Your Birth Certificate as a $750,000 "bond" or Pledge

page: 6
88
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 10 2009 @ 11:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Pauligirl
 

I've been reading your replies to this thread and it really does look like you are taking all of this the wrong way. We've been raised into a system of control that spans and encompasses our entire life, the lives of our forebarers. Look around you sometime, that chair your sitting in, the roof over your head, the ground you walk on, ITS ALL DIRT. If that ever really hits you, if you truly realize the dirt, then ask yourself next, "What the hell is somebody doing in charge then?" or "What gives them right to take any measure of control over another?" The answer to that is "We do." and this is how we do it.




posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 12:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by BugByte

Now look up "Person", It's a "legal fiction" how can a legal fiction drive it's own car?


No where in my Black’s under “Person” does it use the term “legal fiction.”

“Person. A man considered according to the rank he holds in society, with all the right to which the place he holds entitles him and the duties it imposes...Persons are of two kinds, natural and artificial. A natural person is a human being, Artificial persons include a collection or succession of natural persons forming a corporation....It has been held that when the word person is used in a legislative act, natural persons will be intended unless something appears in the context to show it applies to artificial persons.”

This is part of a much longer entry, I just picked the first definition and the pertinent parts. Goes on to say that women are persons too, and that corporations, partnerships, LLCs and other entities are persons in a legal sense.

Black’s Law is not the letter of the law. It’s just definitions as noted by the court and the court is not bound by it.

I didn’t ask for you post the court transcripts, just the case cites. If they are published in reporters or Pacer, they are public.

No one actually wins a case based on these arguments, because the arguments are frivolous . The “free man/legal fiction” defense is a sham. In case you missed it, here’s what happens when you try those arguments: www.adl.org...

While I haven’t read the Free Man Society Forums , I did read the Sui Juris forums for a while. A waste of time. Same arguments, no wins.

This site has a concise overview on Pseudolaw-I’m posting a small part of it, but I would suggest reading the whole thing.
rationalwiki.com...

Pseudolaw often goes hand and hand with other conspiracy theories. Most pseudolaw practitioners believe there is a vast conspiracy to cover up a group of elitists that control all the judges, courts, juries and the government as a whole. This is why their ideas never work in court--not because they are wrong, but because there is a conspiracy to suppress them (just like the vast materialist conspiracy propping up the Darwinian orthodoxy). This dark group holds all the classic labels such as Masons, Illuminati, and Zionists. There is also a tendency to believe that violent revolution is coming and to stockpile supplies, weapons and ammunition. Many of the militia and extremist groups that have dominated press coverage of domestic terrorism over the last decade have relied heavily on pseudolaw concepts and conspiracies.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 01:01 AM
link   
Why do you suppose the ADL associates this legal arguement with what they term " Extremist Legal Arguments"? No, don't answer that one, or we're going to have to have go into why freemasons are considered free and accepted, or the allegorical meaning of building the temple and stuff that would scare people.



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 06:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Pauligirl
No where in my Black’s under “Person” does it use the term “legal fiction.”

“Person. A man considered according to the rank he holds in society, with all the right to which the place he holds entitles him and the duties it imposes...Persons are of two kinds, natural and artificial. A natural person is a human being, Artificial persons include a collection or succession of natural persons forming a corporation....It has been held that when the word person is used in a legislative act, natural persons will be intended unless something appears in the context to show it applies to artificial persons.”

This is part of a much longer entry, I just picked the first definition and the pertinent parts. Goes on to say that women are persons too, and that corporations, partnerships, LLCs and other entities are persons in a legal sense.

Black’s Law is not the letter of the law. It’s just definitions as noted by the court and the court is not bound by it.


Allow me to clarify this definition of a "Person".
I'm Limited to characters so, (*) Will refer to as "End of Sentence which has nothing to do with the previous or next sentence"

“1 Person.(*) 2 A man considered according to the rank he holds in society, with all the right to which the place he holds entitles him and the duties it imposes. (*) 3 Persons are of two kinds, natural and artificial.(*) 4 A natural person is a human being, Artificial persons include a collection or succession of natural persons forming a corporation. (*) 5 It has been held that when the word person is used in a legislative act, natural persons will be intended unless something appears in the context to show it applies to artificial persons.”

