The Women Warriors

[MessiahMews]

Only when people quit participating, and only then will the system fall.


Family Ties -- Marriage License, Birth Certificates & #SSNs

From pages 10-12 of this PDF document.

http://www.teamlaw.org/Warn1.pdf

Family Ties

My sister-in-law lives in a very conservative Utah community wherein most of the people place a stringent guard over the sacred union between husbands, wives, and children.

Yet several years ago, in that community, my sister-in-law’s natural born son came home from school shortly after he left in the morning.

On his way to school he’d been beaten up by a bully and ran home. His mother called the school to inform them that her son would not be to school that day, relating the reason why. The receptionist said she’s have the principal call in about a half hour because he was in a meeting that would last that logn.

About 20 min. later, there was a knock at the door. It was the principal. He demanded she bring her son to the door threatening that he would call the police, have her arrested and declared an unfit mother if she didn’t. Out of fear she got her son.

The principal said, ‘During school hours you are not his mother or guardian, the state is his parent.’ The principal then took her son back to school with him.

That day, my sister-in-law went to the school board and filed the papers to allow her son to be home schooled.

The next day she kept her son home and about an hour after school started there was a knock at the door. It was the principal again demanding entry. This time he had a social worker with him and he was intent on having her whole family removed from her as an unfit mother.

She refused their entry and showed the social worker the school board documents which proved that the state determined she was competent sufficient to home school her son.

Disappointed by the fact the intruders left.

Two years later, in Texas, my sister’s daughter was just starting First grade. Her father often drove her to school and because he thought her classes started ten minutes later than they did she was often tardy.

In that county a certain amount of tardies equals an absence, and, if a person goes beyond a certain number of absences the parent are subpoenaed with the child into the local court where they are fined a minimum of $100.oo as if a crime had been committed. The court has been recognized as having ‘state aurthorty’ to remove the children from the family.

What’s going on?
How could the state have gained such power over the people?
Over our children?
Or, are they our children?
Who are we?
Where are we?
The answers to these questions are found in history, logic, and Law.
They will surprise you.

Marriage

In America, people with children are usually married --- with a corporate state granted marriage license.

Now, everybody knows that a license is “permission to do something that would otherwise be illegal’; and,

Where Common Law marriages are lawfully recognized in every state, it is not otherwise illegal married without a license.

Remember how you first learned about common law marriages. I was walking to school with a friend. A new family had just moved into the neighborhood and my friend told me that they had a common law marriage.

I asked, “What is that?”

My friend told me it meant they had lived together in sin for over seven years, so now their marriage was legal.

Most of us learned about marriage from parents, churches, or from school. But, did we learn the whole truth?

The truth is that the seven year rule is common law. It’s even Biblical. It’s a property law called the “Law of Jubilee”, which says that every seven years (grand jubilee = 50 years) all debts are forgiven, and whatever has been called something for seven years, or more, is what it was called.

Though a responsibility in marriage is proven by jubilee, that is not the limits of common law marriage.

Common law marriage is defined by “agreement” and “consent”.

Jubilee proves the existence of both agreement and consent, because if you haven’t contested the union within seven years jubilee says you waived your right to contest it and therefore you gave your consent by tacit admission.

In a common law marriage the “agreement” is between the spouses to be, they must agree to be married.

“Consent: comes from the father of the bride. He must agree to give his daughter to the bridegroom.

Under common law, if a couple has both agreement and consent they are married. That’s all there is to it.

The moment agreement and consent are in place the bride and groom are married, and that marriage can then be lawfully consummated.

Marriage often result in the creation of children. Children are created in the image of God. Therefore such a union is sacred and often tied to a great deal of ceremony, religion, pomp, and circumstance.

Now, back to the “License”.

Marriage License

Whereas, “license” means permission to do that which would otherwise be illegal’; and,

Whereas, it is not otherwise illegal to be married under the law; and,

Whereas, the only other reason it would be unlawful for two consenting adults to be married is if they ware otherwise incompetent;

Therefore, if a couple goes to “the state” and asks for the state a license, where there is no other reason for them to need a license other than incompetence, in law, those requesting a license must be incompetent because that is the only reason they could possibly need a license.

Now, one must ask, “When a bride and groom are incompetent to be married without a state license and that state grants that license, Who is responsible for the marriage?”

Answer: The grantor, the state.

Who is responsible for anything created in such a license marriage?

Answer: The grantor, the state.

And, what, typically, is the only thing “created” in such a marriage?

Answer: Children.

So I ask you, “Who do the children created in a state license marriage belong to?”

Answer: They belong to the state.

Believe it, or not. Just check out the evidence:
Evidence #1 --- The state social services stand their authority on a doctrine called “Parens Patria” which is Latin for “parent by the country”. In modern usage parens patria is understood to mean “the state is the parent” [if you’d like to see an in depth WARN report on this doctrine let us know].
Evidence #2 --- When U.S. doctors deliver chidren from the womb they are required to create a document known as a: Record of Live Birth.
Is it given to you? No.
You’re given a: Birth Certificate.
So what happens to the Record of Live Birth?
It’s sent to the, “BUREAU OF VITAL STATISTICS”.
And what is that?
It is a subdepartment of the “DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE”.
And, what is the, “DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE”.
It is where the U.S. keeps track of its possessions.
This evidence indicated that the state is declaring the children as their possession at birth.
Evidence #3 --- New statutes require hospitals to assign Social Security Numbers to each child before birth, or without the natural parents signature or permission. (read “Independence Day” in this issue)
Evidence #4 --- Why are each of the childbirth performing hospitals in the U.S. registered as “Ports of Entry” into the U.S. when virtually none of them have incoming foreigners?
Evidence #5 --- Birth records and Census reports are used as collateral for U.S. loans and as proof of the subservient nature of the people under control of the U.S. government.
It’s Scary.
It’s proof of the war.
It’s fulfillment of Biblical prophesy.
And, if we don’t do something to change things we’ll have no promise from the King of Kings (other than judgment).

First we learn what happened.

In times past, there were no licenses of marriage except in cases where it was unlawful to otherwise marry.

For example, Biblical Law forbids the intermarriage of races, so, the statutes of this nation (which were based on Biblical law) prohibited marriage between persons of different races. If a white person wanted to marry a black or an Indian they were, by statute, required to get a license.

Marriage records were kept in family Bibles, then in the County Clerk and Recorder’s offices. Statutes were created to allow anyone desiring a license to obtain one. Churches were used to assist in getting people to use marriage licenses as a manner or recording marriages. Over time people began to believe the licenses were required by law, even though they were otherwise incompetent.

Now, remember, the promise given to Israel, was that if we maintain our stewardship, we’ll inherit the earth.

Our stewardship starts with our families. Isn’t it ironic that the document typically used to being a marriage is the same document used by the corporate state to remove our children from us? And nobody ever even warned us, because government employees were just doing their jobs.

Whenever we discover we’ve erred, we can repent. The error was asking the state of a marriage license.

Repenting includes fixing the damage.

Some people would tell you that to remove the marriage license you have to revoke or rescind your signature from the request for the license.

However, as a matter of law, revoking or rescinding a signature admits that you signed it in the first place.

What if you never signed the request for license? Then there would be no license in existence.

In contract law there is no signature if full disclosure is not given with presentation of the agreement.

In the case of the marriage license, if you used one, you were likely not informed that:
1. The grantor of the license is a privately owned corporation;
2. licensing with them wasn’t necessary for you to be married;
3. If you request a license from them you were declaring yourself incompetent; and,
4. You were signing over possession of your future children to them as collateral.

Therefore, if 1, 2, 3 and/or 4 above are true in your case then the contracting license is void, without signature from the beginning.

So what about your marriage?

Legal & Lawful Marriage

Well think about it. If the two of you want to get a “required” license, you must have had agreement. And, if you had her fathers blessing you had his consent and therefore under common law (and/or Biblical Law) you were married without the license before the license was issued.

The churches rightfully want people to have “legal and lawful” marriages.

A common law marriage is a “lawful” marriage, meaning it fulfills law. The accent in the lawful marriage is the fact the parties of the marriage have an agreement, they have the father’s consent, and they are bound by their acceptance of, and consummation of, the marriage.

A “legal” marriage indicated a written contract or marriage. The accent in the legal marriage is the document that binds the marriage.

All you have to do to make a lawful common law marriage a “legal and lawful” marriage is make a legal record of the union made under common law.

In other words, if you legally record your contract of marriage with the County Clerk and Recorder. Such a record is a legal record and the common law marriage is both a lawful fact and a matter of legal record, i.e. “legal and lawful”.

If your original marriage agreement was verbal, you can later legally reduce it to writing and make it binding from the first moment of your agreement and consent by making your contract “nunc pro tune”, which means, “now as if then.”.

Knowing these things prior to marriage on some interesting questions especially if you or the father of the bride have religious beliefs (like I do) that cause you to desire to go through an ecclesiastic leader that may be unaware of the truth and therefore believes that you have to have a state issued marriage license.

The solution is simple.

If it was me, I would obey the law.

With agreement and consent, I would:
Create a Notice of Marriage stating that:
I and my spouse to be have an agreement to marry, show that we have consent of the bride’s father, and, give notice of the intended ceremony which when performed will bind, seal, and/or begin the Marriage union. I would have all related parties sign the document.

I would then go to the County Clerk and Recorder’s office and legally record the Notice with the marriage licenses. I would then get a couple of state certified copies of the Notice.

I would take a state certified copy to the ecclesiastic leader as evidence of the legal right to lawfully marry.

In Law your Notice has a greater authority than the state issued marriage license. The authority you will be using is the authority of common law in original jurisdiction, as was endowed upon man by birth. It is the same authority and power that makes you sovereign. It follows law.

The Notice is in accord with the laws of the individual states and is binding.

Taking your Family back

This problem started many years ago. It wont’ be removed overnight. The state took charge of our stewardships because we allowed them to.

People are a great source of wealth. If the state can convince you that you are under their control, as their asset or subject, then you won’t control them.

We are living with allege contractual bonds to parens patria, and we have been doing so in condemnation for at least three generations. It’s time we recognized the truth. It’s time to take responsibility for our families, our stewardships, and our lives.

Removing the marriage license won’t remove the entire problem in and of itself. It will, however, remove the foundation upon which the state builds its entire “parents patria” doctrine.

