It’s Time To Withdraw Your Membership To The United States!


Citizenship SchoolIf you are a member of an organization that begins to do things you don’t like, the rational course of action would be to withdraw your financial support to that organization and cease to be a member.

If your bank misbehaves or charges you ridiculous extra fees just because it can according to your “agreement” with the bank, the rational course of action would be to withdraw your financial support and cease to be a customer.

If your insurance coverage starts to diminish in quality or denies you your due benefits or coverage when you need it, the rational course of action would be to withdraw your financial support to that company and cease to be a member.

If my doctor or hospital began to practice bad medicine and cause more illness than it cured, the rational course of action would be to withdraw financial support to that hospital or doctor and cease to be a customer, and perhaps pursue alternative healing.

In fact, when we consider this repetitive logic, wouldn’t anyone be hard-pressed to think of any thing that might mistreat us as a member or customer that would not warrant the withdraw of financial support and termination of contract or membership?

So why then are people still voluntary members of the United States central government?

Do they enjoy the thought of future bad healthcare – which is really the quite unlawful forced commerce with insurance companies and not actual healthcare? If their membership to a corporation that gives them “benefits” suddenly forces them to accept bad medicine and bad insurance, isn’t the simple solution to end their membership to the main corporation?

Do the people enjoy paying taxes and unjust extortion fees and taxes for non-crimes just so that government can invest that money for itself without offering any benefit back to the people? Would it not be prudent to end that kind of business “relationship” with such a bad business?

Do people really believe that the meager benefit of “old-age insurance” called social security (socialism) is worth the vast amount of legal restrictions and tyrannies set forth upon them through their entire life – even when they could have invested their own money and walked away with double or triple what this administration will ever pay them – should they actually live through Obama-care? Do the people even know that there is no actual trust in their name – just a large investment fund that has been completely tapped for the national debt with no legal requirement to ever pay them anything? Do they know the difference between investing for themselves and their future and contributing (giving away) their hard-earned money to government? Do they realize where their money goes as government invests it into war, Monsanto, pharmaceuticals, and Think tanks?

Is there some misconception that being a “citizen” is somehow patriotic – that withdrawing their citizenship (membership) will make them less “American”?

Really? Because last time I checked, it was called the United States of America, not America of the United States.

Was there created at some point in history the fallacy that America is the central government called the United States – a 10 mile square municipal corporation that is not even one of the actual 50 states in the “union” ? Do the people actually believe that America is the United States?

Perhaps that misconception derives from the misunderstanding of just what citizenship is.

For citizenship is simply a membership, be it voluntary or forced through coercion and martial law, unilaterally agreed to by an individual. It is no different than a gym membership; where you must follow the rules set out in your agreement contract that only you sign. Like the government, the gym does not sign your contract. It is simply an agreement for membership to enjoy some benefits, as well as an agreement for you to follow their rules.

But what happens when the rules change without your consent?

What happens when the benefits diminish?

For instance, each state is a member of the Untied States, forced to hand over their unappropriated lands to the United States and draft new State constitutions after the Civil War under “reconstruction” and after agreeing to the terms of uniform “enabling acts” under duress. In fact, the civil war was nothing but a military takeover by a defunct central government under martial law of the lawfully succeeded sovereign states. They were forced back into contract membership with the new central government, one that was unlawfully created absent of the lawful participation of these states’ lawful congressmen. In their stead, military martial officers of law were forced into congress to replace the lawfully elected congressmen of each state. And under duress and at gunpoint, these states became members of this municipal corporation in Washington D.C, eventually dividing the entire territory of America into counties within states.

COUNTY. A district into which a state is divided.

2. The United States are generally divided into counties; counties are divided into townships or towns…

4. In some states, as Illinois; 1 Breese, R. 115; a county is considered as a corporation, in others it is only a quasi corporation.

5. In the English law this word signifies the same as shire, county being derived from the French and shire from the Saxon. Both these words signify a circuit or portion of the realm, into which the whole land is divided, for the better government thereof, and the more easy administration of justice. There is no part of England that is not within some county, and the shire-reve, (sheriff) originally a yearly officer, was the governor of the county. Four of the counties of England, viz. Lancaster, Chester, Durham and Ely, were called counties Palatine, which were jurisdictions of a peculiar nature, and held by, especial charter from the king. See stat. 27 H. VIII. c.25.

COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. Certain officers generally entrusted with the superintendence of the collection of the county taxes, and the disbursements made for the county. They are administrative officers, invested by the local laws with various powers.

***All legal definitions taken from Bouvier’s Law Dictioanry, 1856

Counties are nothing but municipal corporations; a network grid of contract issuers and enforcers for the United States government – acting under administrate local law with federal powers. Another word for administrative is contract. And all administrative law is simply the administration of the unilateral contractual relationship with you and government. The county has police officers. The gym has security guards. There is no difference. Police officers are just security guards for the county corporation. They’re authority is presumed, just as your citizenship that might grant them contractual authority over you is presumed.

UNILATERAL CONTRACT, civil law. When the party to whom an engagement is made, makes no express agreement on his part, the contract is called uni-lateral, even in cases where the law attaches certain obligations to his acceptance… A loan of money, and a loan for use, are of this kind.

One does not generally think of government as just another customer-based corporation, but this is exactly what it is. When signing a unilateral agreement (contract), one agrees to follow a certain set of de facto corporate rules and regulations (codes) as set out by government. This is the voluntary state of citizenship – a series of unilateral contractual agreements signed or unsigned (presumption of law) by the people of America.

This circumstance of multiple contractual obligations is often called the STRAWMAN, which is simply the “person” as defined and bound by these contracts. The “person” is artificial, as defined in US Code and the 14th Amendment (see below). The person is a corporate veil of the man, used for the purposes of contracts. And in administrative law, government can only contract with this artificial person. Government cannot regulate man, only the corporate person. Thus, administrative law has nothing to do with and no authority over living man, unless he or she is acting under the commercial activities described within their contractual relationship with government.

A driver’s license, for instance, is a unilateral contractual agreement by one man to follow the State government’s vehicle code, which is administrative law. Driving is administratively speaking a commercial activity. Thus, driving can be regulated by government… but only if the man agrees to become a commercial person while utilizing his automobile. He does this when he unilaterally agrees for no reason at all to agree with government that he is utilizing his car as a commercial “vehicle”, even when dropping the kids off at school. Even if that car is never used for any purpose in commerce pr commercial activities, the government still elicits people to obtain a commercial license to drive.

You see, this is the only way that government can have authority over you. It must trick you into entering into some agreement and contract for which you give your consent to its authority. Without this unilateral agreement, government cannot rule you and regulate every part of your life. It must convince you that the activities you participate in are within its authority as a legal activity before it can tell you they are illegal. And it must lie to you so as to convince you that using your car to travel is illegal unless you have a license to do so. For a license is nothing more than permission from government to do something illegal. In other words, every time you get into your vehicle and drive you are breaking the law by permission.

Though traveling in your personal automobile is not unlawful, driving commercially without a license is illegal – a breach of contract.

