Do you know who owns your child?
This might seem like a strange question to most… but the answer is even stranger and more terrifying to comprehend.
When a question like this is posed, we the people often look to our legislature and our constitution for the answers, as esoteric and interpretable as those answers may be. But without the rose-colored glasses, we can actually read with our own eyes what the answer to this question is from the eyes and opinion of our government.
Before you can truly attain the answer to this question though, and comprehend how it applies to you and your children, you must first temporarily suspend your emotion, your idealism, and your beliefs. For when we refer to law, these things do not apply. And when it is a corporation that writes these laws, morals, ethics, and values go out the window.
Anger though, for the purpose of the information you are about to receive, is permitted and requested…
≈
First of all, let’s clarify that what we are about to see is the opinion of the court system. Courts do not offer “judgment”, only “opinion”. The justices (not judges) of the “Supreme Court” as well offer nothing but opinion, which then becomes what the BAR association considers to be “Public Policy” or public opinion. The BAR copyrights these opinions then misleadingly calls it the “law”.
The side effect of being a consenting citizen of the United States (corporation) is that these copyrighted codes are applied to you with what the U.S.CODE itself calls Prima Facie law (law which derives its authority from presumed consent). Therefore, all branches of government technically operate under presumed law, meaning that the consent of the governed is automatically assumed in all legal matters and decisions based on court opinion.
This, unfortunately, applies to all contracts made with or on behalf of the state…
And one of those contracts is called a “Marriage License“.
Yours and your spouses signature on that state-sanctioned and federally registered document signifies a consent-based contract between all three parties – you, your spouse, and the “State“.
But don’t take my word for it… Let’s see what the court system offers in their opinion about this subject?
First, lets visit an Illinois Appellate Court judgment from 1997:
Appellate Court of Illinois, NO. 5-97-0108:
“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.
Continued…
“…When two people decide to get married, they are required to first procure a license from the State. If they have children of this marriage, they are required by the State to submit their children to certain things, such as school attendance and vaccinations. Furthermore, if at some time in the future the couple decides the marriage is not working, they must petition the State for a divorce. Marriage is a three-party contract between the man, the woman, and the State“
Linneman v. Linneman, 1 Ill. App. 2d 48, 50, 116 N.E.2d 182, 183 (1953), citing Van Koten v. Van Koten, 323 Ill. 323, 326, 154 N.E. 146 (1926).
“The State represents the public interest in the institution of marriage.“
Linneman, 1 Ill. App. 2d at 50, 116 N.E.2d at 183 (1953).
Continued…
“This public interest is what allows the State to intervene in certain situations to protect the interests of members of the family. The State is like a silent partner in the family who is not active in the everyday running of the family but becomes active and exercises its power and authority only when necessary to protect some important interest of family life. Taking all of this into consideration, the question no longer is whether the State has an interest or place in disputes such as the one at bar, but it becomes a question of timing and necessity.“
Also, this case law states…
“The state has a wide range of power for limiting parental freedom and authority in things affecting the child’s welfare… In fact, the entire familial relationship involves the State.”
Prince, 321 U.S. at 167, 64 S.Ct. at 442, 88 L.Ed. 645.
(SOURCE: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/il-court-of-appeals/1486817.html)
≈
Well now… the courts sure do seem to offer the opinion that your child is owned by the state!
But heck, what should we the people (not People) expect?
When such authority and jurisdiction is just arbitrarily handed over to a bunch of attorneys running around in black moo-moos with little wooden hammers yelling that they rule supreme in their houses of judicial worship simply because the state allows them to presume such authority and jurisdiction… I suppose those people who consent to this charade get just what they deserve – slavery through a bondage contract.
But then, when the President of the country is also a lawyer, along with his wife, and for that mater more than half of all U.S. Presidents, 56/100 Senators, over 35% of Congressmen, both “speakers” of the house, and most of the State Governors in office today are all BAR attorneys/lawyers, I suppose we shouldn’t be at all surprised that the opinion of the BAR Association is the law of the land…
Of course, the above opinion is not just some isolated case. This opinion is quite general in its purview, and quite common in its legal application. In fact, it is the very basis of the criminal racket we call the dreaded “Child Protective Services (CPS)”, which claims its overarching authority from the Federal “Health And Human Services (HHS)” as it legally kidnaps your children.
So where else can we find such blatant power abused so absolutely?
