14th Amendment Slave

[The Great Ag]

I am currently reading The Red Amendment (http://www.pacinlaw.org/index/red_amendment.php), and I encourage every GIMer to purchase this treatise. It is akin to watching The Money Masters or Freedom to Fascism. It is this important! Please buy and read this treatise if you want to free yourself from gov't. If not, then please stop complaining about the gov't, you voted for your dictator. Can you expect nothing less from a dictator.

I am half-way through this treatise and what city, county, state and federal gov'ts do makes complete sense - now. Without the 14th Amendment in conjuction with the 13th and 15th Amendments, these fascist (I use that word correctly) gov'ts could not accomplish the theft of our rights.

A key example was given by River Rat today. He told a story how he was tagged doing 56 MPH in a 55 MPH zone (1 mile over) and by the time he fought the fine (lost) and paid higher insurance rates his total expenditure was $3,710! All because he was going 1 mile over the speed limit!!! This is a true story. This type of flagrant gov't behavior can happen because of the 14th Amendment.

Read the 14th Amendment below and I will in very brief fashion break it down so you can see how the US Consitution and the lawful gov't was usurped by rebels and how, by voting, we are also in rebellion against the gov't and, by that deed alone, voluntarily agree to the restrictions gov't places on us.

I have highlighted key phrases in each section.


XIV - Citizen rights not to be abridged
Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868

1. 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. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor to deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of Electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a State, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or Elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State Legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.


Prior to 1868 the term "United States citizen" or "citizen of the United States" did not exist. Everyone was known by their state, e.g., Virginian, New Yorker, Georgian, Delawarean. . .etc. No one claimed to be a "US citizen" as none existed. Each state was/is a nation, and that is who each human owed political allegiance, not the federal gov't.

After the so-called "civil war" the southern States were not granting freed slaves political status. They were "persons." "Persons" held no status in society. The fed gov't could have passed an act that gave all slaves political status and therefore rights. That was not the purpose of so called "civil war;" the crafters of this code (you need an decryption device to break all code) amended the Constitution to steal our natural, God given rights.

Let's very briefly breakdown each section.

Section 1, the usurption begins:

1. 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. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor to deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

"All persons born in the US and subject (as in a feudal system) to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States." You just lost your state nationality, and have become a ward of the federal gov't. :applause_ Doesn't that just make you feel dandy? Not only that, but you no longer have rights, but privileges granted to you by the gov't. Look at how the fed gov'ts jurisdiction has expanded beyond the Constitututional 10 mile square boundary. ". . .nor to deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Also notice the use of pronoun "its" rather than "their" which would signify the several States. "Its" refers to the federal gov't jurisdiction. Can you begin to see how the gov't can do anything it wants? Can you begin to see how we are in a feudal system?

Section 2: The insurrection begins
Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of Electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the executive and judicial officers of a State, or the members of the legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

This section clearly states that you have lost your sovreigntry and are now a US citizen. The first sentence proves this; Representatives shall be apportions according to their respective numbers of persons, excluding Indians. The fed gov't treats Indians for who they are, sovreigns. You are not. You are a US citizen.

For the second sentence, I am reducing it down to it's basic parts. But when the right to vote at any election. . . is denied. . . or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime. . .representation shall be reduced. . .. By voting you are automatically deemed to be in rebellion of the gov't. Therefore, the gov't can treat those in rebellion as it sees fit. That is gov'ts duty to suppress all rebellion and insurrection by any and all means necessary. By taking away your nationality and replacing with US citizenship, the insurrectionists removed a lawful (de jure) gov't and replaced it with a de facto (of fact in contradistinction to lawful) gov't. By voting for your reps (dictators) you are participating in this ongoing rebellion. The crafters of this language were insiduously genius. Can you see why gov't can do the things to us it has?

Section three, this is hardest section to get your head around as it involves future, present and past tenses in a single sentence.

No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or Elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State Legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Herein section 3 is a clause giving the necessary conditions to be a member of congress or any other office. Let's break this down piece by piece.

No person shall be . . .in congress (future tense) this is the conditional statement, who having previously taken an oath as a member of congress. . . (past tense) meaning you were elected by the citizens of your state and you took the oath (swore to uphold the Constitution) as a member of congress, but you cannot be considerd a "member" yet until you shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion. . .or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. . . (future tense) you must vote on any bill to be in rebelliion and then you can be a "member" of congress.

Can you see how insidious the plot is to bring down the States of the Union? Can you begin to see that you should not vote for any political candidate, local or federal again?

Last section: The big payoff.
The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Here is how all judges, congresspersons, and other officers get off free. Once a person is a "member" of congress, their duty is to "supress the insurrection or rebellion." In other words you, who vote, and are tied in to any nexus of the federal or local gov't (social security, taxes, drivers license. . .etc) are in rebellion against your lawful gov't. It is the gov'ts job, and the representatives duty to suppress us. Since we are citizens of the United States and under such jurisdiction the gov't can do whatever it pleases for any reason. That is why "habeas corpus" is gone, as are many other rights. Because we receive the "benefit" of gov't, we also receive its "liabilities." Accordingly, as far as the law is concerned, we cannot complain and have no recourse as a "citizen."

