Claim: "Your birth certificate is worth millions"

[derrick06]

So this is a claim I recently found in a video on FB that has spread quite a bit lately created by a gentleman named Jordan Maxwell. In the video he attempts to compare Admiralty Law (The practice of using shipping manifests for ships coming into harbor) with the Practice of birth certificates.

https://www.facebook.com/WakeUpNewss/videos/464756160316222/
(The link to the video is here for reference as the source of the claim.)


He claims that your birth certificate in the US is a security on the stock exchange in the NY stock market. Quoting his words in the video directly...

"Did you know for instance that your birth certificate is a security on the New York stock market? All birth certificates in the US will tell you on the bottom "This is printed on security papers. Do not accept if not on full color security paper." Then on the right hand corner you will always have a series of red numbers printed on the birth certificate. Those numbers are a security stock exchange number on the world stock exchange. You can go to any stock office and give them those numbers and you can see what your birth certificate (Your Stock) is worth. They will check it on the stock exchange and find YOU, your birth certificate is a stock on the stock exchange in America. Why? Because you are worth money to the international bank that bought you in 1930

Sadly my birth certificate is put away at the moment and I can't test this theory for myself. However has anyone heard this theory before? Or Jordan Maxwell? Is he just reinterpreting those numbers? Can your name actually be found on the stock exchange? Something seems a weeee bit fishy here. Of course the video uses spooky music because this apparently helps prove the point.

 

[Mick West]

This seems like a claim without evidence, which are not normally worth debunking. Does he actually give any evidence at all that his claim is true?

 

[derrick06]

Well his evidence is the apparently that those numbers on a birth certificate are designating a link to a stock... However this could be debunked if we can have a source designating what those numbers REALLY mean. I would just test his claim head on but currently I don't have access to my BC... I feel this is still worth debunking because it's quite popular for conspiracy heads to throw around.

 

[derrick06]

A bit off subject from the main claim I found an issue with some small talk at the beginning of the video where he claims the practice of birth certificates came from...

The Nazi concept that every human coming out of their mothers water must be birthed and must have a birth certificate to find out how much they will make us in our new world order.

How does that even make sense? Of course there is no source that this came from Nazi Germany but of course there is definitely information on the contrary. From Wikipedia...

The documentation of births is a practice widely held throughout human civilization, especially in China, Egypt, Greece, Rome, and Persia. The original purpose of vital statistics was for tax purposes and for the determination of available military manpower. Births were initially registered with churches, who maintained registers of births. This practice continued into the 19th century.[1] The compulsory registration of births with governmental agencies is a practice that originated in the United Kingdom in 1853.[2]

Clearly documenting births was a thing WAY before 1930 or Nazi Germany...

 

[Balance]

Isn't this a belief of the Freeman on the land movement?
They seem to re-interpret the law and legalese (and ignore statutes as being optional)

The bit about the Birth Certificate bonds arises from this belief...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freemen_on_the_land

They say that all people have two parts to their existence – their body and their legal "person". The latter is represented by the individual's birth certificate; some freemen claim that it is entirely limited to the birth certificate. Under this theory, a "strawman" is created when a birth certificate is issued, and this "strawman" is the entity who is subject to statutory law. The physical self is referred to by a slightly different name – for example "John of the family Smith", as opposed to "John Smith"

FOI requests (sorry I can't find them right now) answer what the numbers officially represent.

 

[Mick West]

Well his evidence is the apparently that those numbers on a birth certificate are designating a link to a stock...

That's not evidence. That's a claim without any evidence.

And which numbers? Certificates vary greatly by state, and have changed over time. Obviously they would have serial numbers. But they all vary by state.

Sorry, but unless there a more specific claim of evidence, then I don't really feel there's anything to debunk.

 

[American Buffalope]

Isn't this a belief of the Freeman on the land movement?
They seem to re-interpret the law and legalese (and ignore statutes as being optional)

Balance hit the right nail on the head. This is straight from the FOTL (Freeman On The Land) and sovereign citizen playbook.
Please ignore it for the sake of not becoming one of those dreadful people who insist on their right to argue their legal status in traffic court for as long as possible while dozens of other people wait to have their case heard.