How about in the case of MEADOWS v. MEADOWS, (Aug 2008), in the “Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama”?
“The primary control and custody of infants is with the government.”
Tillman V. Roberts. 108 So. 62
“There is no wider area for the exercise of judicial discretion than that of providing for and protecting the best interests of children.“
Ex parte Handley, 460 So.2d 167 (Ala.1984).
“The court stands in the position of parens patria[e] of children.“
Ayers v. Kelley, 284 Ala. 321, 224 So.2d 673 (1969)․
“…we held that the best interest of the child took precedence over the parent’s right to travel.“
Everett, 660 So.2d at 601-02.
“In 1984, the Court of Appeals of Idaho ruled that the State had a ‘compelling governmental interest’ that justified restricting the residence of the custodial parent, holding that the best interests of a child had priority over the parent’s right to travel.“
Ziegler v. Ziegler, 107 Idaho 527, 691 P.2d 773 (Idaho App.1985) (citing Carlson v. Carlson, 8 Kan.App.2d 564, 661 P.2d 833 (1983)).
**Note: The word “interest”, when it is used by the courts on behalf of “the state”, should be considered here to be defined in layman’s terms as the monetary interest in what the State considers one of its trade-able commodities. For to a for-profit government, people are considered legal “persons”, and their value is not in flesh and blood, but in labor and tax. Persons are the original form of legal tender. -Clint-
Continued…
“Parens patriae,” literally “parent of the country,” refers traditionally to role of state as sovereign and guardian of persons under legal disability.”
Ex parte Bayliss, 550 So.2d 986, 988 n. 1 (Ala.1989) (quoting Black’s Law Dictionary 1003 (5th ed.1979)).
“Pursuant to the parens patriae doctrine, ‘the primary control and custody of infants is with the government, to be delegated, as of course, to their natural guardians and protectors, so long as such guardians are suitable persons to exercise it.’ ”
Ex parte Wright, 225 Ala. 220, 222, 142 So. 672, 674 (1932). See also Fletcher v. Preston, 226 Ala. 665, 148 So. 137 (1933); and Striplin v. Ware, 36 Ala. 87 (1860).
“In other words, the state is the father and mother of the child and the natural parents are not entitled to custody, except upon the state’s beneficent recognition that natural parents presumably will be the best of its citizens to delegate its custodial powers… ‘The law devolves the custody of infant children upon their parents, not so much upon the ground of natural right in the latter, as because the interests of the children, and the good of the public, will, as a general rule, be thereby promoted.’ “
Chandler v. Whatley, 238 Ala. 206, 208, 189 So. 751, 753 (1939) (quoting Striplin v. Ware, 36 Ala. at 89) (‘ ’).
(SOURCE: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/al-court-of-civil-appeals/1325717.html)
≈
Wait a minute, you say. This doesn’t sound very “constitutional” to me…
Oh, you mean that mythical and more importantly interpretable (in court opinion) document that you believe gives you rights? Silly rabbits, tricks are for kids.
In reality, everything that happens is in fact “constitutional” as long as the court (an attorney in a black moo-moo) says it is “constitutional” from within its (his/her) opinion.
In the end, you have only one right. And that right is the right of non-consent. (Consent is the most important legal term that you can possibly ever comprehend.)
But don’t take my word for it… here are a few more instances of “case law” which let you know that the constitution simply does not apply to you in the corporate world of commercial (copyrighted) code…
“But, indeed, no private person has a right to complain, by suit in court, on the ground of a breach of the Constitution. The Constitution it is true, is a compact, but he is not a party to it.“
Padelford, Fay & Co., vs. Mayor and Aldermen of the City of Savannah 14 Ga. 438, 520
**Note: Remember, the word “person” refers to your veil of artificial person-hood; your STRAWMAN if you will. The court will never refer to you in the sense that you are a living, breathing, sentient being with god-given rights that cannot be taken away, but instead relies on your presumed consent as the physical representation of your fiction, your corporate self. “Person” is defined in U.S. CODE as an “individual, association, corporation, group…” etc. It is not defined as “people” unless those people are a group of “persons”, in which case, as in the constitution, the word “people” is capitalized (i.e. We, the People – referring to the men who signed the constitution, and whom were the only men for which that constitution held under “contract” with any authority. The constitution has no authority accept that for which the court passes judgment (opinion) upon. -Clint-
“The people of the United States resident within any State are subject to two Governments: one State, and the other National; but there need be no conflict between the two. The powers which one possesses, the other does not. They are established for different purposes, and have separate jurisdictions. Together they make one whole, and furnish the people of the United States with a complete government, ample for the protection of all their rights at home and abroad. True, it may sometimes happen that a person is amenable to both jurisdictions for one and the same act… It is the natural consequence of a citizenship which owes allegiance to two sovereignties, and claims protection from both. The citizen cannot complain, because he has voluntarily submitted himself to such a form of government.“
The Supreme Court, 92 US 551: “U.S. v Cruikshank”
≈
Well, there you have it!