If Person = A man, it would read like this...

#1 Person; a man considered according... etc..

#3 sais there are 2 kinds of persons "Natural" and "Artificial". Where is "a man"? We can verify this by what the next sentence sais because it describes these 2 types of persons, and one is a natural person and the other an artificial person, not a "natural man" or "artificial man". They keep using the word person, not "man"

#4 describes what the 2 kinds of persons are and a Natural Person is a "Human Being" and an Artificial Person is a "Legal Fiction" existing on paper only. You are NOT a Human Being! you are a Man/Woman as stated in the Bible, can you show me where in the Bible that God sais let us make Human Beings? The word Human Being isn't even in the Bible period. So what is a Human being? A human being is whatever Man sais it is and in most contexts a human being is a primate which is an "Animal" or evolving from an animal. God created ALL Animals on the 5th day, the 6th day he created Man with Free Will. He also said that Man shall not have anyone before him but God the creator.

Look up the definition of a Human Being. Yes, I will agree that man has a Humanoid body but that does not make Man a Human Being.

#4 also goes on to say that Natural and Artificial are basically the same, which is why many people who go into court claiming to be a "Natural Person" thinking this will save them from federal laws and they will be protected by common law end up disappointed/end up losing their case. All this sentence is saying is that a group of natural person make up a Corporation/Artificial/Legal Fiction only existing on paper. How do we know this..? Because a group of person is considered "Social", and a Social Entity/Corporation/Group is a only something that can exist on paper. Can you prove that Social exists? NO! The Law Society is a social entity but it only exists on paper, a Legal Fiction/Corporation/Artificial.

#5 is basically just saying that in legal laws a person(s) is considered a Natural Person which is basically the same as an Artificial Person/Legal Fiction/Corporation.


Cont...



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 06:37 PM
link   
This is how the definition should read if Person = A Man.

“Person; A man considered according to the rank he holds in society, with all the right to which the place he holds entitles him and the duties it imposes; Persons are of two kinds, natural and artificial; A natural man is a human being, Artificial man include a collection or succession of natural men forming a corporation; It has been held that when the word person is used in a legislative act, natural men will be intended unless something appears in the context to show it applies to artificial men.”

. replaced with ;

Written like this, is Unconstitutional.

#2 sentence reads; A man considered according to the rank he holds in society, with all the right to which the place he holds entitles him and the duties it imposes. This is in accordance with the Constitution but has nothing to do with the rest of the definition of a Person. Also... it reads like this.

A man becomes a man when he becomes of age, according to the society he is with. Depending on the society this man belongs to, that society might have rights and duties.

So basically if your a man and you belong to the Law Society they you must abide by that societies laws and duties. Also known as "Legal Law"

The rest of the definition is mostly to confuse the "Laymen" in hopes they do not understand how Legal laws work and also to make it a Constitutional definition so that when they write laws using the word Person the law is Constitutional. How else do you think the were able to pass the Federal Income Tax Act. Read the Income Tax Act and you will see that they only use the word Person and not People/Man/Woman.

Need more proof? Look up the definition of these words and re-read the definition of person using the new definitions of these words.

Natural
Artificial
Human being
Collection
Succession
Corporation
Legislative
Act
Appears
Intended
Context










[edit on 11-9-2009 by BugByte]



posted on Sep, 11 2009 @ 06:44 PM
link   
I would also like to add, that due to my limit of 4,000 chars I was not able to go into as great a detail as I would have liked and had to use as little words as possible to try and show my point, so there may be some errors and I apologize for that.



posted on Sep, 12 2009 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by KAKUSA
Checked my numbers but nothing came up... does this mean I died..?...LOL


I had the same problem. Maybe my value dropped too low.



posted on Sep, 14 2009 @ 01:24 PM
link   
reply to post by BugByte
 


You are driving on the road that belongs to the state in which the road/street is located in, therefore it is under their jurisdiction. You may well be free to travel wherever, but if you are going to do it on their road you are going to have to abide by the restrictions they set forth.



posted on Sep, 14 2009 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by theQuest
reply to post by BugByte
 


You are driving on the road that belongs to the state in which the road/street is located in, therefore it is under their jurisdiction. You may well be free to travel wherever, but if you are going to do it on their road you are going to have to abide by the restrictions they set forth.



