Attention ATS! Know The Hidden Meanings Behind the Laws in America, Before it is Too Late!

So reading most of this. If I give up my citizenship and such am I still binded to legal contracts and agreements? Even if I leave the country?

If you give up your citizenship and such then, are you still bound to legal contracts and agreements?

Actually it's a little more of "asserting & reaffirming" your Rights than it is of "giving up on society," so to speak. But once you have reasserted yourself, you have to maintain your claim of Rights. Whenever you sign anything that smacks of "contract" or "payment" of any kind, you need to also assert that your signature does not bind you to any kind of a waiver (expressed or implied) of your Rights: That's what it means when you add "All Rights Reserved Without Prejudice, UCC 1-203 & UCC 1-207" near your name...And to make doubly certain on contracts, also include something after your signature that indicates you know the difference between yourself & that Strawman...The term "Agent" will suffice.

Thanks, what would I write if I am Canadian. I am going to be picking up a book of law, but if anyone knows the answer that would be great.

reply to post by lawlb0t

---

I don't remember the actual Canadian references to the law, but many of the links I've posted in this thread were originated by Canadian citizens...It just takes a little digging to find what I've forgotten about the specific Canadian law references.

One example I do remember comes from this link, which was started by a Canadian who claimed that the Sky Train "public transit system" has no lawful reason to charge members of the public to ride. Of course, the Sky Train system is Canadian, but the general application of the Law should still hold up in America as well. But the info at the website is general in nature & you would personally still have to go through the Due Process of Law to affirm/confirm it...This, of course, will require more extensive research on your part.

Throughout this whole thread, I've been linking to sites that provide information...But to actually take action of any kind would still require additional research into the cites of law & facts. In short, I can only get you to start thinking, but everyone has to take the personal responsibility for their own self-education & action.

[edit on 8-9-2008 by MidnightDStroyer]

reply to post by sizzle

---

Thanks to;


danielsil18
posted on 5-9-2008 @ 09:13

www.abovetopsecret.com...&addstar=1&on=4926932#pid4926932

30 little known facts about America

a link here to this great thread by sizzle!!!!!


great stuff here!

[edit on 18-9-2008 by toasted]

It's possible that some people who've been reading this thread that I've earlier mentioned something about getting Power of Attorney & Copyrights on the Strawman? Well, after some more digging, I've found that the Due Process of Law has the methods: Use of UCC 1 forms.

This link discusses the differences between the human & the Strawman at first, but later gets into the advantages of correctly using UCC 1 forms to take full control over that Strawman.

After I read through that, I started Googling "UCC 1 forms" & came up with a bunch of info...Some of the links I ran into (including previous links I've posted that lead to websites providing a plethora of legal documents) also includes legal aid in getting the UCC 1 forms filled out & filed correctly...The correct use of the Due Process of Law is just as important as the decision to start the process.

The best website I've seen so far for providing the legal aid to use UCC 1 forms correctly is here...It may sound a bit expensive at first glance, but pretty much anywhere you go for actual legal aid is going to cost something anyway. Here's another link for helpful instructions with the UCC 1 forms.

One thing to remember is that many legal forms are slightly modified from State-to-State, so be certain that make sure that the forms you use are going to be compatible to both your geographical location as well as fulfilling your individual needs.

reply to post by lawlb0t

---

i to am from the land of the ice and snow to start with everytime you renew or replace any i.d change it as the government up here has a bad habit -you send in all forms printed in small letters not capitals and they change it to capitals it must all be in small letters as even the boys in blue write in capitals -REMEMBER if your name is spelt in small letters the legal papers and all other crap ends as it is not your name on those papers if all your i.d. is in small letters and please do force the issue with them when you change your i.d. good luck

reply to post by MidnightDStroyer

---

quote to retain our rights now there is a laugh,there was an episode of cold case files on this morning which was interesting as we the people don't seem to have a leg to stand on. the police in this episode only had a story from a felon, the police checked out and questioned the so called other bad guy when they finished they had no evidence at all nor did they have probable cause they had nothing ,and yet one officer remembered something that the police did in Sacramento used to solve a case so they pulled this in Minnesota . what they did was go to the courts and petition for a JOHN DOE WARRANT which was granted to them -with this warrant they can serve it on anyone they so chose as there is no one named on it.they in fact forced the man in question to give a dna sample,when serving a warrant they don't have to read you your rights as they are not arresting you ,huhm.this in turns forces you to give them whatever they want and you are not entitled to any of your rights under the law as you are now nameless and faceless until the next step of theirs.which is to process their JOHN DOE evidence then they put a name and face to you after the fact ,correct me if i`m wrong but is this not a form of entrapment and the absolute rights we are guaranteed under the constitution.what a great way to bypass the laws and rights of the individual all in the due process of the law....think on it as that warrant can be used on or for whomever they want i wonder if it could be used over and over again as there is no one named on it except JOHN DOE,so i would suggest you all read any warrants handed to you on the spot and if it says JOHN DOE i`d call a lawyer right then and there and send the boys in blue packing as the warrant is not for me it is for someone else and i`d tell the boys in blue to go find JOHN DOE as that is not my name.