With the state’s foundation removed you’ve taken the first step to prepare for any battle that may come up where the state attempts to use social workers, or other forces, to interfere with your family.

You’ll be beginning to act like the sovereign that you are.

If your marriage is not made under their authority, they have no lawful right to interfere with your family unless you invite them to.

Step two: Stop inviting them to solve your family problems. Be self reliant.

It doesn’t’ mean that they won’t ever interfere. It does mean that if they do you’ve disarmed their #1 weapon.

You’ll need to learn more and to prepare to turn back any attack they bring against you, but foundationally you’ll be ready.

Even after we resolve our marriages, the problem is that the system that set up the parens patria system of control still exists and government officials still want us to believe we are their incompetent servants. We need to solve that problem by eliminating the incompetence. Thus:

Step three: You’re sovereign and therefore you’re responsible, so start acting like it. Learn the Law --- Obey and apply it, and when others trespass against you or yours, mercifully and justly hold them accountable to their trespasses. Accountability is the key.

If you’ll do it you’ll be well on the path to true freedom and liberty, and we’ll get our nation back.

Team Law can help.

That’s why we’re here, to help people wake up and learn the law.

Re-tie Family Ties

Typically for about the same reasons we had the marriage license problem we have the problem or raising our children in that same system that taught us that we needed to have the marriage license. That system that wanted us to be incompetent workers providing all of the “government’s needs”, believing that the “government” was supposed to provide our needs. When in reality we are responsible for providing all of our own needs and government’s responsibility is to insure that our rights and property aren’t trespassed.

The question is, “What are we allowing that system to teach our children?”

You don’t have to take your children out of the public school system. Though many have, successfully.

Within the public school system you do have to take an active part.

At the very least pay attention to what your children are learning.

I’m not talking about the school’s alleged subject matter. I’m talking about the public school’s end results: drugs, immorality, and crime.

You decide what’s best of your children. After all, ultimately, when it comes time for you to stand accountable for your stewardship, you won’t be able to blame the school for the outcome.

After all, you are the sovereign.
_________________

[MessiahMews]

From page 20 of the book...

HOW I CLOBBERED EVERY BUREAUCRATIC CASH-CONFISCATORY AGENCY KNOWN TO MAN

Registration vs. Recording

“Registration” comes from Latin “rex, regis” etc. meaning regal. So think about what occurs to whatever you ‘register’ - you hand legal title over to the Crown. When you register anything with the public, it releases legal title to the government corporation and leaves you with only equitable title - the right to use, not own, and for that use you will pay a ‘use’ tax which is every tax, be it income, sin, sales, property, etc. as opposed to lawful taxes, excise and impost. So that it doesn’t appear that the government now owns the property which you have registered they put it in a name which so much resembles your own that you won’t suspect it, however, the NAME is owned by the government. If you choose rather to record your legal title to your property with the public, you maintain your status as Title Owner. This is one of the most important things you can ever learn for the sake of your commercial affairs.

The best example of the effects of registration is the birth certificate. A bankrupt entity - city, state/province, country - cannot operate in commerce. So how do they manage? Since USA/CA have been bankrupt for decades, having no substance such as gold and silver to back it, the only asset it has are men and women and our labour. We are the collateral for the interest on the loan of the World Bank. Each of us is registered, via the application for a birth certificate. The Treasury issues a bond on the birth certificate and the bond is sold at a securities exchange and bought by the FRB/BoC, which then uses it as collateral to issue bank notes. The bond is held in trust for the Feds at the Depository Trust Corporation. We are the surety on said bonds. Our labour/energy is then payable at some future date. Hence we become the ‘transmitting utility’ for the transmission of energy. The USG/CAG, in order to provide necessary goods and services, created a commercial bond (promissory note), by pledging the property, labour, life and body of its citizens, as payment for the debt (bankruptcy). This commercial bond made chattel (property) out of us all. We became nothing more than ‘human resources’ and collateral for the debt. This was without our knowledge and/or our consent, via the filing (registration) of our birth certificates.

When mums apply for a birth certificate, the application is registered. The legal title of her baby is then transferred from mum to the State. Mum is left with equitable title of her baby whom she can use for a fee - a ‘use tax’ - and since the property does not belong to her, she has to treat it in the manner which the owner wants.

Colonel Edward Mandell House is attributed with giving a very detailed outline of the plans to be implemented to enslave the American people. He stated, in a private meeting with Woodrow Wilson (President 1913 - 1921), "Very soon, every American will be required to register their biological property (that's you and your children) in a national system designed to keep track of the people and that will operate under the ancient system of pledging. By such methodology, we can compel people to submit to our agenda, which will affect our security as a charge back for our fiat paper currency.
Every American will be forced to register or suffer being able to work and earn a living. They will be our chattels (property) and we will hold the security interest over them forever, by operation of the law merchant under the scheme of secured transactions. Americans, by unknowingly or unwittingly delivering the bills of lading (Birth Certificate) to us will be rendered bankrupt and insolvent, secured by their pledges.

They will be stripped of their rights and given a commercial value designed to make us a profit and they will be none the wiser, for not one man in a million could ever figure our plans and, if by accident one or two should figure it out, we have in our arsenal plausible deniability. After all, this is the only logical way to fund government, by floating liens and debts to the registrants in the form of benefits and privileges.

This will inevitably reap us huge profits beyond our wildest expectations and leave every American a contributor to this fraud, which we will call “Social Insurance.” Without realizing it, every American will unknowingly be our servant, however begrudgingly. The people will become helpless and without any hope for their redemption and we will employ the high office (presidency) of our dummy corporation (USA) to foment this plot against America.” - Colonel Edward Mandell House

This is why I coach those who intend to ‘marry’ not to sign anything. Centuries ago, a man put a ring on a woman’s finger and declared, “With this ring, I thee wed”. Family members were the witnesses and that was it. There was no state-issued licence to sign ... frightful! Children can be taken from their parents because of the marriage licence. Do not invite into your private contract a third party which happens to be public, cares not about the interests of the other two parties, and has every legal right to force them to acquiesce to its demands. Your marriage ceases to be your own; the third party will tell you if and when you can end the marriage; the third party will dictate that your children will:

1. require a birth certificate and SSN/SIN
2. require a gov’t-directed (AMA/CMA) doctor to attend to his health,
3. be vaccinated by mandate,
4. attend the Public Fool System,
5. be prescribed and drugged by Ritalin,
6. sign up with the armed forces, etc.
Your child will be a ‘ward of the state’ and the state will have prior say in what IT thinks is best for your child - you will not have jurisdiction over him.

The birth certificate created a FICTION (the name of the baby in upper case letters). The state/ province sells the birth certificate to the Commerce Department of the corporations of USA/CA, which in turn places a bond on the birth certificate thereby making it a negotiable instrument, and placing the fiction, called a STRAWMAN, into the warehouse of the corporations of USA/CA. Representation for the created fiction was given to the BAR (British Accredited Registry/Regency), owned and operated by the Crown, for the purpose of contracting the fiction (which most of us think is ourselves) into a third party action. Do not underestimate the power behind this trick. It is to con us into contracting with the feds so that they can ‘legally’ confiscate our property. All these contracts have only our signatures on them because corporate fictions cannot contract (only natural beings have the right to contract - and the right not to contract). Because there is no full disclosure - we are never told that we have just signed away what we believe to be our property - these contracts are fraudulent, and hence, we are still the lawful owner and the profit earned by the feds from selling securities (our property) belongs to us and must go into a fund for our benefit, otherwise it would be fraud. Not wanting to be charged with fraud, the feds had to create a remedy for us ...and hope we wouldn’t discover it.

For decades, through its ‘public’ school system, the government has managed to deceive us about some very important facts. All facets of the media (print, radio, television) have an ever-increasing influence in our lives and are controlled by government and its agencies, via the issuance of licences. We have slowly and systematically been led to believe that any form of our names represents us, which is not so.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I have the entire book in pdf format if anyone wants it. You will have to email me here as I'm not always current on the posts of the forums. I can send it as an email attachment.
_________________

[MessiahMews]

http://www.barefootsworld.net/parensp.html



Declaration of Independence - 1776
Articles of Confederation - 1777
The Constitution for the United States, Its Sources and Its Application

PARENS PATRIAE....
GOVERNMENT AS PARENT



"When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another . . . ."

These are the words that started a Revolution propelling several English colonies into the nation known as "The United States of America."

This new nation was designed to function under the laws of Nature and Nature's God. The people believed they would never again hear the words of enslavement, i.e.; "under the sovereignty of the King." Living under the sovereignty of the King made you the King's chattel. He owned you. You were his property. You could own nothing, not even your children. The King ruled by divine right.

The framers of this new nation designed the Constitution to be a government "Of The People, By The People, For The People." Representatives of this government were to be elected by the people, not born to power. And so, in 1776 the great experiment in freedom, known as "The United States of America" began.

People from each colony fought in the Great War to enable the colony to become a Sovereign Nation State. These States then created a new state, designed to exclusively serve the several Sovereign Nation States. Under this concept the nation of States united was born. Every Sovereign Nation State joining the Union had a Constitution. The newly created State of the union received one as well. It was written by delegates of the people of the several states and when ratified by two-thirds of the people's conventions of the then Thirteen Independent and Sovereign States was ordained and established as "The Constitution for the United States of America." This new Union of States was comprised only of those states which had ratified the Constitution. (North Carolina did not join the union until 11 months after the United States was established, and Rhode Island held out for nearly a year and a half, and continued to operate under the King's Charter until 1842.)

The government of the United States was "delegated" only 20 grants of power [See Constitution Art 1, Sec 8] and ten things were carefully enumerated which the government may not do, [See Constitution Art 1, Sec 9], and 10 further restrictions were added in the first 10 amendments [See "Bill of Rights"] to the Constitution by the several states. The people never intended that government of the United States should over step it's delegated authorities.

Some scholars believe the freedom ended before the ink was dry on the contract written between the people and their new government, "The Constitution." There is some question as to exactly where and when the new nation faltered. Some say it was in 1789, with the Judiciary Act. Others say it was after the Civil War. Still others claim it was in 1913 or 1921 or perhaps in 1933 ....... History tells us the Supreme Court of the United States government claims it was when the Union itself was formed.