 

[deirdre]

Balance hit the right nail on the head. This is straight from the FOTL (Freeman On The Land) and sovereign citizen playbook.
Please ignore it for the sake of not becoming one of those dreadful people who insist on their right to argue their legal status in traffic court for as long as possible while dozens of other people wait to have their case heard.

i googled "what are the numbers on birth certificates" and there is an explanation a few links down

Since 1948, most State registrars use a uniform numbering system.

Birth certificates (BCs) issued by the States generally include an 11-digit number in a xxx xx xxxxxx format. The number begins with a 3-digit birth area code number followed by a 2-digit year of registration (almost always the year of birth) and lastly a 6-digit serial registration number (assigned sequentially to each birth as it is filed). https://secure.ssa.gov/poms.nsf/lnx/0110210305

i was born after 1960 (New York State) though and have no numbers on my certificate. i do have the embossed seal..which i believe is the "security paper", but i'm too lazy to look up what 'security paper' actually means as i agree with Mick.

But under the google search "what are the numbers on birth certificates", if you click images, there are tons of BCs with serial numbers shown.

edit: ---text edit..oops guess i should have actually read it ..not the emboss. My certificate doesnt appear to be on security paper. and doesnt say anything about security paper on it. maybe that is just for copies?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security_paper

 

[derrick06]

That's not evidence. That's a claim without any evidence.

And which numbers? Certificates vary greatly by state, and have changed over time. Obviously they would have serial numbers. But they all vary by state.

Sorry, but unless there a more specific claim of evidence, then I don't really feel there's anything to debunk.

You make a good point Mick, so he's essentially just rambling on about a claim that isn't even able to be tested through information then aye?

 

[Mick West]

You make a good point Mick, so he's essentially just rambling on about a claim that isn't even able to be tested through information then aye?

He's just rambling. Again, he's not making a claim of evidence. He's claiming that if you do something, then something else will happen. He's not providing any evidence that it actually does happen.

It's like he's saying "if you go to a police station, and wave a flag, they will give you a cake". But he provides no evidence to back it up. Sure, you could got to a police station and wave a flag, get no cake, and hence disprove his theory. But why would you? The onus is on the person making the claim to provide evidence.

That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

 

[derrick06]

Balance hit the right nail on the head. This is straight from the FOTL (Freeman On The Land) and sovereign citizen playbook.
Please ignore it for the sake of not becoming one of those dreadful people who insist on their right to argue their legal status in traffic court for as long as possible while dozens of other people wait to have their case heard.

Ah so this isn't a new claim then? Interesting to see. @Mick is right. I suppose it's More claim than actual evidence based but I found it interesting that this theory has spread so fast. People believe it but nobody seems to question it so I fealt an urge to discuss it with people on here who have been around the block and fighting bunk a wee bit longer. I appreciate your feedback everyone!

 

[mm1145]

I knew I had seen this calim before this is old bunk

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Freemen_on_the_land

Birth certificates
There are three main beliefs about birth certificates in freeman mythology:

1. The government uses them to create your strawman and legal person to which all your legal responsibilities, debts and liabilities belong.[36][29]
2. As a form of registration, they transfer ownership of an individual to the state. This is what allows the state to seize your children if you don't play by their rules.[36]
3. They are financial instruments or birth-tracking bonds (a.k.a. live birth bonds) that are sold by the government and then traded on the sea of international commerce, using you as security (an idea taken from the redemption movement).

Freemen claim the government secures the value of its fiat currency using its own citizens' birth certificate "bonds." It is claimed that the value of an individual's "bond" may reach into the billions. It's interesting to see how the alleged value of the Birth Certificate has changed over time. When the conspiracy theory started in the US the value was estimated at ~$630,000 USD more recent versions of this conspiracy theory put the value of Birth Certificates in the billions.

This can supposedly be proven by entering the numbers on one's birth certificate into various stock-tracking sites to show the current value of one's "bond" on the market. Several popular Youtube videos claim to show evidence that numbers on Birth Certificates are actually CUSIP numbers. In reality, CUSIP numbers are 9 digit alpha-numerical codes. Birth Certificate numbers for the US are 11 digits long. UK birth certificate serial numbers are 10 digits long. In Canada the number is 12 digits long.

Notwithstanding this, freemen believe that one can access the money represented by one's own "bond" though various pseudolegal methods and by filing forms with government agencies. There are plenty of conmen, fraudsters and snake-oil salesmen selling methods on how to achieve this to gullible fools. Naturally, none have ever been shown to work.

