. They created a new Rodeo Title and sold it at auction, the Sheriff is here with a gun and he is ordering me off my land and I have an Allodial Title and these people never had title to the land, they created a fraudulent title and I have no way to protect myself." Rick: Do you have any suggestions to those people out there who want to be law abiding and as sovereign as possible2 David: Do I have any remedy for them? Yeah. They have to understand how language formulates. The Algebra formula that I have created to certify language, both frontwards and backwards, because truth is written in a circle and anything they can write frontwards they can write backwards--and I'11 certify if it is truthful. The past does not exist in real time. Neither does the future exist in real time. Only the present-tense exists in real time, and we are ALWAYS in present time. Therefore, present tense is the only thing that has jurisdiction inside the court, outside the court, and on paperwork. My course, Dave Miller Law Procedures, teaches people how to correct their documents in real time; how to write mortgages, how to write contracts, how to write treaties, how to write trusts, how to write contracts between unions and companies, all in real time, in present-tense jurisdiction. You know, I just corrected the Massachusetts Trust. It's got 1900 mistakes in the trust and indenture, and another 450 in just the language of the minutes. So that makes roughly 2500 mistakes in the Massachusetts Trust. And you want to put your money into a trust with that many mistakes and say this contract is going to protect me? Rick: I know that you're busy and I know you have a family there. What general statements would you like to make to our readers about the Law, about their need to become informed, about what their rights are? David: Well, I think this will sum it up, and you can quote me on this: People of America, I don't know in what religion you are or what God you worship but every religion in the world has one factor--"our people perish for lack of knowledge". If you stick your head in the sand and say it doesn't exist, this wrong does not exist, and you turn your back on the truth that can now be certified from an Algebra formula, which is a pure science, thereby certifying that this fraud that exists out there cannot be corrected from an Algebra formula written in real time, in real tense, then, like it says in the Bible, our people perish for lack of knowledge. It is only through the study of the English language and understanding how this procedure works that you will set yourselves free and be able to secure yourself in life. At no time in history has anyone ever developed a procedure that abridges all politics, all laws, all communication skills, and all religions in every nation of the world, such as the Dave Miller Law Procedures does with the Algebra. Everyone that has come to me in any language, with any subject matter or argument, I have been able to answer their questions, showing them how the procedure will correct the wrong that they have been believing in. And, roughly, at my seminars I have fielded over 3400 questions without missing any. So that's a lot of questions. This is a separate issue, but at the last seminar, we had three men--we had a Christian, we had a Protestant, and we had a Catholic--and they wanted to start talking about religion in my seminar. Of course, the discussion got heated in about 10 seconds. And, I said, "Excuse me, gentlemen, I respect every one of your points of view but these are subject matters." I said, "If you remember, we're here to learn about procedure. And my procedure will answer all of your subject matters individually. It doesn't matter who you believe your God to be or what the politics are of your religion, the procedure is based on Algebra, therefore it will not discriminate against anyone's belief. It may only clarify them into a truth written in a circle. And anything that you can write frontwards, you can write backwards and you will have the same tense (spelled out, t-e-n-s-e), and the same truth, in both directions. And from that you will be able to communicate fairly." I said, "Knowledge is responsibility, and at all times you must be responsible for knowledge. I brought this technology to you for peace to stop the bickering and to make peace between all the different politics, religions, and laws that people are now fighting about here on this planet. I gave this to you and I ask nothing in return, only that you study it and you will all answer your own questions once you learn it. And it doesn't take a rocket scientist to get through it. It's written at a fifth-grade reading level, and everyone that has studied it, to date, fully understands it. The procedure cannot be used for extortion. It cannot be used to hurt anyone. It can only be used to seek out the truth. And only from the truth can people gain freedom and gain knowledge." That's basically what I told them. I said, "If you use the procedure to hurt anyone, or use it for the purpose of extortion, it wlll destroy you because there are people that watch this technology, and those that will use it for evil, they wind up in Jail instantly. You can only use it for good." And there's a magic about it that I've seen take place since I introduced it to people on 4th of July, 1994, this magic has continued. And everyone who touches it, no matter what there agenda was before, they agree that Algebra or mathematics is an exact science, that there is no prejudice from anybody on any subject that is dealing with this Algebra. And they usually answer their own questions once they learn how to use this properly. They're able to correct their own lawsuits, they're able to correct their own trusts, they're able to correct all the contracts that they want to get into. And the individuals that work with them or are recipients of their contracts or trusts also agree, and feel very comfortable with the truth because now they can see the math within the truth. And so, you have peace. The only reason controversy is allowed to take place is through misinformation or not enough information. And when you have a math formula to explain how the communication skills take place, then the math formula or the communication skills will then certify that you have a complete, truthful answer. And that is something that you can move forward on. [The end.]