It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

PROOF! Your Birth Certificate Makes You a Slave

page: 3
10
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 24 2010 @ 05:03 AM
link   
I swear that real slaves from a couple centuries ago will turn in their graves because of the massive abuse of the word "slave" nowadays.




posted on Jul, 24 2010 @ 07:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by DISRAELI
reply to post by MidnightDStroyer
 

It does seem to me, though, that your version of "being traded on the Stock Exchange" is very abstract and has no practical effect on the person "being traded".

It may be "abstract" in regards to UK Law, but not US Law. In the US, Common Law was elevated above any other body of Law, but not in the UK. However, parts of Canada has closely similar Common Law and, if someone pays particular attention to the few differences, these procedures work essentially the same way...The similarities exist because the UCC between the US & Canada is enforced in the same way. the majority of the small differences is in the fact that the name/ID numbers of the particular paperwork needed might differ, or there might be some differences in the specific court procedures, also.

But I do have to agree that this will in no way work in the UK...Our Constitution sets a vastly different system of government. Also, different "bodies of law" carry different "weights" between us & our cousins across the pond. Here's the biggest difference: The UK Parliment can essentially choose how far to enforce Common Law...Over there, it's effectively optional, but in the US Common Law is the Supreme Law. In fact, the USA is the first nation in the history of human civilization to elevate Common Law this high. This is why we've been referred to as the "Great American Experiment." However, our very own government, charged with the duty to obey the Law, is the most widespread & pervasive violator of the Law, compared to earlier American history.



posted on Jul, 24 2010 @ 08:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Cythraul
 


Fascinating video..thanks for posting.



posted on Jul, 24 2010 @ 10:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by metro

Like I said, they must have juristiction over you for their laws to apply. When you enter court, think of it as entering a game that is played by their rules - just like "life".


Well, if you go to court with this stuff, let us know how it works out for you. I haven't seen it save anybody from anything.



posted on Jul, 24 2010 @ 11:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pauligirl
I haven't seen it save anybody from anything.

Did you not watch the video I posted here? It's only about 10 minutes long and it's what you're looking for. You asked for it.



posted on Jul, 24 2010 @ 12:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Cythraul
 


I recall sometime last year reading an article about an MP who had taken up the case of a woman who was fighting to overturn a social work decision to remove her children. The interesting part of this case was that when the children were taken into care the following day one was returned to her as the child had never been registered. My memory of the details is sketchy but funnily enough I’m sure it was in the Torbay region. Indeed this case may have been responsible for bringing this idea to the TPUC’s attention.



posted on Jul, 24 2010 @ 01:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cythraul

Originally posted by Pauligirl
I haven't seen it save anybody from anything.

Did you not watch the video I posted here? It's only about 10 minutes long and it's what you're looking for. You asked for it.


I saw it. Do you have any proof that the charges against Barry were actually dismissed?



posted on Jul, 25 2010 @ 08:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pauligirl
I saw it. Do you have any proof that the charges against Barry were actually dismissed?

The video indicates that they were - and why would he have distributed it if it had proven unsuccessful? The only possible reason would be that he is 'part of the system' and deliberately wants to mislead people. I don't think that's realistic.

Incidentally, do you know that the charges weren't dismissed? I'd say that video was a pretty good response to your requests for evidence of this whole theory working... or do you want not to believe it? Remember - I'm merely investigating it all myself.



posted on Jul, 25 2010 @ 12:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by Cythraul

Originally posted by Pauligirl
I saw it. Do you have any proof that the charges against Barry were actually dismissed?

The video indicates that they were - and why would he have distributed it if it had proven unsuccessful? The only possible reason would be that he is 'part of the system' and deliberately wants to mislead people. I don't think that's realistic.

Incidentally, do you know that the charges weren't dismissed? I'd say that video was a pretty good response to your requests for evidence of this whole theory working... or do you want not to believe it? Remember - I'm merely investigating it all myself.


Found a transcript since the audio was so bad. Last comment:
Lay adviser: "The court takes judicial notice that the magistrates have abandoned the court. I am therefore the highest authority in this court room and therefore we dismiss the case."

Notice that it’s the Lay adviser saying this. Not the court.

Here is a discussion on it–the Lay Adviser is posting as Rebel leader
vimeo.com...


Reay posts: So the whole exercise was a failure then. The Liability order was granted.

Rebel leader: Nah it wasn't a failure ... the magistrate committed fraud on video - they issued the LO after the court we left the court because we know they didnt want the Police seeing the fraud take place - BIG Commercial Lien coming the magistrates way - they will have to deal with the Lien before they proceed in that case is the lien brings estoppel!


