Printable View
Someone should beat the counties to the punch, and announce the birth of their baby first in time at the county recorders, claiming the entire name as the given name for their baby.
Then let the hospitals (et al) do their dirty work, and register the birth of the name.
Mary Croft regret's not registering her children.
I guess I should correct that statement.
She regret's not registering the event.
I like that!
Miyamoto MUSASHI, invulnerable samurai rogue:
1) Do not think dishonestly
2) The Way is in training
3) Become acquainted with every art
4) Learn the ways of every occupation
5) Distinguish gain and loss in worldly matters
6) Develop intuitive judgment and an understanding of all things
7) Perceive those things that cannot be seen
8) Pay attention, even to trifles
9) Do nothing that is of no use
That is found in Timing in Strategy - A Book of Five Rings.
By registering the birth at the county clerk and recorder you then serve it on any Department of Health. Use that proof of service for the hospital when they start pestering you for signatures on any birth certificate. The problem is that you would need a private or professional process server running around doing all this for the parents while they bond with the infant at the hospital. And it would be nice to have a friend telling the officials to get out of the hospital room too.
Yeah, there was a story in the media a few months ago, about a young lady who "couldn't prove her citizenship", because her parents never "got her a birth certificate". Her complaints, while childish, we're typical of what I'd expect to hear from modern young Americans. I actually saw her point, since it was obvious that she simply didn't understand what the purpose of a BC was.Quote:
Originally Posted by walter
What if her parents had made a prior claim on the name given to her, and recorded it, and then let the state record its vital statistics? I think it would have answered their objections to the BC, and the girl also would have no cause to complain. Today, she'd have the option to use the State BC, while having evidence of a prior, private birthright.
Well, if my parents had done what I'm suggesting, I'd have evidence that my name is mine and mine alone, without any state agency attached. I'd still have the option to use the agency, or in the alternative, if I didn't wish to use the agency, I'd have very good evidence of my status as a native born Californian, and not simply being a resident thereof.Quote:
Originally Posted by David Merrill
As far as the problem of having to do the work of performing a survey, preparing a notice, and making the record with the county, I think people should actively be doing that, regardless of the extra effort. It would give their posterity the option to use the State agency or not. There would be a clear record of both the State agency, and the private name.
The problem that I see is you are still using their registers.
If you real want out then you will have to create your own register (UN recognized) so you can deposit the SOLB.
I don't think the registering of the birth event is the problem as much as the BC is.
The SOLB should be the ticket to your share of the common wealth.
The BC is abandoning that share created from jurisdiction hopping.
Leaving the garden of Eden to do commercial adventures.
With out the SOLB you are stateless, a refugee. Now you need protection from the very state you want out from.
8) Pay attention, even to trifles
9) Do nothing that is of no use
we must lean how to execute what we have before changing it,
the SOLB is the most powerful instrument we will ever have yet we do nothing with it.
I'm not sure what you mean by 'their' registers. I see it no differently than posting notice on a tree in the town square, or in a newspaper. I'm seeing it not as a registration, but rather as public notice. Am I missing something?Quote:
Originally Posted by walter
As far as finding a real out (without doing what I'm suggesting with a prior, public announcement), I think its very simple: just quit using the family surname.
Who owns the tree in town square?Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith Alan
If I own the tree and you tack a document to it then you have deposited your document with me.
I hope your document has value so I can sell it.
Yes, I will have "deposited" public notice with the public.Quote:
Originally Posted by walter
I think maybe my understanding of what the BC is (I'm calling it that, for brevity and simplification, as it includes the matrix and all of its derivatives) might be different than yours.
You may have heard of one "KW" who's been making the rounds lately. After listening to him quite a bit, I'm thinking the BC creates a state agency, with the local State having jurisdiction over the survey and the name attached thereon. In the US, the instrument is where 14th amendment citizens are born, and so people using the created person (just about everyone) inadvertently alienate themselves from their native state, and become residents.
As residents, their native states treat them as foreign agents, and the people become subject to all this administrative procedure, and lose their status as native sons and daughters of their republic.