Perhaps most ironic about all of this is the simple realization that all of this contractual relationship nonsense is based on one and only one thing – your membership with the United States corporation in Washington D.C. This is the central hub of information. It is where your official artificial person is stored and maintains residence. And states and counties are just subdivisions of that corporation – artificial borders signifying United States jurisdiction, assigned federal locator codes called ZIP codes that are property of the United States. For the U.S. Postal Service is part of the United States corporation in Washington D.C. Your United States mail is not delivered to your home, it is delivered to your commercial address within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.

You must never forget that all of your commercial activities are being done inside of the United States jurisdiction – the artificial corporate veil that extends throughout the 50 states and beyond like a spider web, ensnaring the activities people like flies and spinning them into commercial persons.

Imagine in your mind that the entire land of America has a plastic coating over it for which all people walk upon as corporate persons and citizens of the United States, never really comprehending that this clear plastic coating of corporate person-hood separates their natural body from the natural land. The people walk and talk on this corporate veil of clear plastic as if it doesn’t exist and as if they are walking on the actual land – which ironically is a true statement. For corporatism is indeed artificial, just as the artificial person replaces the man in his or her transactions with the corporation government, so to does the United States replace the land of America with its veil of artificial person-hood called statutes and codes.

Yet just on the other side of this artificial construct lies the natural world, natural law, and all of the natural rights that existed before the people contractually agreed to give them up for government granted political rights. For tyranny and oppression is literally the contractual right of citizens of the United States.

For a deeper understanding of what a right actually is (and this reality will certainly surprise you), please take the time to study my expose’ here:

Link–> http://realitybloger.wordpress.com/2013/02/19/tyranny-requires-equality/

Perhaps this love affair with citizenship stems from the fallacious belief that the United States is still the same old sovereign county it was when it was founded, before the civil war tore it apart and the defunct and unlawful United States glued it back together with legal tape and military oppression?

Well, I’ve got some bad news for you folks…

The United States is now a member of the United Nations… and the United States is referred to as a “sovereign state” by that international central government. Just like the states under contractual membership with the United States corporation in Washington D.C. are not referred to as “countries”, the 193 countries of the world under membership of the United Nations corporation are also not called “countries”. And it is not the people or the 50 states that are members of the United Nations, it is just this 10 mile square piece of land called the United States corporation that is a member.

So can a sovereign individual state be a member of such a central government and still be sovereign? And can a sovereign nation then still be sovereign as a member of an international government under international maritime and admiralty (military) law?

The United Nations doctrine for “statehood” rings familiar, sounding very much like the false paradigm of the rules of “statehood” for the 50 states in the United States of America:

The dominant customary international law standard of statehood is the declarative theory of statehood that defines the state as a person of international law if it “possess the following qualifications: (a) a permanent population; (b) a defined territory; (c) government; and (d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.” Debate exists on the degree to which recognition should be included as a criterion of statehood. The declarative theory of statehood, an example of which can be found in the Montevideo Convention, argues that statehood is purely objective and recognition of a state by other states is irrelevant. On the other end of the spectrum, the constitutive theory of statehood defines a state as a person under international law only if it is recognized as sovereign by other states. For the purposes of this list, included are all states that either:

  • (a) have declared independence and are often regarded as having control over a permanently populated territory

or

  • (b) are recognised as a sovereign state by at least one other sovereign state

Link–> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states

The word-magic here involves the concept that the “state” has “declared independence” and has “control over a permanently populated area”.

This is of course the United States. It, as a central incorporated government, has declared independence that no one dare challenge due to its military might. The once sovereign states now pledged as collateral for this corporation, its debts, and its “good faith and credit” are considered nothing but legal territories of the United States in the legal realm through this contractual and constitutional relationship. The governments of the individual state territories of the United States are still military in nature, each one occupied by the United States’ military and its bases, which under the Libor Code represents military rule.

In other words, the presence of a military base in your State is stated in law to signify military rule under martial law. These bases are not just for your protection, they are for your control. They are the occupying forces of the United States, left over from the same forces that occupied each State during the Civil War. They are the United States corporation’s military – the military of Washington D.C. –  not the American or state militia. They protect the United States from all threats both foreign and domestic, and that includes the people of America and the 50 states. The military ensures the continuity of this 10 mile square municipal corporation and its military rule over the 50 states and other insular possessions. The United States is legally in possession of us!

And each state is governed militarily by a “governor”, whom in Canada is referred to as “Governor General”, and who is the ex officio Commander-in-Chief of the State National Guard of His State unless called in total by the President as (CIC) of the United States. This military position of Governor as commander of a military force is followed by a whole list of military positions…

Lieutenant Governor
Attorney General
Solicitor General
Insurance Commissioner – i.e. military commissions
Superintendents – The commanding officer of the United States Military Academy is its Superintendent.
State Controller
Officers of the court
Police Officers
Employees of Commissions and Authorities

All of these titles represent rule by military force.

OFFICER. He who is lawfully invested with an office.

2. Officers may be classed into, 1. Executive; as the president of the United States of America, the several governors of the different states. Their duties are pointed out in the national constitution, and the constitutions of the several states, but they are required mainly to cause the laws to be executed and obeyed.

3. – 2. The legislative; such as members of congress; and of the several state legislatures. These officers are confined in their duties by the constitution, generally to make laws, though sometimes in cases of impeachment, one of the houses of the legislature exercises judicial functions, somewhat similar to those of a grand jury by presenting to the other articles of impeachment; and the other house acts as a court in trying such impeachments. The legislatures have, besides the power to inquire into the conduct of their members, judge of their elections, and the like.

OFFICE. An office is a right to exercise a public function or employment, and to take the fees and emoluments belonging to it

2. Offices may be classed into civil and military.

TAKE. This is a technical expression which signifies to be entitled to; as, a devisee will take under the will. To take also signifies to seize, as to take and carry away…

CIVIL. This word has various significations. 1. It is used in contradistinction to barbarous or savage, to indicate a state of society reduced to order and regular government; thus we speak of civil life, civil society, civil government, and civil liberty.

2. It is sometimes used in contradistinction to criminal, to indicate the private rights and remedies of men, as members of the community, in contrast to those which are public and relate to the government; thus we speak of civil process and criminal process, civil jurisdiction and criminal jurisdiction.

3. It is also used in contradistinction to military or ecclesiastical, to natural or foreign; thus we speak of a civil station, as opposed to a military or ecclesiastical station; a civil death as opposed to a natural death; a civil war as opposed to a foreign war.

So what does all this mean?

Consider for a moment just what the term “civil war” actually represents. As with the United States Civil War, we find that it was indeed fought to ensure the forced continuity of the United States government. It was not so much a war as it was an invasion. And it was fought to ensure that the people under martial law went along with that government who did not wish to.

To make the contradistinction between the words military and civil is almost a mute point. For a “civil society” under “civil law” cannot be accomplished without force of a military entity – which is the executive branch of government (now the Department Of Defense – as in defense of the realm).

For instance, the U.S. District Courts operate with no authority to actually enforce their decisions. Thus the power of the courts lie in the connection it has to the Executive Branch of that area. This is the true importance of the County Sheriff, for the Sheriff is the Executive power of all the courts within that county. The Sheriff’s Department man’s these courts (bailiffs, etc.), who operate under his authority. Of course, the Sheriff would have little power without the decisions and warrants issued by the courts. In a lawful society this would be referred to as a check and balance, creating a restraint of unreasonable power or influence by either entity. But when unlawful men occupy these offices as persons of the militarized United States under its authority and jurisdiction, the law becomes lawless and the powers of corruption go unchecked.