Even as the Supreme Court – which has mistakenly translated the word “supreme” to mean that these seven appointed “justices” who pass “opinion” upon the masses of consenting “citizens” are more supreme than even God himself – these men and women; who are not voted into these positions of power in any way by the people, but instead are appointed by the President of the United States (corporation)… these self-imposed deities clearly state here that they are the law of the land, and that that “the natural consequence of citizenship” is for the people to be under their supreme opinion!
Well I for one do not voluntarily submit to the opinions of these megalomaniacs any longer.
And for the record, as a free man with God as my witness…
I DO NOT CONSENT!!!
.
FYI… Stay tuned, subscribe, or do what ever you need to do to monitor future postings from my blog – for there are BIG things happening and lots of important information coming to you soon, free of charge, from yours truly and my band of merry men.
Stay tuned…
.
Special thanks to Burt for all that he does to open my eyes. Please visit his YouTube page here:
http://www.youtube.com/user/donotconsent83?ob=video-mustangbase
And keep this future website in your bookmarks, of which I very much plan to be a part of:
onlyfreemen.com
.
–Clint Richardson (realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Friday, December 16, 2011
Thank You Clint! I posted this on my the FB Right away! Much appreciated for all you do!
Children are big business for government. In 1974, The Adoption and Safe Families Act, created federal aid in the form of financial incentive to the states that increase adoption numbers. Local CPS must therefore get more children (merchandise) Funding becomes avail to the states, to the CPS agents, to the foster families, when children are placed in foster homes and/or mental homes and medicated against the parent’s will Poor children are often targeted because they do not have the wherewithal to hire an attorney or fight the system.
Six times more children die in foster care than in the public at large, yet more and more children are put in foster care as it’s very profitable. Not to mention the child trafficking that takes place through CPS. Children are used as either personnel benefit and/or form of entrapment to keep the powerful in line.
Former Georgia State Senator and her husband were gunned down for exposing the CPS. “The Corrupt Business of CPS”
http://fightcps.co/pdf/TheCorruptBusinessOfChildProtectiveServices.pdf
[...] Attacking Creators of Indefinite Detention BillDec 172011Do You Own Your Children? Clint Richardson Do you know who owns your child?This might seem like a strange question to most… but the answer [...]
[...] ~Ingri (Re-Post from: http://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2011/12/16/do-you-own-your-children/) [...]
To think you own your children is utter immaturity. You cannot own another self aware being, with regards to legality thats merely claims, games and toys insane humans play.
If your Children hate you, dont be surprised.
Yes, I do hate my ‘incubator’ and ‘sperm donor’. I disavowed them, and trashed the more evil, crotch-dropping abusing incubator for eternity in a published e-book series I wrote, and in song. (The biotch will NEVER know about it for as long as she’s alive.) I also got sterilised BEFORE having sex (Planned Parenthood is WONDERFUL!!!!!!! Yes, Maggie Sanger is my hero!), and having a very nice, statistically easy, more problem-free, life for it with much less wasted time and resources. (As ya can tell, I don’t think much of the concept of pregeny either, but having to take care of my half siblings when I was 6, and they were a defiant 2 and 3 turned me off to the infernal creatures FOREVER!!!!!!!)
Your comment is disgusting, but it unfortunately represents a too-large percent of popular opinion.
I post it hesitantly, but recognize you as a victim of many propagandist theaters.
Per Margaret Sanger, the eugenicist, please see my documnetary, “Lethal Injection: The Story of Vaccination”.
Well gee Dan, I suppose you then must agree that the state should “own” your children as they have so clearly claimed.
And since you are someones child the state “owns” you as well.
Did you not comprehend a thing that has been said herein?
There’s no business like bullshit – and that is business as usual in a corporitist state.