The value of one's birth certificate "bond" can also supposedly be used to discharge one's debts and financial liabilities through a process known as "acceptance for value" or "A4V", without the freeman having to gain direct access to the funds himself. The UK Treasury has stated that the existence of these bonds, as well as various other freeman financial concepts, are myths.[51]

 

[Trailblazer]

I knew I had seen this calim before this is old bunk

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Freemen_on_the_land

Exactly. The whole thing seems to be based on the rather ludicrous concept that there are perfectly legal ways to unlock vast riches and get out of debt, if you know the secret code. The idea seems to be that the government makes it almost, but not quite impossible to crack, and will willingly hand over the loot to those smart enough to know the special handshake. It doesn't seem to occur to them that the government makes the laws, and if any such loophole existed it would have been closed long ago.

 

[tadaaa]

lol, I love these theories, they are so daft

they do work though, right up until you are convicted and thrown in jail - for contempt, at the very least

they remind me of the story regarding the Nigerian counter fitter, who forged a cheque for 2 billion dollars (perfectly I might add)

it was an audacious and successful plan ----- right up until he went to cash it!!!!!!

 

[Mick West]

lol, I love these theories, they are so daft

they do work though, right up until you are convicted and thrown in jail - for contempt, at the very least

They work until they are tested. But part of the reason they are popular is that they give the illusion of working. Like the "You don't have to pay taxes" scams. Since the tax system is voluntary unless you get audited, you can put anything down on your tax return as a deduction and pay no taxes - or even get a big refund. So it looks like it works.

Then you (probably) get audited a few years later, and go to jail.

But here, with "your birth certificate is worth millions", there's even less of an illusion of working than that. It's just a magical belief wth no evidence to back it up, that would fall apart if ever tested.

 

[derrick06]

I knew I had seen this calim before this is old bunk

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Freemen_on_the_land

Birth certificates
There are three main beliefs about birth certificates in freeman mythology:

1. The government uses them to create your strawman and legal person to which all your legal responsibilities, debts and liabilities belong.[36][29]
2. As a form of registration, they transfer ownership of an individual to the state. This is what allows the state to seize your children if you don't play by their rules.[36]
3. They are financial instruments or birth-tracking bonds (a.k.a. live birth bonds) that are sold by the government and then traded on the sea of international commerce, using you as security (an idea taken from the redemption movement).

Freemen claim the government secures the value of its fiat currency using its own citizens' birth certificate "bonds." It is claimed that the value of an individual's "bond" may reach into the billions. It's interesting to see how the alleged value of the Birth Certificate has changed over time. When the conspiracy theory started in the US the value was estimated at ~$630,000 USD more recent versions of this conspiracy theory put the value of Birth Certificates in the billions.

This can supposedly be proven by entering the numbers on one's birth certificate into various stock-tracking sites to show the current value of one's "bond" on the market. Several popular Youtube videos claim to show evidence that numbers on Birth Certificates are actually CUSIP numbers. In reality, CUSIP numbers are 9 digit alpha-numerical codes. Birth Certificate numbers for the US are 11 digits long. UK birth certificate serial numbers are 10 digits long. In Canada the number is 12 digits long.

Notwithstanding this, freemen believe that one can access the money represented by one's own "bond" though various pseudolegal methods and by filing forms with government agencies. There are plenty of conmen, fraudsters and snake-oil salesmen selling methods on how to achieve this to gullible fools. Naturally, none have ever been shown to work.

The value of one's birth certificate "bond" can also supposedly be used to discharge one's debts and financial liabilities through a process known as "acceptance for value" or "A4V", without the freeman having to gain direct access to the funds himself. The UK Treasury has stated that the existence of these bonds, as well as various other freeman financial concepts, are myths.[51]

I think this one hit the nail really hard on the head. Disproving the logic and even the claim of evidence. Thanks for sharing. I figured some of you had seen this before. Appreciate the help everyone. I know this isn't quite the subject matter we tackle on here but it was a popular one I had ran into a few times.

 

[Whitebeard]

lol, I love these theories, they are so daft

they do work though, right up until you are convicted and thrown in jail - for contempt, at the very least

they remind me of the story regarding the Nigerian counter fitter, who forged a cheque for 2 billion dollars (perfectly I might add)

it was an audacious and successful plan ----- right up until he went to cash it!!!!!!