In essence, this relationship between the judicial and the executive is symbiotic in nature, where alone each office and officer would have no lawful power. But together they become the law, both written and enforced. The cowardly attorney’s in black robes called judges hide behind their pulpits and gavels while the Sheriff hides behind his badge and gun, while each gives authority to the other. Neither takes responsibility for their own actions, because they have been allowed to operate as artificial persons under limited liability incorporation. And they protect each other from legal action as one derives power unjustly from the other.

If lawful men took over either office, refusing to enforce the power and authority of the other, and taking responsibility for their own actions outside of the color of law, the people would have little to fear from their government. But lawful men such as these generally end up dead or imprisoned by the very entity they represent.

On the national level, the President of the United States acts as the Commander In Chief of his executive army, carrying out the legislative and judicial law presented to it. Congress, like the judicial, has no power to enforce its created statutes and codes (judicial opinions for courts) without the enforcement arm of the Executive Branch. A law or decision without force carries no weight, especially from men with no honor.

In other words, the legal system of the United States is solely based on the force and coercion of the executive government to carry out the political laws created by congress. The local and state governments operate under the authority of the United States, for they are just corporations as extensions of that federal government corporation.

Congress created the court system and the Supreme Court, which derives its authority and jurisdiction from that body politic.This is an important fact because this means that the entire system of corporate administrative courts across the country are statutory in nature – created by congress and not the constitution itself, and operating under the authority and jurisdiction of the United States corporation. To put it simply, this means that the courts are operating under private corporate law without lawful authority. That is, unless you consent to that authority as a private corporate person – a member of the United States corporation. Just like the gym example, this private law only applies to members of the United States.

This creation of the court system was done by Congress in the Judiciary Act of 1789:

–=–

The Judiciary Act of 1789

September 24, 1789.

1 Stat. 73.

CHAP. XX. – An Act to establish the Judicial Courts of the United States.

SECTION 1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the supreme court of the United States shall consist of a chief justice and five associate justices, any four of whom shall be a quorum, and shall hold annually at the seat of government two sessions, the one commencing the first Monday of February, and the other the first Monday of August. That the associate justices shall have precedence according to the date of their commissions, or when the commissions of two or more of them bear date on the same day, according to their respective ages…

Link–> http://www.constitution.org/uslaw/judiciary_1789.htm

–=–

The authority and jurisdiction of these statutory courts only applies to citizens (members) of the United States.

Some people also refer to citizens as “employees” of the Untied States, which is not incorrect. Congressmen (representatives and senators) are also “employees” of the United States corporation, but are officially called “Members”. And we can read above that judges and justices are “commissioned” as employees.

All of these men are acting as artificial persons of the United States, for there is no natural law or natural rights under civil and administrative law because only political law exists there – abeyance by force of contract. This is the very definition of military rule. And every time a citizen does not obey the law, the militarized executive branch steps in to force either compliance, incarceration, or death.

Murder is unlawful and illegal, but government gives license to commit this illegal act – a license to kill. It is interesting to note that government only acknowledges the “civil death” of a person, not the bloody and violent taking of the life of a man.

CIVIL DEATH, persons. The change of the state of a person who is declared civilly dead by judgment of a competent tribunal. In such case, the person against whom such sentence is pronounced is considered dead.

It is interesting to note here that just as a living or natural man cannot have a civil death but only a natural one, the word “perish” does not apply to persons, as artificial persons never existed as a living things but only as contractual things in legal code:

TO PERISH. To come to an end; to cease to be; to die.

2. What has never existed cannot be said to have perished

You see, an artificial person (corporation) never actually exists in nature, so it cannot have a natural death.

So it is perhaps the best definition of civil law for me to say that:

Civil law is the state of non-necessity of martial law while under military rule, because the governed are not acting in civil disobedience.

Martial law is the physical manifestation of force and violence via government decree to ensure the continuity of military rule that is visible and obvious (violent) to all people.

And military rule is simply the current state of a system of de facto United States corporate law based on coercion, force, and occasional violence, which is sugar-coated and masked under the appearance of civility and under the guise of “civil law”.

Civil law and military rule, therefore, are all but indistinguishable. They are both systems of law enacted by forced compliance of the Executive Branch of government. In both systems, the laws they tout are ensured by force. And in both instances, a man’s natural rights are struck down in lieu of positive or political rights.

It is ironic and disturbing then to point out the now obvious paradox of a subjected people in an occupied land…

For it would only be through open revolt and total disobedience of the current laws of the United States central government that the above facts could manifest themselves as self evident. This axiom of military rule is invisible to the civil servants and citizens of government, no differently than the subjects of a king might never consider that they are at all times under military rule – the rule by force of a tyrant – no matter how fair or just that king seems to be.

This kingdom called the United States – the District that reigns the lands of America through contractual membership under force of its own law despite being a foreign corporate entity outside of those lands – holds the reigns to millions of soldiers; obedient Americans conscripted by their own enemy through contract as security guards for the United States. And these soldiers, in their belief that they are fighting for America, will no doubt blindly follow this United States corporation into oblivion no differently than did those useful fools that killed father, brother, and child in that great United States Civil War – “The War Of Northern Aggression“.

Perhaps a more fitting title to that Civil War and to all wars proceeding it would read: “The Unending War Of Continued United States Aggression, Both Foreign and Domestic“.

Now you might think that Congress is there to redress grievances of the people to the United States government as representatives thereof. But oh what a tangled web they weave…

Congressmen are “employees” of the United States government, according to TITLE 5 of U.S. CODE.

So this would be like expecting a mid-level management employee of Walmart to change the policies of Walmart’s CEO and board of directors. Employees have no individual say on what happens in the United States corporation. So a single representative is worthless without the agreement of the vast majority of the entire body of representatives.

And of course the people represented in these congressional districts never seem to realize that the business affairs of Congress only happen inside of Washington D.C. – in other words outside of their State. Just as employees of Walmart have no authority outside of the corporate jurisdiction of Walmart, neither do the congressmen and Senators have power in the 50 individual States as republics. They are the Representatives of the Federal Government to the people, not the representatives of the people to the Federal Government. They conduct only Federal business in the jurisdiction of the United States, even while doing so in the States they hold domicile. They are United States Employees, not State Employees. In fact, they have absolutely no power within the State government, except those imposed by force by the Federal Central government as a whole.

So why do the people contractually volunteer to give up their power to a bunch of known-to-be-corrupt representatives as employees of the very entity that enslaves them, instead of leaving this horrific militarized club called the United States by withdrawing legal membership?

Perhaps it is the misconception that our membership (citizenship) is not a choice.

But wait a minute, you say. Isn’t it my “constitutional right” to be a citizen?

That’s an interesting question, actually. In fact, the concept of “citizenship” as it stands today was not part of the original constitution. Citizenship was created after the “country” was placed under military rule (martial law) under the Libor Code and General Orders 100. It was in this reconstruction period after the “Civil War” that was created reconstruction amendment #14.