I don’t anything about UK tax laws–but I don’t think this will work the way he thinks it will.
If anything, he’s probably gotten Mr. Barry into deeper trouble.

Read all the posts–there’s a guy posting as Jules that seems to know the law.

Lay adviser=Rebel leader=Ray St. Clair
You may want to check out Mr. St. Clair. Not a very savory character.

I'm in the states and I work for an attorney. I've run across a bit of this in real estate, where someone tries to save property from a foreclosure, by filing Freeman and sovereignly documents disputing the bank's right to foreclose for nonpayment. It doesn't do a thing. I have the feeling that "Commercial Lien" will go the same way. They don't really have a good argument.



posted on Jul, 25 2010 @ 01:53 PM
link   
We all know your birth cif makes your a slave. As soon as you have one you have debt.



posted on Jul, 25 2010 @ 02:39 PM
link   
reply to post by sabbathcrazy
 


Unfortunately, your post is accurate...I remember seeing a short public service ad on TV sometime in the neighborhood of 3 decades ago. It depicted a guy in a 3-piece suit leaning over, with his face coming full into the camera. He says, "Welcome to the United States. Unfortunately, I must tell you that you already owe us $350,000." Then the camera cuts from his face to a view of a baby in the crib...Which promptly starts crying.

This was a few decades in the past, people...It's a problem that's been getting worse, pretty much on a geometric scale since then! I know...I've been living through it! It has been only during the past 4 or 5 years that I've been learning why it is this way.

[edit on 25-7-2010 by MidnightDStroyer]



posted on Jul, 25 2010 @ 03:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Pauligirl
 

Thanks for doing some digging - star! I'd not seen any post-discussion on this case. Still, I never had any doubt that the courts would pursue the case. After all, they can't be expected to bend over so quickly each and every time Joe Bloggs stumbles across this information and decides to use it. The legal system needs to seem to maintain authority and will happily waste money on trial-after-trial to do so. The accused, or the court, will eventually give in. But my personal feeling is that with a little bravery and persistence, the accused will find the end of that rat-run.



posted on Jul, 25 2010 @ 03:22 PM
link   
There are legal duties that you must register the birth of your child. The authorities won’t take your child away (as indicated by the Freedom of Information answer), but I assume the authorities have other sanctions.

Why would you not register your child? For some silly paranoid principle you are prepared to jeopardise your child’s life by completely messing things up for them. For example, they won’t be able to apply for a passport and won’t have a national insurance number issued, thus preventing them from being employed. If something happened, they would have difficulty proving they had e.g. inheritance rights etc…

Poor kid. You are not enslaved the child by registering the birth, you are selfishly making their life more difficult.

Regards



posted on Jul, 25 2010 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by paraphi
Why would you not register your child? For some silly paranoid principle you are prepared to jeopardise your child’s life by completely messing things up for them. For example, they won’t be able to apply for a passport and won’t have a national insurance number issued, thus preventing them from being employed. If something happened, they would have difficulty proving they had e.g. inheritance rights etc…

It's that very same registration that enforces those oppresive Statutes...why should you need a passport if the SCOTUS has ruled that we have an inalienable right to "travel freely on public roads & to transport personal belongings" in the first place? Why must we have the government's permission to leave our own country?

Why does your child have to have government-sponsered health care?...Unless the parents themselves won't do it? It all boils down to Personal Responsibility for yourself & your family: If you don't take care of them, the government will...And they'll make you jump through hoops of red tape to get it!

The whole idea behind the Constitution & Common Law is that people are free to make their own decision, without government interference. But the government doesn't like the idea of self-control & self-determination among people, so they strive to take control over everything. Government strives to create a sense of irresponsibility in society itself so that it can take control.

The Common Law recognizes that there are personal responsibilities attached to every single inherent Right that nature grants to human beings...The primary responsibility is to exercise your inherent Rights in a way that won't violate the equal Rights of others. Law Enforcement is designed to bring responsibility & accountability on those who, by accident or design, actually violate someone else's Rights...But what is the function of Statutory Law, as it's written & enforced in modern times? It's enforced on people who haven't got any victims! To commit a crime means that someone's Rights were violated: With no violation, there's no crime & no victim.

The body of Stautory Law cannot be imposed upon people who have not contracted with the government...To apply for any government benefits, you have to follow their rules to get them. If you instead provide for your own personal responsibility, then you don't need them to provide it for you. There's a very true saying that goes, "While the government gives with one hand, it takes with two other hands."

