| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Admin |
Posted - 22 Oct 2001 : 14:50:13
 Birth CERTIFICATES = Fictional Entities
Firstly, there is a vast legal difference between a State issued "BIRTH CERTIFICATE - CERTIFICATE OF BIRTH" and a "Certified copy of a live birth". A CERTIFICATE, as used today, is not lawfully the same as a certified copy. A BIRTH CERTIFICATE is issued by the State to conform with federal requirements under the purported necessity of 'vital statistics'. In Florida State, the Florida Department of Health (a/k/a HRS), Office of Vital Statistics, issues these statutory CERTIFICATES. The names are spelled in all capital letters and conform to federal 'law' regulations.
Prior to the 1860's, the only certification of a birth came from the church, not the State or government. The church required two Christian witnesses to attest to, by their signatures and seals, the birth, be it a live birth or a stillborn birth. The church viewed that living or dead, the birth was to be attested to under affirmation before God.
-----------------------------------
Click the blue floppy icon above to view/print the entire article.
The file is in Adobe PDF format, so you will need Adobe Acrobat Reader to view it. To download the FREE Adobe Reader, go to http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/readstep2.html
Click the blue floppy icon below to view/print the sample form regarding a live Christian Birth. |
| 20 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Lewish |
Posted - 21 Feb 2006 : 12:58:08
Greetings Brothers and Sisters,
Manual wrote:
quote:
The question was, "What kind of conclusive evidence would best prove that one is in fact a living, breathing, flesh and blood (wo)man?"
The answer is a document called an "Archetype". To be able to have such and have it be true, you must:
1. Declare your Citizenship first and foremost to the Kingdom of God, and all other loyalty secondarily to a body politic on the Land,
2. Revoke the trust relationship,
3. Sever all other legal relationships.
Once you have done steps 1 thru 3, you can openly and honestly create an Archetype for the living Man. The front is a Common Law document, which is signed and then sealed with a print of the great toe of the right foot. See Exodus Chpt 29 for the reason. The back of the document at the top is for the witnesses. The separated portion at the bottom is for the Apostille.
Once the document has been Apostilled, it can then be "lodged" in the Hague. When you receive the pink slip back, you can then use the Archetype in place of a passport for international travel. One fellow has been using his for over 7 years. It even allows you to go to countries that normally require getting a visa in advance without that restriction.
Because it was filed into a State case, and the State judge refused to accept it, the State judge was sued in federal court. The federal judge ordered the State judge to abide by it, and to expunge the State case.
Very powerful Document.
Peace to you all,
Lewis |
| Manuel |
Posted - 20 Feb 2006 : 22:40:35
Greeings to all,
Did I ever tell you this joke? Well... here it is for peace sakes:
A man went to a psychiatrist and as he layed on the couch, he constantly smacked his imaginary critters off his clothes. The psychiatrist got so disturbed by the mans actions that he alerted 'his patient' to not throw the critters his way:).
You know... during these times where the SPY-ders are constantly weaving their webs to arachnatose us unto their SUB-MISSIONS, the following article sounds pretty good:
From the January 2006 Idaho Observer
Who/what is a slave?
When the subject of slavery comes up between people born and raised in the U.S., an image of cotton-picking negro slaves comes immediately to mind. To the public school-educated and mass-media-conditioned American mind, if your skin is not black and you don’t live in pre-14th Amendment America, you cannot be a slave. The logical obverse, in the minds of properly indoctrinated Americans, is the automatic presumption of personal freedom. As we can see in millions of examples among our countrymen, none are so capable of being progressively enslaved as those whose presumption of freedom can be maintained—from birth to death.
But the slave model etched in the American mind is only a stereotype—it’s only one definition. Slavery has many definitions, a few of which are cited below. All of them, excluding word usage variations like, "He’s a slave to his habits," infer sets of circumstances where people’s physical bodies, political expressions and spiritual beliefs are controlled by others.
Americans living under the laws of the U.S. are, by definition, slaves. Artful legislative machinations have transformed the inalienable rights to pursue life and liberty and acquire property into statutory privileges that can be granted by government or taken away without recourse.
Are you a slave?
Under the definitions provided above, just about all of us are slaves. Under the Black’s definition, all prisoners who were unduly convicted or "denied due process of law" are slaves per 13th and 14th amendments to the Constitution.
Per the second half of Black’s definition, everyone is a slave because, at any time and without just cause, government agents may "dispose of our person (Vickie Weaver, for instance), dispose of our industry and labor (ask thousands of small business owners who have been unjustly ruined by the IRS) and anything that we acquire may be seized at any time—and the seizures will stand in court because ownership is proved by the highest claim of possession and disposal.
The previous paragraph proves the Bouvier’s definition: Another has unlimited control over our lives—whenever it decides to exercise that control.
Both Black’s and Bouvier’s describe people held in bondage, enthralled; enslaved per Webster’s.