Like the guy I know who had a fool proof way of not paying his UK TV license. It worked fine until the court letter for non-payment arrived and he wrote back with his sure-fire legal grounds for not paying.... The refusal to pay his £145.50 soon turned into a £500 fine, plus costs and then when he still refused to pay an extra judgement for non-payment of fines tripled the amoount due and then the bailiffs got involved and the whole episode ended up costing him around £3,000;

 

[Landru]

Gnarly Carly has a similar theory about traffic tickets.
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1599603233388664&id=100000170079375

 

[Efftup]

Like the guy I know who had a fool proof way of not paying his UK TV license. It worked fine until the court letter for non-payment arrived and he wrote back with his sure-fire legal grounds for not paying.... The refusal to pay his £145.50 soon turned into a £500 fine, plus costs and then when he still refused to pay an extra judgement for non-payment of fines tripled the amoount due and then the bailiffs got involved and the whole episode ended up costing him around £3,000;

Please tell me it was Tony. ( I am so evil)

 

[Whitebeard]

Please tell me it was Tony. ( I am so evil)

sorry, it wasn't him

 

[Efftup]

It is very sad when people believe these things. Interesting that the people spouting it very rarely actually use them themselves. I understand that John Harris, a big promoter of this kind of stuff just paid up when chased for back taxes, and didn't try any of the tricks he was advocating.

 

[Balance]

FOI requests (sorry I can't find them right now) answer what the numbers officially represent.

To complete this. Here's one example of such an FOI request https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/birth_certificate_numbers

From: Master_Stuart

23 August 2015

Dear General Register Office, FAO: 151 Officer

Notice For Information Under Freedoms of Information Act 2000

Can you please advise me as to why all the birth certificate
numbers on all the birth certificates of my family and some of my
friends who checked their birth cert relate to funds and or delayed
funds on the world markets?

For the purpose of checking we changed the numbers slightly to
which no accounts can be found in this way but every time we
entered a birth certificate number a record is found. Will you
explain this?

Are there any contractual or consentual obligations attached to the
birth certificate process?

What is the financial business being created with these records if
any?

Is a legal title created from the birth records process and who
owns equitable right to it if so?

Yours faithfully,

Master_Stuart


Link to this


From: Hughes Selwyn

24 August 2015

Dear Master Stuart,

Thank you for your email via this website to the General Register Office
in relation to birth certificate numbers.

We have handled your request as official correspondence rather than under
the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act, but this has made no
difference to the response.

Each birth certificate contains a unique reference number, comprised of
letters and numbers. This is an anti-fraud measure, designed to enable it
to be possible if need be to tell where the certificate was issued from,
and to which register entry it relates. Since each certificate has a
unique number, if more than one certificate is issued for the same entry
then they will have different serial numbers.

Birth registration has nothing to do with "funds or delayed funds on the
world markets", and the numbers on birth certificates are in no way
related to such matters. They simply relate to birth register entries.

I'm not sure what you have in mind by "contractual or consensual
obligations". There is a requirement under the Births and Deaths
Registration Act 1953 for all births to be registered, but there is no
contract entered when a registration is made. Similarly, there is no legal
title created from the birth registration, and no financial business is
created by registering a birth.

I hope this helps to clarify the position.

Best wishes

Selwyn Hughes
Policy advisor
Civil Registration

Her Majesty's Passport Office, General Register Office
Room 03, Smedley Hydro, Trafalgar Road, Southport PR8 2HH
E: [email address]
[1]www.gov.uk




show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

References

Visible links
1. file:///tmp/www.gov.uk

 

[Efftup]

i think some of the confusion does lie in business law, but they got it the wrong way round.
If a company is made up of Me, mick, and TW CObra, then you have to sue the three of us individuals as we are the company. If I leave and Weedwhacker and Deirdre join the board, you have to go back to companies house and change all the details so someone then has to deal with a different set of directors.
So instead, the COMPANY is given a Business registration which is a legal fiction and is described as "being like a birth certificate for the company" so you then deal with or sue the COMPANY. And whoever is in charge takes the rap, rather than having to change a lot of paperwork EVERY time the personnel change.

So a birth certificate does NOT make a person like a company, a company registration makes it like a person.

It is based on a big misunderstanding, whether accidental or a deliberately taken out of context.

 

[Balance]

The name Master Stuart is likely used to avoid...