The Constitution established a "general government" so as to be as far removed from the individual person as possible, with the States themselves acting as a "buffer zone." But the "general" government has been using Contract Law as a means to bypass the States.



posted on Jul, 26 2010 @ 10:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by MidnightDStroyer
It's that very same registration that enforces those oppresive Statutes...why should you need a passport if the SCOTUS has ruled that we have an inalienable right to "travel freely on public roads & to transport personal belongings" in the first place? Why must we have the government's permission to leave our own country?


In the US you don’t need a passport to travel between the States. You need a passport to travel abroad regardless of “your inalienable rights” as you won’t be allowed to enter any other countries so will be prevented from leaving your own. I don’t know how you think it works in the States but I don’t have to ask anyone’s permission to leave my country (the UK) and my American sister in law has to seek permission from the UK authorities to stay in the UK rather than from the US authorities to leave.

If a Birth Certificate is a pre-requisite document to for a passport then I fail to understand what the problem is.


Originally posted by MidnightDStroyer
Why does your child have to have government-sponsered health care?...Unless the parents themselves won't do it? It all boils down to Personal Responsibility for yourself & your family: If you don't take care of them, the government will...And they'll make you jump through hoops of red tape to get it!


Of course that is up to whatever healthcare you choose to have. At the end of the day if you or your child has a health problem then you should seek a resolution, but you may have to demonstrate who you are, unless you are one of these sad twats who would prefer that their child suffers on principle. Of course in the UK we have universal government sponsored healthcare and I don’t need to prove my eligibility.


Originally posted by MidnightDStroyer
The whole idea behind the Constitution & Common Law is that people are free to make their own decision, without government interference. But the government doesn't like the idea of self-control & self-determination among people, so they strive to take control over everything. Government strives to create a sense of irresponsibility in society itself so that it can take control.


Not sure on the US Constitution, but I think you have got the wrong end of the stick with regards to the concept and application of Common Law. Common Law is where law evolves through precedent. You then go on to about Statutory law and “contracts with the government”. Not sure what you mean. Statutory law is just written law and surely is the cornerstone for legal order. You then mention Contract law which at its simplest defines a legally binding agreement between parties, but then you are referring to the US so it could be different.

I think your views are confused


Regards



posted on Jul, 27 2010 @ 11:02 AM
link   
ALL of this is true. A "Birth Cerificate" is not traded on the Stock Exchange. A "Birth Cerificate" becomes the backing for Treasury bonds, which are then used by the govt to borrow from the Fed, with your and everyone else's labor as an asset that backs the bonds. But ask yourself: did you agree to back up debts assumed by the faceless corporation known as the United States? I sure didn't.

Let me tell you a little story that illustrates this well. It applies to the driver's license rather than the birth certificate but it is all part of the same scam, known as the UCC. We are all operating under Admiralty or Maritime law without realizing it, this is what the gold fringe on the flag in every courtroom means.

I am down here in Mexico. When I first got here I was fearful of the police or the Federales. "Everyone knows" that the police in Mexico are so corrupt, and they will throw you in jail for life for having a seed of pot, and there is nothing you can do about it because you are in a foreign country. This couldn't be further from the truth.

Since I am a foreigner here, and have not entered into any contracts with them or the Mexican govt other than to be a tourist and be allowed to spend money here (they like that), the worst thing they could do to me would be to deport me, and not let me spend any more of my money here, unless I committed an ACTUAL crime such as murder, rape, robbery, arson, kidnapping etc. These fall under the Common Law, whereby an infringement of someone ELSE"S rights is a crime and that's about it. Everything else is under UCC, almost every country in the world has agreed to play by these rules, where it is all about contracts. Using their own rules against them is the way you can win.

Anyway, as I have been learning more and more about this whole grand swindle, the strawman, etc. I realized more an more what is going on. Also things I can remember in the past take on more importance. And on Easter weekend I had an opportunity to test it out, upon Mexican cops, as a foreigner.

I live in a very popular tourist area. On Easter weekend we were inundated with tourists, the streets were choked with traffic, the beaches so crowded you can barely find a patch of sand to sit on, but of course everyone loves it because they are making money on it.

The majority are usually American and Canadian, but at certain times of year even they are eclipsed in numbers by the "chilangos" or people from Mexico, D.F.(Distrito Federale), known to you as Mexico City. They are looked upon by all other Mexicans similar to how New Yorkers are viewed by most of the rest of the US: fast talking, nervous, demanding service and throwing lots of money around. Even the locals who are making money off them start getting annoyed by them.