Though we may not be "purchased," we are born free and then "captured" by statutory (14th Amendment) snares that completely divest us of our personal rights and; we submit to these fictitious bonds in a "servile manner" making us slaves under the Oxford Universal Dictionary definition.
Per our American Heritage dictionary definition, we are bound in servitude as instruments to pay an infinite array of taxes to specified influences in a condition that has been easily likened to slavery.
Slave. A person who is wholly subject to the will of another; one who has no freedom of action, but whose person and services are wholly under the control of another. One who is under the power of a master, and who belongs to him; so that the master may sell and dispose of his person, of his industry, and of his labor, without his being able to do anything, have anything or acquire anything, but what must belong to his master. The 13th Amendment abolished slavery. ~Black’s Law Dictionary, 5th Edition
SLAVE. One over whose life, liberty and property another has unlimited control.
~Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, 1870
slave: 1. A person held in bondage; a thrall.
~Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, 1947
thrall: a A slave; bondman. b One in moral or mental bondage. c Thralldom - To enslave; enthrall.
~Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, 1947
Slave: 1. One who is the property of, and entirely subject to, another person, whether by capture, purchase, or birth; a servant completely divested of freedom and personal rights. 2. One who submits in a servile manner to the authority or dictation of another or others; a submissive or devoted servant. ~Oxford Universal Dictionary, 1955
slave: 1. One who is bound in servitude to a person or household as an instrument of labor. 2. One who is submissive or subject to a specified person or influence. 3. One whose condition is likened to that of slavery.
~The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 1969
Conclusive evidence of live, non-fiction, flesh and blood status
It all seems to start when we witness or experience the lawless power of government: We begin to realize that ours really isn’t the land of the free. As we progress in our understanding and the depths and breadths of the betrayal become apparent, we discover that governments are fictions and that, through constructive fraud, they transform our flesh and blood into paper fictions because this trick somehow authorizes governments to treat us like property. The process is a lot like the movies when "real" people are suddenly thrust into cartoonland where the only laws in effect are those imagined into existence by the cartoonist. Though it may seem hard for most to conceive, one of the cornerstones of being abused as government property is our inability to overcome government’s presumption that we are paper fictions over which it has the rights of ownership. Patriots have gone to great lengths to"break the presumption" (many of which are expensive, complicated and covered in previous editions of The IO)—and still government throws them around like paper dolls. Aren’t these strange times: The government will tax and imprison, even murder us at its pleasure and convenience because we are forever failing to provide it with conclusive proof that we are flesh and blood men and women. The following is an interesting, simple and inexpensive tactic one may employ to finally break that presumption—provided all our other sovereignty ducks are in a nice, neat row.
by Augustus Blackstone
An interesting question was put to me recently during a discussion about making a legal distinction from an idem sonans (sounds the same when spoken) ens legis (corporate fiction) "strawman" (all capital letter spelled name) entity, that the courts and existing (political) systems would have little choice but to recognize and acknowledge. The question was, "What kind of conclusive evidence would best prove that one is in fact a living, breathing, flesh and blood (wo)man?"
Legal fiction entities, being fictions, cannot bleed because they have no blood. Only living entities have blood, which can be quantified and qualified through immunological compatibility testing and classification (blood typing). In answer to the question, I suggested obtaining a Red Cross blood donor’s card, making sure that it shows one’s name properly spelled in upper/lower case lettering. This would be an "acceptable" form of conclusive evidence that can be carried in one’s wallet and that can be used in conjunction with evidence of one’s live birth.
Unlike other, more local blood collection agencies, the Red Cross Society is an internationally recognized body that enjoys near absolute neutrality and political immunity in all nations participant in or adherent to the Geneva Convention, even during active military hostilities between those nations.
To what extent that international political immunity reaches into other zones of application within this country remains to be explored. But anyone can obtain a blood donor’s card, even if they do not intend thereafter to donate blood (or anything else). The Red Cross Society is an international philanthropic organization, formed in 1864. And, as such, there is no obligation to donate. It’s all voluntary.
This is not a promotional plug for the Red Cross Society. It is an answer to the question pertaining to obtaining conclusive evidence of being a living (wo)man which is or can be recognized by existing political systems (and their courts), that has international neutrality/immunity implications and that can be used to establish entitlement to declared God-given Rights. It is the life within the blood that establishes one’s connection to the divine tutelary authority. Make the most of it.
Note: Several of our readers have engaged correspondence with Augustus Blackstone, author of The Errant Sovereign’s Handbook. In case you are one of those, "Uncle Gus’" address has changed to:
Augustus Blackstone
c/o postal service address:
South 921 Monroe Street #5
Spokane, Washington CF 99204 CF
United States of America |
| David Merrill |
Posted - 02 Feb 2005 : 04:30:35
Is that relating specifically to admiralty terms? Gold fringes and all that? I just got an email today...
Crosstalk:quote:
quote:
I was there. The Notice and Grace have been given a decade ago. I was on the jury.