In addition to capitals, the use of titles such as Mr and Mrs are claimed to indicate a reference to a person's strawman...Some woos believe that the strawman is created by the government when a birth certificate is filed. Woos sometimes then try and present their birth certificate when their strawman's name is called for, such as in court...The strawman belief seems to stem from a misunderstanding of the concept of legal person-hood. In actual legal theory there is a difference between what is known as a 'natural person' (which is a human being, i.e., not a legal fiction) and that of a corporate person (a legal fiction known as corporate personhood, which applies to business, charities, governments and any recognised organisation). Courts recognise human beings as 'persons', not as a legal fiction joined to a flesh and blood human being but as one and the same (though in the past not everyone was recognised as a person before the law).

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Strawman_theory

 

[Mick West]

It's interesting because it's right on the intersection between fantasy and reality. Most "alternative" beliefs like chemtrails and 9/11 trutherism have very little impact on a person's lives - they are just some odd beliefs. So there's a buffer between fantasy and reality. Here with "sovereign citizen" type beliefs the idea that you don't have to pay taxes ( or get a driver's license, or pay debts) is in direct conflict with practical reality. A reckoning is inevitable, and that reckoning for most people (I suspect) will hit them like a cold bucket of realization that they were wrong (at least on the practical level).

Other belief systems, like chemtrails or aliens, have no such reckoning. There's no real consequence to belief in chemtrails other than a building puzzlement that the end of the world is not arriving, and not understanding why your friends and family don't talk to you any more.

Perhaps it might be useful (regarding chemtrails) to force some kind of reckoning? I'm thinking specifically about predictions people make. You know Dane Wigington is constantly predicting the imminent collapse of everything. Has he put a date on it? Have there been prior predictions?

 

[occams rusty scissor]

It is based on a big misunderstanding, whether accidental or a deliberately taken out of context.

This is the entire Freeman/legalese concept summed up, a big misunderstanding. Having dealt with a few recently I can say they are true believers in what they've read and been told is "the law" (which is what can make them a bit on the dangerous side). Even if you print off legislation and read it to them, they will swear black and blue that it's not lawful because the government is listed on the stock exchange and therefore is a company that they dont need to obey (?). No lawyer will bother with them, and most refuse legal representation because "that would grant someone power over them in legal matters" ...

A reckoning is inevitable, and that reckoning for most people (I suspect) will hit them like a cold bucket of realization that they were wrong (at least on the practical level).

I've seen the same "Freemen" get arrested time and again due to non appearance in court, warrant after warrant, all because it just doesnt hit them that they've got it wrong. One was remanded for weeks at a time for refusing to give the magistrate his name, as that would be "giving the court a name by which to enslave me"...it knocks me over just how deeply ingrained their belief is.

 

[Efftup]

This is the entire Freeman/legalese concept summed up, a big misunderstanding. Having dealt with a few recently I can say they are true believers in what they've read and been told is "the law" (which is what can make them a bit on the dangerous side). Even if you print off legislation and read it to them, they will swear black and blue that it's not lawful because the government is listed on the stock exchange and therefore is a company that they dont need to obey (?). No lawyer will bother with them, and most refuse legal representation because "that would grant someone power over them in legal matters" ...



I've seen the same "Freemen" get arrested time and again due to non appearance in court, warrant after warrant, all because it just doesnt hit them that they've got it wrong. One was remanded for weeks at a time for refusing to give the magistrate his name, as that would be "giving the court a name by which to enslave me"...it knocks me over just how deeply ingrained their belief is.

I never really understood how they brought Maritime law into it though. That never made sense.
I've seen an Australian posting on facebook how the Pope has some control over Aussie laws or something and that was linked to Maritime law somehow.

 

[derrick06]

I never really understood how they brought Maritime law into it though. That never made sense.
I've seen an Australian posting on facebook how the Pope has some control over Aussie laws or something and that was linked to Maritime law somehow.

I am consistently amused how people seem to think the Pope rules the world... This is so far from the truth. They look at customs from the height of the church's power, mix contexts with law of the time period, compare it to modern law and BAM. Another overhyped conspiracy theory because they look for only what they want to see.

 

[Mick West]

I've seen the same "Freemen" get arrested time and again due to non appearance in court, warrant after warrant, all because it just doesnt hit them that they've got it wrong. One was remanded for weeks at a time for refusing to give the magistrate his name, as that would be "giving the court a name by which to enslave me"...it knocks me over just how deeply ingrained their belief is.