On Saturday night before Easter Sunday, I made the mistake of traveling down one of the main roads here at around 830 PM. I should have known better. The cops had set up a sort of checkpoint at a main intersection. There was no actual roadblock, but there were cops standing at all four corners of the intersection, and at least one police car at each corner.

I had the window open, and was not wearing a seatbelt. They passed a seatbelt rule last year, mainly as a way to extort money from tourists, since they certainly don't care about safety. Forty guys standing up in the back of a truck rolling down the highway? No problem. Riding a scooter with the entire family, including a five year old standing up on the footrest in front of Dad, Mom riding sidesaddle on the back with a baby in her lap? No problem. Me not wearing a seatbelt? Apparently I am endangering everyone.

I don't have a Mexican license, though I could get one with no problem, and my American license expired years ago. (I've been here a LONG time)
My car and property and everything else here are in my Mexican girlfriend's name, who has a govt job and therefore some juice. I try to live by Rockefeller's plan: own nothing, control everything.

So I pull up to the red light, and then notice all the cops standing around when the one near me looks in the window and says, "You are not wearing a seatbelt."

I put the seatbelt on and said, "Yes I am." (This was all in Spanish)

"Pull over here," he said in a commanding tone, pointing off to the right.

"No, I'm going this way," I said, pointing straight ahead.

"Pull over here!" he said, in an even more authoritative tone.

"Oh, s%$#, here we go," I thought to myself. I made the right turn, parked the car, and then got out of the car, closing all windows and locking the doors.

"Let me see your license and registration."

" I don't have a license, I am a foreigner, you have no authority over me," I replied.

"And registration?" he came back, ignoring that one. First point for me. The car has a local license plate and all the decals up to date.

"This is not my car, it is a friend of mine's, who is the boss of the ***. (A big govt office here that has a very good relationship with the cops.) "Don't touch the car."

He then gave up on this angle, and said, "Come over here, the doctor wants to talk to you." Score another point for me. No license, no registration, no problem.

I said, "Doctor? What, do you want to give me an injection or something? I have my own doctor, no other doctors touch me!"

"No, no, no injections," said the "doctor". "We just want you to blow in this tube here."

I told him I was not blowing in any tube, I'm a foreigner, you can't make me do anything. We stood around for a while, I wasn't running away, I was being very polite about it all, and they weren't slapping cuffs on me or anything. I watched at least ten or twelve young chilangos approach, blow in the Breathalyzer, fail, sign some papers, and their car is towed away by a waiting tow truck. They were obviously trying to target the chilangos, I didn't see one gringo other than me getting pulled over.

I asked, "So what happens if I won't blow in your little tube here?"

"Oh, then we will arrest you," said the doctor, pointing at the police car. The cop opened the back door, and waved his hand towards the seat like Vanna White presenting a prize.

"And what if I blow in your tube and it says something other than zero?" I hadn't been drinking, but who knows how accurate the thing is anyway?

"Then we will tow your car away, but you can just walk home."



posted on Jul, 27 2010 @ 11:26 AM
link   
(continued)
It was the very definition of a Mexican standoff.

I thought for a moment, and then said, "OK, go ahead, arrest me," holding my wrists out to the cop. He jingled the handcuffs on his belt, but still did not do anything. If they had arrested me and took me to the police station, their superiors would be sure to ask what I was arrested for, and they had no "charges" against me yet. They were still trying, though.

We went around and around on this for over three hours. They asked me my name, I told them it was Cristobal, nothing else. I have no license, I don't carry my passport around with me, this is not my car, on and on. After a while, I twisted my foreigner argument around, after seeing the way they were targeting chilangos. I told them, "Come on, guys, I'm a local here, not a chilango, I live here, you don't want to do this to me..."

"Well, which are you, a foreigner or a local?"

"Yes. I am BOTH"

Once the clock had passed midnight, this caused something to change, I'm not sure what. Even if I had been drinking, unless I was staggering drunk it would not register after three and a half hours. I kept holding the *** govt agency over their heads, as the boss's car here. At around 12:01 they finally gave up and let me go with no paperwork, NOTHING.

Now, I can get away with this stuff because I am an ALIEN here. I have not entered into any contracts with them, at least as far as "driving" goes. I have entered into other contracts to enable me to work, as in, agreeing to pay them their "taxes" and play by their insane rules, etc. However, the cops don't know this, as long as I don't show them the FM3 work visa, they assume I am just a tourist, and therefore they really have no hold on me, nor do they want to "alienate" me and make me not want to spend my money here anymore.