The 14th Amendment states:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside…”

Whereas before this amendment was ratified by the now unlawful military congress the concept of citizenship was based on the blood of the man in question in a natural sense, the United States now took on a corporate disposition and changed the presumption of citizenship into a legally binding contractual duty; where all people became artificial persons as individual corporate bodies politic within the United States’ web of corporatism.

The most overlooked word in this amendment to the constitution is the word “subject”:

SUBJECT, contracts. The thing which is the object of an agreement. This term is used in the laws of Scotland.

SUBJECT, persons, government. An individual member of a nation, who is subject to the laws; this term is used in contradistinction to citizen, which is applied to the same individual when considering his political rights.

2. In monarchical governments, by subject is meant one who owes permanent allegiance to the monarch. Vide Body politic

NATIONALITY. The state of a person in relation to the nation in which he was born.

2. A man retains his nationality of origin during his minority, but, as in the case of his domicil of origin, he may change his nationality upon attaining full age; he cannot, however, renounce his allegiance without permission of the government. See Citizen; Domicile; Expatriation; Naturalization…

NATIONS. Nations or states are independent bodies politic; societies of men united together for the purpose of promoting their mutual safety and advantage by the joint efforts of their combined strength.

2. But every combination of men who govern themselves, independently of all others, will not be considered a nation; a body of pirates, for example, who govern themselves, are not a nation. To constitute a nation another ingredient is required. The body thus formed must respect other nations in general, and each of their members in particular. Such a society has her affairs and her interests; she deliberates and takes resolutions in common; thus becoming a moral person who possesses an understanding and will peculiar to herself, and is susceptible of obligations and rights…

3. It belongs to the government to declare whether they will consider a colony which has thrown off the yoke of the mother country as an independent state; and until the government have decided on the question, courts of justice are bound to consider the ancient state of things as remaining unchanged.

In the Civil War, it would be a foregone conclusion to state that the United States did not accept (as it was lawfully required to do via its own charter) the secession of the confederate states – the yolks that threw themselves from the mother country. Instead, it acted unlawfully by all standards of ethics and natural law – a military conquest being the result – forcing the confederate states to be captured as prisoners of war and to accept the new reorganized United States and its new corporate constitution as their new sovereign tyrant.

COUNTRY. By country is meant the state of which one is a member.

2. Every man’s country is in general the state in which he happens to have been born, though there are some exceptions. See Domicil; Inhabitant. But a man has the natural right to expatriate himself, i. e. to abandon his country, or his right of citizenship acquired by means of naturalization in any country in which he may have taken up his residence. See Allegiance; Citizen; Expatriation…

Remember, the United Nations refers to the United States as a state that is a member of the U.N, just as the United States refers to its own 50 States that are supposedly independent but members of that body.

But more importantly one must understand the distinction made here of being “born in the country of the United States”.

Though a man may be born in the State of Georgia, his residence is created within the jurisdiction of the United States – that incorporated legal boundry that extends across the entirety of the territories called “states” and beyond. In essence, when a man is born in the United States, it is his artificial person that is civilly born, creating a citizen.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside…”

Again, this very important distinction must be made…

Though you physically are born in and reside within a State, the artificial representation of you called a legal “person” and a “citizen” is civilly born in and resides within the jurisdiction of the United States. Registered persons/citizens who vote are actually voting in the artificial representation of Washington D.C. – the jurisdiction that extends from that central district 10 miles square over the entire “country” through contract. Your home is a registered United States home. Your vehicle is a registered United States vehicle. Your children are registered United States persons. And all of these contractual agreements can be utilized to take these things away from citizens. In fact, it is the political and constitutional right of all citizens to have their registered property of the United States taken away from them. Just read the 5th Amendment very carefully… for it tells you clearly that through the United States court system under what it calls “due process”, you life, liberty, and property can be taken from you (see definition of take above).

In this way, it is correct to say that for the most part, the actual individual states are empty – abandoned by all the people who became residents of the United States in Washington D.C. – for the people all reside in the United States, and the States are territories of the United States. The people walk as persons upon the plastic coating of United States jurisdiction, never touching the natural land. Of course the illusion of States rights still exists among the citizens of the United States, who have no idea they are under the military rule of this foreign corporation, and who do not comprehend the true nature of the word person or citizen.

In the United States corporation…

Citizenship is granted, not taken;

Citizenship is legal and political, not lawful and natural;

Citizenship is contractual, not moral;

Citizenship is a voluntary membership, not a mandatory requirement.

Citizenship is artificial and un-American!!!

Perhaps the natural born citizens of the United States should be asking themselves why this so-called privilege and natural right of citizenship is being tossed to the wind and bestowed to those who did not naturally and traditionally gain it? The fact that citizenship can be contractually bestowed upon anyone who is contractually willing to receive or pay for all of the benefits and tyranny that accompanies such a legal status should be enough for anyone to realize that its conveyance has nothing to do with anything but a contractual tie to the military rule of government. This once honorable title of men is now just a corporate slogan to sell monopolized, for-profit government products and services to ignorant persons at non-competative prices.

Take the influx of what we call “illegal immigrants” as a clue as to how America became a militarized corporate slave machine:

The Pew Hispanic Center determined that according to an analysis of Census Bureau data about 8 percent of children born in the United States in 2008 — about 340,000 — were offspring of unauthorized immigrants. In total, about four million American-born children of unauthorized immigrant parents resided in this country in 2009, along with about 1.1 million foreign-born children of unauthorized immigrant parents. The Center for Immigration Studies – a think tank which favors stricter controls on immigration—claims that between 300,000 and 400,000 children are born each year to illegal immigrants in the U.S.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states

These are “natural born” children (citizens) just like you according to your representatives in government, for citizens are no longer required to have honor to join the “country”. And soon over 11 million non-natural born invading immigrants will join the party when the United States says it’s just alright.

Citizenship means nothing to an honorable man. It is just a ticket to ride on the slave-ship. It is the act of selling ones soul to acquire artificial things. And it has become a pour substitute for a once-cherished thing. Most importantly, it does not make you an American, just a useful pawn in a collective extortion racket designed to create corporate authority by making all the people into one collective tool to extract their individual power and intent as one lone consenting voice for the actions of an unlawful corporation. And every unlawful action by government is based on the informed consent it presumes from its members.

Isn’t it time to rebut that presumption of consent and take back our individual voices and power as individual men?

So let’s say that you are a member of an exclusive golf club that only allows people just like you to enter. You retain a membership to this club because you wish to be a part of something special and be around like-minded individuals who contribute and benefit from this club and its rules and regulations, as well as its exclusivity and respect. And you stay a member because this club operates legitimately and lawfully with full respect to nature and to all involved.

But then let’s say that your club is taken over and its rules for membership changed.

Suddenly, this club is full of men, women and children (persons) who are not like-minded in any way and who do not respect in any way your methods, opinions, lifestyle, morals, ethics, values, and so on. And then the club management passes rules and regulations that require you to integrate, hire as employees, and tolerate all of these new members – lest you be fined and imprisoned for discrimination and your corporation terminated and its assets seized by government. (Note: This is what E-Verify does.)