I suspect though that that's the visible tip of the iceberg - the stuck true believer. There are many more who go to a seminar, don't file their income tax, then get caught (or just succumb to reason) and realize it's not actually going to work.

 

[derrick06]

Totally random @occams rusty scissor but quoting what you said above on what they claim

"Even if you print off legislation and read it to them, they will swear black and blue that it's not lawful because the government is listed on the stock exchange and therefore is a company that they dont need to obey."

Out of curiosity, are goverment's actually listed on the stock exchange? Is it do to Gross domestic product? Or is that just another fallacy they made up as well. Just wondering.

 

[derrick06]

What this definitely shows is that knowledge really is power. It's amazing how a lack of understanding on how stock exchange works and essentials of law and perhaps a bit of history lead to people just jumping right into these believes without asking themselves or checking if it just might be bullshit...

 

[occams rusty scissor]

I never really understood how they brought Maritime law into it though. That never made sense.
I've seen an Australian posting on facebook how the Pope has some control over Aussie laws or something and that was linked to Maritime law somehow.

Yeah I dont quite get the origin of that either. I had one guy bring the Phoenecians (!) into it and relate slave names back to capital letters and such, but baulked when I asked about the "admiralty law" he said I operated under.

Edit: Theres an attempted explanation here: http://loveforlife.com.au/content/10/03/31/law-land…-or-law-sea-david-icke-8th-may-2009

The term 'legal' does not mean lawful. That's why I call banking legalised robbery. It is 'legal' under Statute Law, but it is still robbery, an unlawful offence. Common Law is what is lawful; Statue Law is what we call 'legal'.

We think that a 'person' is a human being, but under the 'legal' definition of Statue Law a 'person' is a corporation and, to meet the criteria of Maritime Law, the 'person' represents a ship, in effect. That's why when a 'person' goes to court - a maritime court in reality - the 'person' stands in the dock.


Look at the maritime language in everyday use, especially in relation to governments and legal terms, like ownership and citizenship. We also have a courtship before agreeing a corporate merger called marriage in which we contract with the government corporation through a marriage certificate.

I saw a definition of Admiralty Law which said that it 'covers many commercial activities, although land-based or occurring wholly on land, that are maritime in character'. What they do is use language that makes everything 'maritime in character'.

..he had me at "statue law". Somewhere lies a lengthy tome related to the governance of artfully formed concrete objects..

There's definitely a few more of them getting about now in Aus than there were 5-6 years ago. Not widespread and not quite as militant as in other countries, but slowly growing. There's a funny YouTube clip somewhere in Queensland of a magistrate ordering a psych assessment on a sovereign citizen after 5 minutes of him trying his legalese and failing.

 

[occams rusty scissor]

Out of curiosity, are goverment's actually listed on the stock exchange? Is it do to Gross domestic product? Or is that just another fallacy they made up as well. Just wondering.

Oh dear...

If you want to do your head in and try to understand what it is they've messed up, have a look here http://www.peoplesmandate.iinet.net.au/Government_as_Foreign_corporation.html

..be warned, the logic made me cross eyed.

The Australian government is, apparently, listed as " Commonwealth of Australia" on a stock exchange, as explained in the link above. There's a legit reason for it I'm sure, but don't look for it on this page.

 

[Mick West]

The Australian government is, apparently, listed as " Commonwealth of Australia" on a stock exchange, as explained in the link above. There's a legit reason for it I'm sure, but don't look for it on this page.

Perhaps they are thinking of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia, which is just a bank.

 

[occams rusty scissor]

I suspect though that that's the visible tip of the iceberg - the stuck true believer. There are many more who go to a seminar, don't file their income tax, then get caught (or just succumb to reason) and realize it's not actually going to work.

Yeah I agree - some would see it as a "give it a go" and see what happens. The ones that take it for gospel would be the bulk of our "Freeman" customers.

 

[mm1145]

Perhaps it might be useful (regarding chemtrails) to force some kind of reckoning? I'm thinking specifically about predictions people make. You know Dane Wigington is constantly predicting the imminent collapse of everything. Has he put a date on it? Have there been prior predictions?

not going to work there are pepole who still belive the end of the world dec 2012 stuff and remember the harold camping thing with the rapture? even when they have a hard perdiction that dose not come about the belife lives on.

it would be interesting to try maybe prhaps sugest that they make a positiove prediction that could be tested? that to me is the problem with most of the chem trail etxc belivers they refuse to make testeable predictions

 

[Efftup]

Yeah I dont quite get the origin of that either. I had one guy bring the Phoenecians (!) into it and relate slave names back to capital letters and such, but baulked when I asked about the "admiralty law" he said I operated under.