Mark regretted having given out all the Press Releases and apologized for giving me this last rough draft. That still amuses me.
Let Freedom Ring (framed press release)
I picked up P.L. 94-412 just the other day. It unfortunately reads just as the article below says:
Photo of last page of P.L. 94-412
----- Original Message -----
From:
To: David Merrill
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2005 5:59 PM
Subject: In Section 17 of the Act of October 6, 1917, the Trading With the Enemy Act:
I am sure you have read this, but this brings some light on things, especially how the courts are acting.
"No contract is considered as valid as between enemies, at least so far as to give them a remedy in the courts of law of either government, and they have, in the language of civil law, no ability to sustain a persona standi in judicio."
We now come to the question of how to terminate these extraordinary powers granted under a declaration of national emergency. We have learned that, in order for the extraordinary powers to be terminated, the national emergency itself must be canceled. Reading from the Agricultural Act, Section 13:
"This title shall cease to be in effect whenever the President finds and proclaims that the national economic emergency in relation to agriculture has been ended."
Whenever the President finds by proclamation that the proclamation issued on March 6, 1933 has terminated, it has to terminate through presidential proclamation just as it came into effect. Congress has already delegated all of that authority, and therefore was in no position to take it back.
In Senate Report 93-549, we find the following statement from Congress:
"Furthermore, it would be a largely futile task unless we have the President's active collaboration. Having delegated this authority to the President in ways that permit him to determine how long it shall continue, simply through the device of keeping emergency declarations alive we now find ourselves in a position where we cannot reclaim the power without the President's acquiescence. We are unable to terminate these declarations without the President's signature, so we need a large measure of Presidential cooperation."
It appears that no President has been willing to give up this extraordinary power, and if, they will not sign the termination proclamation, the access to, and usage of, extraordinary powers does not terminate. At least, it has not terminated for over 60 years.
Now, that's no definite indication that a President from George W. Bush on might not eventually sign the termination proclamation, but 60 years of experience would lead one to doubt that day will ever come by itself. But the question now to ask is this: How many times have We, the People, asked the President to terminate his access to extraordinary powers, or the situation on which it is based, the declared national emergency? Who has ever demanded that this be done? How many of us even knew that we have been in this perpetual national emergency situation? And, without the knowledge contained in this report being disseminated freely on the internet, how long do you think the blindness of the American peoples to this situation would have continued?
Now, a quote from an exclusive reply written May 21, 1973, by the Attorney General of the United States regarding studies undertaken by the Justice Department on the question of termination of the standing national emergency:
"As a consequence, a 'national emergency' is now a practical necessity in order to carry out what has become the regular and normal method of governmental actions. What we intended by Congress as delegations of power to be used only in the most extreme situations, and for the most limited duration's, have become every day powers, and a state of 'emergency' has become a permanent condition."
So we see that our government can operate in two capacities: (a) in a sovereign peacetime capacity, with the limitations placed upon it by the Constitution and restrictions placed upon it by We, the People, or (b) in a wartime capacity, where it may operate in its belligerent capacity governed not by the Constitution, but only by the laws of war.
In Section 17 of the Act of October 6, 1917, the Trading With the Enemy Act:
"That the district courts of the United States are hereby given jurisdiction to make and enter all such rules as to notice and otherwise; and all such orders and decrees; and to issue such process as may be necessary and proper in the premises to enforce the provisions of this Act."
Here we have Congress conferring upon the district courts of the United States the booty and jurisdiction, the jurisdiction over enemy property within the continental United States. And at the time of the original unamended, Trading with the Enemy Act, we were indeed at war, a World war, and so booty jurisdiction over enemies' property in the courts was appropriate. At that time, remember, we were not yet declared the enemy. We were excluded from the provisions of the original Act.
What jurisdiction were We, the People, then placed under? We were not the booty jurisdiction given to the district courts by Congress. It would no longer be necessary, or of any value at all, to bring the Constitution of the United States with us upon entering a courtroom, for that court was no longer a court of common law, but a tribunal under wartime booty jurisdiction. Take a look at the American flag in American courtrooms. The gold fringe around our flag designates Admiralty jurisdiction.
Executive Order No. 11677 issued by President Richard M. Nixon August 1, 1972 states:
"Continuing the Regulation of Exports; By virtue of the authority vested in the President by the Constitution and statutes of the United States, including Section 5 (b) of the Act of October 6, 1917, as amended (12 U.S.C. 95a), and in view of the continued existence of the national emergencies . . ."
Has the termination of the national emergency ever been considered? In Public Law 94-412, September 14, 1976, we find that Congress had finally finished their exhaustive study on the national emergencies, and the words of their findings were that they would terminate the existing national emergencies. We should be able to heave a sign of relief at this decision, for with the termination of the national emergencies will come the corresponding termination of extraordinary Presidential power, won't it. But yet we have learned two difficult lessons: that we are still in the national emergency and that power, once grasped, is difficult to let go. And so now it should come as no surprise when we read, in the last section of the Act, Section 502, the following words:
"(a): The provisions of this Act shall not apply to the following provisions of law, the powers and authorities conferred thereby and actions taken thereunder (1) Section 5 (b) of the Act of October 6, 1917, as amended (12 U.S.C. 95a; 50 U.S.c. App. 5b)"
The bleak reality is, the situation has not changed at all.