It’s too bad people like you are in the market for such bullshit.
ww
Freeing Your Lives Once and For All – Vote Correctly !
Working the fields or that humans need to eat grain is ALSO a myth. Humans can well subsist on a diet of domestic animals and fruits that grow on trees and bushes. There might be no need to work any field at a certain densiy level. Labour could well be a thing of the past under this hunter-gatherer paradigm.
Note that a cow produces 2 litres of milk daily. With a small self sustaining herd, chickens, a water reservoir, and a number of fruit trees/plants on ALLODIAL land (without Eminent Domain powers which MP’s should be voted on the basis of their ability to abolish by) there hardly is anything to ‘labour’ about, barring the taxes that your idiot MPs again allow in law to begin with and should not be voted for unless they intend to abolish the same.
If MP’s abolish assessments and taxes on the subsistence land owners, and the fact that MONEY (food) DOES GROW ON TREES, who needs to work or labour or pay any taxes at all?
The entire ‘democratic’ system is a ‘remake’ of feudalism via mob rule, and your new parasitic version of the monarch (not the4 limited types with only ceremonial powers) is government itself – especially those who are nepotistic within government (and less so but still harmful nepotists) within political parties where independent MPs should be in power instead.
Finally one does not need to own that much land but to be considerate, should have what produces a good amount for one’s family or extended family at most with reasonable space to walk around on and provide some privace (1-2 acres minimal? No more than 100 acres at most . . . )
This is the end of big govt. but vote very carefully for pro-ALLODIAL anti-EMINENT DOMAIN candidates. And make sure those you vote or even those in undemocratic political parties are term limited.
Thanks, good job.
Of course, I don’t own my children.
But the State sure as hell doesn’t either.
@Dan although as parents/humans we don’t “own” anyone but we do have inalienable rights about how we choose to raise our kids, not the government. As a parent i choose if my children will get vaccinations, i choose what my children eat, I choose what they will wear, i choose what they will watch on TV, if anything and how much TV they watch. It is not any business of the state or federal government and I will fight any government agency and i don’t mean in the court system. They will be meeted at the door with my AK47 and i will make all those pay a dear price, even at the cost of my own life, to defend my rights and my children from the state. So if you work for the state and are willing to die to take my kid or force my kid to do something i don’t consent please come and try to take my kid or froce my kids to your whims. I will gladly give you an opportunity to meet your maker.
I’ve read about this numerous times. There was even a story of a man going to his local court house and discussing the matter with one of the higher ups (some lawyer who administrated all of the marriages in the county). The administrator was actually glad someone had finally realized this deception was going on. I don’t always agree with you Clint but I’d stand beside you in a second. We all need to take our freedom back and make a go at a new way of life, one in which individuals are the masters of their own fate.
For newbies, This guy explains it better than I ever could.
Side by side columns; The Republic vs THE CORPORATION
http://www.usavsus.info/ Take the blue pill and ignore this and everything in your life will stay the same, take the RED PILL and open this, and the truth will be revealed to you and there will be no going back, it is your choice, your free will. But anyone reading this site has already taken the RED PILL.
You should study up on what the certification of birth registration is all about. Same with Social Security. Neither of these are required and it’s exactly these things that binds you to contract with the State, United States, State of <insert state name here), the District of Columbia and the Crown.
From what I understand one can get married by a Preacher and put the marriage in a family Bible along with a family tree stating who each of the spouses parents are. This is legal and binding contract and cuts the state out of the marriage. The Bible being like garlic to a blood sucking vampire, I guess.
One more thing. I can’t say I agree with the right of “non-consent”. In theory, yes. But, in reality, no. You can claim that you do not consent all you want. You can declare yourself a sovereign citizen, or a real flesh-and-blood human being, rejecting your incorporated self. but run into the wrong law enforcement officer, judge, etc, and try claiming “non-consent”. They’ll throw you in jail, or worse, and chuck the key.
In other words, if jackbooted nazi law enforcement, or the often times, thug justice system wants to destroy you, they can. People who are successful at declaring themselves sovereign are few and far between. They’re either very lucky, or have exceptional smarts and ability to articulate…or maybe, both.
After all, who is the drug kingpin of all drug kingpins? The DOJ.
Oh yeah, a Preacher marrying a couple without a state endorsed license would violate the state endorsed 501 3c preaching license. So good luck getting a preacher to preside over your marriage. Maybe if you do the Bible thing, sign it and declare by the soverein authority over ourselves we declare ourselves married works. Its really about weather or not we have the right to enter into consentual contracts (like marriage). No one needs the consent of a government which actually needs our consent!