In the case New Hampshire v. Louisiana and others.; New York v. Louisiana and others, (1) it states that: "all the rights of the States as independent nations were surrendered to the United States. The States are not nations, either as between themselves or towards foreign nations. They are sovereign within their spheres, but their sovereignty stops short of nationality. Their political status at home and abroad is that of States in the united States. They can neither make war nor peace without the consent of the national government. Neither can they, except with like consent, "enter into any agreement or compact with another State." Art. 1, sec. 10, cl. 3. "The relation of one of the united States to its citizens is not that of an independent sovereign State to its citizens. A sovereign State seeking redress of another sovereign State on behalf of its citizens can resort to war on refusal, which a State cannot do. The state, having been a sovereign, with powers to make war, issue letters of marque and reprisal, and otherwise to act in a belligerent way, resigned these powers into the control of the United States, to be held in trust."

In United States v. Chamberlin, (2) the Supreme Court of the United States Decided, to wit:

"It is a familiar principle that the King is not bound by any act of Parliament unless he be named therein by special and particular words. The most general words that can be devised (for example, any person or persons, bodies politic or corporate) affect not him in the least, if they may tend to restrain or diminish any of his rights and interests. He may even take the benefit of any particular act, though not named. The rule thus settled respecting the British Crown is equally applicable to this government, and it has been applied frequently in the different states, and in practically all the federal courts. It may be considered as settled that so much of the royal prerogatives as belonged to the King in his capacity of Parens Patriae, or universal trustee, enters as much into our political state as it does into the principles of the British Constitution."

Under most religious law, the children belong to the parents. It is a moral obligation on the part of the parents to care for and educate their children in their existing social values and morals.

In 1921, the federal Sheppard-Towner Maternity Act (3) was passed creating birth "registration" or what we now know as the "birth certificate." It was known as the "Maternity Act" and was sold to the American people as a law that would reduce maternal and infant mortality, protect the health of mothers and infants, and for other purposes. One of those other purposes provided for the establishment of a federal bureau designed to cooperate with state agencies in the overseeing of its operations and expenditures. This can now be seen as the first attempt of "government by appointment," or cooperation of state governments to aid the federal government in usurping the legislative process of the several states as exists today through the federal grant in aid to the states programs.

Prior to 1921 the records of births and names of children were entered into family bibles, as were the records of marriages and deaths. These records were readily accepted by both the family and the law as "official" records. Since 1921 the American people have been registering the births and names of their children with the government of the state in which they are born, even though there is no federal law requiring it. The state claims an interest in every child within it's jurisdiction, telling the parents that registering their child's birth through the birth certificate serves as proof that he/she was born within territories of the united States, thereby making him/her a United States citizen.

In 1923, a suit was brought against federal officials charged with the administration of the act. (Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Mellon, Secretary of the Treasury, et al.; Frothingham v. Mellon, Secretary of the Treasury et.al..). (4) The plaintiff, Mrs. Frothingham, averred that the act was unconstitutional, and that it's purpose was to induce the States to yield sovereign rights reserved by them and not granted the federal government, under the Constitution, and that the burden of the appropriations falls unequally upon the several States. The complaint stated the naked contention that Congress has usurped reserved powers of the States by the mere enactment of the statute, though nothing has been, or is to be, done under it without their consent. Mr. Alexander Lincoln, Assistant Attorney General, argued for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. To wit:

"The act is unconstitutional. It purports to vest in agencies of the Federal Government powers which are almost wholly undefined, in matters relating to maternity and infancy, and to authorize appropriations of federal funds for the purposes of the act.

Many examples may be given and were stated in the debates on the bill in Congress of regulations which may be imposed under the act. The forced registration of pregnancy, governmental prenatal examination of expectant mothers, restrictions on the right of a woman to secure the services of a midwife or physician of her own selection, are measures to which the people of those States which accept its provisions may be subjected. There is nothing which prohibits the payment of subsidies out of federal appropriations. Insurance of mothers may be made compulsory. The teaching of birth control and physical inspection of persons about to marry may be required.

The act gives all necessary powers to cooperate with the state agencies in the administration of the act. Hence it is given the power to assist in the enforcement of the plans submitted to it, and for that purpose by its agents to go into the several States and to do those acts for which the plans submitted may provide. As to what those plans shall provide the final arbiters are the Bureau and the Board. The fact that it was considered necessary in explicit terms to preserve from invasion by federal officials the right of the parent to the custody and care of his child and the sanctity of his home shows how far reaching are the powers which were intended to be granted by the act."

It was further stated in the complaint that "The act is invalid because it assumes powers not granted to Congress and usurps the local police power." (5)In more recent cases, however, the Court has shown that there are limits to the power of Congress to pass legislation purporting to be based on one of the powers expressly granted to Congress which in fact usurps the reserved powers of the States, and that laws showing on their face detailed regulation of a matter wholly within the police power of the States will be held to be unconstitutional although they purport to be passed in the exercise of some constitutional power. (6)

It went on to state:

"The act is not made valid by the circumstance that federal powers are to be exercised only with respect to those States which accept the act, for Congress cannot assume, and state legislatures cannot yield, the powers reserved to the States by the Constitution. (7) The act is invalid because it imposes on each State an illegal option either to yield a part of its powers reserved by the Tenth Amendment or to give up its share of appropriations under the act."

"A statute attempting, by imposing conditions upon a general privilege, to exact a waiver of a constitutional right, is null and void." (

"The act is invalid because it sets up a system of government by cooperation between the Federal Government and certain of the States, not provided by the Constitution."

"Congress cannot make laws for the States, and it cannot delegate to the States the power to make laws for the United States." (9)

In 1933, bankruptcy was covertly declared by President Roosevelt. The governors of the then 48 States pledged the "full faith and credit" of their states, including the citizenry, as collateral for loans of credit from the Federal Reserve system. The "Full faith and credit" clause of the U.S. Constitution, Article 4. Sec. 1, requires that foreign judgment be given such faith and credit as it had by law or usage of state of it's origin. That foreign statutes are to have force and effect to which they are entitled in home state. And that a judgment or record shall have the same faith, credit, conclusive effect, and obligatory force in other states as it has by law or usage in the state from whence taken. Black's Law Dictionary, 4th Ed. cites omitted.

Today the federal government "mandates, orders and compels" the states to enforce federal jurisdiction upon it's citizens/subjects. This author believes the federal government draws it's de facto jurisdiction for these actions from the "Doctrine of Parens Patriae." Parens Patriae means literally, "parent of the country." It refers traditionally to the role of STATE as sovereign and guardian of persons under legal disability. Parens Patriae originates from the English common law where the King had a royal prerogative to act as guardian to persons with legal disabilities such as infants.

With the birth registration established, the federal government, under the doctrine of Parens Patriae, had the mechanism to take over all the assets of the American people and put them into debt into perpetuity. Under this doctrine, if one is born with a disability, the state, (the sovereign) has the responsibility to take care of you. This author believes that the disability you are born with is, in fact, the birth itself. I believe that when you are born, you are born free, a "citizen of the soil," an American National. Parents, without full disclosure under law, make application for a "birth certificate," thereby making the child a citizen of the corporate government known as the United States. The government then turns the new citizen into a corporation, a legal fiction, under the laws of the state. The birth information is collected by the state and is then turned over to the U.S. Department of Commerce. The corporation is then placed into a "trust", known as a "Cestui Que Trust". A cestui que trust is defined as: "He who has a right to a beneficial interest in and out of an estate the legal title to which is vested in another; The beneficiary of another." Cestui que use is : "He for whose use and benefit lands or tenements are held by another. The cestui que user has the right to receive the profits and benefits of the estate, but the legal title and possession, as well the duty of defending the same, reside in the other."

The government becomes the Trustee, while the child becomes the beneficiary of his own trust. Legal title to everything the child will ever own is now vested in the federal government. The government then places the Trust into the hands of the parents, who are made the "guardians." The child may reside in the hands of the guardians (parents) until such time as the state claims that the parents are no longer capable to serve. The state then goes into the home and removes the "trust" from the guardians. At majority, the parents lose their guardianship.

The subject of every birth certificate is a child. The child is a valuable asset, which if properly trained, can contribute valuable assets provided by its labor for many years. The child itself is the asset of the trust established by the birth certificate. "Title" to your child is now owned by the state. The state now directs the trust corpus and provides "benefits" for the beneficiary -- the corpus and beneficiary being one and the same -- the citizen -- first as child, then as adult.

The debt transfers from the death of one corpus to the birth of another through the process known as "Novation." Novation is defined as "the substitution of a new contract between same or different parties; The substitution of a new debt or obligation for an existing one; The substitution of one debtor for another or of one creditor for another, whereby the old debt is extinguished. This author believes the debt of an individual is extinguished at his death, and the same debt is then transferred to a new individual when he/she is born through the registering of the birth, thereby creating a new corpus that will again reside in the hands of the trust.

Each one of us, including our children, are considered assets of the bankrupt United States which acts as the "Debtor in Possession." We are now designated by this government as "HUMAN RESOURCES," with new such resources being added (born) continually. The bankruptcy is a receivership, rather than a discharged bankruptcy. The bankruptcy debts are serviced, not paid or discharged. The Human Resources service the debt, which continues to grow with time.

The federal government, under Title 15, U.S.C., re-delegates federal Parens Patriae authority to the state attorney generals. The attorney generals' can now enforce all legislation involving your personal life, the lives of your children, and your material assets.

In today's society the government, through the doctrine of Parens Patriae, has already instituted its control of our children through the legislative process. Medical treatments are enforced through the court with threats of loss of your child if the treatment is challenged. Vaccinations are now mandatory. Refusal may result in the loss of your child under the guise of "child neglect" (failure to preserve the trust corpus). If you spank your child or cause him/her any embarrassment or indignities, you are also at risk of having your child taken from you under the guise of child abuse (damaging the trust corpus).

Some states have legislation either pending or passed to give social workers arrest authority. School nurses may now report any suspected child abuse to the proper authorities. Warrantless searches of your home are tolerated by the courts, all in the name of safety for the child.