Would not the proper response be to immediately end your membership with that club and either find a more lawful club or start your own exclusive one?

The club only seeks to collect more and more revenue and fees from these new members, in order to both generate more revenue and to control more and more of the population by forcing its registration of all things and children. So why would anyone stay as a member of that club only to be forced to tolerate a cultural invasion and complete change in the standards of that club? Why would you continue to financially support that club’s central governing body when everything it does goes against your ideals and values?

So why do you continue to stay a member of the United States club?

It’s not a requirement! It’s not necessary for you to work and live in America and in a State. This beast’s Social Security number is not needed for anything at all. And it certainly isn’t helping you to stay a member, unless you consider tyranny, unjust taxation without representation, pain, punishment, and extortion your political right like government does.

We complain, we scream, we weep, and we suffer. And all because we believe that we must stay members of this corporation that continuously harms us. We accept the mark and the number of this beast because we believe it is for the greater good. We support its illegal wars and pay for them with our voluntary taxes. It doesn’t listen or care about us as anything but commodities, because a corporation only cares about growth (expansion) and profits. It sells our labor and bonds our incarceration. It takes all and gives nothing.

So why are you still a citizen of this 10 mile square corporation that seeks to control every aspect of your life through your voluntary contractual obligation? Isn’t it time to pull the plug and stop financially supporting its exaction tactics to extort your money and estate?

Isn’t it time to take back your registered United States property and place it back into your personal possession, including your children?

Or are a few non-guaranteed benefits at the expense of future generations (your children and theirs) more important than being free?

Do you really think it would be un-American to withdraw your membership to this corporation that isn’t even part of America?

Since the concept of being an American seems to have been blurred between the natural and the contractual, perhaps we should end here with a quote from the most American thing I can think of…

“When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security…”

–Declaration of Independence

.

–Clint Richardson (realitybloger.wordpress.com)
–Saturday, May 18th, 2013

 

All legal definitions taken from Bouvier’s Law Dictioanry, 1856:

About these ads
Leave a comment

27 Comments

  1. It would be irresponsible and even dishonest to simply withdraw from the United States of America. The responsible thing to do would be to form an alternative system of government that supports the necessary benefits of humane society such as health, education and welfare but which have their funding source in free will offerings distributed through accountable ministers rather that by forced tribute. It is by coercively forced taxation of our fellow man through those who call themselves benefactors but who exercise authority one over the other that determines socialism. This key action of control is ultimately what robs humankind of the opportunity to transcend to a higher level of liberty where we voluntarily serve our fellow man without anyone having to point a gun to our head to do so. For this to occur we must tax ourselves in an efficient and effective system of charity (we choose what we give maintaining a most basic level of freedom of choice). Only on this foundation can we be free and the only way we can set other people free is to forgive them of their obligation to us the tribute we force from them my means of a social contract that binds. We are to be bound only by love not by force though some contract or constitution made by men to control other men, even if it is by their own consent.

    No man is an island so unless we first form a logical, organizational network and system based on good faith, hope and charity where at least the needy of of our society (that may not have any other means of survival) will be supported (so as to maintain a most basic level of humanity) we are doomed. We cannot overlook this if we are still to call ourselves men. This is not socialism because funds to care for these needy arrive from a spirit of love not force but unless we consider these and only want to make a run for it we are not free men but selfish beasts…

    We might as well walk the plank…

    No. First we must unite in a spirit of love and communication and form a system of society that considers realistic functions of human society and THEN can we walk out together free. Only then will we have responsibly considered, produced and deserved our basic level of freedom. We need each other to make this work and we need to be on the same page/have the same spirit to do so. Not a spirit of ME but a spirit of WE…

    Mark

    Reply
    • Idealistically, I agree. Realistically, I don’t. The damage is already done to the psyche of the people.

      You misunderstand, as most do, that I am only speaking of the citizenship to the 10 mile square corporation called the United States. This has nothing to do with the entirety of America. The system you speak of is called “State and local government”. United States Federal Government not needed. Don’t confuse the withdrawal of a corporate agreement with this entity as the withdrawal of State government. Nothing has to change except for good people to take interest in their local and state government as they abandon the central one.

      The difference here is what needs to be understood.

      -Clint-

      Reply
  2. Clint, I have been reading your stuff with avidity. You are a very wholesome researcher and I admire your courage and consistency. The only practical way to take control of the STRAWMAN (that I know of) and therefore withdraw your corporate personhood (i.e. citizenship of the United States) is to properly file Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) paperwork. I know that you previously covered, although not with great detail, the UCC filings. I have not taken that plunge yet, but profess to do so in the near future. I’m wondering where you are with this process and if you will be sharing your experiences with your audience? It may be of import to suggest this process to your readers so that they may do their own research. I suggest “Cracking the Code, Third Edition” as a starting point. This can be found in pdf form free online.

    Reply
    • After further research about UCC (over a years worth), I decided that my path was to go beyond this as it is still a commercial venture. UCC is nothing less than government code. It’s in the name… Uniform COMMERCIAL CODE!

      I have decided to completely withdraw all ties of citizenship with the Federal Government and become a “national”.

      This process I will be documenting, including withdrawing my Social Security application, ending my “relationship” with the IRS, removing myself from the voting registry, and finally nullifying my driver’s license because nothing about me is a number or commercial in any way. I’ll only be at all times a man, living not artificial.

      My belief is that the act of merely controlling the STRAWMAN is not the same as being a free man. And so I will truly remove myself from any semblance of commercial or contract law.

      I don’t need to crack the code, for the code is not attainable to comprehend for one man. I just need to remove myself from its power, which is not as difficult as you might think.

      I’ll be creating a documentary about this process.

      Thanks, and good luck in what you decide.

      -Clint-

      Reply
      • No man is an island.

        What will you do when you need help and you can’t apply because you have no numbers?

        Mark

        Reply
        • There are many free man-islands floating around, unorganized and ignorant of each other. When those islands merge, or at least dock, the islands become a chain, and eventually a body politic with its own barter/currency and society.

          This is my goal. Most will not go public about their journey, but I have decided this must be done, at my own risk. How else will others join the chain?

          As to what help you are referring to, I’m not sure what you are asking. Numbers are a 20th century tool, and man lived thousands of years without them. If you have a specific question, like how will I identify myself, please ask. A friend travels through the airports with a notarized letter stating who he is. That’s it. He is not a citizen, and so he bypasses the TSA. And he travels abroad with no problem. There are solutions for every concern, and I have been searching for those for a very long time. It is now time to put them all to practice. The problem is that each solution is on a different island… and I had to find each one to bring them together.

          You see my point.

          By your standards, I should quit now because being free isn’t as pretty as being a slave. I choose not to accept those standards, and believe in my heart that men will help other men as it has been since human society began.

          So I wont have a mansion or a shiny new car.

          I will be free…

          Whaaaaa!

          -Clint-

          Reply
          • “There are many free man-islands floating around, unorganized and ignorant of each other.”

            This is true even if they are free man islands idealistically if not yet realistically :-)

            Your goal and mine is to organize so that these will not be ignorant of each other but find one another (like we are doing) to hopefully build some type of network that supplies our needs and that of society without infringing on the rights of others. This requires a fundamental understanding of what needs to be done in forming an organizational structure (and jurisdiction) which is capable of standing apart so that we may stand alone as individuals within (and without) it. You and I have our reasons why it needs to be done and now we need to explore how.

