Citizenship defined lost in translation.

[shikamaru]

This is interesting and an awesome find!
http://idhistory.ncidpolicy.org/hist_identity_bc.html

* Birth Certificates *

In England, where English Common Law arose, even into modern times a birth certificate is not given official regard as an identity document, although the novel phenomenon of demanding it as such has very recently arisen parallel with this same novel trend in the U.S. [and has led to a 2004 statute in Britain authorizing issuance of new birth certificates in some cases, despite its official status as NOT being an identity document]. Indeed, the early advent of birth certificates bore no impact upon the ability of an individual to change identity at will, initially being devoid of identity information specific to any individual, and the complete and universal disregard for their existence in daily business and life prevented their existence from infringing upon that right. That is, birth certificates were not solicited for any purposes except later in contested inheritances of noble titles, and so their rare existence did not disclose the existence of any former identity of an individual, and such information remained strictly private throughout life.

Presently, in U.S. law, a birth certificate continues this legal tradition and does not dictate an individual's contemporaneous legal identity, and is Constitutionally prohibited from doing so. (Marbury v. Madison (S Ct., 1803); Christianson v. King County (S Ct., 1915); Harman v. Forsenius (S Ct., 1965); Department of Justice v. Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press (S Ct., 1989); Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey (S Ct., 1992); Lawrence v. Texas (S Ct., 2003); et al.; Jonson v. Greaves (KB, 1765); Entick v. Carrington and Three Other King's Messengers (KB, 1765); et al.). In order to make any use of a birth certificate subsequent to birth in proper accordance with the rule of law, it is necessary for states to issue new birth certificates to an individual upon identity change, and without cross-reference to any prior identity information or certificate, at the sole direction of that individual. Failure of any agents of the state to do so constitutes felony violations of law. (18 U.S.C. §§ 241, 242, 1001, 1028, et al.).



The concept of the birth certificate appears to have derived from customs among nobility, where it was originally applied strictly among nobility. It was a determination of a putative heir to a noble title, and the role of this certification was to ensure the ongoing lineage of that particular noble title. Acknowledgment and acceptance of a child as an heir by a noble family was optional, and at the discretion of the noble head of household. Such 'certifications' were issued directly by heads of noble households as acknowledgments of a potential heir and inheritance right of that heir, and could be issued or revoked at any time by that noble (the putative heir could be disowned) to any individual able to fulfill the duties of the role of heir to that title, even an individual biologically of another lineage (the noble could adopt any child or adult as an heir).

During later times of increasingly stringent patrilineal patriarchy, family noble lineage became predominantly patrilineal (passing from patriarchal head of household to patriarchal heir), and gender role associations by such certifications slowly emerged. The right to inherit noble titles also came to be determined more formally in the order of seniority of potential heirs, giving rise to an interest in determining the order of the acquisition of a potential right to inherit, later becoming more stringently the order of birth (hence documentation of dates of birth, and increasingly consistent issuance of such certifications at birth).

In other words, the 'birth certificates' were certifications of noble lineage and inheritance right that came to be based upon reasonably demonstrated ability to properly fulfill the social role expectations of a patriarchal heir to a family lineage. Any heir without such acknowledgment was not a noble patriarchal heir, and therefore was not documented by such certification. In short, the ancient legal role of a 'birth certificate' was more akin to the modern legal role of a will for noble titles (and the estates associated with those titles). But, again, to ensure the ongoing lineage of that particular noble title. This is why, to this day, the stigma of an 'illegitimate', or 'bastard', conception is so extreme, and nearly on par with feminizing epithets directed at putative males.

Such 'birth certificates' were also not originally in the form of paper documentation, but in symbolic form, such as a grant of right to wear a noble family crest or shield or other symbols on armor or clothing, or go into combat under the standard or banner that represented the noble family, with the putative heir granted the greatest leadership authority (second to the nobleman patriarch himself) under that standard or banner. In these early forms, there were no representations of identity information specific to the individual heir, but only familial information and the putative rights of inheritance to familial noble title. Modern birth certificates sometimes retain vestiges of these early traditions in the form of disclosing parental identity information on the face of some birth certificates.

In general, a putative heir had ongoing opportunity to earn acknowledgment of paternity and masculinity (patriarchal suitability), and the right to inherit, from the putative paternal nobleman throughout life, and could even re-earn it again subsequent to being disowned. Later, when the system of nobility was banished from the U.S., this control over "birth certificates" at law was transferred from the patriarchal nobleman to the free individual, conforming it to the same standard (dictated exclusively by the individual) as for identity change dating to earlier times when name was the full extent of identity. (Marbury v. Madison (S Ct., 1803); Christianson v. King County (S Ct., 1915); Harman v. Forsenius (S Ct., 1965); Department of Justice v. Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press (S Ct., 1989); Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey (S Ct., 1992); Lawrence v. Texas (S Ct., 2003); Jonson v. Greaves (KB, 1765); Entick v. Carrington and Three Other King's Messengers (KB, 1765); et al.). Consequently, by common law within the U.S., the power to issue, withdraw, change, reissue or entirely omit a birth certificate is entirely at the discretion of the individual described by that birth certificate. This individual power clearly remains wherever and to whatever extent legislatively enacted laws, pursuant to case law, have not abrogated.