In “the State of Georgia”, the work around to a state licensed minister marrying an unlicensed couple is for the groom to post in the church on at least two consecutive Sundays prior to the ceremony a notice called “Marriage Bans” or “Bans of Marriage”. This is what I did, so our minister would not get into trouble with the State. I did not get a marriage license.
As for the guy who thinks expressing your non-consent is worthless in the face of jack booted thugs, I would answer that you are probably right, but if you don’t give them notice of your non-consent, you are deemed to be approving of their abuse of you. So say it anyway, and tell them you appeal to God to judge them. Those who live by the sword will die by the sword.
Yes, they,.the (Body Politic) have you by the “mouth…” Yes, if you red the codes and statutes for your State, you will see it in writing. Yes, they own you and your children by contract. That is why they can do what they can and they are not even hidding it for us all. (It’s in plain view).
The good news is, you can get out of it. By (Affidavit of Denying Corprate Statutes).You can read in Federal Rules of Civil Procedures..
D
[...] .SOURCE [...]
It is important to understand the “invisible contracts” one frequently signs on to unwittingly with the “government”. One should know that in most cases one actually has the option to refrain from engaging into these contracts. Under the Uniform Commercial Code, you can reserve your rights in any transaction, however who really ever bothers doing that? Instead, you unwittingly waive our rights that you have naturally from our Creator, and, according to the UCC, a right, once waived, is lost. When you sign up for a bank account you not only agree to certain corporate rules the Bank wishes to impose on you. Again, who ever bothers reading the fine print? But you also agree to contracts that that bank entity has with certain corporate entities that operate, under color of law, your government. (The corporations that were formed by the banks that lent money to your government, and when the government defaults under international law that stipulates a seventy year default period for such debt, the banks that lent the money take over, and form a corporation from the nation that allows it to govern that nation and distribute its assets in an orderly fashion to the creditors, and/or refinance the debt under new agreements, such as pledging the labor of all citizens to repay the debt). When you sign on the “line” on your checks that actually, when you examine it closely, says in fine print “authorized signature” (or when you sign up for your state issued driver’s license, or to multiple other invisible contracts), you agree to accept the position of agent for a legal entity that was created shortly after your birth in your name. Your signature also at the same time generates a debt (money) by simply in opening a bank account. You also right then and there agree to become a taxpayer under the Internal Revenue Code. Did you read the fine print regarding to your newly created relationship with the International Monetary Fund? No, you didn’t. When you insist you are a sovereign individual; that you never volunteered for this or that; you are mistaken. You did volunteer. As did the young man who stepped up to the yellow line after he got drafted. He volunteered. He could have refrained and stayed seated. Or like the dude who is asked by the judge, “Do you understand” agrees (unwittingly) to the judge’s jurisdiction. You lost your rights because you unwittingly waived your rights. When you got married, you did agree and assent (which is different from consent but adds up to the same result; assent means agreeing by failing to protest, even if unwittingly) that the state owns your children. Keep in mind that the state only co-owns them (one third, along with you and your wife). It is actually not that the state owns your children at all, but the state owns the legal fiction created at birth with your signing of a “birth certificate”, (analogous to a “berth certificate” on a maritime vessel that causes you to come, with your agreement, mind you, under maritime jurisdiction, which is very similar to martial law; so don’t complain when the judge sits next to a flag that has a golden fringe, but that is another story). This birth (berth) certificate is a marketable security representing the legal fiction that is You, a citizen or “employee” of the state corporation, which is used as a collateral for the debt the state and Federal “governments”, Inc. continue to “restructure”. After the international default of US, Inc. of 1999 certain regulations had to be passed that would allow the creditors to own the physical bodies of those who had signed on as “authorized agents” of their fictitious c’es tui que trust, also known as Strawman, to be used as collateral, (with your assent), so that true slavery, genocide, total control can be achieved legally = with your assent, since contracts are the only real law; statutes are mere regulations), established through Legislative Acts (corporate code). Again, with your assent! If a state mandates a vaccine for the corporate cattle (humans), such as the state of California under Jesuit Governor Brown, the state, not you, gets to decide 100% if you get one. Funny, one thing, have you noticed the numbers? Somebody really likes ones and twos and nines. After 1999, as early as 2001, there was 911. That shocking event convinced you to assent to the I-wave-a-flag-Patriot Act. It passed, with the sole dissent of one Sen. Paul Wellstone. Too bad, his plane disintegrated shortly after takeoff. Ever wonder why you never hear anything anymore about this hapless man? The corporate suits (his colleagues) that ordered the hit laughed profusely at Wellstone’s funeral. Now in 2011, you get the “We-can-kill- you-any-time Act”, again with your assent. I predict that if a state passed a law that allows the corporate financier “owners” to inject an RFID chip into your baby’s body right at birth, like you brand cattle, only surreptitiously, such as in conjunction with your baby’s God-forbid-we-must-protect-baby against-unprotected-sex-early-Hepatitis B shot, you will again waive your rights and assent. Some never learn. If you wish to learn more about Invisible Contracts, read George Mercier’s book Invisible Contracts, widely available on the net.