            I believe you will find how in Gregory’s books, I have read them.

            As to what help I am referring to I mean the care people that join the “chain” may require as human beings surrounding general health and welfare. Without the possibility for application to the state in future for coverture (any benefit the “number” or membership in U.S. gives you), such as the possibility of insurance in an accident other costly event out of your control a man has no means of comfort or even survival if first he is not surrounded by people who may help certain situations (“family” may only go so far if even at all these days). In Greg’s books you will understand that “numbers” and the benefits that go along with them have been around for a long time and it was how for example the Romans exacted tribute and could keep track. The technology is better nowadays but the concept remains the same.

            And please don’t misunderstand me…being a slave can look pretty yes and I would much rather be “poor” and free too but unless we follow precepts in our quest for freedom that have freed people or supported them in the past when a system they depended on didn’t, our lives may get uglier than we could ever imagine. A higher liberty than what we have is what we are seek, and yes it will be determined by how and where we stand, and I have faith along with yours that men will now help other men.

            We’re done with the shiny cars and houses and know they are products of a counterfeit system. Now it is time to put our money where our mouth is so to speak, and I understand that freedom from here may take all we’ve got.

            Mark

            Reply
      • ITS MORE EFFECTIVE IF YOU WOULD APPLY THE U S CONSTITUTION AND LEAVE THE UNCONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS OUT AND ONLY THEN YOU WOULD BE FREE .
        WE THE PEOPLE NEED TO DO THAT , ALL TOGETHER AND AT THE SAME TIME .
        REMEMBER ! THERE WAS 13 PROPOSALS BROUGHT FORTH TO THE CONVENTION FOR RATIFYING THE U S CONSTITUTION HAD 7 ARTICLES OF CONFEDARATION AND THE FOUNDING BROUGHT 13 PROPOSALS THEY ONLY EXCEPTED 10 WICH TOGETHER FORMED THE U S CONSTITUTION .
        11 , 12 ,, AND 13WERE REJECTED BECAUSE 11 PROPOSAL WAS IN CONFLICT WITH ARTICLE 3 SECTION 2 BACK THEN AND IT IS STILL IN CONFLICT TODAY!! SO GUESS WHAT HAPENED ? FIVE YEARS AFTER THE SUPREME CRIMINALS OF THE S. C. DID ?
        THEY SNEAKED IT BACK IN THERE AS AN AMENDMENT HA ! CHECK IT OUT SO GUESS WHAT ? THE CHIEF JUSTICES OF THE SUPREME COURT COMMITED TREASON AGAINST THE U S . THEY TOOK THE POWER OF THE FOURTH BRANCH OF GOVERNMENT FROM THE GRAND JURY , AND RETAINED IT’S POWER FOR THE CHIEFS OF THE SUPREME COURT CRIMINALS . READ THE U S CONSTITUTION LEAVE THE AMENDMENTS OUT… JOE

        Reply
        • Honestly, Joe, I read nothing good in the constitution. It is nothing more than a debt compact, that has nothing to do with me or anyone else. It only applies to government, and gives no rights to the people. It only restricts government. But those restrictions have been “constitutionally” stripped away through legislation. This is the problem. The constitution is the worst kind of religion. No piece of paper will ever give me rights, for natural rights cannot be legislated. Understand that, and you understand the fallacy of the constitution.

          -Clint-

          Reply
      • Kathleen M.

         /  May 19, 2013

        Looking forward to the documentary. I removed myself from the voter registry by sending a notarized affidavit to the California Secretary of State. I sent it certified and stated “I am leaving this State.” By leaving this State I mean pulling out of the system.
        Kathy

        Reply
        • The word state is a tricky one, as are most other legal concepts. My congrats.

          -Clint-

          Reply
          • Kathleen M.

             /  May 23, 2013

            Yes. I assume the Secretary thought I meant Nevada or Arizona or the like. That plastic coating you refer to is what ex- lawyer Harmon Taylor calls the hover zone. Have you heard of him? He helps folks pull out of the system.
            Kathy

            Reply
  3. I am a national. I went through an expatriation process many years ago. Expatriate or expatriation is basically a process to divorce a patri, a father, a daddy, which is what I did. The trouble with this process in reality is like what Mark said. I am a national, but a national of what? A nation is a body of men, not an island of one. I inhabit a land mass called Iowa, but there is only me and one other Iowan that has done what I have done, all the other so-called Iowans are federal citizens/federal employees bound to Uncle Sam as their father, their patronus, through the natural law process of novation, corban and tutor.

    So here is the main issue that from my direct experience from being a “national” without a body, without having a new Father, which I do now, and know now that having a Father/father is required for any created being under the law of nature and nature’s God. But here is the main issue. Those individuals that are seeking to walk the plank and give Pharaoh the middle finger and run out to the shores of the Red Sea on their own without the protection of the Creator and His body, nation, law and kingdom, i.e. God’s government, which is what Mark is talking about, i.e. the Kingdom of heaven or kingdom of God at hand, will find it very hard to survive. I cannot be an employee or an independent contractor engaged in any public business, no commerce, nothing commercial. No bank accounts, no credit, etc. I cannot accept any of their promises to pay, i.e. Fed Notes, nor any money, silver and gold that is theirs, i.e. no US silver eagles or gold eagles. I am totally outside their economy and I cannot go back into it unrighteously without being a covetous liar, thief and murderer under the natural law due to what all my expatriation documents say that I will not ever do again.

    I went from being a pissed off 14th citizen, national, person, member of the US body politic earning around 100k of their credits a year to barely being able to feed myself, unless I wanted to become that dishonorable thief and liar I mentioned and sneak back into their private economy for their persons and steal and murder and covet and hope I don’t get caught. Of course when people like me get caught they scream that the civil law government, the corporate body politic called the United States is usurping power and taking their rights away. A national has no rights to their altars. To that father’s blessings. I don’t live under Uncle Sam’s roof any more, which means I cannot eat at Uncle Sam’s table and altar. Are you really ready for that? This is what the Bible means by not being able to buy, sell or trade without the mark of the beast.

    If people expect to be free under God, who is the author of real freedom, then we have to repent and return to His Kingdom, His Law, His Way and path. And Mark already started explaining what that looks like.

    I also hate to break it to people but can US citizens manumit themselves from all their debts both public and private? Most US citizens I know have a whole bunch of stuff that that they only hold legal title to via constructive trusts. US citizens do not hold the equitable titles and beneficial interest to what they think is THEIR stuff. It is not their stuff they get possession and use as long as use is in accordance with their father’s house rules, i.e. the civil law of the United States and its 14th Amendment States. Just like the Israelites in Egypt who need the superior party in the contract, i.e. Pharaoh, to give his consent and release them, the US citizen bound by debt to Uncle Sam and his creditors under the precept of joint and several liability as members and persons of the corporate body politic, cannot free themselves. Slaves can manumit themselves but the slave owner has to accept the offer of manumission from his slave. And Uncle Sam will not, his heart is hardened, and will remain hardened until the people repent and start to return to God the Creator.