I immediately regretted telling the suitors it was "unfortunate" that we have never released the War Powers. Notice the opening sentence. One can easily convince the U.S. Provost Marshal to execute arrest of a district court clerk for diversion of cargo - for diverting an admiralty (revenue) cause out of admiralty into the civil forum. At least in theory. |
| Caleb |
Posted - 02 Feb 2005 : 03:55:20
Due to the length of this topic, I have started a new post that relates closely to this one titled:
"BERTH" Certificates
"Of the increase of His government and peace there shall be no end"
Isaiah 9:7 |
| Werner Maximilian |
Posted - 28 Jan 2005 : 13:55:47
My sister, a widow with three children, asked,"Wouldn't I be more of a burden on the family if I didn't take social security payments?" I said,"Yes, but thats' our responsibility."
What occurs to me is this fiction called, "Government" is being used to supplant the roll of men in society, a virtual man that has become the head of the household that demands everyone in the house give their all for the support of the family.
Now, anyone thats had to have the support of family knows the strings that can come with that arrangement, the embarassment, the constant critisism about how your living and what you should (in their opinion) be doing. Your life is no longer yours.
The virtual father takes all that away and even passes laws to stop people that may not approve of your lifesyle from commenting on your acceptance of his largess. Ah, your life becomes your own again.
All this might not even be so bad if the virtual father wasn't a lazy, gluttenous, alcoholic, child beating, murdurous, thieving, control freak.
Therein lies the problem for men that don't approve of this situation. It comes down to a war of ideology. On the one side are men who believe they are head and act accordingly, but in order to do that they need control of many aspects of their lives, not the least being complete control of their finances. This comes into direct conflict with virtual father and his increasingly growing and insatiable extended family with their distorted view that its O.K. to steal (but never ,ever call it that) from everyone outside the family to keep them in the life they have come to expect.
As I see it, the mechanism of war between the two is the Social Security system and its' enormous entitlement programs and the idea in its'supporters heads' that "government" is the source of magical free money for all.
Good luck with that thinking because men are the source of that wealth.(I know, God is.) And good luck to us when every thing you have is no longer enough to satisfy them.
So it does seem that the key is the Social Security number attached to a Birth Certificate attached to an ALL CAPS legal name. Hmmm. If we just didn't have to have one of those.
I salute you brave souls that do not use them.
Werner Maximilian |
| David Merrill |
Posted - 21 Jan 2005 : 13:25:21
Right on.
When a policeman was telling me he had to have my Date of Birth I explained that was because his supervisor required it. I was not accountable to his supervisor; he was.quote:
Dr. Wayne Dyer
You can never solve a problem by condemning it.
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_FibbSpiral.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_FibbSpiral1.jpg |
| Cornerstone Foundation |
Posted - 21 Jan 2005 : 12:51:44
quote:
Originally posted by David Merrill
That is very interesting,....
It looks like he successfully pulled his daughter from being registered in commerce....
I think the reasons can be traced to Franklin D. Roosevelt's speech before the State Governor's Convention on March 6, 1933 when he clearly said, "If people can be persuaded to follow these new forms..." (paraphrased).
The presumption is that the parents were persuaded until they squalked differently about it, defeating the presumption.
Regards,
David Merrill.
Cornerstone Foundation wrote:
In our opinion, David is presenting a concept of high significance in the quote above.
Much of what we are told we must do and/or asked to do by those who are enslaved to the Babylonian System, are commands or requests based on presumptions.
Even in their code, there are very few presumptions that are indentified as conclusive presumptions.
Even by their own words, any presumption that is
not specifically listed as a conclusive presumption is a disputable presumption that can be overcome by controverting evidence.
The way the Babylonian System view things is that if you do not dispute a disputable presumption the presumption stands as fact.
It appears to us that when you dispute the disputable presumption; by doing so you "knock the ball back into their side of the court" and now what you have stated as fact is the new disputable presumption which stands as fact until someone else controverts it with evidence. If you have communicated the proper converting evidence to support your "new fact" they are not able to overcome that.
We perceive that one who grasps this one simple concept and uses it, has made a giant step toward freedom from the Babylonian System.
When the birth we referred to above in this topic occurred, about a year ago, the father of the child contacted us from the hospital. He indicated that some of the hospital administration people had brought to him a copy of the statute in the Montana Code Annotated (MCA) at 50-15-221. They were telling him that it is “the law” that you have to cooperate in filing a STATE Certificate of Birth for your son.
