The Power of De Jure Nationality

[iscovedel]

there's a PAC workshop in Ohio Aug 13 members are probably aware of...
I was wondering if I could be advised as to the worth this workshop.

The Power of De Jure Nationality
Presented by LB Bork of the People’s Awareness Coalition

[weishaupt1776]

The Power of De Jure Nationality
Presented by LB Bork of the People’s Awareness Coalition



DID YOU KNOW:
That if you are born in America you are a United States citizen at birth and are not a national of your state as international law and the Constitution prescribes!



And, did you further know that you have the natural right to correct this adverse status of which is recognized by the Government of the United States and become part of the de jure sovereign authority!



YOUR NATURAL RIGHTS of which have been endowed to you by your Creator are the most valued thing you possess. Such rights are protected under the doctrines of international law by your rightful or de jure nationality. However—unknown to most Americans—such rights have been taken away by the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution!



Because you were not provided this knowledge by the government, to assist you in filling this void.....



YOU ARE INVITED TO JOIN US IN A ONE-DAY TUTORIAL WORKSHOP.



In this workshop you will discover who you are, how you have lost your rights, and most importantly, how to become a de jure national of your true country under the authority of the original constitutional system through congressionally provided legal procedures, and additionally—how to live your new life.



This informative one-day workshop is held by People’s Awareness Coalition. For added information and reservations please contact the host herein below. The host will be more than happy to take your reservation[s] and also answer any questions you may have regarding schedules, location, etc.



Cost of event is One Hundred dollars* Spouse of attendee is admitted at half charge. For event preparation purposes, we ask that reservations be made in advance. Reservation and Payment is required to be made No later than August 6th.**



LOCATION: Fredericktown Firehouse - 133 Columbus Road - Fredericktown, Ohio [ 43019 ]**
DATE: August 13, 2005
TIME: 9 AM– 5 PM Door opens at 8 AM



CONTACT:* Al: at (419) 886-4694 – hipa@earthlink.net



PDF Flyer Download at: http://www.pacinlaw.org/workshop/OH/...hop_OH_frd.pdf

[Ice]

The problem I see with the above is that we are not "United States" citizens at birth. We are citizens of the state in which we live. If it were any other way the states would not be Sovereign.

It is only a "presumption" or "assumption" that you are a "U.S." citizen... it is never anything else UNLESS you make it abundantly clear what your citizenship status is.

Ice

[weishaupt1776]

That is true that it is a presumption, but if that presumption is not broken ADMINISTRATIVELY & PRIOR to a court action, one's status will be assumed to be that of a U.S Citizen during the proceeding no matter how much they piss and moan about how sovereign they are or how they are a lumberjack, etc
in their pleadings

ICE, I know that you are strapped for time, but it is well worth your while to read the short pdf called Nationality premise in the Expatriation Tutorial thread in the citizenship forum

A systematic study of 8USC, 22 USC, 28 USC the 14th Amdmt, Hague convention, the Law of Nations and the Expatriation Act affords the admin remedy/presumption rebuttal

[Ice]

No one can declare your citizenship status but you.

From the very first, when you are "invited" to any court proceeding you must make your citizenship declaration. Best to do it in written form (usually Affidavit). But once you have done it... they cannot rebut it. They must deal with the status that you claim.

And that's a fact.

Ice

[weishaupt1776]

No doubt, but LB's position (the one doing the seminar), is that there is a legal difference between being a national & a citizen.

Since Indiana is a Nation, then one needs to Declare their status as an Indiana National or native Indianian.

However, if one has an administrative record of a default/estoppel SENT TO THE PROPER AGENCIES, there exists a preponderance of evidence PRIOR to any court action.

The issue of status must be settled. At this point, it is wise to go for the certificate in 8 USC 1502.

LB's process is laden with the proper language of law rooted in statute, statutes at Large, the constitution, Law of Nations, and senate reports.

His admin procedure for this is most meticulous.

This process does not involve you begging somebody for your status, it involves defaulting/estopping the proper agencies(8 main ones, but about 30 others), in which you make a solid public record, and then get an apostille from the SoS.

People keep going for the apostille, w/o administratively settling the issue of status FIRST.

This seminar will go in to great deal. ICE, if you haven't, I strongly encourage you to buy the Red Amendment at pacinlaw.org for 20 FRNS.
Every American should own this book

[Ice]

But that's my point... if you declare yourself to be a "national"... then they have to deal with that. They can attempt to rebut ... but their attempt will untimately fail. And they are left having to deal with the status you have declared.

The presumption is done away with the moment it is rebutted... but it needs to be done immediately.

Now, if you're talking about acquiring some form of paperwork from the state that may bring other benefits with it... it may be worth looking into.

Ice

[Jerseee]

Weis,

I'm in agreement with Ice on this. I have been pounding this drum for the longest.

Citizenship is voluntary. A fiction cannot stake a claim on a human being's life or existence.

Folks really need to stop giving credence to the Constitution like it applies to people. The Constitution does not apply to people--people wrote it for the benefit of government to exist among them.

Although it may be corrupt in some ways---it does not apply to people.

So I am kind of at a loss as to why I see statutes mixed with organic law to effectuate a legal rebuttal to something that you or I do not have to prove but just merely state?

I am who I say I am--prove otherwise. This is basically it.

I think using statutes to prove something is a trap waiting to be sprung. Especially since statutes are their creation.

I cerated a simple affidavit backed by case law to rebut these presumptions. My affidavit is not based on the case law--its only supported by it. My word as a human being is essence of the affidavit. Since I am the closest thing to natural law that there can be--another human being hiding behind a fiction has lessen his/her position in natural law. Anytime you put an idol god in front of you and subserve yourself to it, I believe you are asking for trouble.