The Sun Sentinel, a Florida news paper, reported on March 15, 1996 that limits on the ability of divorced parents to relocate when minor children are involved were clarified by the Florida Supreme Court. The high court three years ago approved a policy favoring relocation requests of custodial parents as long as such moves are made in good faith for the well being of parents and children. Also, the justices ruled at that time, moves cannot be made "from a vindictive desire to interfere with the visitation rights of the other parent." The right of locomotion is held as an element of personal liberty. Restraint upon the right of locomotion was a well-known feature of slavery abolished by the Thirteenth Amendment. A first requisite of the right to appropriate the use of another man was to become the master of his natural power of motion. The control by government courts (supra) of an individuals' freedom of locomotion could be construed as a sign of ownership of the individual, or slavery.

It has been reported that in California, early in the year 1996, an assembly woman, in regard to education policy, made the statement "the children belong to the STATE."

Parens Patriae legislation covers every area of your personal life. Federal Parens Patriae legislation can be found in Title 15 of the United States Code:

TITLE 15, Sec. 15h. Applicability of Parens Patriae actions:
STATUTE- Sections 15c, 15d, 15e, 15f, and 15g of this title shall apply in any State, unless such State provides by law for its non-applicability in such State.

The primary responsibility of a State is to protect it's citizens from the tyranny of the federal government. The Federal Constitution claims a citizen can seek redress and protection under the 14th Amendment of the Federal Constitution for any state legislation that brings them an injury by depriving them of a civil right. A state may sue the Federal government for protection for its citizens if federal legislation violates the Constitutions of the several states and brings harm to its citizens. The 14th Amendment did not authorize congress to create a code of municipal law for the regulation of private rights. Positive rights and privileges are undoubtedly secured by the fourteenth amendment, but they are secured by way of prohibition against state laws and state proceedings affecting those rights and privileges. The amendment was intended to provide against state laws, or state action of some kind, adverse to the rights of the citizen secured by the amendment. Such legislation cannot properly cover the whole domain of rights appertaining to life, liberty and property, defining them and providing for their vindication. That would be to establish a code of municipal law regulative of all private rights between man and man in society. It would be to make congress take the place of the state legislatures and to supersede them.

However, the Supreme Court in the above case ruled that: A State may not, as Parens Patriae, institute judicial proceedings to protect her citizens (who are no less citizens of the United States), from the operation of a federal statute upon the ground that, as applied to them, it is unconstitutional.

The Parens Patriae power has been recognized and exercised from time immemorial as being under the rule of a tyrant.

Note: The Maternity Act was eventually repealed, but parts of it have been found in other legislative acts. What this act attempted to do was set up government by appointment, run by bureaucrats with re-delegated authority outside of Constitutional authority, with the ability to tax, which is in itself unconstitutional and represents taxation without representation. This type of government is in place today and is known as "Regionalism." The federal government couldn't fool the people in 1921 into surrendering their sovereignty, ..........


.................... but in 1933 ....................
Footnotes:
1. New Hampshire v. Louisiana and others.; New York v. Louisiana and others, 108 U.S. 76, 27 L. Ed. 656, 2 S. Ct. 176, March 5, 1883.

2. United States v. Chamberlin 219 U.S. 250, 55 L. Ed. 204, 31 S. Ct. 155, January 3, 1911

3. Sheppard-Towner Maternity Act, Public Law 97, 67th Congress, Session I, chapter 135.

4. Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Mellon, Secretary of the Treasury, et al.; Frothingham v. Mellon, Secretary of the Treasury et.al.. 262 U.S. 447, 67 L.Ed. 1078, 43 S. Ct. 597.

5. McCulloch v. Maryland, 4 Wheat. 316, 405; United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542, 549-551.

6. Hammer v. Dagenhart, 247 U.S. 251; Child Labor Tax Case, 259 U.S. 20; Hill v. Wallace, 259 U.S. 44.

7. Message of President Monroe, May 4, 1822; 4 Elliot's Debates, p. 525; Pollard's Lessee v. Hagan, 3 How. 212; Escanaba Co. v. Chicago, 107 U.S. 678; Coyle v. Oklahoma, 221 U.S. 559; Cincinnati v. Louisville & Nashville R.R. Co., 223 U.S. 390.

8. Harrison v. St. Louis & San Francisco R.R. Co., 232 U.S. 318; Terral v. Burke Construction Co., 257 U.S. 529.

9. In re Rahrer, 140 U.S. 545; Knickerbocker Ice Co. v. Stewart, 253 U.S. 149; Opinion of the Justices, 239 Mass. 606.

See Also ""The Unconstitutional Fourteenth Amendment"


_________________

[MessiahMews]

Secular Marriage
by Virgil Cooper
forward by Gregory Allan

The following article came to me by way of my friend Bill Munro. From the looks of it, he found it posted on a USENET list, or perhaps a private mailing list.

It's not the kind of thing I normally publish. It is definitely "on-topic" for The Lawful Path, but I haven't contacted the original author, or verified any of his allegations. However, even if he made the whole thing up, I believe his points are basically sound.

With the recent news about "gay marriages", the topic of civil marriage has come to the attention of the mainstream public. Many of them might change their opinions, if they knew what is revealed here.

These are things which every couple considering marriage should think about -- long and hard.

I hope someday to have time to correspond with the author, and see if he has anything to add. In the meantime, here is some fodder for thought.
_____________________________________

About 15 years ago, my former wife of 26-1/2 years, filed for divorce. We had seven children, five daughters and two sons. Our youngest at the time, our second son, was five years old.

At the time, I prepared a counterclaim to the Petition for Dissolution her attorney filed in Domestic Relations (DR) court. I met one afternoon with the head of the Maricopa County Superior Court, Marriage License Bureau, in downtown Phoenix.

The marriage license bureau was headed by a young woman of about age 25. I asked her to explain to me the general and statutory implications of the marriage license. She was very cooperative, and called in an Assistant, a tall Black man who at the time was working on an Operations Manual for internal departmental use.

She deferred for most technical explanations to her Assistant. He walked through the technicalities of the marriage license as it operates in Arizona.

He mentioned that marriage licensing is pretty much the same in the other states -- but there are differences. One significant difference he mentioned was that Arizona is one of eight western states that are Community Property states. The other states are Common Law states, including Utah, with the exception of Louisiana which is a Napoleonic Code state.

He then explained some of the technicalities of the marriage license. He said, first of all, the marriage license is Secular Contract between the parties and the State.

The State is the principal party in that Secular Contract. The husband and wife are secondary or inferior parties. The Secular Contract is a three-way contract between the State, as Principal, and the husband and wife as the other two legs of the Contract.

He said, in the traditional sense a marriage is a covenant between the husband and wife and God. But in the Secular Contract with the state, reference to God is a "dotted line," and not officially considered included in the Secular Contract at all. He said, if the husband and wife wish to include God as a party in their marriage, that is a "dotted line" they will have to add in their own minds. The state's marriage license is "strictly secular," he said.

He said further, that what he meant by the relationship to God being a "dotted line" meant that the State regards any mention of God as irrelevant, even meaningless.

In his description of the marriage license contract, he related one other "dotted line."

He said in the traditional religious context, marriage was a covenant between the husband and wife and God with husband and wife joined as one. This is not the case in the secular realm of the state's marriage license contract. The State is the Principal or dominant party. The husband and wife are merely contractually "joined" as business partners, not in any religious union. They may even be considered, he said, connected to each other by another "dotted line."

The picture he was trying to paint was that of a triangle with the State at the top and a solid line extending from the apex, the State, down the left side to the husband, and a separate solid line extending down the right side to the wife, a dotted line merely showing that they consider themselves to have entered into a religious union of some sort that is irrelevant to the State.

He further mentioned that this religious overtone is recognized by the State by requiring that the marriage must be solemnized either by a state official or by a minister of religion that has been deputized by the State to perform the marriage ceremony and make a return of the signed and executed marriage license to the State.

Again, he emphasized that marriage is a strictly secular relationship so far as the State is concerned and because it is looked upon as a "privileged business enterprise," various tax advantages and other political privileges have become attached to the marriage license contract that have nothing at all to do with marriage as a religious covenant or bond between God and a man and a woman.

By way of reference, if you would like to read a legal treatise on marriage, one of the best is Principles of Community Property, by William Defuniak. At the outset, he explains that Community Property law descends from Roman Civil Law through the Spanish Codes, A.D. 600, written by the Spanish jurisconsults.

In the civil law, the marriage is considered to be a for-profit venture or profit-making venture (even though it may never actually produce a profit in operation) and as the wife goes out to the local market to purchase food stuffs and other supplies for the marriage household, she is replenishing the stocks of the business.

To restate:

In the civil law, the marriage is considered to be a business venture, that is, a for-profit business venture. Moreover, as children come into the marriage household, the business venture is considered to have "borne fruit."
Now, back to the explanation by the Maricopa County Superior Court, Marriage Bureau's administrative Assistant.

He went on to explain that every contract must have consideration. The State offers consideration in the form of the actual license itself -- the piece of paper, the Certificate of Marriage. The other part of consideration by the State is "the privilege to be regulated by statute."

He added that this privilege to be regulated by statute includes all related statutes, and all court cases as they are ruled on by the courts, and all statutes and regulations into the future in the years following the commencement of the marriage.

He said in a way the marriage license contract is a dynamic or flexible, ever-changing contract as time goes along -- even though the husband and wife didn't realize that. My thought on this is can it really be considered a true contract as one becomes aware of the failure by the State to make full disclosure of the terms and conditions?

A contract must be entered into knowingly, intelligently, intentionally, and with fully informed consent. Otherwise, technically there is no contract. Another way to look as the marriage license contract with the State is as a contract of adhesion, a contract between two disparate, unequal parties. Again, a flawed contract.

Such a contract with the State is said to be a "specific performance" contract as to the privileges, duties and responsibilities that attach.

Consideration on the part of the husband and wife is the actual fee paid and the implied agreement to be subject to the state's statutes, rules, and regulations and all court cases ruled on related to marriage law, family law, children, and property.

He emphasized that this contractual consideration by the bride and groom places them in a definite and defined- by-law position inferior and subject to the State. He commented that very few people realize this.

He also said that it is very important to understand that children born to the marriage are considered by law as "the contract bearing fruit" -- meaning the children primarily belong to the State, even though the law never comes out and says so in so many words.

In this regard, children born to the contract regarded as "the contract bearing fruit," he said it is vitally important for parents to understand two doctrines that became established in the United States during the 1930s. The first is the Doctrine of Parens Patriae. The second is the Doctrine of In Loco Parentis. Parens Patriae means literally "the parent of the country" or to state it more bluntly -- the State is the undisclosed true parent.