I'm proposing that people create their own surveys, and make their own registrations through making their own public notices. They should do this prior to the State making its survey and registration, since being first in time would give the newborn baby evidence of being one of the native born people of the state, and easily rebut any presumptions the State might make as to their status of citizenship.
In the older days the birth events were registered in a family bible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith Alan
Who owned the bible?
The family did.
What rights were granted to them from that registration?
How would one travel around the world if they never got a SOLB?
COULD BE BUT IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT WE THINK IT IS AS COMPARED TO WHAT IT REALLY IS.Quote:
Originally Posted by walter
We know the BC is an instrument, and it is evidence of a state agency, and governs the survey and the name thereon.
THAT IS ALREADY HAPPENING WITH THE SOLB
Respectfully disagree. What I really think is happening with the BC is, the states (in their role as corporate subsidiaries of the US federal government) are finding an alien and creating a person based on a survey. They are coming in as parens patriae, and giving the newfound child civil rights, and granting parents custody of the child (in most cases).
Regarding Bibles, recordings in family Bibles are regarded as evidence of parentage. There's nothing to stop anyone from recording their baby's names in a family Bible, and if ever there is a question of identity, it can be brought in to support various assertions. But I can't think of any rights being granted by doing that.
As far as traveling across borders, the BC would still be available, assuming states followed the law, and made the required registrations. But this brings up another interesting question: Whatever gave people the idea that they had the right to use the BC? I think what's happening is, people just assume that they can, and they pick up a copy of their record and begin using it.
The idea of preempting the State's registration, is to give people's offspring the ability to rebut presumptions made by states, that the person in question may or may not be an US citizen. Here, there would be a clear line between state citizens and US citizens.
Hold on here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith Alan
We are not talking about the same instruments.
SOLB is the "Statement of live birth" and BC is the "birth certificate"
When I said that is already happening with the SOLB you replied back to the BC.
Registering the birth event and getting a BC is two totally different events.
You can not get a BC with out first having a SOLB.
Thats putting the cart before the horse.
These two instruments can be acquired from your state as
one being "certified" and the other a "certificate".
Big difference.
You see the SOLB original is held by them making them the appointed trustee.
The sheeple hold the original BC. So what position does that put the sheeple in?
Won't it be trustee ?
Sorry for the miscommunication, but I thought I made it clear that I was using 'BC' as an all inclusive term for the matrix (the protocol or first draft of a legal instrument, from which all copies are derived) and all of its derivative instruments. The people hold nothing but certificates and/or copies of certificates, which are derived from a matrix, which never leaves the State's custody.Quote:
Originally Posted by walter
But anyway, no one other than the state legislatures are appointing the State as trustee. What the States are doing is jumping the claim that mothers and fathers have on their offspring, and essentially are claiming to find infants of unknown parentage. From that point on, it's parens patriae all the way, and children become 14th amendment citizens, granted federal civil rights, and alienated from their natural estate as one of the People. ( I don't know how it works in other countries, but it's probably very similar.)
Now as far as persons becoming trustees, when a citizen answers to the name, he assumes the role of surety for the name. It's not his agency. He's simply an agent for the agency, exercising his discretion for the benefit of his principal. This is what I meant earlier when I asked: Whatever made people think they had the right to use the name? They just assume the obligation, even though there's no formal appointment .
hi Keith Alan, walter, & David Merrill,
I think you may be onto something here Keith Allen!
seemingly so but have you also followed Kurtis Kallenbach's theories on this "material"? in a nutshell, he suggests they are not claiming the child, they are claiming the afterbirth! this nutshell is only touching on a small part of what he talks about. its the deepest Ive seen about it from anyone and it has connected many dots for me but it is complicated.Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith Alan
just something else to consider and it would be nice to read what others think about Kurt's theories since they are so deep.