Ok, so this has been an incredible source of information for me, and I think it should be bumped here.

So here's a question:

If you were to sit down to create a check list of a process to use to undertake taking your rights back under the law as discussed in this thread, what would that check list look like? Taking all things into consideration, things you'd need before attempting it, appropriate steps during the process, things to do afterward.

I definitely think it is very important that each person takes it up as their duty to become educated in this process, but I also think that it would be helpful for people to have a very basic road map to use as an outline. It seems the way the system works now, it isn't a revolution to be undertaken by force of arms for all those in the nation, but one to be undertaken by the force of law by the individual that will turn this one around. 300,000,000 revolutions.

reply to post by sizzle

---

There is a good book called "The Web Of Debt--the shocking truth about our money system" written by Ellen Hodgson Brown. This book also refrences The wizard of Oz as really being a story about the money system at the turn of the century.

Well, I'd suggest that you start at the beginning, with your Birth Certificate. As it was a contract presented to your parents when you were born, they were not given "Full Disclosure of All Terms & Conditions" at that time, so the UCC can have it voided right back to the same moment they filled it out. Then you'd have to follow up by using that same basic info to have your Record of Live Birth properly filed at the County Records Office where you were born. This basically removes the "US Citizen" status (defined as a limited form of citizenship under the 14th Amendment: That Amendment was to grant some form of protection by Law for the newly-freed slaves of the time) from your name but you must make official note that you retain your Natural Born American Citizenship under the main body of the Constitution & Bill of Rights.

Then, onto the Social Security...Again, lack of Full Disclosure. Even if they have regulations limiting your action against the SS to a certain time period after you have become the Age of Majority, again, you were denied Full Disclosure even then & only "recently learned" enough of those T&C's to accomplish your task. Of course, you lose any "benefits" you may have otherwise gained under the federal government, but then the body of Statutory Regulations also loses power over you. Remember that Statutes are not the same as Laws...Laws are covered by the Constitution, Bill of Rights & the Common Law jurisdiction, while Statutory Legislation is nothing more than a way to regulate commerce. Remove yourself from their "commerce" & you also remove their power, except as when you enter into any new contracts they will certainly try to "offer." I use the word "offer" loosely here, as they will try to intimidate you into compliance through the abuse of their limited authority...Statutory Regulations are written with a precisely limited "jurisdiction" & they'll stop at little-to-nothing to get you to contract yourself into that jurisdiction.

This is only a start though...As you get along in these stages, you should be able to learn enough to plan further ahead & take other precautions against their attempts to "extend their jurisdiction" over you again. I think a good place to look is at Jurisdictionary to help you learn how to defend your Rights under the Law against the limited jurisdiction of Statutes.

It's very true that "Ignorance of the Law is no excuse" & it serves as no defense either...So strive to not remain ignorant.

[edit on 28-1-2009 by MidnightDStroyer]

reply to post by MidnightDStroyer

---

Nicely said!

That's well worth a star!

I've been catching bit's and pieces on related info, mostly teaser stuff....

I'd love to see a chart on all the options and the downside to each. Because I think someone could foolishly cut their own throat while trying to establish their soverignty, and that would not be a good thing...

I found this;

www.1215.org...

This is a MUST SEE;

video.google.com...

Menard has more info on google

and his site;

www.thinkfree.ca...

I also asked the bank about opening an account without a ssn, and they said no, and cited the patriot act. I'm sure had I pressed the issue for a senior officer I'd get whatever the current legal exception is, but it seems that unless you're gonna press the issue you'll just get the common answer they want everyone to believe.

I don't think they want us having options and won't offer any either...unless pressed to other levels as has been said. And I'm thinking the lower level officers may not even know. I suppose maybe they could be directed to persuade the customer that no such thing is possible to frustrate any attempts. I can't say for sure.

I just wanted to add my bank experience to that as of Jan 2009.


[edit on 11-4-2009 by toasted]

reply to post by MidnightDStroyer

---

I heard that the shortened form of that was valid too, any thoughts?

"" Without Prejudice, UCC 1-203 & UCC 1-207 ""

1. What about writing that under the sig line on a ticket, or is that redundant?
2. What if you write that on the ticket but it's not on the license?
Just curious, covering the bases....

I haven't gotten a robot not full stop on right on red ticket, but how would those get handled?

And there's no room under my name. I'd have to place it next to it.
I'm supposed to renew in 4months, I wonder what they'll say to my extra comments? I guess I'm gonna find out!!...


www.archive.org...

[edit on 11-4-2009 by toasted]

Given the length of this thread someone may have already posted this link , enjoy !
video.google.com...

This guy covers just about every point brought up by the OP .