merry men?
Present!
If I ever get any postal mail, “ALL CAPS”, from any of these useful idiots again, although I doubt it being as they already stole my house, I intend to right on the front of the envelope, “No Such Fiction At This Address, Return To Sender”.
Happy Trails, . . .
Stop Feeding These Damn Parasites!
[...] Posted: December 18th, 2011 by Militant Libertarian by Clint Richardson [...]
To be a free carbon based unit, you must divest yourself of all these (adhesion) contracts. Marriage license, Drivers License, Vehicle Registration, Voter registration, Gun permits etc, accept no benefits, no welfare, no food stamps, no unemployment bennies… the list seems endless.
You must also give notice to the parties that you withdraw consent and revoke your signature, past and present by sworn affidavit by legal ‘notice and demand’ documents.
This is the part that people can’t comprehend. They think their government is a government. Your “government” is a de facto corporation posing as a legitimate government. Look up your city, county or state name on Dunn and Bradstreet in their search box and you’ll see that it is true. Your police and sheriff’s departments are corporations as well.
The only thing I haven’t figured out yet is how to rescind your Social Security Number. This is the first thing they use against you when you try to claim freedom. Until I find a workable procedure, NEVER NEVER NEVER give that number to anyone, especially cops and judges.
Social security is voluntary and for tax purposes only. It is NOT to be used for identification purposes. (Social Security Act and the Privacy Act of 1974(?) are two sources). So it is a federal crime if anyone asks for or demands you provide that information. If you do, you are volunteering into a contract and giving your consent….thus you are a government slave and bound by the terms of that contract (Statutes and regulations)
If you hold any of these licenses and permits or REGISTER anything with the STATE,or accept ANY benefits, you can’t claim freedom. That’s why people don’t win in “court” or get thrown in jail. Just look in your wallet. If you have anything with your name in all CAPS, you are considered a corporation/statutory fiction/Person/US CITIZEN..
OK Clint, you are hereby challenged. Let’s see if you can help with the Social Security Number thing. Good article by the way. I like how you reference court cases instead of just making claims.
Social Security, in my opinion, is the hook that has many people baited into staying a citizen.
The legal act of relinquishing citizenship is in US CODE, and by default the “social services” like Social Security would be relinquished, since they are services provided by the corporation to “citizens”.
You should follow Burt, who is walking the walk.
His info is listed at the end of this article.
-Clint-
I took a completed Form SSA-521 to the local SSA office along with the SS card. I surrendered the card and gave them the completed form. I just stated on the form that my decision to apply for the benefit has resulted in a disadvantage to me, and that I do not believe I am a U.S. citizen. (Would be better to say “I have never consented to be a U.S. citizen.” The benefit that I withdrew my application for was the SS card. The type of application being withdrawn is Form SS-5. I asked the clerk at the counter to make a copy of my completed form and to stamp it received by them for my records. She obliged. 60 days went by without any objection being received by SSA. Silence equals acquiescence.
The benefit of this is, if I am ever asked for this number again by the occupational military forces, I can honestly state that I do not have one.
Now, I did this simply because I believe I was led by the Holy Spirit to do this. It does not mean this is right for everyone.
The truth, however, is that even if you hold a SS card, YOU do not have an SSN. The SSN belongs to a trust. You granted the license to SSA to create the trust for your benefit. So you are the grantor-beneficiary of the trust, but the owner/trustee of the trust is SSA. The trust has a name similar to the Birth Certificate name, but it is different, because it uses only a middle initial instead of a middle name. You are allowed the beneficial use of the number.