Yes, I heard one of Angela Stark's shows where Kallenbach was talking about that. It was interesting, but I thought at the time that if indeed the afterbirth was being claimed, it would only be part of a survey. It's true - in a sense - that mothers are abandoning their children.Quote:
Originally Posted by george
'Child' is a legal term, which according to Blacks is:
So what they appear to be claiming, is parens patriae. Someone's gotta do it.Quote:
This word has two meanings in law: (1) In the law of the domestic relations, and as to descent and distribution, it is used strictly as the correlative of "parent," and means a son or daughter considered as in relation with the father or mother. (2) In the law of negligence, and in laws for the protection of children, etc., it is used as the CHILD 197 CHIROGRAPH opposite of "adult," and means the young of the human species, (generally under the age of puberty,) without any reference to parentage and without distinction of sex. Miller v. Finegan, 26 Fla. 29, 7 South. 140, 6 L. R. A. 813.
Law Dictionary: What is CHILD? definition of CHILD (Black's Law Dictionary)
the feminine part, of virgin birth, since the afterbirth has no male DNA. he goes into distillation or separation of spirit and matter and the technicalities of it as to how it relates to use.Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith Alan
it really makes some sense, especially for some of us with some bible study under our belts that have also later become suspicious of the bible.
but isnt there another document? the Certificate of live birth (is what walter says SOLB?) and the Birth Certificate but I seem to recall that someone somewhere mentioned another document prior to both of those that was just basic details and it was used to make the COLB but not an official document, more like just notes taken at the time?
it may just be a regional thing or it could also just be me over recalling something on the subject and nothing at all.
Maybe that bears more research on my part. I know I have a lot of questions in my mind about many things in the Bible.Quote:
Originally Posted by george
My understanding is, the State takes a survey and prepares a matrix, from which statements of live birth and birth certificates are prepared.Quote:
Originally Posted by george
I found this particularly... bothersome:Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith Alan
http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/di...=102425-102475Quote:
(b) Notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary,
information collected pursuant to subparagraph (A) of paragraph (2)
of subdivision (a) shall not under any circumstances be disclosed or
available to anyone, except for both of the following:
(1) The State Department of Public Health and the Department of
Child Support Services for demographic and statistical analysis. The
Department of Child Support Services shall keep information received
pursuant to this subdivision confidential in accordance with Section
17212 of the Family Code.
(2) The federal government, without any personal identifying
information, for demographic and statistical analysis.
The young lady's inability to prove a public birth should not equate to any inability to prove a private birth. Consider birth as in 'entry into office'. On another note, proof of U.S. citizenship in the US without a birth certificate can be AFAIK accomplished by two witnesses that have known the person for a number of years. I'm a bit surprised any learned folk are even the slightest bit hung up on this matter. It is possible to keep and maintain one's own private, household birth records.
Or better yet, how about this:Quote:
Originally Posted by David Merrill
1. write the child details in your private household register;
2. serve a certified copy of the page on the {State} Attorney General;
3. notarize a certificate of service concerning # 2
4. File the notarized certificate of service in a USDC misc. jacket or a county case jacket along with a redacted or full copy of the register page (its possible to do it so that one has a single entry or form per page).
I'd print things on archival quality paper or security paper and also keep a certified copy of the register page and the certificate of service in a secure location.
The above might not be suitable or appropriate for U.S. persons, U.S. citizens or U.S. residents.
Perhaps the news segment is a kind of advertising?Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith Alan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith Alan
the most current updates from him can be found here: https://trustandcontract.wordpress.com/ several videos and audios on this link. Ive found the audios are better than the videos on the subject myself but for those seriously interested in what he theorizes, you should watch and listen to all of them that are linked on this page.
there is also quite a bit of not directly related but good info as well.
I know you are referring to the BC but you are again putting the cart before the horse.Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith Alan
Nobody holds a copy of a certificate.
Copy's of certificates mean nothing and have no value what so ever.
The BC is an "original certificate", not a copy of anything, its an abstract. When you order one you hold the original. The state doesn't.
The Statement of live birth is a "certified true copy", again not a certificate.
If you want to make a birth announcement you do not make a birth certificate.
You make a statement, a declaration, a testimony any one of those but not a birth certificate.
Do you see the difference?