We read the statute and then told the father of the child that the statute when carefully read shows that all the obligations for filing anything are on the “licensed health care facility”. None of those obligations were incumbent on the parents.
The statute itself reinforced our position where it states at….quote:
MCA 50-15-221 (8)
Either the parent of the child, or another informant, shall verify the accuracy of the personal data to be entered on the certificate in order to permit the filing of the certificate within the time prescribed in subsection (1)….
What we were communicating to the father of the child was that his foremost obligation was to the child rather than to the “licensed health care facility” who had chosen to put themselves into a situation where they must obey the statute.
It appears the writer of the statute was savvy enough to not only know that statutes apply to those who waive unalienable rights in return for a license which grants them privileges….but also knew that remedy must be provided, in the statute, for those such as the father of the child, who did not choose to voluntarily waive there unalienable rights.
Without such an “escape” provision in the statute, it is our opinion that the statute would not pass constitutional muster if a properly framed challenge was launched against it.
The Law Book that we are bound to obey says...quote:
at 2 Kepha(Peter)2:2-3...
...And many will follow their destructive ways, and because of them, the way of truth will be evil spoken of.
and in their covetetousness shall they with feigned fashioned, made up words make merchandise of you...
We say....He who has ears let him hear!
Respectfully submitted,
Marty |
| Cornerstone Foundation |
Posted - 21 Jan 2005 : 11:11:58
quote:
[teal]David Merrill wrote...
I think the reasons can be traced to Franklin D. Roosevelt's speech before the State Governor's Convention on March 6, 1933 when he clearly said, "If people can be persuaded to follow these new forms..." (paraphrased). The presumption is that the parents were persuaded until they squalked differently about it, defeating the presumption.
Cornerstone Foundation wrote:
Yes, David, that does appear to be a key.
It may be that men and woman are commanded to not be persuaded. It seems that we have a responsibility to keep ourselves from being deceived.
Best Regards,
Marty |
| David Merrill |
Posted - 20 Jan 2005 : 17:15:27
That is very interesting, the correspondence between Mr. Jones and the State of Florida. It looks like he successfully pulled his daughter from being registered in commerce. http://ecclesia.org/forum/uploads/bondservant/bcertP.pdf
I think the reasons can be traced to Franklin D. Roosevelt's speech before the State Governor's Convention on March 6, 1933 when he clearly said, "If people can be persuaded to follow these new forms..." (paraphrased). The presumption is that the parents were persuaded until they squalked differently about it, defeating the presumption.
Also I think for Colorado you would find the first form is the same thing Mr. Jones acquired. That is the report that was sent to the State and they produced the second all-upper case Certificate in commerce. It proves the same thing anyway - the legal name designated for my first choice of one is "David Merrill Van Pelt". The comment on the bottom of the back "certification2" corresponds exactly with Mr. Jones' experience with the registry in the State of Florida. [I am a little annoyed the Sister thought to put two "a"s in upper case "A".]
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_certification.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_certification2.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_certification3.jpg
Looking closely at the correspondence Mr. Jones knew his daughter's name and the family nomen but I do not think he knows putting them together creates a legal name, upper and lower case too. See "Name" and "Legal name" hold that definition in common in Black's Fifth Edition law dictionary. The legal name is what is held assumpsit of a binding social (citizenship) contract. At least here in Colorado and proven by a lot of experience with abatement for misnomer. So long as I do not sign anything "David Merrill Van Pelt" then there is no holding me accountable for The "David Merrill Van Pelt" (vessel in admiralty).
So pondering it over. If I were to request a copy of Document 1 "DAvid Merrill VAn Pelt" from county health, I would likely receive Document 2 "DAVID MERRILL VAN PELT". Then if I took it back they would request I return Document 2 and give me Document 1, "destroying" Document 2 and replacing it with Document 1 in the county health records. From that time forward people would not find record of DAVID MERRILL VAN PELT because it will be sealed from public viewing.
So long as I am careful to let them see clearly my name is "David Merrill" and that the document clearly pertains to my birth, there should be no problems with presumption I am dawning the legal identity "David Merrill Van Pelt".
Regards,
David Merrill.
P.S. This correction is quite fetching. Suppose I encounter trouble with the county health department or the clerk and recorder. Supposing they refuse to replace the DAVID MERRILL VAN PELT documentation with the correctly spelled David Merrill Van Pelt documentation [and indication is to seal it from public viewing - commercial verification of registry]; could I go to the district attorney with a complaint about falsification of information? My and even my parents' consent to redact the name into commerce was presumed by the State of Colorado. I should be able to defeat that presumption like Mr. Jones did for his infant daughter.
|
| Bondservant |
Posted - 19 Jan 2005 : 19:34:40
quote:
It is our hope that someone reading this will either post an example of an Affidavit of Live Birth or its equivalent and/or contact us privately at farmco7@yahoo.com with information on where such a document can be obtained or what verbage it should properly include.