    Peace.
    Scott in Iowa

    Reply
    • Funny, because other nationals I’ve talked to have no problem whatsoever. Perhaps it is because you chose the actual “expatriation” process that gives you this hardship? This is not what I’ll be doing, which is to withdraw all contracts and applications. And you have every right to sue for discrimination of any who do so, but only if you know how to utilize and force the recognition of the court of record. You know this because there are no fees to use it. No money exchanged for services. It is the free court for free men.

      I consider you to be very brave and one of the few men I know. And yes, I am prepared and ready for all of that, eventually. You have my respect. And I believe and hope others will follow…

      -Clint-

      Reply
  4. The idea that “Nothing has to change except for good people to take interest in their local and state government as they abandon the central one.” is not true considering the reality of the present connection to that “10 mile square municipal corporation” and the fact that the vast majority of people in the states would not be willing to give up most of benefit that are now filtered through the present federal government. Every state employee is actually a federal employee with a federal employee identification number working for someone with a federal employer identification number without which no state ID will be provided. States attempting to just thwart the requirements of Title 42 section 666 have all buckled under what is minor pressure because there is little or no will to take back their responsibility that is required to maintain a free nation.
    Hard working self reliant Americans found freedom in this land because the hardships of those times made them strong or they died or left. It was a unique time that produced a unique people. Without the filtering agent of hardship there will be no freedom in America that anyone can survive for long. The good news is that hardships are coming. If you really want to be free as a people then you need to find out what the success in history were really doing. Most Americans do not have a clue how to be a free people. Hard times will teach them but they need a plan, a blueprint and the constitution is not the solution most imagine because it was never the source of American freedom. You should read my book Contracts, Covenants and Constitutions and then I will have you on the radio show again to discus it.
    Last time I was in that “10 mile square municipal corporation” speaking with some of the top Lawyers in the United States who had just had a meeting to figure out how to “withdraw consent” they told me that they found the key in another book I wrote that was sitting on their table. That book outlines what other people in history facing the same problems did to become a free people and a “viable republic in the heart of the Roman Empire”, and thrive during the decline and fall of systems like the United States which we are seeing in these present times. You can read all my books for free and talk with teams of people who will explain the details at TheLivingNetwork.org. They provide such services as they can for free because they care about your liberty as much as their own. Without that there will be no freedom in the “world”.

    Reply
    • I thank you for the thoughts, and I will certainly get your books.

      And yes, the mental state and dependence of the people is the obstacle as we both agree.

      -Clint-

      Reply
  5. David Cothern

     /  May 19, 2013

    Clint,
    I don’t see the logic of your actions to remove yourself from the federal system to that of a state national when even the States are under Federal Jurisdiction. The system as a whole, ie., commercial, industrial, economic, etc., is all tied together in this web you speak of. Single individuals, without forming together as a seperate, alternative society, will have no way of being a truly free people.
    Just as Mark breifly stated, individuals cannot be an island unto themselves. There are countless functions of life that, as single individuals, we are simply not capable of performing ourselves. Can the average individual grow or raise their own food and livestock? Can they weave or sew their own clothing? Fix their own broken equipment parts? Diagnose and treat their own medical malformations? Yet each of these aspects, and even more, are all still a part of the beast system you speak of.
    I completely agree with your findings on the current system. Yet I humbly disagree with your solution. I personally know if individuals that have expatriated and claimed State Nationality. Their lives are worse off than before because without the Federal SS number it is impossible to function and survive as an individual unto yourself. There must be a system in place or else, as Mark also stated, you are simply walking the plank. Or entering into a wilderness unprotected from the wild beasts that roam the earth.

    Reply
    • What makes you think I’m an average individual?

      Again, the act of expatriation is not my goal. That is a legal status.

      The States are republics, unused as they are. The misconception is that the United States is a republic. But in fact the federal government only guarantees that each state will keep its republic. The Fed is not a republic. It is a federation with corporate ties to the states. Your friends have different experiences than my friends. And the biggest difference I am assuming is the understanding of the legal system. No one who understands what expatriation is would do so. That is the plank.

      Again, your misconception is that being a corporate citizen is necessary for anything. It is not. If it is your suggestion that everything is run by the Federal government just because it exists, you are poorly mistaken. And I am unclear as to why you think I will be alone, as if I cannot work beside you without a social security number. That is plain fallacy. The Social Security Number is only for one thing – Social Security benefits. It is not legal as ID or as a requirement to work. I’d make more money suing any employer who discriminated against me for not having a SS# than I would working for them!

      Your concerns are based on nothing but fear.

      Is it your suggestion that I cannot go to a hospital because I am not a “citizen”? Well, I’ve got 14 million illegal Mexicans for you to meet.

      Is it your suggestion that I cannot utilize the services of a mechanic, clothing store, or grocery store just because I’m not a “citizen”? Here, meet the other millions of Russian, Vietnamese, Croatian, and other illegals in this country doing so every day.

      Where did this idea come from?

      I remind you that the legal definition of the word “solution” is THE END OR SATISFACTION OF A CONTRACT!

      With respect…

      -Clint-

      Reply
  6. So a free man can sit and eat at another man’s table under the law of nature without being a member of that man’s family, or an invited guest, and not suffer an consequences or be considered a covetous thief, especially if the free man tries to eat for free and not pay tribute/excise for the privilege of eating at that man’s/father’s table and altar?

    Only patriots, people who share a common patri, father, i.e. the corporate members, persons, of a father’s family, i.e. Uncle Sam and his children, i.e. US nationals, US citizens, US persons that are his registered peeps can sit and eat and pray at his family’s tables and altars. Once some rescinds membership, which they cannot fully do without the superior party to the contract releasing his bond servants or manumitting his dependent children, due to all the debt the kids are bound by, but once someone declares he is no longer seeking to live under his daddy’s house (US corporate body politic) and daddy’s house rules (US civil law system, a private municipal legal system for that family of citizens) the expatriating child, which is what it is, divorcing that daddy, leaving membership and personhood in his family, then trying to go back and eat at his table, i.e. his commercial economy, financed by his creditors, without paying lawful tribute/excise to that father for his granted privileges is unrighteous according to natural law and that ‘rebel’ becomes a covetous thief, murderer and liar.

    Canaanite Trafficking has never been the Way of God the Creator, but is the way of the gods many of the world, and if anyone engages in Canaanite Trafficking there are tributes that must be paid to the Canaanites for trafficking in their system, which is what the US economy is.

    If individuals want to lawfully, legally and righteously want to follow the command, to come out of her my people on their own, under their own power, redeeming themselves by their own grace and beliefs, then in order to maintain their righteousness they cannot go back in that system of the beast to earn a living without playing by that system’s rules and paying tribute to the beast in the form of excise.

    Peace,

    Reply
    • You use lawfully and legally together, as if they are the same, and then say that both are righteous.

      This type of religious speak is why people turn away from God – the mathematical perfection of nature – and accept exactly what you are speaking of that goes against it. You are confusing people.

      The word patriot means: one who loves his or her country and supports its authority and interests. But I do not love this country (United States) and certainly do not support its authority and interests of war, death, and profit. I do not hold the constitution dear. If you are a patriot, how can you also be an ex-patriot?