Please prove the roads belong to the state. They do not, they belong to "We The People". You need to learn your history, and even if it was owned by the state/province, it is We The People that own state/province as well, since it is We The People who own our Country. They just work for us.



posted on Sep, 16 2009 @ 04:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Red Dawn 09
 


this is really disturbing stuff. since I read this post I have run accross the"strawman" reference at least 5 times. today I decided to read a little more and found this...via the net

usa-the-republic.com...
it explains in legal terms that we are...
"A sovereign flesh and blood person is an American Citizen.

A corporate U.S. citizen is an artificial person and is a government agent/employee.

WHICH ONE ARE YOU?




posted on Sep, 16 2009 @ 04:56 PM
link   
Well, thankfully I'm not in their databanks..

But wait!.. Are they trying to say I have no worth?!


*sniff sniff*
- Mea

[edit on 16-9-2009 by Veritas Lux Mea]



posted on Oct, 8 2009 @ 05:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Red Dawn 09
 


You have no idea what you are talking about! No offense.
By the way, you are in there databanks. $750,000?
hahaha I am redeeming my BC. I have all the info you need, or can provide you with it. What to do? what to do?

[edit on 8-10-2009 by friend22]



posted on Oct, 24 2009 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Red Dawn 09
Lets assume that from your birth you have been given a number. And that number has a dollar value on it. How much someone else thought you would make in an average lifetime. And this amount of money is in the form of a "pledge". I have done quite a bit of research on this subject and can provide some credable info to be digested.


 



MASSIVE Copy-and-paste removed.

Original content is here: www.nmcservices.net...

[edit on 8-9-2009 by SkepticOverlord]


Per my original post on here, I have done some digging, and have come across this as a potential scam.

Sight drafts: Financial freedom the easy, fraudulent way

I followed all of the links, websites, and as well terminology and have determined that this is potentially a scam perpetrated via public ignorance of the law, perpetrated by fraudulent means.


Quote from : Sight drafts: Financial freedom the easy, fraudulent way

Anti-government extremists have long tried to avoid paying taxes, but in recent years some of them have focused on paying off everything from mortgages to credit cards to utility bills the quick and easy way -- with bogus sight drafts; essentially, bad checks.

The scheme doesn't hold up for long.

Eventually, the person or company that was paid with the phony sight draft realizes it's worthless and takes action, says assistant prosecutor Dan Kasaris of the Cuyahoga, Ohio, county prosecutor's office.

"The problem is these things look so legitimate.

We've had people take them to the county treasury office and use them to pay their taxes.

The treasurer takes them, stamps them, and sends them off for processing.

You get an initial credit that you paid the tax, and then the credit is reversed."


Per my original seen below :

SpartanKingLeonidas : Verichip/Digital Angel/I.B.M. and the Holocaust

I stated that the corporations of Verichip, Digital Angel, and the book I.B.M. and the Holocaust may in fact be linked to this and at this time I am seeing that was potentially misleading due to my not knowing the facts at the time, and whereas Verichip, Digital Angel, and the book I.B.M. and the Holocaust are all interlinked, they may in fact not be linked to the original post or the claims of the website which was supplied by the original poster.

I am not claiming anything derogatory against the original poster, however, the website provided, in the original post of this thread, may in fact be erroneous, and or fraudulent, and if people attempt to do this they need to seek legal advice through a licensed and practicing attorney.