Thus, a good reply when asked for the SSN is “That number is trust property. It does not belong to me. You should contact the trustee.”
oooops?
Clint, you posted above,
“Even as the Supreme Court – which has mistakenly translated the word “supreme” to mean that these seven appointed “justices” who pass “opinion” upon the masses of consenting “citizens” are more “supreme than even God himself” etc.
Correction,
The Supreme Court of the United States, which meets in the United States Supreme Court Building in Washington, D.C., consists of a chief justice and eight associate justices who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate. Once appointed, justices have life tenure unless they are removed after impeachment.
Happy Trails, . . .
DON’T GET MARRIED, DON’T SIGN ANY CONTRACT WITH PEOPLE. THAT WAY YOU ARE FREE
[...] by Clint Richardson [...]
hello clint. ive been very inspired by your blog. I would like to ask you a couple questions. I’m sure you are a very bussy but if you get a chance i could use some help. ive basically lost all my friends and my parents think that i have lost my mind and need to see a therapist simply cause they think that there reality has to be there reality and “its just the way things are” it would be nice to talk to someone who can give me some feed back and maybe help me take back my freedom.
Thanks and have a wonderful holiday.
George.
Send me an email, George, and I’ll give you a call. – clint@cafr1.com
We all go through this, trust me.
Now I have accumulated this blog, etc, and can just pull up the proof. My parents know not to argue with me now since I can point to the law, code, patent, or CAFR that proves my point. It’s a great feeling, and they are losing their battle with cognitive dissonance me thinks.
-Clint-
@Chili – “The only thing I haven’t figured out yet is how to rescind your Social Security Number.”
You can only file a request for the SSA to delete the record of your SSN “application”, they will not rescind a SSN once assigned. Call SSA and get further information on how to receive and fill out a form to void the account they created.
Also, you will have to void, null, cancel, purge, etc your Birth Certificate as well.
Everyone must renounce their U.S. citizenship and go back to being nonresidential aliens (aka American Citizens). Stop paying income, Federal, FICA, SS, medicare, medicaid and State taxes. This is a positive non-violent way to protest and tell the “government” where they can go!
Go to Youtube and watch videos from Dean Clifford and Kurt Kallenbach (listen to Kurt at http://libertyandfreedomradio.net/archives.asp under “I Am The People” – sorry I’m not trying to advertise but this IS IMPORTANT information to get out!). They understand this system very well and Kurt will tell you how to get out of the system. The only dilemma is the United States [Corporation] will fight you tooth and nail; they will fight you either by consent or conquest.
And don’t think Ron Paul will save the day either! And Alex Jones is a Zionist shill who’s job is to keep you in the system by becoming a “register” voter (look up the term “Register” in Black Law’s dictionary 5th addition – it means “to enroll” aka contract!).
We need more men and women Withdrawing their Consent and get out of the system. Let this so called “government” die!!! We don’t need “government” of any kind! Not even the Republic created by the Founding Fathers because they did it for their own selfish needs! Remember, a CONstitution is a Contract — Why in the heck would anyone give up their God/Natural given birth rights for man made rights (privileges) created by selfish people?!?!
Interesting…
Parens patriae is Latin for “parent of the nation.” “In the United States, the parens patriae doctrine has had its greatest application in the treatment of children, mentally ill persons, and other individuals who are legally incompetent to manage their affairs. The state is the supreme guardian of all children within its jurisdiction, and state courts have the inherent power to intervene to protect the best interests of children whose welfare is jeopardized by controversies between parents. This inherent power is generally supplemented by legislative acts that define the scope of child protection in a state.”
Seems to me that the property taxes that we pay should be billed back to the state because: “The state is the supreme guardian of all children within its jurisdiction, and state courts have the inherent power to intervene to protect the best interests of children.”
That is until the age of majority: The age at which a person, formerly a minor or an infant, is recognized by law to be an adult, capable of managing his or her own affairs and responsible for any legal obligations created by his or her actions.
That is if you give you’re consent.
Just one problem…
As soon as you accept “representation” via a lawyer/attorney, you have just admitted to being incompetent and made yourself and your property a ward of the courts. At this point, you are considered “mentally ill” as an incompetent person.
You loose immediately.
I wrote a post about this topic today at my blog. technicallythatsillegal.com
You might be interested to read it.
Good stuff here, by the way.