Along this line, a 1930s Arizona Supreme Court case states that parents have no property right in their children, and have custody of their children during good behavior at the sufferance of the State. This means that parents may raise their children and maintain custody of their children as long as they don't offend the State, but if they in some manner displease the State, the State can step in at any time and exercise its superior status and take custody and control of its children -- the parents are only conditional caretakers.

He also added a few more technical details. The marriage license is an ongoing contractual relationship with the State. Technically, the marriage license is a business license allowing the husband and wife, in the name of the marriage, to enter into contracts with third parties and contract mortgages and debts.

They can get car loans, home mortgages, and installment debts in the name of the marriage because it is not only a secular enterprise, but it is looked upon by the State as a privileged business enterprise as well as a for-profit business enterprise. The marriage contract acquires property througout its existence and over time, it is hoped, increases in value.

Also, the marriage contract bears fruit by adding children. If sometime later, the marriage fails, and a divorce results, the contract continues in existence. The divorce is merely a contractual dissolution or amendment of the terms and conditions of the contract.

Jurisdiction of the State over the marriage, over the husband and wife, now separated, continues and continues over all aspects of the marriage, over marital property and over children brought into the marriage. That is why family law and the Domestic Relations court calls "divorce" a dissolution of the marriage because the contract continues in operation but in amended or modified form.

He also pointed out that the marriage license contract is one of the strongest, most binding contractual relationships the States has on people.

At the end of our hour-long meeting, I somewhat humorously asked if other people had come in and asked the questions I was asking? The Assistant replied that in the several years he had worked there, he was not aware of anyone else asking these questions.

He added that he was very glad to see someone interested in the legal implications of the marriage license and the contractual relationship it creates with the State.

His boss, the young woman Marriage Bureau department head stated, "You have to understand that people who come in here to get a marriage license are in heat. The last thing they want to know is technical, legal and statutory implications of the marriage license." (Laughter)

I hope this is helpful information to anyone interested in getting more familiar with the contractual implications of the marriage license.

The marriage license as we know it didn't come into existence until after the Civil War and didn't become standard practice in all the states until after 1900, becoming firmly established by 1920. In effect, the states or governments appropriated or usurped control of marriages in secular form and in the process declared Common Law applicable to marriages "abrogated."

Please pass this information along and share it as widely as possible.

Best regards from Virgil Cooper

http://www.lawfulpath.com/ref/secularmarriage.shtml

Hope this is useful information.

mgd406
_________________
Markus
_________________

[MessiahMews]

Slave to the State
The time to choose is now

You are a slave. Your children are slaves. And you probably don't even know it. Slavery in twenty-first century America is nearly universal. Nearly every person who believes he is a citizen of the United States of America is, in fact, a slave.

In nineteenth and eighteenth century America the law required slave owners to provide basic necessities, such as food, shelter, clothing, medicine, and retirement care--in general they were to look out for the welfare of their slaves.1 Slaves, in their turn, were required to give the lion's portion of their labor (not 100% as is commonly believed) to their masters. If a slave refused to work for his master he was beaten, humiliated, sold, or sometimes even executed. This is typical of most owner/property relationships. I provide gasoline, oil, and regular maintenance to my car; it provides me with transportation. I provide my pets with food, shelter, medical care, and security; they provide me with companionship and entertainment. If my car refuses to move, I will sell it for scrap. If my pet bites or attacks people without provocation, I will have it killed. I own these things.

In these respects, twenty-first century slavery is little different. Your master promises you medical care, shelter, comfortable retirement, and other necessities, while you provide him with the lion's share of your labor. If you refuse to cooperate, you will be punished with harsher labor, a less comfortable dwelling, fewer privileges, the alienation of your spouse, the sale of your children, imprisonment, torture, or even death.

Don't believe me?

Try not paying your taxes. I think you'll see what I mean.

Depending on where you live you pay between 30% and 40% of your income directly in taxes2, whether through wage, sales, and property taxes, or license fees, etc. You likely pay an additional 10% to 20% of your income indirectly through higher costs of doing business, a product of over-regulation and bureaucratic incompetence3. If you spend a significant amount of money on medical care, then I guarantee that you are spending far more than that to support the federal slave state.
In exchange for 40% to 60% of your income, your benevolent government promises to take care of your medical expenses and your retirement, to ensure you have adequate housing, food, education, security, and to shield you from the consequences of your own mistakes--in general to look after your welfare.

"Is it such a bad thing to ensure adequate medical care for the poor?" You ask. Certainly not, so long as you don't steal from or enslave anyone else to do it. "But this isn't slavery! It's taxes and government. This is the way the world works. Even Jesus said to give unto Caesar what is Caesar's." Absolutely right. And if you belong to Caesar, then you have no right to object to anything he may take from you or do to you.

Applying for a social security account or accepting benefits from the State is not a business transaction--simple services received for payment. In a business transaction you are free to withdraw at any time. According to the Social Security Administration, "SSA does not change, void or cancel SSNs."4 If you decide you no longer wish to purchase this service, you could go to prison; your home could be taken; your children could be sold out of state. A dirty business indeed.

"[The Beast] also forced everyone, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on his right hand or on his forehead, so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark, which is the name of the beast or the number of his name. This calls for wisdom. If anyone has insight, let him calculate the number of the beast, for it is man's number. His number is 666."5

Application for a social security account is application for State ownership of your soul. You are a sheep in the State pasture and your social security number is the State's brand of ownership. It's only a matter of time before your master has Applied Digital Solutions or some other vile corporate entity inject a microchip, containing your Number, under the skin of your right hand.6

In 1996 Congress passed, and the President signed into Law, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996. This act tied your social security account number into your driver's license, your professional licenses, your hunting or fishing licenses, your marriage license, your passport, and your employment. You are no longer allowed to drive, hunt, fish, marry or divorce, or claim paternity without a social security number. If you are a doctor, a hair stylist, a pharmacist, or any other professional for whom the State requires a license, then you are no longer allowed to work without a social security number. Very soon you will be unable to buy or sell without the Number. Congress' justification for this abomination? Dead-beat dads.7 Yeah, right. "If anyone has insight, let him calculate the number of the beast, for it is man's number." Or is it Dad's number?

What is your addiction to the Slave State? Is it really the help that it gives the poor? If so, you have been deceived. The poor were much better off materially and spiritually before the Welfare State. Or are you addicted to the illusory safety net of knowing that Uncle Sam will be there to catch you when you fall in your old age. It's time for you to make a choice. There is another thing that Jesus said: "No one can serve two masters. Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and Money." If you have chosen the slavery of welfare and social security, then you have chosen money over God. You have sold your soul to the State. Is God your master? Or is the State? You cannot serve two masters. "But if serving the Lord seems undesirable to you, then choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your forefathers served beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you are living. But as for me and my household, we will serve the Lord."8 You have a chance now to repent of your dependence on the State instead of on God. Reject the mark of State ownership now. Return to God now!
Oh, by the way. . .that law designed to catch dead-beat dads? The one that makes it a crime to drive, fish, or possibly even work without a social security number? It's also known as Title 42, Chapter 7, Subchapter IV, Part D, Section 666.

1 Of course, not every slave owner abided by the rules of law or morality. At one time or another every master/slave relationship except that between God and man is abused. Witness Ruby Ridge, or Waco, or Ismael Mena, or Peter McWilliams, or thousands of others just like them.

2 Tax Foundation, "Comparing the Total Tax Burden in Each State to Just the State/Local Tax Burden", http://www.taxfoundation.org/statelocal01.html, as viewed on March 7, 2002.

3 The Americans for Tax Reform Foundation estimated compliance costs at 11.33%. This estimate deliberately excluded economic costs. "Cost of Government Day Report 2001," pgs 9-13, http://www.atr.org/cogd/2001/070601reportCOGD.pdf, as viewed on March 7, 2002.

4 Social Security Administration, "SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER POLICY AND GENERAL PROCEDURES, 00205.100 PARENT OBJECTS TO ASSIGNMENT OF SSN TO CHILD UNDER THE ENUMERATION AT BIRTH PROGRAM," http://www.save-a-patriot.org/files/view/ssbirth.html, as viewed on March 7, 2002.

5 Revelation 13:16-18, NIV

6 Mark of the Beast, Cyborg facts and fantasy: Chip implants, http://www.countdown.org/end/mark_of_the_beast_07.htm, as viewed on March 7, 2002. See also DigitalAngel.Net and Applied Digital Solutions.

7 "TITLE 42, CHAPTER 7, SUBCHAPTER IV, Part D, Sec. 666.", http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/42/666.html, as viewed on March 7, 2002.

8 Joshua 24:15, NIV

last modified: 01/12/2006 22:22:09
_________________

[MessiahMews]

Socialist security numbers, government certified birth certificates, and marriage licenses are very relevant in regards to vaccination since this is how the people are tricked into voluntarily giving their own precious children over to the state. It is not the intention of this site to explain and prove all this, but rather to provide some brief information so the reader can research further. The Family Guardian website is a good place where one may obtain adequate research into these and other subjects. http://www.famguardian.org

[MessiahMews]

See also: "And Your Social Security Number?" (Nov. 26, 2006)

SUCCESS!!!

-----Original Message-----
From: Dave Champion
Sent: Friday, January 07, 2000 10:50 AM
To: Subject: Another No SSN victory

This is an inspiring personal account by my friend Annette.

Dave

***************************************

I would like to share my success at the South Carolina DMV yesterday with you.

I stood in line for over an hour to get my SC Driver's License renewed. I had to fill out a form that asked for insurance information - I had to give my policy number and ins. company, or check the box that said I don't own a vehicle required to be registered in SC. I checked both boxes because both are true. However, I didn't know my policy number (forgot to take it with me). So I showed the car registration that shows I don't own the car and she agreed to renew the license without the ins. policy number. Cleared hurdle #1.

Then she noticed the box that asked for a social security number and I had written "None." She frowned and questioned me. I explained that I had revoked my SS-5 application and couldn't legally use that number anymore. She showed it to the clerk in the next booth. That woman also frowned and questioned me. I explained again. Then the second lady said, "Well, the SSN isn't printed on the driver's license anyway, so it doesn't bother me."