Some say no, and that the Queen or Regency is behind an evil plot, some say otherwise.
It's important to consider, that we in the UK and the Queen may not be behind the evil planners, but that the British Government then, as the U.S.A now , is tricked and governed through Admiralty law by an inner corrupting influence, the elite bankers.
One example to consider is freemasonary, along with all corruptible inner socieities. The Queen is the Head. But does that make her the head of corruption? Hold on... not necessarily, she is also the head of the sheeple and the good people. The Monarch had limited powers, and it is up to the people to steer their government, particulalry in point of acceptance, about which the Monarch can do little, but accept, whatever the monarch or their intelligence officers know!

The point I'm driving at is this: it's not so much freedom from England, but freedom from the corrupt influences of bankers that was not gained.
You may reason conversely, that the influence of the Queen in Canada and America, slows down the corruptoin, and gives us some space. Why? because the monarch has their own Intelligence officers who take action where they can on behalf of goodness and freedom. For this there is recent evidence, as well as historic:
See www.worldreports.org...

and particularly releases of this year such as :
www.worldreports.org...

Look for reports there on how the Crown personally called in Blair, in an effort to topple the Bush crime syndicate, even sending armed personnel over to the USA, and delivering ultimatums to Obama.
There is much to learn from that source of intelligence.
Please pass on the link, and please take a good look. Check out the authors' credentials.

Just over two years ago the Queen said 'we are living in dark times'. I take that to mean , it is not a corrupt people, reflected in their corrupt government, but a corrupt inner government. It is that, I suggest, which American States and unions failed to get free of, although they were almost free at the start. They simply quickly established themselves, possibly because common understanding blamed the Crown for the people's ills, no doubt through propaganda machines, like we have now, which are funded and not free speech.

Richard Harris ( a Freeman on the Land), has stated how unfortunate position the monarch is in nowadays, where she is vilifieed by the people and press, held responsible for the people's parliament.
So far as any lands and monies being held in the Monarch's Soveriegn name, on behalf of the people, I think that's is the safeguard which protects the land and property from being amassed by a the corrupt elite, and held by them, in bogus and fictitious company names.

[edit on 8-7-2009 by bolly]

reply to post by bolly

---

re: the queens statement that we are living in dark times ,no truer words have ever been spoken . so why is it that there are three areas of this world that answer to no one and no government ,the Vatican ,Washington area -approximately 5 block area ,and Britain a small area also.
quit throwing down the banks as it is not them you see the great churches of the christian faith own those banks and they have for many centuries.this was the true reason that the CHRIST threw over the money lenders tables as they were not in the church they are the church and they have the governments of the world so far in DEBT that we could never ever get out and our useless governments won`t go to a cashless society which is the best thing that could happen as this would break thier stranglehold on them . but alas we lost control of the governments and credit is so easy to get and use ,ask those who are now out of work because of the money lenders why they are going to lose everything to the bankers CHURCH,because when they saw the mess they make they jacked all of your credit cards interest rate by 5% to 6% on top of the 19% TO 28% that you were already paying them -greed no`s no boundary.

This makes fascinating reading and I'm sure there's truth in it. BUT the reality of being in the US is you're not going to be able to get away with not doing what is called unlawful actions by citing Black's dictionary of Law or whatever.

I'm still waiting to hear the true life stories of those who 'became free' and can do as they wish in the US - not register their car, not pay taxes, etc etc. I don't think we will be seeing the evidence. Basically the general information in this thread is correct and we live in a system based on lies where we don't know our true rights.

But everything is geared within the system to keep us adhering to multiple rules and laws. The Patriot Act will be a huge disincentive for a start to anybody wanting to refuse to give their SSN. Yes before it you could refuse to give it to any no. of bodies but the numerous 'acts' brought in by Bush mean you're going to be unable to do the overwhelming majority of things you want to live as a free person.

Driving unlicensed? You can say all you like that you're 'travelling' but it's not going to make one sliver of difference to this system. Again - nobody has posted any real evidence on this thread or the Choosing Freedom thread that we can live this way without being harassed, fined and or jailed.

As for the guy in this or the other thread who talked about the Dutchwoman or whatever who made her own passport - see how far your homemade passport gets you out of the US or into it for that matter. Or anywhere in the world.

[edit on 18-10-2009 by dontbelievehype]

Still waiting Please give some evidence in refs for courts etc that prove you can do this. You can declare yourself a free man and remove yourself from the jurisdiction of our legal system.

I'm not opposing the basic view, I'm sure it's correct. But how can you apply in practically in the US especially in light of all the Acts that Bush and cronies bulldozed through?

Good luck too in trying to do this under Obama - I don't care about the guy's skin color. I care about how ethical he is and from all the evidence so far ethics is not something he feels applies to him. Sealing all his records for a start and refusing to present hard evidence in a real birth certificate stink to the heavens.

Genuflecting to Muslim princes or whoever that guy was is also seriously suspicious. Obama is worse than Bush etc I think - nobody really knows much about this guy. He seems to have been especially groomed and was always in the right place at the right time with the right people. He's NWO trained through and through.

How are we going to challenge Maritime Law under this tinpot would be dictator?