[edit on 24-10-2009 by SpartanKingLeonidas]



posted on Nov, 11 2010 @ 07:40 PM
link   
For those on this board that may be in doubt about the validity of a large dollar amount being attached to your birth certificate, I want you to consider a couple of things. First, why would any 'financial institution' continually offer and increase the debt limit of a corporation that has been bankrupt for 80 years? That's 13 trillion in debt and every year it is allowed to increase, despite the fact that the corporation cannot even cover interest payments on that debt. Second, why would the Federal politicians be so accepting of millions of illegal aliens, and keep their laws in place that guarantee citizenship to any domestic births? And it's not just democrats, as Reagan was the last perpetrator of amnesty for illegal aliens. Each birth certificate the Fedcoat bankers can claim as one of their pieces of property can then be borrowed against with the collateral being living men. Of course all of that debt is completely unsecured as the banks doing the loaning have no collateral backing on their side except pieces of paper. It is at its most basic level a monumental scheme for the enslavement of nations. You turn your energy via work into value that can then be extorted from you and channeled to a very few that do no work other than perpetuating the scam. In return, you get corporate script to be used at the corporate store.
There are quite a few in the discussion that will never believe any of this. Their mind is as hardened as their arteries and it is impossible for them to grasp that they are living in a world of fiction and thus are to be treated as incompetent and fiction. All of this disbelief stems from one thing: ego. Do yourself a favor and let go your ego, cause it's about as beneficial as a toaster waffle.
The wealth of rich people is built in increments, each increment requires another man to be poor. How many poor people will it take to enable the corporate fantasy of riches to come true for you?



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 03:23 AM
link   
Hello, very interesting topic so i've noticed thus far. Ok, here's something that i would like to offer in relation to this subject at hand. On the back of your social security card, you'll notice a red alphnumeric number there. It will always start off with a letter; as an example: F12345678 The letter "F" represents the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, Georgia the (8) digits that follow thereafter the letter is your bond#. Below here is a list of all (12) FRB (Federal Reserve Banks) located within the US.

A - BOSTON - 0110-0001-5 G - CHICAGO - 0710-0030-1
B - NEW YORK - 0210-0120-8 H - ST. LOUIS 0810-0004-5
C - PHILADELPHIA - 0310-0004-0 I - MINNEAPOLIS - 0910-0008-0
D - CLEVELAND - 0410-0001-4 J - KANSAS CITY - 1010-0004-8
E - RICHMOND - 0510-0003-3 K - DALLAS - 1110-0003-8
F - ATLANTA - 0610-0014-6 L - SAN FRANCISCO - 1210-0037-4

Here's what the account information will look like using the letter "F" as mentioned in the above portion only as an example:
Account # 123456789 (SSN without the dashes)
Routing # 0610-0014-6 (View the letter "F" above in the list)
Bond # 12345678 (8) digit number followed after the letter on the backside of your social security card.

One other thing i would like to throw out here, HJR-192 (June 5, 1933) the "HJR" means House Joint Resolution search this up and read it carefully, this will offer a better understanding perhaps. Aslo, read a book titled, "The Redemption Manual" it contains a vast amount of information that potentially will open eyes to a diffrent way of viewing things depending upon the mindset of the reader.



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 04:11 AM
link   
Concerning A4V (Accepted for Value) you do not use one particular A4V for all debt created, there are diffrent format A4V's that will be used, yet similiar never identical though. House hold monthly bills, these are debts that you want to keep creating for obvious reasons. When writing or using a stamped A4V for these NEVER use this in your A4V "Settlement and Closure" with this you are instructing them to zero the account and close it hence a disconnection to your utilities.

A4V Example:

Accepted for Value
Exempt from Levy
By: (Your Upper & Lower case signature here)
Exemption ID# (Social Security # without the dashes)
Deposit to the United States Treasury
and Charge the Same to
/s/: (Upper & lower case signature here (John Doe)
SSN here with the dashes

Another A4V example would be this:

Accepted for Value
Exempt from Levy
Certified and sworn on the undersigned's
unlimited commercial liability, true, correct, complete
with all related endorsements front and back
in accordancewth the UCC 3-419 and HJR-192 of June 5, 1933
Prepaid exempt from levy
By: (Write your name here as you normally would)
Date: (Todays date)
Exemption ID# (social security # without the dashes)
Deposit to the United States Treasury
and Charge the Same to: UCC contract trust account # (Social Security # with the dashes here)
(Your name here all in upper case letters)

When writing or using a stamped A4V it has to be be done all in blue ink, previously these were done in Red ink and signed in blue. BTW, always position your A4V at a 45 degree angle on your presentments. Before executing an A4V, file and submit a UCC-1 Financial Statement to the Secretary of State in getting a UCC Filing number and also have a Security Agreement completely filled out and recorded at your local County Clerks Office in the city of the state that you reside in. Why you might ask...this will establish you as a "Secured Party Creditor". You now can start discharging debt that you have with the use of the A4V.