However, it is this history of determination of worthiness for inheritance of a noble title that leaves, to this day, a most profound social shaming in being deemed an 'illegitimate' or 'bastard' child.

There is more. Check it out.

[motla68]

Yes, that is quite interesting, thank you.

[motla68]

Some updated details about signing authority for the name, keep in mind this is just updates of our progress, cannot prove anything yet as we have not tried to use it anywhere yet:

In the Canadian Vital Statistics Act
http://www.canlii.org/en/on/laws/sta...1990-c-v4.html

Admissibility of certificates, etc.
46. (1) A certificate purporting to be issued under section 44 or a certified copy of a registration purporting to be issued under section 45 signed by the Registrar General or Deputy Registrar General or on which the signature of either of them is reproduced by any method is admissible in any court in Ontario as proof, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, of the facts so certified, and it is not necessary to prove the signature or official position of the person by whom the certificate or certified copy purports to be signed.

The following notation is from a local Coresource study group member in reference to the above:
===================
On another note...
I have had three of the Certificates of Indemnity returned to me authenticated by the STATE OF MICHIGAN. I just received them back yesterday. The verbiage on the authentication cover document is quite interesting. The verbiage indicates that the Registrar does in fact, by action of signing/putting his/her signature to the Certificate of Live Birth, does so in and through the full faith and credit that has been granted to them in the capacity of their office. Now, where do you think this, "full faith and credit," originated?

This is only made possible through the presumption of the pledge made by President Franklin D. Roosevelt on behalf of the People of the Republic United States of America to the UNITED STATES, INC. bankruptcy of 1933, which became the Receiver of the Bankruptcy. I also think it is possible that this is a nexus point revealing if we have not made our intent known through expression of who we put our Trust into, but rather have allowed it to be implied it through our action(s), thus allowing for the presumption to have standing and the full force and affect of law.

Furthermore, I also believe that this pledge can be properly rebutted, rescinded, and revoked, ab inito, nunc pro tunc, in a peaceful manner, and this would change a lot of things. Perhaps even bring to a conclusion the conquest that needs to be complete, per Lincoln's General Orders 100. In the spirit of this, I wrote the following for another friend by inspiration to help encourage them in their time of need. I think part of what I have written herein below, could apply for just such an expression and covenant of Trust dedicated and declared for the purpose of Giving, Forgiving, and Trust in honor of Love and for the Love that Loved Us first, the foundation through which all such things are made possible.

> there was a separation in thought here when establishing identity in court: >

"Furthermore, you may consider this formal notice that I do not consent to be recognized by that name, firstly because it is not my creation and I had nothing to do with its creation, and secondly, because I do not claim to own it or be the owner of it in any fashion. Therefore, mark my words, it was never my will and intent to gift or pledge to you the energy of my life, labor, body, soul, and spirit through such an entity/creation directly or indirectly, expressed or implied.

Therefore, however you determine to settle this matter, is fully under the jurisdiction of your own power and authority, of which I AM determined to not interfere, for I AM a peaceful inhabitant sent of my Father who I AM one with as an Envoy to help you settle this matter honorable."

"Now, is there anything more that I can help you with? If there is nothing more for me to help you with, and seeing how this issue does not involve me and that you are fully capable of settling it, I will be taking my leave of you now."

====================

There is another guy through a private group I am not in contact with in Georgia that got authentication " through the elections office " that has the same verbiage of " full faith and credit",
not to mention the video that had been show from canada of making the same statements about what he got.

The point of Authentication again was to eventually prove out that the Authenticated COLB could act as a passport here in the states as stated from Mark from canada in his video.

Summarize tracking of the COLB/BC:

- " Revenue Receipt " , linked to indemnification as stated in the Liber Code.

- Authenticated in the intent of " full faith and credit" mentioned in more then 1 authentication, also stated on U.S. Currency.

We are getting closer to the goal of proving this out that the authenticated COLB/BC standing on it's own could be used as a passport in our travels without actually having to apply for some separate passport under penalties of purjury, also as stated in the above canadian statutes that registrar generals have signing authority for the name in court room situations (passing through commerce) ' just passing through.
Your body (state of me) was born from the soil and it shall return to the soil when the creator says your time on this earth is up.
Another guy in our study group has a interesting online name in accordance to this " Dan of the Dust ".

Have a great day.