I could show them a US driver's license, there are fifty different ones. The cop cannot run it through his computer to see if it's real, they are not linked up, nor do they even know what, say, an Idaho license looks like. I could print up any old thing, laminate it, and they would accept it, they have no choice. All they know is I am only under "tourist" rules, and Rule Number One around here is DON'T F**K WITH THE TOURISTS, THEY ARE OUR LIFEBLOOD.

Now, how does this apply to you up there in Gestapo land? Well, once I was with a friend of mine who was from Switzerland. He was a member of the Swiss National Ski Team. We were driving around in a rental car. Being from Europe, he was unused to speed limits, and being a pro ski racer, he had a real "need for speed" at all times. So we are hauling a$$ in a residential area. I told him he should slow down or he would get a ticket. He said, "Ticket? What is this ticket?" He found out a minute later as a cop pulled us over.

The cop walked up, all mirror glasses and cop attitude, and demands license and registration. He handed him a Swiss driver's license, and a flurry of cursing and haranguing in French. The cop just looked at it for a minute, shaking his head, and then let us go just saying slow it down, boys.

How does any of this apply to you? Well, if you don't HAVE a "driver's license", or any of their other paper chains that bind you, they have no hold over you, and cannot enforce anything on you other than Common Law. If the Swiss guy had run someone over, then there is a complainant, and therefore a crime. Whenever it is the "State" against you, there is NO COMPLAINANT, and therefore as long as you play your cards right and don't fall into any of the million word traps they lay out there for you, there is NO CASE.

I guess I'm going way off topic here, but it is all part of the same swindle.

[edit on 27-7-2010 by CaptChaos]



posted on Aug, 18 2010 @ 03:17 AM
link   
reply to post by CaptChaos
 

Yep, you've actually made some sense from the chaos, Capt.

Besides the Birth Certificate, the US government has set up a nearly unlimited number of "legal traps" that drag you under the UCC. This link to another thread discusses quite a number of these traps & delves into many of the consequences of falling into them.

There are, however, perfectly legal methods contained within the UCC itself that allows people to extract themselves from these traps. For every contract entered, there's at least one way out of it: Every contract must contain certain attrributes to be legally entered...All attributes must be fullfilled! Also, any violations committed by any party to any terms & conditions can also cancel the contract, but that usually involves someone paying penalties.

These contracts with the government (including the registration process of the Birth Certificate) already contain flaws that outright nullifies that contract, with no penalties being paid by the individual tricked into it. The Birth Certificate Registration, for example...Did your parents receive the requirement of "full disclosure of all terms & conditions" when you were born? Probably what actually happened was that somebody on the hospital staff (NOT qualified in legal practice) just stuffed a bunch of paperwork in your parents' faces & said, "You have to fill these out." Also, not being qualified as a legal representative to offer a federal contract, it was "grossly misrepresented." And even more, were your parents advised that they should consult a legal attorney before filling out that paperwork?

Filling out an application for Social Security is pretty much the same way...


Any one problem like this is enough to get the registration process nulled right back to the moment of conception (as if the paperwork had never been filled out at all). You can find even more particulars about voiding contracts in the Remedy & Recourse sections of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC). If it happens that it's your Birth registration being nullified, you have effectively "expatriated" yourself...There's a lot of websites dedicated to helping expatriates adjust to a new, free lifestyle, but be careful that many are scams that will only suck your money. Better to learn more about expatriation before joining any group, because with knowledge on your side, it's easier to pick out the scams from the "real McCoy."

Another option is to take full control of that "strawman identity" that's created in a semblence of your name (Remember that they always spell your name in all capital letters, but your given name is spelled in a combination of upper & lower case letters). It takes some use of a UCC1 form & an affadavit (properly notarized & filed) stating your Intent & the citations of law that back up your stated intent. Once the Due Process of Law is completed, your Strawman is legally seperated from you as a human being. You then act as the Power of Attorney Representative whenever the "strawman" is charged with any non-criminal charges..In effect, they can still screw the strawman (if your defense of it loses), but they can't touch you.

This is pretty much it in a nutshell, but the other thread I've linked can help a lot more than I could here...But be warned that it's a long thread & will take time to absorb it. I would also recommend that, should anyone decide to carry through with learning & doing anything like this, they seek professional legal council. For quite a few years, there have been literally hundreds of people each year successfully doing this...And the more people that do this, the more free our nation becomes.



posted on Feb, 10 2015 @ 12:26 PM
link   
a reply to: MidnightDStroyer

i am replying to this as im not sure exactly how to make a post yet on this site. I am faced with the decision of whether or not i should get my kids socials and a birth certificate. Im finding it rather hard to get a passport with out them. ever since the new laws and recent acts passed. i feel it may not be worth the hassle.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join