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by allclear
star and flag. Excellent beginning. I have read most of this information a while back, but never took it seriously. Its a bit too surreal to take too seriously.

Is it possible to to put this well written article into another format such as MS Word, or a PDF?? It would be easier to read and digest, as well it could be distributed to those that don't want to visit the internet for their news.



It is all right here on the first link. Download it and read it, all the forms included. I have done this part way, need to go all the way. It does work, but it is time consuming, what isn't, and it is deep. Sad but true and if everyone did it, how wonderful that would be to stop these maniacs!!

loveforlife.com.au...

www.freemanitoba.com...



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 02:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by theQuest
reply to post by BugByte
 


You are driving on the road that belongs to the state in which the road/street is located in, therefore it is under their jurisdiction. You may well be free to travel wherever, but if you are going to do it on their road you are going to have to abide by the restrictions they set forth.



theQuest, you are wrong and for one reason only........explain to me just WHO IS the "state" and WHERE did it come from. ALL jurisdiction is presumed and NONE of it is actual.

We pay taxes which pay for the roads when we buy fuel. Approximately 60 billion+ dollars a year (per state depending on size and area) in taxes, that pays for a lot of roadways and maintenance, remember that fuel is used in boats, lawn mowers, weed trimmers, generators and everything else NOT used on the roadway. Please get your info and education correct before you post. And include ALL the info to back up the claims you make.

WHO IS "THE STATE"?



posted on Oct, 24 2011 @ 09:31 PM
link   
The "occupy" protest movement is thriving off the claim that the 99 percent are being exploited by the 1 percent, and there is truth in what they say. But they have the identities of the groups wrong. They imagine that it is the 1 percent of highest wealth holders who are the problem. In fact, that 1 percent includes some of the smartest, most innovative people in the country — the people who invent, market, and distribute material blessings to the whole population. They also own the capital that sustains productivity and growth.But there is another 1 percent out there, those who do live parasitically off the population and exploit the 99 percent. Moreover, there is a long intellectual tradition, dating back to the late Middle Ages, that draws attention to the strange reality that a tiny minority lives off the productive labor of the overwhelming majority. I'm speaking of the state, which even today is made up of a tiny sliver of the population but is the direct cause of all the impoverishing wars, inflation, taxes, regimentation, and social conflict. This 1 percent is the direct cause of the violence, the censorship, the unemployment, and vast amounts of poverty, too.

Look at the numbers, the US population is or about 307 million. There are about 20 million government employees at all levels, which makes 6.5 percent. But 6.2 million of these people are public-school teachers, whom I think we can say are not really the ruling elite. That takes us down to 4.4 percent. We can knock off another half million who work for the post office, and probably the same who work for various service department bureaus. Probably another million do not work in any enforcement arm of the state, and there's also the amazing labor-pool fluff that comes with any government work. Local governments do not cause nationwide problems (usually), and the same might be said of the 50 states. The real problem is at the federal level (8.5 million), from which we can subtract fluff, drones, and service workers.
In the end, we end up with about 3 million people who constitute what is commonly called the state. In short, we can call these people the 1 percent.

You ask, "Who is the State?"



posted on Oct, 27 2011 @ 07:41 AM
link   
reply to post by southrn1428
 


The "state" according to every "state' constitution IS the people "in whom all political power is inherent with the right to alter, abolish...."

My personal copy of "my" birth certificate has on the back "Revenue Reciept No. 999999999 L" on the left side bottom and on the right side it says "For Treasury Use Only". I have filed my UCC paperwork.

I have tried to upload a photo of it but I always get an error mesage that the photo page is down?





new topics
top topics
 
88
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join