Marty,
Click the blue floppy icon links in the first two posts in this thread. I believe the examples given will answer your question.
He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err. - Mark 12:27 |
| David Merrill |
Posted - 19 Jan 2005 : 16:20:28
Are the doctors and nurses pestering for the document? Like some kind of bill collectors? Or maybe Social Services?
Affiant infers swearing - affidavit.
In contemplation the young man may want to acquire a driver license (which requires no SSN if you look carefully) or for any reason want a Birth Certificate in the future, why not make an asseveration of fact? Simply call for two or three witnesses - doctors and nurses to sign a paper that acknowledges the fact that this boy "True Name of the Family nomen family" was born at this exact moment at such hospital, healthy and without defect or complication. Record it at the county recorder and offer a certified copy to the hospital.
Specify the certified copy is only for the hospital's records. The county records are satisfied already. You do not wish the young man registered in commerce through the birth certificate process. Somebody somewhere will probably redact the asseveration into commercial form to satisfy "the law". Even if they do, teach the young man his name and that he is who he says he is and until he decides to get into contracts with the world, he is not in any contracts with the world.
The following evidence of contract has no effect on me whatsoever. I have signed nothing "David M. Van Pelt" for well over a decade. If I wanted to use that trust entity I would sign "David Merrill dba DAVID MERRILL VAN PELT". My name is obviously "David Merrill" and I was born into the Van Pelt family. Notice my father's name is "Philip Jansen" and my mother is "Louanne"*. This paperwork is not even mine. I borrowed it from my mother to file it when I understood how it could be used to prove assumpsit. I suppose the certified copy you are looking at is mine because I paid for it at my clerk's office. But it is not mine until I say so. And I can disown it instantly if it suits me. Like that:
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_certification.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_certification2.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_certification3.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_certification4.jpg
http://friends-n-family-research.info/FFR/Merrill_certification5.jpg
Registration as chattel by Birth Certificate
Regards,
David Merrill.
* You know her better "Lucy Van Pelt" because our families have been life-long friends with Sparky Shulz, the famous cartoonist.
|
| Cornerstone Foundation |
Posted - 19 Jan 2005 : 14:43:57
quote:
Originally posted by Cornerstone Foundation(see page 5 of this topic...the post is date 1/19/2004G 8:20:50 PM.)
The young mother gave birth at 2:27 A. M. 1-17-04 Gregorian Calendar to a healthy boy.
The hospital personnel continued to pressure them for the information to send the STATE so that a BIRTH CERTIFICATE could be issued.
The father requested that we meet with the hospital personnel to discuss the matter.
We met late that afternoon.
We told the hospital personnel:
1. The parents have not made a final decision on the child's name yet.
2. {We may have stated that} the parents had a religious objection to providing the information.
3. We would prefer to prepare a proposed Affidavit of Live Birth ourselves for the doctor and nurse to sign and for the parents to keep for themselves.
The hospital personnel agreed to that and the "free baby" and the parents went home the afternoon of 1-18-04G without further incident.
We want to thank all of you for your guidance and support.
If anyone has suggestions of what should be included in the "Affidavit of Live Birth" please let us know.
Marty
Earlier this week we were invited to a gathering on the 1 year anniversary of the birth of the child referred to above.
The "free baby" is healthy and on his way of growing into a "free boy".
The parents have not yet, however, obtained a suitable Affidavit of Live Birth for the attending doctor and nurses to sign.
It is our hope that someone reading this will either post an example of an Affidavit of Live Birth or its equivalent and/or contact us privately at farmco7@yahoo.com with information on where such a document can be obtained or what verbage it should properly include.
Thank you, for giving this your attention. Your help is appreciated.
Best Regards,
Marty |
| God is Love |
Posted - 29 Mar 2004 : 18:58:02
quote:
Originally posted by Manuel
God is Love,
"Hey" I once was on Mount Fuji! It is a beautiful Mountain, and about twelve thousand two hundred and eighty eight feet tall. Two big craters up there. They say it is inactive. There was a little Jar-Head base down on the base of the mountain called, "CAMP FUJI." That was during the days of old when I was AN ACTIVE VOLUNTEER, through my consent. It was a very steep climb up to the top, pea-rock size vulcanic pebbles... for every step... go down half a step. On the way down,the total down time (running) is approximately one third the up time. The boot-lui (second lieutenant)on the way up handed me the PRC-77 (RADIO) on the last hundred or so meters, therefore reaching up there first during the climb - "Rank has its priviledges" they say :)
I tell you brother, but there is no mountain higher than Fathers Mountain top, and similar to the days of old... nothing can close the doors of heaven on your face, no matter how heavy the burden placed upon your back.
Manuel,
Please forgive the pause before my reply.
That must have been an incredible experience to say the least!!
And I pray that despite the burdens we bear, none of us fall by the wayside for fatigue!
Mount Fuji was originally written in characters that meant "without equal," thus my quote.
And, yes, as former of the mountains, our and their Creator proclaims His own praise!
Some interesting facts and quotes on mountains:
Nearly 1/4 of the earth's surface is covered with mountains.
The Himalayas and the Andes were shaped by huge pieces of the earth's crust moving upward from deep within the earth.
Our lives depend upon the mountains. They are nature's water towers.
All major rivers are fed from mountain sources. Half the people on earth depend on the mountains for water.
New Scientist: "six of the world's 20 major food plants originate in the mountains."
The European Alps, including Mount Civetta, are also incredible peaks.
The only mountains I have seen that I can remember, were the Rocky Mountains.
I have seen pictures and read about other mountains, and can only imagine the awe of looking upon such mountains as the Alps with their icy, snow-covered crests, ridges and slopes, valleys, lakes and meadows. So much earth to explore and so very little money to do so! To me it is such a shame that the world has come to such a state, barring free travel.
There are also the hills in Guilin, China, that are said to be beautiful. Along the Li River, protruding limstone pinnacles pile one upon the other. You can find pictures of the crystal clear, calm and yet misty waters moving along through these "hills."
10 percent of the world's population lives in mountainous areas.
The animals living in the mountains are absolutely incredible testaments to the Creator. The mountain goat, in particular the horned Nubian ibex, one of the most surefooted of the dwellers of mountainous regions, venture along ledges that are so narrow they appear to be impossible to pass. This ibex actually lives in these practically impossible to access areas. The cleft of the goat's hoof is able to expand under it's weight, providing a firm footing for the animal when moving about on the narrow, rocky areas. Truly incredible creations!
I have no doubt these beautiful land masses were created by our Maker as much for our enjoyment as for the ecology of the earth.
Of course, as you've said, nothing compares to the beauty of our Creator!
When the Creator returns all ecological balance will be restored to its former state, despite our wear and tear over the ages on his incredible self-healing planet. Surely it will take a lot of work on our part to undo the harm that we have done as a race.
Amos chapter 4 verse 13: "For, look! the Former of [the] mountains and the Creator of [the] wind, and the One telling to earthling man what his mental concern is, the One making dawn into obscurity, and the One treading on earth's high places, YHWH the God of armies is his name.""
Psalm chapter 95 verse 4: "He in whose hand are the inmost depths of the earth And to whom the peaks of the mountains belong;"
Job chapter 38 verses 4 through 6: "Where did you happen to be when I founded the earth? Tell [me], if you do know understanding. Who set its measurements, in case you know, Or who stretched out upon it the measuring line? Into what have its socket pedestals been sunk down, Or who laid its cornerstone,"
Psalm chapter 104 verse 13: "He is watering the mountains from his upper chambers, With the fruitage of your works the earth is satisfied."
Psalm chapter 72 verse 16: "There will come to be plenty of grain on the earth; On the top of the mountains there will be an overflow. His fruit will be as in Leb'-a-non, And those who are from the city will blossom like the vegetation of the earth."
2 Peter chapter 3 verse 13: "But there are new heavens and a new earth that we are awaiting according to his promise, and in these righteousness is to dwell."
Psalm chapter 98 verse 8: "Let the rivers themselves clap their hands; All together let the very mountains cry out joyfully"
Psalm chapter 65 verse 6: "He is firmly establishing the mountains with his power; He is indeed girded with mightiness."
Psalm chapter 147 verse 8: "The One who is covering the heavens with clouds, The One preparing rain for the earth, The One making the mountains to sprout green grass."
Isaiah chapter 52 verse 7: "How comely upon the mountains are the feet of the one bringing good news, the one publishing peace, the one bringing good news of something better, the one publishing salvation, the one saying to Zion: "Your YHWH has become king!""
Psalm chapter 104 verse 18: "The high mountains are for the mountain goats; The crags are a refuge for the rock badgers."
Psalm chapter 104 verse 10: "He is sending springs into the torrent valleys; Between the mountains they keep going on."
Psalm chapter 76 verse 4: "You are enveloped with light, more majestic than the mountains of prey."
Mount Fuji----"without equal" |
| Manuel |
Posted - 22 Mar 2004 : 22:51:04
God is Love,
"Hey" I once was on Mount Fuji! It is a beautiful Mountain, and about twelve thousand two hundred and eighty eight feet tall. Two big craters up there. They say it is inactive. There was a little Jar-Head base down on the base of the mountain called, "CAMP FUJI." That was during the days of old when I was AN ACTIVE VOLUNTEER, through my consent. It was a very steep climb up to the top, pea-rock size vulcanic pebbles... for every step... go down half a step. On the way down,the total down time (running) is approximately one third the up time. The boot-lui (second lieutenant)on the way up handed me the PRC-77 (RADIO) on the last hundred or so meters, therefore reaching up there first during the climb - "Rank has its priviledges" they say :)
I tell you brother, but there is no mountain higher than Fathers Mountain top, and similar to the days of old... nothing can close the doors of heaven on your face, no matter how heavy the burden placed upon your back.
|
| God is Love |
Posted - 22 Mar 2004 : 22:02:08
Thank you, Robert-James!