Godspeed my brotha. Just my thoughts

[Ice]

Remember that the "created" cannot be greater than the "creator".

What, exactly, are you declaring when you have the "STATE" authorize, agree or "recognize" the status you claim through the use of that process?

Are you demonstrating your standing as the "creator" of that government or are you demonstrating that the government has equal or greater standing than yourself?

I just tell them who I am... they gotta deal with it.

I'm the Sovereign ... I make the rules.

Ice

[David Merrill]

Remember that the "created" cannot be greater than the "creator".

What, exactly, are you declaring when you have the "STATE" authorize, agree or "recognize" the status you claim through the use of that process?

Character, not Status

You all bring out some very important points. I think the entire debate may be neutralized by simply looking at the legal name as a benefit of citizenship. Another way to look at this is display of taking the benefit will likely be construed debt action in assumpsit. Assumpsit is a promise made. You effectively promise to be the chattel capitalized presumed to be backing the debt promise [death bonding = MORT - GAGE] called national debt.

The true name is what our parents name us at birth. Social conditioning is to train into social compact, being a good citizen - in America there is a concept of dual citizenship; United States and state citizenship. Through Governors' Convention appertaining to banking matters, the U.S. citizenship prevails by presumption. One has to secure that legal name/artificial entity on the birth certificate to a man or woman. Otherwise the debt backing the U.S. Dollar is empty of meaning. A confidence game in motion through conditioning.

Yet another way to understand this is that colorable money needs colorable names. This is an ancient truth captured in Deuteronomy 15:1-3 foreigner and 23:20 stranger. Both words are the Hebrew word nakar/nokriy - "feign self to be another". Quite simply put, if I tell you today that I am David Merrill and then tomorrow tell you I am David Merrill Van Pelt, you would begin to doubt my honesty. And with good reason. I am changing my identity and name. Therefore I am severed from the truth - in the Holy Bible represented by the Camp or Israel. I no longer get the benefits of debt forgiveness and exemption from usury on loans. I got a fellow kicked out of jail some time back by citing usury laws from the Code of Jewish Law [faxed to the sheriff].

Deu 15:1 At the end of every seven years thou shalt make a release.
Deu 15:2 And this is the manner of the release: Every creditor that lendeth ought unto his neighbour shall release it; he shall not exact it of his neighbour, or of his brother; because it is called the LORD'S release.
Deu 15:3 Of a foreigner thou mayest exact it again: but that which is thine with thy brother thine hand shall release;

Deu 23:20 Unto a stranger thou mayest lend upon usury; but unto thy brother thou shalt not lend upon usury: that the LORD thy God may bless thee in all that thou settest thine hand to in the land whither thou goest to possess it.

H5237
נכרי
nokrîy
nok-ree'
From H5235 (second form); strange, in a variety of degrees and applications (foreign, non-relative, adulterous, different, wonderful): - alien, foreigner, outlandish, strange (-r, woman). [Note: this computer version does not contain "feign self to be another" like the book #H5235.]

It troubles me to think many of you believe me to be a glutton for punishing myself; spending so much time with the rediculous (rediculing) and rude authors on Quatloos. I try to explain so that some people here can understand the dichotomy of society with me. So that maybe you can see it simplified as I do. The Book of Acts is a great example in my opinion. Paul only declared his municipal (Tarsus, not Celicia) alliance when it served him to keep from being flogged. Until then he was just another Jew in Jerusalem. But the declaration had to come out of Paul's mouth now, didn't it?

Like a fellow (Lewis) pointed out on ecclesia.org recently, an attorney, black robed or not is going to take control "by the clock". Meaning that you are taking up time in his courtroom and therefore under the doctrine of martial rule (executive order) expressed "law of the flag" (in admiralty) by the gold fringed flag you are spending valuable time with your appearance. In simply granting you that time you have accepted the benefit of discussion. You are quickly bracketed (all upper case name in header). And it just goes downhill from there. The only method I have seen to avoid that paramilitary process fairly consistently is abate for misnomer and stand on that technicality under Rule E(8)* which requires the notice you have obligations to perform be brought forth. [In other words, the lectures may be somewhat edifying but in a nation that has so strongly embraced dual citizenship for so long, and even subject the state Citizen through bankruptcy foreclosure and presumed forfeiture, I doubt it is very effective. And it sounds very expensive. I know of a fellow who did something very similar and when he started harassing people for "trespassing", going across his land on a prescribed easement road, he was locked up and mowed down through process without any special recognition.]

http://friends-n-family-research.inf...tification.jpg

Notice my father's true name is Philip Jansen and my mother's is Louanne. The family name is separated and distinct on the very next line of the birth certificate. Being in control of my contracts I say that is not my birth certificate until something about the contract offers a better benefit than debt. However, like on the backside of the Dollar we find a zigurat (pyramid), one of those bricks is now empty. The one that says "David Merrill Van Pelt" was a loadbearing brick but now supports nothing. There is no man, David Merrill helping to hold up the confidence game creating the illusion that FRNs are money. That creates a lot of pressure.

From Webster's Encyclopedic Dictionary 1828:

ATTORN. To turn. In the feudal law, to turn, or transfer homage and service from one lord to another. This is the act of feudatories, vassals, or tenants, upon the alienation of the estate. (emphasis added)

Regards,

David Merrill.


*

(8) Restricted Appearance.

An appearance to defend against an admiralty and maritime claim with respect to which there has issued process in rem [in personam/arrest], or process of attachment and garnishment, may be expressly restricted to the defense of such claim, and in that event is not an appearance for the purposes of any other claim with respect to which such process is not available or has not been served.