And they renewed my license on the spot.

I know this is not a total Constitutional victory, but to me it was a major one. I also know they probably realized they have my former SSN on file. But they could have said, "Sorry, no number no license;" and they didn't! So I feel pretty good about the whole thing.

I am continually amazed at what I can get done when I explain to people that I no longer have a SSN. Even though they're amazed to learn that having a SSN is voluntary for a citizen, they go ahead and do what I'm asking of them without getting one from me. In the past year I have accomplished the following things without giving anyone a SSN or other federal i.d. number:

Opened three bank accounts and obtained loans for Trusts.

Managed the purchase of a new home by a Trust.

Was given Power of Attorney for my elderly mother.

Got her bank to put my name on her personal checking account as POA. (This is probably the most amazing and important accomplishment.)

Rented an apartment (after another declined to rent to me without the SSN to do a credit check.) The second apartment manager was happy to get credit information from my mortgage company alone.

Bought car insurance and homeowners insurance from a major mainstream insurance company.

Gotten on airline flights using a personal photo i.d. that wasn't issued by a government agency.

There are probably other things, but I'm getting so used to getting things done without a SSN, I've probably overlooked them.

I feel empowered, and my life is so much better now than it was when I gave my SSN to every Tom, Dick and Harriet who asked me for it. I do feel that it is helpful that I can honestly say I don't have a number, rather than say I won't give it to them. To say I had one and then refuse to give it would make me seem uncooperative and I probably wouldn't be as successful with those who ask.

I'm also educating my fellow Americans on how to live as private, free citizens which is a good feeling.

I will be happy when all Americans learn the truth about how to live as our founding fathers intended, instead of allowing Big Brother to control their lives (primarily through the use of "taxpayer" i.d. numbers.) And I will be happy when Americans demand a return to our Constitutional Republican form of government.

That is my hope.

Life is good.

Thanks for listening.

--

Annette
_________________

[MessiahMews]

* * *

"The primary control and custody of infants is with the government" Tillman V. Roberts. 108 So. 62

"Marriage is a civil contract to which there are three parties - the husband, the wife and the state." Van Koten v. Van Koten. 154 N.E. 146.
"The ultimate ownership of all property is in the State: individual so-called 'ownership" is only by virtue of Government, i.e. law amounting to mere user; and use must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the necessities of the State. Senate Document No. 43 73rd Congress 1st Session. (Brown v. Welch supra)

"The right of traffic or the transmission of property, as an absolute inalienable right, is one which has never existed since governments were instituted, and never can exist under government." Wynehamer v. The People. 13 N.Y. Rep.378, 481

"...You own no Property because you are a slave. Really you are worse off than a slave because you are also a debtor... Don't let this information alarm you because without it you cannot be free. You have to understand that all slavery and freedom originates in the mind. When your mind allows you to accept and understand that the United States, Great Britain and the Vatican are corporations which are nothing but fictional entities which have been placed into your mind, you will understand that our slavery is because we believe in fictions." - Stephen Ames.

* * *
_________________

[MessiahMews]

SOME FURTHER THOUGHTS REGARDING SOCIAL SECURITY:

Getting a Social Security number is voluntary. There is no law or statute which requires you to obtain one either for yourself or your child. A brochure which I obtained from the Social Security Administration in March of 1997, entitled Numbers for Newborns, asks the question, "Must My Baby Have A Social Security Number Now?" The answer given in the brochure states, "No! Getting a Social Security number for your baby is strictly voluntary."

Now, so often when the State says something is "voluntary", they use some other device to try and coerce you into "volunteering". For example, when it comes to the School to Work program which is being initiated in Wisconsin and throughout the nation, they will say "taking this Certificate of Mastery test is purely voluntary." But then they tell you, "Oh, but if you don’t take the test you are automatically excluded from getting the best jobs in society." This is the underhanded deception of the State. They will try to "coax" you into volunteering. The carrot is usually money. When it comes to Social Security, the State says getting a Social Security number is voluntary. But then the IRS comes along and says you cannot claim your child as an exemption on your tax return and get a refund unless you have a Social Security number for him or her.

The past. In the past, those who did not have Social Security numbers for their children and therefore did not put any numbers on their tax returns, simply received a letter of warning from the IRS, stating that they must have Social Security numbers on their return next year or they would be penalized. They would be told that the IRS would let it go this year, but next year they must have the numbers. My wife, Clara, and I received these letters for ten years. We were never penalized.

The present. In 1996 however, things changed. Section 151(e) of the Internal Revenue Code was changed by the GATT/WTO legislation. Three families in our congregation no longer merely received a threatening letter, but were sent notice by the IRS that they could not get their refund without their children having Social Security numbers. They were told they now owed the IRS money because they could not claim their children as dependents without the number. All three families wrote to the IRS stating that they have religious objections to getting their children Social Security numbers. Two of the three families have since received their tax refund without Social Security numbers for their children. The third family is still waiting to hear from the IRS.

(A side note. The family who is still waiting to hear from the IRS, formerly received Social Security benefits. The mother in this family had been married before. Her first husband died. The daughter from her first marriage was receiving survivor benefits from Social Security as a result. But because of coming to realize that Social Security is unBiblical and idolatrous, they wrote to the Social Security Administration to refuse receiving further money from it. So, here they refused to receive money from the State through Social Security, but now the State is harassing them over Social Security numbers.)

The future. 1997 stands to be an interesting year. In 1996, Congress passed the Small Business Jobs Protection Act which contained legislation which once again modified Section 151(e) of the Internal Revenue Code. The modification further strengthens the language that you must have a Social Security number for your children in order to claim them as dependents. (*Update: See article enclosed titled - What to do when the IRS sends you notice that they will not send you your refund because you don’t have Social Security numbers for your children.)

Supplemental Security Income. The Supplemental Security Income (SSI) is administered by the Social Security Administration. SSI gives $5000.00 to $20,000.00 "backpay" checks to drug addicts and drunkards (and for a host of other lame reasons) for their "disability." They then pay these people $500.00 a month because of their "disability." This is not compassion. This money does not help these people, it hurts them. Why? Because they take it and booze up for a few days until their broke. This enables them economically to continue in their "disability", it does not help them. Many end up in hospitals after their livers finally fail. You’re told that the money taken from your check each week for Social Security does not go toward SSI, but it really does, in part at least. Each year there is a surplus of money given to Social Security. This is not kept in some little account for you somewhere, rather the surplus is put into the "general" tax fund. SSI is part of the "general" tax fund. So, drug addicts and drunkards are rewarded by our government, but honest, hardworking families, like the one mentioned above from our congregation, are harassed by it.

How Do We Respond To The UnBiblical Social Security System?
When a teaching like this is given, there is potential for people to become judgmental or harsh.

First, we must repent of the idolatry we have been involved in when it comes to Social Security, and we must call others to repentance too. We must recognize that God is the one in whom we are to trust, not the State. We must also recognize that while repentance and forgiveness are instant gifts of God’s mercy and grace, it takes time, discipline, hard work, sacrifice, and perseverance to "rebuild the walls that have fallen down."

RESTRUCTURING OUR LIVES - WHAT INDIVIDUALS CAN DO.

A.) People who receive Social Security money. The elderly people who are receiving Social Security benefits, or are nigh to receiving benefits, should consider refusing to receive the benefits if they can financially do without them, or if they can continue to work. They should also see if their children or other family members can help them in their financial situation if they need it now, or if they cannot work as much or at all in the near future. Children should understand that it is their God-given duty before God to care for their parents in their old age (Exodus 20:12; I Timothy 5:. However, those elderly people who are unable to do without their Social Security money because of their situation should not be held in ill repute for the following reasons:

1. They were deceived all of their lives by our government into thinking that Social Security was insurance, or a pension, or that there were little individual accounts that they were paying into and when they turn 65 they’ll get it back. They were deceived all of their lives, therefore they were planning on having this money in their old age. They did not structure their lives to do without it. Now, in their old age, it could be impossible for them to restructure to do without it with as few years as they have left to live.

2. Many elderly people have children who refuse to do their God-given duty and care for their parents in their old age. These children have believed the Statist lie that their parents should be cared for by the State and not by them.

3. We are dealing with generational sin when it comes to Social Security. When the people of God see a sin which has been going on for generations in their midst, and repent of it, it can be so imbedded in the culture that it takes time and much restructuring to root it out (read Nehemiah).

B.) No young Christian should receive Social Security benefits. No Christian should be receiving SSI benefits. We should not get our children Social Security numbers. We should all work to see the Social Security system abolished.

(Important note. When your child is born at a hospital, the hospital personnel will come to you and ask that you fill out the birth certificate form and check the box to receive a Social Security number for your child. Refuse to do so. Just record your child’s birth in your Family Bible. If they try to tell you that you cannot leave the hospital unless you fill out the birth certificate form and check the box to receive a Social Security number, just ask them "what are the terms of this kidnapping?" They will back off real fast. Remember, receiving a Social Security number is voluntary. So is receiving a birth certificate. You are not required to sign for or fill out either. You need to know that many hospitals now automatically apply for your child to get a Social Security number when you fill out the birth certificate form. You need neither (regardless of what they tell you) and you’re wise not to fill out or sign for either.)

RESTRUCTURING OUR LIVES - WHAT CHURCHES CAN DO.

God uses the wicked for His purposes. Sometimes He uses what the wicked do for good in His people’s lives. What they mean for evil, God can use for good. Social Security looks like tyranny, and it is. But God could use it to get His people out of their safety zones. Upon recognizing Social Security for what it is, namely idolatry, Christians could begin new jobs, new trades, entrepreneurship could explode, a parallel economy could be established, Christian colleges could begin to set up their own accreditation boards rather than going to the pagans for accreditation. Or some of God’s people might consider more earnestly going into the ministry or into missions. We need to have compassion, band together, and help each other out in restructuring our lives to be free and not part of the idolatrous Social Security system.