I will contact you off list.
May YHWH continue blessing you and yours!
Mount Fuji----"without equal" |
| Robert-James |
Posted - 22 Mar 2004 : 21:49:37
Hi God,
we had ShekinYah 13 years ago in a hospital, because we could not find a midwife who would handle my older wife after five children, the last being a C-section. My wife refused the ss# application, which the witches checked the box anyway, on the certificate of live birth. Weeks later we were noticed by SS that the number was issued, and she called many at SS, mostly Negro women, who thought she was nuts for refusing the opportunity to receive FREE benefits. Finally she talked with a white man, who understood, and said that he would rescend the SS#, as we asked NOT for it. If ShekinYah ever applies for the SS#, she will be issued most probably THAT same #. Till then, neither she, nor her parents APPLIED for the #. ShekinYah never was issued shots by DR.s nor went to GOVT. schools...she is clean. THEY can do as they will, and we also. No joinder occurs, till one accepts BENEFITS from the GOVT.
A Law maxim is noteful: the Law of blood and Kin {Abrahamic covenants} can not be overcome by civil law. Civil law is the law of Rome. Just never use nor accept THEIR number, for it is always THEIR number, never yours, unless you use-accept the numbering of the beast. In David's Day, Benyamin and Levi would not be numbered in David's satanic numbering census. As her guardian, does your child have a number? You are the headship on this matter. Many PARENTS to serve MAMMON, include their children's ss# on 1040 forms, so as to save cash. If they only knew that they were passing their children through the fire unto Moloch!!! Once passed over to the other god, someday that child will have to pass through the Fire of YaHuWeH to get back into the Kingdom. Called the baptism of Fire, which you and your helpmeet shall surely have to deal with. I would be well pleased to go private with y'all, but have no e-mail for you. mine is...american@madison.main.nc.us |
| God is Love |
Posted - 22 Mar 2004 : 19:14:23
Hi all,
On the topic of birth certificates, I have some questions. First off, I would like to point out that I am still learning (always will be), so my statements may not be 100% accurate. If they are not, please point this out to me.
In essence, when an application for record of birth is filled out and signed, this is the first step (second one being the ssn) in the process of changing state citizenship into U.S. citizenship. Later comes preschool enrollment, then school enrollment, then w-4's, bank accounts, accepting presentments, selective service, jury duty summons, and driver's licenses.
At any rate, it would seem to me that in order to nip this ungodly power over us (which we actually provided to them ourselves via our unconditional signature on negotiable instruments/contracts) in the bud, is to go back and revoke or rescind any and all signatures that we have made unconditionally.
Is anyone here experienced and successful in revoking/rescinding past signatures? Anyone know if it is indeed possible? If so, could someone please share that information with me?
Interesting thing, when my son was born, this supposed "voluntary" signature on the application for record of birth was pretty much coerced out of my wife and I. They told us that we wouldn't be permitted to leave without signing it. Is there some way to revoke/rescind the signature on that document as well?
Any info on the topic of revocation/rescindment of unconditional signatures I would gratefully accept! Please, if you have such information, do share! Feel free to email me off list if you like.
May YHWH bless you all!
"We now know that the unborn child is an aware, reacting human being who from the sixth month on (and perhaps even earlier) leads an active emotional life."----The Secret Life of the Unborn Child |
| DanielJacob |
Posted - 08 Mar 2004 : 23:31:22
Greetings brothers,
I found a very interesting and illuminating article on the following site:
http://law.wlu.edu/clinics/lawreview/TOC/TOCvol59iss4.htm
Scroll down to "The Devil in U.S. v. Jones". While the piece is a bit long it is well worth the read. |
| earlthomas |
Posted - 05 Mar 2004 : 19:51:25
The new york times published a half page
the San francisco Chronicle published a 2 page article on Birth Certificates in @ 1997.
A birth certificate Regis-ters you boy or girl
(which then Converts them into a CHILD.)
The article went on to tell how Bolivia or Belize had a low Regis-tration rate and how you can get government jobs or loans if you have one but not otherwise.
|
| Cornerstone Foundation |
Posted - 05 Feb 2004 : 13:45:56
quote:
Originally posted by Robert-James
Now, how can one certify the second birth? That begs an answer. Any willing to respond?
Robert James and Batkol:
We cannot recall having seen anywhere in Scripture where Yahweh commands that either a first birth or a second birth be "certified".
Perhaps what Romans 8:16 states is the approriate way for a man or a woman to know, for themselves, whether or not the second birth has occurred...Perhaps no certification is appropriate.
Romans 8:16...(Yahweh's) Spirit itself testifies(1) with our spirit, that we are the children of Yahweh:...
(1)testifies...How? Because we agree with His Laws. We are in unity with Yahweh.
Marty |
|
|