      Sitting at another man’s table without being invited? Where does this come from? Did I partake in such suggestion? Do you think citizens are enemies instead of fools? Unwashed? Evil by association?

      I don’t believe we are pursuing the same goals here. This is not an Elmer Gantry circus tent I am throwing up. The “system” is there and cannot be ignored. You cannot live in America without being an accidental tourist within the United States. It claims the same land that God and the people do, so you cannot walk around it or below it, and you cannot pray your way above it. Therefore, you must learn to live along side it while fighting it and hope enough others will see the light.

      So far your responses are nothing but negative, self-defeating, and dogmatic.

      I’ll pass on your religion and pursue my own path, thanks.

      -Clint-

      Reply
  7. Edith Maria

     /  May 20, 2013

    Many thanks for an interesting and meaningful blog for me and many of my distraught “countrymen” in the still occupied area of Germany. Our country is still under the control of foreign armies of several corporate governments. The so-called German government is a form of insolvency administration pretending to be a government – at least that was the case until March when the private organization called “EU” was given administrative authority over the organs of the local administrative regions. This is supposed to prepare the way for the super-state or “United States of Europe”, a private supragovernmental corporation.

    Those of us who have understood the scam since our college days have recently been given some recognition by new-age groups who unfortunately do not understand the workings of government let alone the tricky legal traps of “personae”. This has been used by the master-minds of the next world order to nurture movements of freedom-seekers, pseudo-hippies, and childish religions based on dropping out of the rat race, now being spiralled down into neo-feudalism by strict governmental policies such as “contraction and conversion” or “de-growth”. But one interesting thing all these groups have in common is their search for nationality, natural feelings of belonging or herd-characteristics as B.F. Skinner would have commented. The forced loss of natural tribal identity of peoples is what we have been lamenting for some 40 years. This has been “re-discovered” by many modern movements in Germany long after people were psychologically crippled by the artificial suppression of their recently awakened nationality right after it was abused and perverted to foment two world wars that thoroughly destroyed the old European order. The wonderfully individual or “national” diversity in the cultures of Europe has been suffering at the hands of enforced conformity for over 70 years. The molders of the new order have been successful up til now, but their arrogance has caused them to lower their masks of deceit in the wake of assumed victory.

    Recently awakened patriotic pacifists have realized that a peace treaty was never signed and that the “corporate” United Nations was created to defeat and plunder the axis powers of WW2 – Japan, Germany and Italy – while serving as a front for a world government. We now have many groups of all ages wrestling with their loss of nationality while simultaneously trying to find legal ways of regaining it. The topics you have mentioned in your blog, namely citizenship and nationality, are presently central themes in heated debates across Europe. Dutch, Germans, French, Britains are struggling with the realization that they have been reduced to “personae” described in their passports with terms such as “frenchish” or “netherlandic” replacing the names of their national states. The EU technocrats are well aware of this and placate tempers with the offer of “Union Citizenship” which they claim is the only valid replacement for the antiquated nation states they have sworn to abolish.
    All are equal, all are employees (citizens) of the supra-state government – Fabian Socialism has finally triumphed, or so it seems.

    How do we deal with grasping the natural concept of a people or nation without falling into the modern traps of Law of Persons? How do we deal with being men and women and not “persons” except when entering legal contractual relationships with “legal fictions”? How can we regain our proper place in our own countries’ governments when the majority thinks that the plural of people is personae? At a recent alternative-movement congress I got into an argument with a professor of political science who adamantly claimed that a constitution is written by the people for the people itself, not for control or limitation of government. He was of course applauded by the new-agey groups that are prescribing ‘governance’ solely by Councils of Wise Men (and banksters) in autarchic high-tech utopias scattered across the illuminated landscape. Theirs is a world society which does not permit nationality, unless it is a native Indian nation. Natural unalienable rights and responsibility exist only at the top level of the Wise (Wo)Men who give the orders. (By the way, every time an example was offered by the wise-man protagonists, a TV show was referenced and immediately accepted by the majority of participants as helpful. What TV show could possibly bring these people back into reality? Any suggestions?)

    How can one describe the difference between free men/women and the levels of citizenship or nationality? How can one successfully explain the pitfalls of self-administration according to UN rules, or why the UN “human rights” charter is only a list of privileges, not “rights”? Who can we get to listen to our call for a peace treaty to officially end WW2, if all the governments are LLCs ?

    Any input on the following occupational government’s federal statutes for “voting” in the
    German economic region would be greatly appreciated:
    1. Only those ‘persons’ listed as certified “Germans” can vote or run for office.
    2. A “German” is someone who already has a certificate of proven “German” nationality.
    3. A foreigner is everyone who does not have a certificate of “German” nationality.

    * The occupied German economic region has approx. 80 million residents; only
    3 million are certified “Germans”.

    Get the picture?

    Peace,

    Edith

    Reply
  8. Daniel

     /  May 20, 2013

    I get Scott’s point. If you formally renounce the contractual ties that bind you to the corporation, you can’t make use of the corporate system – it’s like selling your wares in the King’s market, then not paying him his cut. Say I’m a craftsman. If I trade my goods to another person, say for another good, or a precious metal, etc… I owe no one anything. But if I accept a check and deposit it in a bank, or accept Federal Reserve Notes, or make use of the banking system such as PayPal to receive my payment I’m using the corporations financial system, so it deserves it’s cut.

    If I understand Clint’s position correctly, is that he’ll make no such formal pronouncement. He will simply extricate himself from every contract that binds him to the corporation, without a formal declaration. He’ll be going ghost so to speak. So a cop asks for his driver’s license, he doesn’t have one. Worst thing that can happen is they take him in and he spends a day in the pokey while they run his fingerprints. Inconvenient, but not the end of the world. He can probably sue them as well if he was behaving lawfully, given that there’s no law that one must apply for a driver’s license. All across the board, they seek for something that ties you to the corporation, but there’s nothing.

    Reply
  9. Wayne

     /  May 21, 2013

    Clint,
    This will be your most important contribution to date. I have a relative understanding of the framework and mechanics of the system but lack reference or tangible experiences. There has to be remedy, in a specific legal sense. Without it, contracts are invalid and illegal. The fed inc provides benefits. In commerce, you have remedy if there is unequal consideration. How this happens and what resources are needed is still an area of uncertainty, but I’m confident you will cover it in great detail. Your work is much appreciated and empowering. Thank you.

    Reply
  10. Reblogged this on THE TRUTH.

    Reply
  11. Ron

     /  February 26, 2014

    Clint
    You are correct in cancelling or rescinding the contracts for everything is of the United States, ie. State of Ohio, State of Florida etc by virtue of United States deception. The union states however remain intact provided people know who and where they are. For those wanting to know more details and perhaps the how to should continue their research. https://archive.org/details/PurgingAmericaOfTheMatrix I agree with both Scott and you although I do not believe expatriation is required. It is not easy to readjust however if one puts their actions in to play based upon their belief solutions can be had. We are free men and women and no government has authority over uss and only upon their subjects or those that consent.

    Reply
  1. A Pictorial History Of The US Government | Piotr Bein's blog = blog Piotra Beina

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,381 other followers

%d bloggers like this: