Do I allow the fire marshall in?

[RickA]

To expand on the fact that my BC had been recorded. It is recorded in my "state of birth", not where I "currently am". Although I know that my BC had been recorded in the "state of my birth", I do not know where a copy is. I'm certain that if I wanted one I know where I could get one, but I'm really not interested. Also, I do not have a ss card though I DID have one.

[Livefire]

One and all,

The Birth Certificate is in fact an affidavit and an unrebutted affidavit has standing as truth in law and commerce. Since we cannot of ourselves have personal cognizant knowledge of the event, it is impossible for us to rebut it. If we bring the issue up in court or in adminstrative dealings....We have the burden of proof. People involved in adoption have the ability challenge the BC because state's statutes and regulations clearly show that those documents
are prima facie forgeries. I say it might be more prudent to establish one's status by positive affirmation via publicly filed affidavits as HB states. I'd rather be on the offensive than defensive. Make the state rebut my status as a sovereign rather than sayin I'm not a 14th amendment chattel. Follow that up with perfecting a land patent, then you meet the definition of an Elector!

Hi citizen soldier -

In post #18 below, you posted:

I do not buy into some of the "paytriot" views of our founders nor the Constitution itself. The treaty signed by King George only served to cease hostilities between England and the ex-Colonies - it did not "codify" our expatriation from England nor only expatriate those who were English subjects. Expatriation happened as soon as the colonies took up arms for independence and it included anyone supporting independence. Its very simple - expatriation is founded upon liberty. Liberty is an unalienable right. Just because ole King George did not honor his part of the treaty does not cast doubt on the commitment to our new country of those who negotiated the treaty.

Yadu: I agree, neither do I adhere to the common patriot misinformation, nor do I disagree with your basic premise; however what you state ignores international custom and practice; the Constitution was written in respect thereto. And, there was more to the Treaty of Peace than the cessation of hostilities. Those who founded this country were not interested in going it alone - they wanted (and needed) to engage in commerce with European nations and to facilitate that commerce they needed to and did adhere to international custom and practice, and they were very sensitive to their English political heritage - and not interested in diluting their hard won English heritage with French or German versions, why else did they adopt the English common law? The Founding Fathers did include a Constitutional provision to allow other nationalities to participate in government by setting forth the criteria for those naturalized as “citizens of the United States” to hold public office in Article One of the Constitution. Nowhere have I ever read of any position taken by persons of other nationalities that they were included among those whom King George devolved his sovereignty in the Treaty of Peace. If you have some source for that I would be very interested; particularly in view of what Chief Justice John Jay stated in his opinion rendered in Chisholm v. Georgia, where Jay stated that the former subjects of King George were thereby (in the Treaty of Peace) made equally sovereign to the said king. (That the sovereignty of those who revolted was accomplished on July 4, 1776 is in no way disputed, however in order for such sovereignty to be totally enjoyed by participation in international commerce, such sovereignty needed to be “officially” recognized by King George and King George had no political ability to include any other than his own former subjects). It is obvious that no one of other nationalities were in armed revolt against their sovereign and if such other nationalities expatriated themselves from their foreign sovereign such expatriation would not automatically make them citizens of the United States. As I am sure you will recall, one of the complaints listed in the Declaration of Independence was that King George was interfering with the colonists ability to determine their own rules of naturalization - who would they have been naturalizing, certainly not persons from England?

CS: The idea of the Constitution being a farce and the like is pure nonsense.

Yadu: I absolutely agree with your position as stated above, however there is the question of the United States being in bankruptcy. If the United States is in bankruptcy (and there is much evidence that it is - particularly in the Congressional record), then those administering the bankruptcy would have no obligation to adhere to nor be bound by the Constitution and citizens of the United States would be part of the property of the United States (but the People of the United States would not - as per the rules of corporate administration, IMHO).

CS: It is clearly a contract between the states to delegate narrowly defined authority on behalf of "We the People" through our elected representatives to a central government. Claiming such bs because the government ignores their lawful duty to uphold this contract only shows the lack of commitment of "We the People" to keep their servants in line - not that the contract never existed or was a ruse. Unfortunately, "We the People" seem content to wallow in ignorance as to our sovereignty - either because of our own fears to take complete responsibility for our and our families lives or we enjoy living off the labor of others. The Constitution isn't failing us - we're failing it.

Yadu: Again - we are on the same theme but I would ask you, CS: What is it that makes the US a republic that also applies to the People’s Republic of China and about 50 other totalitarian nations that include the word “republic” in the names of their countries? And also, what is it that explains the meaning in the Fourteenth Amendment where it is clearly stated that citizens of the US are “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” and are required to pay the national debt without complaint? And why the division in the First Amendment wherein, in the later portion, the right of redress is limited to only the People; and why, in the 2nd Amendment, was the wording used to limit the right to keep and bear arms to only the people - not worded to universally include everyone?

CS: "We the People" are every citizen of the various states or those designated by the 14th amendment-

Yadu: Again, I do not disagree with what seems to be your basic statement here, to acknowledge that the citizens of the states are “We the People”. I was quite deeply involved in the State Citizen movement in California for about two years but in all our efforts, where we documented many many court cases clearly acknowledging that state citizenship was separate from and did not flow from US citizenship, I never saw or heard of even one instance where such political status (of State Citizen) was dispositive of any issue. Although I do not disagree with your statement (above) I have found that using the word “citizen” works against me, perhaps because of its use so much in connection with the 14th Amendment. It seems that the word “citizen” is now broadly understood to designate a person who owes fealty to the United States, as stated in the 14th Amendment. (This seems to fit well I into a definition of the word “republic” as being a form of government where there are primarily two political classes; (1) the People of the United States and; (2) the citizens of the United States, being those persons who have volunteered to pay the national debt without complaint (here it may help to recognize that the United States is not merely a republic - it is a Constitutional Republic!!). I have found that I get my point across much more easily with the “authorities” by using the word “People” and/or the phrase, “Posterity of the People of the United States, as they defined themselves in the Preamble to the Constitution” or a variation thereof. What would be your comment on this reasoning in consideration of the provision in the 14th Amendment that citizens of the US are subject to the jurisdiction thereof and are therein, required to pay the national debt, without complaint?

CS: the only difference is whether you are represented by officials of an individual state or Congress as a whole. Although the Constitution provides Congress as being the sole legislative body over federal lands, it still doesn't allow Congress to infringe on unalienable rights. How could it - they were not given by government in the first place.

Yadu: Again, your statement above is basically correct and the Declaration of Independence clearly provides that all men are created equal but such equal creation does not prevent anyone from voluntarily waiving their God given rights and pledging their fealty to some government or other earthly authority. Isn’t this what takes place when an immigrant is naturalized? Is it not the intent and purpose of the naturalization ceremony to have the naturalization candidate voluntarily publicly renounce his former sovereign and voluntarily publicly swear his allegiance to a new sovereign, the new sovereign (in this case) being the United States? What would the words “... and subject to the jurisdiction thereof...” mean in the 14th Amendment? These words are preceded by the Thirteenth Amendment’s prohibition of involuntary servitude? If a person has freely and voluntarily subjected himself to the jurisdiction of some (obviously) higher authority, then where are the limitations to such subjugation and where are there any inalienable rights, other that those specifically listed in the 14th Amendment? It should be noted that under the 14th Amendment US citizenship is primary and state citizenship thereunder is secondary. I am not aware of any instance where any state requires anyone to prove or even assert that they are state citizens - to prove or assert they are state residents - yes - but not to prove they are state citizens. A resident is a person who is temporarily living in a location. State citizenship changes upon the mere whim of the individual - no renunciation of previous state citizenship is required and no pledge of allegiance or application for acceptance by the new state is required.

My point here is, that in order for the People of the United States to be able to straighten out the mess that has developed - the People of the United States need to be able to clearly identify just exactly who they are, because the right to redress of grievance, protected in the First Amendment, is limited therein to the People of the United States - and does not extend to citizens/subjects of the United States.

Cheers,

Yadu

To Henry Bowman -

What you post in #19 below may very well be true but one major point you do not address is that immigrants who apply for naturalization voluntarily pledge their fealty to and become subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, whereby they abandon the route you present. Those who acknowledge and claim US citizenship are stuck with the obligations thereof as set down in the Fourteenth Amendment and are not politically positioned to invoke the Scriptures.

Under international custom and practice children inherit the political status of their parents but the Thirteenth Amendment puts a wrinkle in international custom and practice by its prohibition of involuntary servitude, thus in order for anyone born in the United States to become subject to the jurisdiction thereof such person must individually personally volunteer to be subject to the jurisdiction thereof, to volunteer themselves into subject status - which they do when they voluntarily claim the birth certificate which was created at the time of their birth. If they were more astute they would never make such a claim, IMHO.

IMHO just about everything you state in your post #19, is reiterated by implication, in the Thirteenth Amendment's prohibition of involuntary servitude. The 13th Amendment is the way out but I have never openly referred to it - I just challenge jurisdiction and they cannot establish it without my assistance. I am personally aware of a local man who invokes Scripture as you suggest and he gets nowhere with it. What works in some jurisdictions does not always work everywhere.

Cheers,

Yadu

Hi RickA -

In reference to your posts 20 and 21 -

You state therein that you “know” that a BC was issued regarding your birth. One thing which we all have a tendency to do is to confuse the word “know” with the word “believe”. The only things that we “know” are things we personally witnessed and can independently remember.

You certainly may very well KNOW that a woman who claimed to be your mother told you a certain BC pertained to your birth and you believe that she is your mother and that she told you the truth about the said BC but if you have personal knowledge and can personally remember that a BC was issued regarding your birth and that you can actually remember the day you were born and can remember and identify that the woman who later told you she is your mother was indeed the woman who delivered you then you are indeed a unique individual. To “believe” is to accept on faith with no proof.

Whether or not a birth certificate was issued regarding your birth and is recorded in the government’s files is totally irrelevant - what is relevant is whether or not you acknowledge that document as pertaining to your birth. Without your acknowledgment (and acceptance) no one else can prove it pertains to your birth. You do not have to deny the BC pertains to you (I would never do that) - “they” have to prove it does (and I would require them to do that) - which it is totally and absolutely impossible for them to do without your full cooperation.

It would make no difference whether or not you “received” a BC, there is no way you could reasonably have personal knowledge that any BC you received actually pertained to your birth.

It is very important to understand what the word “know” means and do not ever answer any question as to what you might or might not believe - what you believe, in regard to a birth certificate - is irrelevant - what is relevant is what “they” can prove!!

Cheers,

Yadu

[RickA]

Yadu: It is very important to understand what the word “know” means and do not ever answer any question as to what you might or might not believe - what you believe, in regard to a birth certificate - is irrelevant - what is relevant is what “they” can prove!!


I now understand what you have said AND what I would have to do now. I say HAVE becuse, as you have said, I CAN NOT "know" such a thing.

I'll have more questions.

Thank you.

[dimarco123]

The above discussion has again readjusted my paradigm concerning citizen, subject, and the People and their Posterity. Today's english is not understood as clearly as in the days of Thomas Paine, but nevertheless, words have meaning (depends on which dictionary you refer to, esp. in Law).
Given the above discussion, esp. by YADU, I, and I believe many others in this board searching for answers who have awaken to the Matrix, NEED to have systematic procedures to chart OUR course to Liberation, once again for the citizens of this country, which has acquired our very lives, without our knowledge/understanding that we as citizens are no longer We the People.
Can we have another American Revolution to devolve the contractual chains by the government that many have now awoken up to see on our hands and necks?

My plea is to HOW do we as citizens or posterity of citizens and naturalized citizens release ourselves and our posterity from this hidden yoke that we all pull under the color of law, hyprocrisy of freedom and conspiracy to enslave us all???

Apostille? Redemption? Notariat Protest? UCC Process?

Though not too new to all of this...I am aware of this particular dimension of reality that affects my state-of-being. I still have other dimensions to hold free - my spirituality for one.
Can we as a NEW defined People real exits as sentient beings with our natural rights in this world?

Like many of you...I have tried to fight the hydra and have taken some hits and given some back. But I grow more cynical thristing for a final confrontation to blow the horn to rally ourselves and take back our very body, mind and soul.

There are so many of us, but like Mr Franklin, 'we all must stand united, or divided we will fall.' Maybe the hubris of youth pushes me forward, but I do not want to die an old man knowing what I left behind for my prosteriy or my fellow brothers and sisters.

Where do we all 'together' go from here??

Will those on this board reach out to other boards and to others and form party? Have a convention, or perhaps another political entity with real power to push back? I don't know...but with an open analytical mind and courage to stand by my beliefs that all are free, will we take action from our knowledge or just find comfort in understanding only?

Hi Group -

I do receive notification when posts are made here in regard to my previous posts but I just do not have the time to respond here.

I have a Yahoo group: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/whoru, which I post to in conjunction with my internet and short wave radio WhoRU show on RBNlive.com, at 11:00 am, central.

If you would pose related questions to me on my Yahoo group or call in on my show, I will be happy to respond.

Thanks, and

Cheers,

Yadu (Eric Williams)

[Livefire]

Well, Well, Well !!!

My old buddy Yadu is back!!!! How's things going with yer buddy Jah these days ???? When's the spaceship coming back to beam us up before the maelstrom of fire comes......and Im certainly hoping there's more on the menu than pastries loaded with cream!!! Welcome back dude! LOL

[idknow]

Originally Posted by dimarco123

The above discussion has again readjusted my paradigm concerning citizen, subject, and the People and their Posterity. Today's english is not understood as clearly as in the days of Thomas Paine, but nevertheless, words have meaning (depends on which dictionary you refer to, esp. in Law).
Given the above discussion, esp. by YADU, I, and I believe many others in this board searching for answers who have awaken to the Matrix, NEED to have systematic procedures to chart OUR course to Liberation, once again for the citizens of this country, which has acquired our very lives, without our knowledge/understanding that we as citizens are no longer We the People.
Can we have another American Revolution to devolve the contractual chains by the government that many have now awoken up to see on our hands and necks?

My plea is to HOW do we as citizens or posterity of citizens and naturalized citizens release ourselves and our posterity from this hidden yoke that we all pull under the color of law, hyprocrisy of freedom and conspiracy to enslave us all???

Apostille? Redemption? Notariat Protest? UCC Process?

Though not too new to all of this...I am aware of this particular dimension of reality that affects my state-of-being. I still have other dimensions to hold free - my spirituality for one.
Can we as a NEW defined People real exits as sentient beings with our natural rights in this world?

Like many of you...I have tried to fight the hydra and have taken some hits and given some back. But I grow more cynical thristing for a final confrontation to blow the horn to rally ourselves and take back our very body, mind and soul.

There are so many of us, but like Mr Franklin, 'we all must stand united, or divided we will fall.' Maybe the hubris of youth pushes me forward, but I do not want to die an old man knowing what I left behind for my prosteriy or my fellow brothers and sisters.

Where do we all 'together' go from here??

Will those on this board reach out to other boards and to others and form party? Have a convention, or perhaps another political entity with real power to push back? I don't know...but with an open analytical mind and courage to stand by my beliefs that all are free, will we take action from our knowledge or just find comfort in understanding only?

I guess the simple answer to "how" is to make the govts persona non-grata!!!

just plain ignore them until *they* want something fmor us.