A.) Churches should preach about Social Security. The Bible speaks to all matters of life. The pulpits in America need to condemn this system for what it is - blatant idolatry. Pastors need to preach sermons about The Bible and Social Security, and expose it for what it is. In 1976, economist Jodie Allen, who is a socialist, wrote an article in the Washington Post entitled Social Security: The Largest Welfare Program. She details the response she received and what she learned:

I was deluged with calls and letters from the guardians of the Social Security system saying, "Gee, Jodie, we always liked you but how could you say this." I acted very politely and I said, "Well, what’s the matter with this, isn’t it true?" And they said, "Oh, yes, it’s true, but once you start saying this kind of thing, you don’t know where it’s going to end up." Then I came to perceive that Social Security was not a program, it was a religion. It’s very hard to reform a religion.

And it is a religion. Social Security is socialism. Socialism puts man at the center, and makes the State god. As a religion, the State has every intention of enforcing its law/order. By the State demanding that we trust in it for our needs, it is usurping the place of God. It is demanding that it be recognized as God. This idolatrous system should be condemned by pulpits in America, and people should be called upon to repent of their idolatry for receiving from it or paying homage to it.

B.) Churches should stand with those who are persecuted by the State. Our congregation has every intention of helping the family that’s still waiting to hear from the IRS. Churches should make sure they stand with families who are harassed by the IRS. This includes helping them finance a fight in the courts, or staging an effort with Congressmen to get new laws passed to see that the harassment ceases.

C.) Churches should help those families that are in need. There are times when the burden to meet a family member’s needs becomes too great for the family alone. In such times, the church should step forward to help. An elderly person upon recognizing the idolatry of Social Security might want to no longer be a part of it, but simply cannot afford not receiving all or some of the money. The church should consider what it might be able to do in such a situation. A system should be established within the church whereby people can approach the deacons when they are in serious need.
(Important note. We are not to be moving people from a statist welfare system to an ecclesiastical welfare system. It is primarily the family’s responsibility to care for the needs of its members. The church steps in to help only when the need becomes too great.)

D.) Churches should help organize apprenticeships. This is important if we are going to see the next generation raised to know what it means to be a freeman. Churches could hold meetings with their men and women to brainstorm as how to live in this culture without a Social Security number. The meetings could also serve to hook young people up with other men or women in the church who could apprentice them in a trade. We must restructure and begin to rebuild the wall.

FINAL NOTE - the Church of old versus the present day Church.
Some will say, "Though I participate in the Social Security system, it is not idolatrous because I know in my heart that the State isn’t God, nor am I trusting in the government to meet my needs."

We must remember however, idolatry is not just a condition of the heart - it is an action. The early Church could have easily said, "You know that I don’t believe that the Emperor is God, Lord. I know he’s a false god. You also know, Lord, that if I don’t throw in this pinch of incense I will be jailed and well, I have a responsibility to provide for my family. You know my heart, Lord." They could have easily justified and rationalized throwing in the pinch of incense. But they didn’t because they knew that idolatry wasn’t just a condition of the heart - it was an action, and by throwing in the incense they were committing idolatry.

I considered entitling this article Social Security: None Dare Call it Idolatry. Why? Because we are all up to our eyeballs in this economic system (especially those who have national ministries or are in comfortable denominational positions and could therefore inform thousands about the idolatrous nature of the Social Security system). Many will therefore chafe at this position paper because they have so much treasure built up in this economic system they never want to see it fall even though the Social Security system is idolatrous and unBiblical. It is because their god is the god of money and not the God of the Bible that they dare not call it idolatry.

God help us to repent, and trust in Him as He has decreed!
_________________

[MessiahMews]

Links...

Thank you to...

http://www.satanicvaccines.com/

http://www.satanicvaccines.com/BirthCertificates.htm


http://www.satanicvaccines.com/user/bin/allegiance_and_birth_certificates.pdf


http://www.satanicvaccines.com/SocialSecurity.htm


http://www.satanicvaccines.com/MarriageLicense.htm


http://travel.state.gov/passport/get/first/first_830.html
(As of 08/2006, Passports can be obtained without Certified B/C)


http://www.rocklandcountyclerk.com/clerkforms/birthaffidavit.html


http://www.ecclesia.org/forum/uploads/bondservant/birthP.pdf


http://www.ecclesia.org/forum/uploads/bondservant/bcertP.pdf


MP3 and Video Downloads
_________________

[Lilly]

sharing an email
-----------------

Lilly,

Thought you'd enjoy this, ties in with the recent posts on WW.

Adventures In Legal Land

I recommend highly to watch the Marc Stevens Interview (Full), it has some yummy legal pwnage in it, he keeps it simple with the least possible legal mumbo jumbo. Out of my massive list of law links, I always recommend this one first, he clearly proves with fact how the whole "government" is fraud and etc. without sidetracking into anything off topic. I haven't read the book yet, but I have one on the way, and I'm sure it's good from reading discussions on his forum about legal things. (he's not a lawyer)

Also amusing is his phone call to a lady at the FTB(Franchise Tax Board) on behalf of a guy he was/is helping out with some tax nonsense, these workers are like robots, and might as well be.

Lionil (Prophageus)
_________________
Get My FREE eBook ---> http://psychicspiritinyou.com/balance-your-chakras-free-ebook/

http://www.natures-blessings.org/OrgoneFeetChakraBalancers.htm

[MessiahMews]

Invading MySpace, am I?

http://truthbeyondfiction.com/more.php?id=271_0_1_0_M6

----------------- Original Message -----------------
From: robert

Date: Dec 9 2006 2:27 PM


Hey Donna got this message from a friend, thought I'd share.

----------------- Original Message -----------------
From: Eternal Flame of Burning Truth
Date: Dec 9 2006 2:02 PM


Hey robert, thanks for that post (How the govt steals children).....I posted it on my site

Click Here
_________________

[MessiahMews]

From: Make Music 4 HUMAN RIGHTS


THANK YOU: power moves managment


Are You Free, Or are you a slave?
Author unknown


Originally, the Constitution limited the jurisdiction of the federal government by making citizens of the state in which they were born or resided. According to the Constitution, the federal government could only have jurisdiction on a person if they lived in Washington DC or a US territory.

The Federalists who took control of our government after the Civil War, instituted the 14th Amendment to "protect" the former slaves. This amendment allowed the former slaves to come under the Jurisdiction of the Federal Government in order that the Federal Government could protect their Constitutional rights. Many blacks were being abused by people and the local or state governments would not come to their aid. The 14th Amendment may have freed the slaves from oppression of their neighbors, but it gave them and us a new master, the Federal Government. The 14th Amendment makes us citizens of the United States AND of the several states. This allows the Federal Government to have jurisdiction over us that it never had before the 14th Amendment. The 14th Amendment also states (the last section) that the debt of the Federal government cannot even be questioned.

Most people have received their United States citizenship when they received their Social Security Card. With the Social Security Card came income taxes. I am not going to go into how we have been put under Statutory (Admiralty) Law; I will simply state that we are under it. We all know this because we need a license (permission to break the law) or permit to do things. A free citizen doesn't require a license or a permit. Why would a free person require permission from the government to get married, drive a car, start a business, to add onto his/her home or improve his/her property?

Please show me in the US Constitution or your state constitution where a government has the right to demand such obedience? If anyone is arrogant enough to try to use the US Constitution to show such things, please align your argument with the 10th Amendment. How did we get in such a mess, but more importantly, how do we get out of such a mess?

The Congress in session during the time the 14th Amendment was declared law provided people with a way to get out from under these provisions. It is called an apostille. An apostille allows you to deny or renounce your United States citizenship and receive diplomatic immunity. For total freedom, you also must file a UCC-1 lien against your strawman and a denial of corporate existence against the incorporated local and state governments.

Have you ever noticed that your driver's license, bank statement, and any bill that you receive is in all capital letters? This is not by accident; there is a legal reason for this.

DID YOU EVER WONDER WHY THE GOVERNMENT OR THE STATE CAN TAKE YOUR HOUSE, PROPERTY, CARS, BANK ACCOUNTS, CHILDREN ETC.?

DO YOU THINK YOU OWN EVERYTHING YOU WORKED SO HARD FOR THROUGHOUT YOUR LIFE?

DO YOU THINK YOU ARE TRULY FREE AS GOD INTENDED IT TO BE SO? OR ARE YOU A SLAVE?

ARE YOU A SUBJECT AND PAYING DUTY TO THE CROWN OF ENGLAND THROUGH THE TAX SYSTEM?

WHAT IS YOUR REAL NAME? IS IT JOHN HENRY DOE, IN ALL CAPITAL LETTERS OR IS IT, John Henry Doe, IN UPPER AND LOWER CASE LETTERS?

I KNOW THE ANSWERS, BUT DO YOU?

IF YOU WANT YOUR LIFE AND FREEDOM BACK YA BETTER READ ON!

ASSUME THE FOLLOWING:

The United States is bankrupt and has been since 1933. The government has no gold or silver as required by the Constitution. The only asset left is the people. So how does the U.S. finance its daily operations?

Solution, collateralize the people for credit. How? By registering them in international commerce, and selling bonds on them. The people become the surety on the bonds, or the "pledge". The asset bonded (surety) is the labor of the people which is payable as some undetermined future date. Thus, the people become the "utility" for the "transmission" of energy. Result, a very sophisticated form of peonage or slavery and the Constitution does not apply because the government, on all levels, is thrown into international commerce, the law merchant, now known as the Uniform Commercial Code. [See Public Law 88-244 in which the U.S. Subscribed to private international law. See definition of "goods" under the Uniform Commercial Code; Section 2-105(1) and 9-105(1) in which animals, i.e. humans and their unborn offspring, become "goods" sellable in commerce!]

When a baby is born in the United States, a birth certificate is registered with the Bureau of Vital Statistics in the State of birth. The key word here is "registered" as registered in international commerce. The baby becomes the surety, whose energy is due at some future date. When the birth certificate is registered in the U.S. Department of Commerce, the Department of Treasury issues a bond on the birth certificate ($1,000,000) and the bond is sold at some securities exchange and perhaps bought by the Federal Reserve Bank, which then uses it as collateral in order to issue Federal Reserve Notes or some other form of "debt obligation" (see 18 USC §411). The bond is then held in trust for the Federal Reserve at the Depository Trust Corp. At 55 Water Street, in New York City, about two blocks down the street from the Fed. It is a high rise office building and the sign out front reads "The Tower of Power".