Updating on the Authentication process, I found related information in Florida statutes associating registrar as trustee, plus more:

The 2010 Florida Statutes(including Special Session A)


Title XXXIX
COMMERCIAL RELATIONSChapter 678
UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE: INVESTMENT SECURITIES

678.4071 Authenticating trustee, transfer agent, and registrar.―A person acting as authenticating trustee, transfer agent, registrar, or other agent for an issuer in the registration of a transfer of its securities, in the issue of new security certificates or uncertificated securities, or in the cancellation of surrendered security certificates has the same obligation to the holder or owner of a certificated or uncertificated security with regard to the particular functions performed as the issuer has in regard to those functions.View Entire Chapter
History.―s. 4, ch. 98-11.
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/...0678.4071.html

I just got word through the grapevine about other study groups, the same guy who got a hospital bill taken care of got a second one and another interesting event a man in Texas who's wife died over complications of a long battle with cancer and a huge hospital bill had taken a certified copy of the death certificate tendered to the window of the billing clerk via certified mail and got the whole hospital bill settle in full, he had got a letter back telling him so.
Unfortunately I have no direct contact with these people and since this was done in the private it has to stay in the private.
I got some stories about hospital bills taken care of in the past, but I do things differently these days in how to take care of them as shown similar success with vehicle taxes.

[motla68]

You all will get some enjoyment out of this attachment, someone in our groups sent this to me, a response from a Vital Stats Office. Also shows a little proof of things I mentioned:

- Not to be used as identification

- Certificate is only proof that the original exists somewhere, the only artifact we have to go on is the seal of the one holding the original in trust.

There is a contradiction in this thing though, if it is not suppose to be ID then how else are you suppose to get these other documents it mentions you use it to get. Could it be they are making you an offer to contract as trustee with your high office as Heir?
Seems a bit of a demotion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTckFl0jPN8

[ see attachment ]

[Frederick Burrell]

Great Info Matla

So if the birth cert is not to used as Identification, does that mean a drivers license is not a valid form of Identification. How does one establish identification. I guess it would be the same as it has always been. What you claim. Frederick Burrell

[motla68]

Great Info Matla

So if the birth cert is not to used as Identification, does that mean a drivers license is not a valid form of Identification. How does one establish identification. I guess it would be the same as it has always been. What you claim. Frederick Burrell

There is a couple of schools of thought on all that, we are working on it to prove it out one way or another, I hate to even go into the details about them schools of thought because we have no proof yet so we continue on with some next steps.

- I hear rumors that a couple of guys in different parts of the country walked into a DMV office and explained their position, in the end got a DL without signing or paying.
That is one of the next things on the agenda this will prove out. The one I have now needs a mailing location corrected, so will see what I can do with it.
Also the one in my possession I first got back in 1985 when they were still allowing religious objections for not giving a SSN, about 3 years ago I went in there to
ask some questions, one I asked was the number they put in, they would not give it to me even though I had the instrument referencing their computer entry,
I asked if it ended in a certain last 4 numbers that I knew was the SSN and he said no it does not, so whatever they have in there who knows.

The creator gave man earth as a gift to take care of (stewardship) and these corporations and government have taken resources away from that gift to do what they
do, so therefore we demand consideration, that consideration is the recycling of credit in their system, this is the indemnification mentioned a few times as realted
to Coresource education. One man who wishes to remain anonymous shared with me a letter that I seen with my own eyes that said basically and not specific that
they were thankful that the user returned the the credit so that someone else could also use it for their education. This man used Coresource Solution education
material to settle the amount owed.

Will keep you all up to date on that progress of course.

[Chex]

You probably see this video before but it’s worth repeating.

No man can serve two masters; we need evidence as well.

[Frederick Burrell]

"A man cannot serve two masters"

The flesh =man

two masters

One the indwelling spirit, the christ within

two the ego, mind that usurpted the place of spirit.

which one rules you house, or is it divided.

Just my interpretation of your quote. I find I like it better than the implied one as it does not create a controversy with TPTB.

[Frederick Burrell]

Why not just remove your self from the body politic by renouncing your US citizenship and claim national status. Its not a lengthy process. Many are doing it to avoid income taxes when they move out of the country. Correct your error of using the birth cert for purposes it wasn't intended for. There has been a mistake. fB

[Chex]

Why not just remove your self from the body politic by renouncing your US citizenship? The Irs Code states

The Treasury Department (issuer of debt notes) and IRS (enforcement of debt notes) have authority to issue regulations under IRC ? 877A that your worldwide property has been sold for its fair market value on the day before the expatriation or residency termination.

Who gave them authority over your property is 1 unanswered question? I like persons names with faces.
2nd who gave anyone authority over you? Pessimism.

Irs tries their self-made remedy for that, that corporation does not make law.

Jurisdiction over citizenship via birth within the several States was simply an exercise of a States "numerous and indefinite" powers.

Early acts of Naturalization recognized the individual State Legislatures as the only authority who could make anyone a citizen of a State.

Framer James Wilson said, "a citizen of the United States is he, who is a citizen of at least some one state in the Union."

These citizens of each State were united together through Article IV, Sec. II of the U.S. Constitution, and thus, no act of Congress was required to make citizens of the individual States citizens of the United States.

Read more here