Edit: Theres an attempted explanation here: http://loveforlife.com.au/content/10/03/31/law-land…-or-law-sea-david-icke-8th-may-2009

The term 'legal' does not mean lawful. That's why I call banking legalised robbery. It is 'legal' under Statute Law, but it is still robbery, an unlawful offence. Common Law is what is lawful; Statue Law is what we call 'legal'.

We think that a 'person' is a human being, but under the 'legal' definition of Statue Law a 'person' is a corporation and, to meet the criteria of Maritime Law, the 'person' represents a ship, in effect. That's why when a 'person' goes to court - a maritime court in reality - the 'person' stands in the dock.


Look at the maritime language in everyday use, especially in relation to governments and legal terms, like ownership and citizenship. We also have a courtship before agreeing a corporate merger called marriage in which we contract with the government corporation through a marriage certificate.

I saw a definition of Admiralty Law which said that it 'covers many commercial activities, although land-based or occurring wholly on land, that are maritime in character'. What they do is use language that makes everything 'maritime in character'.

..he had me at "statue law". Somewhere lies a lengthy tome related to the governance of artfully formed concrete objects..

There's definitely a few more of them getting about now in Aus than there were 5-6 years ago. Not widespread and not quite as militant as in other countries, but slowly growing. There's a funny YouTube clip somewhere in Queensland of a magistrate ordering a psych assessment on a sovereign citizen after 5 minutes of him trying his legalese and failing.

The suffix -ship has been studied in some detail, but most of that detail is irrelevant to all but the most hardcore etymologist. The most important thing, in terms of its origin, is that it is unrelated to the word ship meaning 'a vessel, especially a large seagoing vessel'.

-ship is a suffix used to form nouns of state or condition, chiefly added to nouns and especially personal nouns. In Old English it was widely used with adjectives and participles, but only two of these survive (hardship and worship, from an adjective meaning 'worthy').

and the dock being an enclosed area where the defendant stands, symbolically still caged while on trial apparently stems from the flemish word Docke meaning cage.

What also is odd, is how these Freeman ideas spread across countries, even though the rules and laws and customs are different. Flags in a courtroom apparently show a maritime connection, although it's very rare to see a flag in a UK courtroom. US Freemen seem to also link to the Magna Carta ( A UK document from 1215 that Freemen think can never be repealed even though the original was repealed within months and even replacements have been almost completely superseded by now. )

 

[Leifer]

I tried googling all the sets of numbers on my Birth certificate.
I got a wide range of hits, but none were (suspicious) or specific to me.

Searching a string of numbers, up to 9 or so numbers (especially if there are spaces), will bring-up almost anything, from baby toys, to gov't supply numbers.
"NSN" (National Stock Numbers) results come up often...even if not including all 13 numerals.
I wonder if this has confused anyone...the word "stock" ?
But NSN's are....

A National Stock Number is simply the official label applied to an item of supply that is repeatedly procured, stocked, stored, issued, and used throughout the federal supply system. The use of NSN´s facilitates the standardization of item names, supply language, characteristics and management data and aids in reducing duplicate items in the federal inventory. The NSN is 13 characters with a series of numbers that identify a unique item.
https://www.bradleycorp.com/government/DOD

...and I'm reaching with the above scenario. It's all I could come up with, regarding the word "stock", if you are looking-up your personal numbers.

 

[tadaaa]

they (Freemen) get really exercised with the genuine legal term "joinder"

which I believe simply means to "join" things together - the legal profession (along with most other professions) have a habit of needlessly complicating things

and obviously they totally misunderstand it

so in conversations with "authority" they often refuse to accept a "joinder" being created between themselves, as a human being - i.e. the physical entity and the administrative representation - i.e. a letter to Mr Stuart

so in essence a TAX demand sent to Mr Stuart is invalid because they would argue there is no "joinder" to themselves

and as said a great strategy - until it is actually tested

 

[Mick West]

This type of thing is why I dissuade semantic arguments. If you are arguing over the meaning of words, then use different words. If the words are in a law that applies to you then check with a lawyer, or just ask the judge when you are in court.