When the birth certificate is registered, a separate legal entity is created, like a mirror image of the flesh and blood human. This separate entity, or alter ego (THE ALL CAPITAL LETTER NAME) is the "straw man". (See Black's Law 6th edition dictionary). And it is the "accommodation party" of the Uniform commercial Code §3-415. The "name" is credit. (See Back's 6th "accommodation party"). Therefore the right (or the use) has been separated from the title (or deed). The "straw man" holds the title (he belongs to the government's client who bought the title) and the real live you, flesh and blood man or women has only naked possession with the limited "right" to use the thing (like your body or your alleged possessions and land). Maybe that's why our civil rights suits get dismissed out of court on Civil Rule 12(b)(6) motions. This deals with "failure to state a title upon which relief can be granted". A claim is another word for "title". So we have "failed to state upon which relief can be granted". We do not own the "title", even to our own bodies anymore. Isn't that encouraging! How free are you now?

When the straw man violates some rule or statue (for instance a traffic ticket), the flesh and blood, the real you has to appear at the arraignment and admit the straw man's name (credit) and the "energy" surety is due and payable (fine) by the flesh and blood man who is in use of the straw man. This, I'm sure, is why it is so important to "voluntarily give" your name to the magistrate (court). The defendant is the straw man. The real you, the flesh and blood man is the "offender". An "offender" is on the offensive team until he screws up and goes on the defensive team with the defendant (straw man) and looses as the real man.

So if this scenario is correct, how does one get back the bond that has been sold on the birth certificate. And then how does one get in control of his body and his property?

TITLE = RIGHT = REMEDY = RELIEF can only be granted after perfecting the "security interest" in the "goods" (The collateral = pignus = the straw man

DEFINITIONS & MEANINGS

Stramineus homo /straminiyas howmow/. L. Lat. A man of straw, one of no substance, put Forward as bail surety.

Stratocracy /stseokraisiy/. A military government; government by military chiefs of an army.

Straw man or party. A "front", a third party who is put up in name only to take part in a transaction. Nominal party to a transaction; one who acts as an agent for another for the purpose of taking title to real property and executing whatever documents and instruments the principal may direct respecting the property. Person who purchases property for another to conceal identity of real purchaser, or to accomplish some purpose otherwise not allowed.

At birth your parents and the doctor become the pledger of the birth certificate title to the baby Johnny. The State become the recipient of this pledge for the future energy output of "Johnny". The state converts the "title security document" into a bond which is sold on the open market place to finance government. The bond holder is the secured party to receive the future energy output of Johnny. Johnny is the mere naked holder and possessor of the body with no title. His duty is to the secured party.

The definition of the straw man now becomes apparent. The straw man is nom de guerre artificial entity put forth that is owned by the secured party who bought into the bond placed on the market by the Treasury of the United States. The straw man is not yours. It is the front man for the secured party holder of the bond. Whatever the straw man signs, he does so to place title to property in the hands of the UNITED STATES and the bond owner. The straw man does not place title to the property into Johnny's hands. That is because Johnny does not have title to the straw man. The straw man belongs to the UNITED STATES and the bond owner.

In order to get one's liberty and independence back, one must first secure the title and ownership of the straw man back. Once one controls the straw man, then one controls the rights of the property that the straw man acquires.

The key to ownership is registration. In a military government, registered property is recognized By the "public" side. If the property is registered on the public side of the government, then the property is public. If the property is registered on the private side, then the property is private with no public interest.

The military government (democracy) has three appointed leaders. The governor, the Secretary Of State, and the Secretary of Treasury. The Secretary of State holds the registration for the Democracy corporation. The public side of the registration is the "corporate filings" at the state And county levels. The private side of the filings are the "Uniform Commercial Code filings" of the creditors to transactions. This registration by the private creditor is the highest priority of recognition by the military State (democracy). If one is not registered, then one is believed to be "foreign" with no rights, private or public, except what is granted by the military law form As a privilege.

For one to regain title to his body, the Birth Certificate must be secured and attached and recorded in the private UCC-1 filings with the Secretary of State in the democracy. Once the living soul has redeemed his Birth Certificate and filed notice of the redemption by a UCC-1 filing with the Secretary of State, then the living soul has the right of property ownership in himself through his straw man who now belongs to the living soul. Furthermore, the bond created and sold in the market place for the straw man now becomes the property of the living soul. The living soul now has the capacity to own real property by allodium and to own private chattel property by the process of the passover, redemption, chargeback, and discharge of public debt.

What's in a name? Very simple. A name is CREDIT. For any unauthorized person to use your Name or the straw man's name (when they do not own the title to the straw man) is to violate the laws of "slander of credit". Once you have redeemed the straw man and own him, then any further commercial process done by any person (like an attorney, a judge, or law enforcement office without your consent) is slander of credit against your straw man. This is a federal criminal securities violation that means prison for them.

Until you redeem your straw man and register his title to you, the living soul, then your straw man becomes the source of the credit for the UNITED STATES to the public affairs of the nation through the "pledge" or gift of your property) your body and energy) to them for their use.
http://www.nmcservices.net/youareaslave.html
_________________

[MessiahMews]

-

You sure act like you are a seasoned radio guest -- amazing!
We are so excited that you are a part of our network and willing to tackle this "seemingly" difficult issue in state.

Donna Carrillo wants to email you some specific information that she hasn't posted on all the exemption pages just yet. It pertains to marriage licenses and birth certificates. You may not know this, but does not have a state birth certificate, having instead, a certificate of live birth. And, yes, there is a BIG difference.
http://www.proliberty.com/observer/20040317.htm To Whom Are You Married? (By Contract)
http://proliberty.com/observer/images/idbirth.htm (Idaho Birth Certificate -- shocking!)
http://proliberty.com/observer/20030601.htm (more on birth certificate)

Anyway, there is much more on the birth certificate. Donna has helped three women have a child without having a state issued birth certificate. I wasn't able to "save" my own granddaughter from having one

Also, it is Donna who will be inviting you to the Yahoo Group. We look forward to your participation and announcements posted to our group.

With Love,
~Ingri

Ingri Cassel, director
Vaccination Liberation
P.O. Box 457
Spirit Lake, Idaho 83869
(208) 255-2307 / (888) 249-1421
vaclib@coldreams.com

www.vaccinetruth.com
www.vaclib.org

Free Your Mind.....
From the Vaccine Paradigm

"When we give government
the power to make medical decisions
for us, we, in essence, accept that
the state owns our bodies."
~U.S.Representative Ron Paul, MD

NOTICE: Due to Presidential Executive Orders, the National Security Agency (aka Big Brother) may read this email without warning, warrant, or notice, and certainly without probable cause. They may do this without any judicial or legislative oversight. You have no recourse or protection against such unconstitutional violation of your personal effects except to call for the impeachment of the current 'president' and his entire 'Cabal-net' and to move forward with the understanding that the War on Terror is an elite protection racket designed to pave the way for Orwell's nightmare.
_________________

[MessiahMews]

From the September 2000 Idaho Observer:



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Image: Idaho Certificate of Live Birth

5th Branch files first page in Big Brother's baby jacket

Organized medicine participating in sinister socialist plot to nationalize children?

By Don Harkins

According to a midwife who asked to remain nameless, any person attending a live birth must fill out a Certificate of Live Birth (see form at right) that is filed with the Bureau of Vital Statistics. If the form is not filled out completely, it will be returned immediately to the noncompliant attendee who will be liable for a $250 fine. Fifty dollars per day will be added to the penalty until the form is returned in a manner that is satisfactory to the state.

Refusal to comply could mean a loss of state licensing, loss of insurance and the possibility of serving time in jail.

Many midwives and other alternative healthcare practitioners are forced to comply with state live birth laws. Such professionals we have spoken to resent participating in this Orwellian intelligence gathering mechanism. Organized medicine's corporate hospitals (the fifth branch of government?) seem to experience no crises in conscience in submitting this data for entry into government databases.

Most people have no idea that from the moment your innocent baby is born, the government has begun to keep detailed records of its little life and, by law, under threat of fines and imprisonment, hospitals, midwives and family doctors must supply the state with the information.

Not one parent of a newborn that has been asked has ever seen the form printed at right. The highly personal and private record that is being supplied to the state and, therefore, the federal government, is being obtained without knowledge or consent of the parents.

The form lists such information as the parents' education level, type and location of birth, how the birth was paid for, date of last menses and length of gestation. Note also in reverse print to the far left where the person attending the live birth must attest that all of the “personal information provided on this certificate is correct” in the capacity of an “INFORMANT.”

“If that doesn't add insult to injury,” stated one midwife who has helped mothers bring hundreds of babies into the world. “We have to live with the fact that, under threat of fines and imprisonment, we must supply this information to the state, then to have us sign our names to the form as an 'informant' just makes me feel horrible inside.”

Please excuse our not attaching names to the persons supplying information for this article. The state is so militant about obtaining the information that alternative healthcare practitioners feel that they may be stripped of their ability to openly assist live births should the state learn that they are philosophically opposed to state live birth laws.

“The push is to make it impossible for alternative practitioners to assist in live births so that all children will be born in hospitals where records are more easily kept and controlled. We must stay in business for those who do not want their baby to be born in a hospital,” a midwife said.

Information provided on the form is gathered through a variety of means that include lifting data from other sources such as insurance forms, drivers licenses and checking accounts. Some of the information may also be picked up by the “informant” through seemingly casual conversation.

According to one midwife, the form pictured is a brand new form that has just been issued to all persons the state recognizes as being participatory in live births. The form is identical to the form that the state has been using for the last several years except for one detail. In the lower right hand corner in box 45 it now says, “CONSENT OBTAINED FOR IMMUNIZATION REGISTRY ENROLLMENT.” Previous forms simply asked if the controversial hepatitis B shot had been administered to the infant shortly after birth.

“Now that the 'voluntary' vaccination tracking registry is in operation, the state probably feels very confident that by determining whether or not the parents gave their 'consent' to be enrolled in the registry answers the hep B question. They were probably quite proud of themselves for saving the taxpayers' money by avoiding the expense of significantly altering the form,” commented North Idaho Chapter of Vaccination Liberation President Ingri Cassel.

***

Image: Idaho Certificate of Live Birth


Vaccination Liberation - vaclib.org

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Idaho Observer
P.O. Box 457
Spirit Lake, Idaho 83869
Phone: 208-255-2307
Email: observer@coldreams.com
Web:
http://idaho-observer.com
http://proliberty.com/observer/
_________________