Here is the last part of section 4 . . .but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void. If at some point in time we take back our dejure (lawful) gov't all monies paid are illegal and void, i.e. we cannot get reparations from those who set up this crappy deal. Ain't that a pisser! :s15: If we get back our gov't the elitist stooges gave themselves an out clause.

There is a saving grace for us. When the insurrectionists took over the gov't in 1868, they could not replace the Constitution (their ploy would have been obvious), so there are two sets of laws. But only the Constitution can be accessed by State Nationals. By divorcing yourself from the fed gov't, and renoucing your citizenship, you can be a State National and all those silly penal laws, like those that trapped River Rat, cannot be used against you. Those penal laws are for citizens of the United States, not a State National. BTW, if you call yourself a "state Citizen" you are still a US citizen and bound by the penal laws.

I encourage everyone to purchase and read the Red Amendment (http://www.pacinlaw.org/index/red_amendment.php) for more detailed information regarding nationality, citizenship, fascism and law than I can give here.

Ask any questions, I will answer to best of my ability.

The Great Ag

[The Great Ag]

After reading the last post, you might say, "Hey, Great Ag, what you are saying sounds like slavery? That was outlawed a while back. The 13 Amendment if I recall, right?"

Let's see how the 13th Amendment properly applied with a 14 Amendment framework actually enslaves ALL US citizens.

XIII - Slavery Abolished
Passed by Congress January 31, 1865. Ratified December 6, 1865.

1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Now re-read it with my highlights.


1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Remember by voting you are rebelling against the dejure (lawful) gov't. You are committing a crime, and Congress can enslave or commit ALL US citizens to involuntary servitude for committing a crime, which every US citizen has done, simply by voting.

Paragraph two compels Congress to take all appropriate means to enforce slavery or involuntary servitude upon criminals.

To complete the puzzle, here is the 15th Amendment.

XV - Race no bar to voting rights
Passed by Congress February 26, 1869. Ratified February 3, 1870.

1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

2. The Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Prior to the 15th Amendment, only landowners could vote. Post 15th Amendment any US citizen can vote for their dictator/suppressor. Now it makes sense why the gov't wants illegal immigrants to come to the US. Give them gov't benefits (including citizenship) so they can vote and participate in the rebellion as well.

There is a solution as I pointed out in the first post. When the insurrectionists usurped the gov't they could not remove the Constitution. Effectively there are 2 forms of law and gov't. The US citizen has great difficulty accessing the Common law because he/she does not understand what has happened.

For proof of the two forms of gov't, here is Article 4 section 4 of the Constitution.

Section 4: The United States shall guarantee to every state in this union, a republican form of government, and shall protect each of them against invasion; and on application of the legislature, or of the executive (when the legislature cannot be convened), against domestic violence.

The process is to renounce US citizenship and become a State National. It's okay, prior to the 14th Amendment, everyone was considered a state national, and a non-resident alien to the federal gov't.

There are some GIMers who have done this: Barnacle Bob, Halophyte, Sukhoi Fan. JCarvingBlock and Tet have the knowledge, but I cannot ascertain their legal status.

Ask any questions, I will keep everyone updated as regain my status of State National.

Let's get out the NO VOTE campaign.

The Great Ag

[flash91]

So if RiverRat did 56 in a 55 the government can enslave him.

AWESOME! Now the big question: Cotton or Tobacco?

(Tongue in cheek humor may not apply in the jurisdictions of New Hampshire, Delaware, and deepest Mississipi. Tounge in cheek humor and other products are trademarks of the Tongue in cheek corporation)

[Tn...Andy]

Thank you for the post, Ag.

I'll be getting and reading a copy of the book.

[The Great Ag]

So if RiverRat did 56 in a 55 the government can enslave him.

AWESOME! Now the big question: Cotton or Tobacco?

(Tongue in cheek humor may not apply in the jurisdictions of New Hampshire, Delaware, and deepest Mississipi. Tounge in cheek humor and other products are trademarks of the Tongue in cheek corporation)

We are already enslaved or at the very least, serving involuntary servitude.

The Great Ag

Thank you for the post, Ag.

I'll be getting and reading a copy of the book.

Make sure you have a legal dictionary handy. You will find it helpful. He does define a lot of words, but I would not have the additional knowledge I have without a legal dictionary.

I have Blacks 5th edition. The newer ones have redefined many words. This is not unusual as the legal system is private law.

BTW I exchanged 2 ounces of silver for the book rather than FRNs. I asked him before hand and he was agreeable to this.

THe Great Ag

[Anty Ep]

there is no question in my mind that these postwar amendments dramatically changed the calculus of citizenship and sovereignity in our nation and laid the foundations for subsequent usurpations of individual and states rights by the federal government.

the political process was also questionable and basically it came down to duress against the dissident states in the form of the federal invasion.

this point of force was reproven during the 50s and 60s during federal integration.

the point of federal supremacy to the point of total negation of democratically passed laws was hammered home in three cases: Griswold v Connecticut, Brown V Board of Education, and Roe V Wade. Those laws negate state laws because of federal POLICY-- enacted not even by the CONGRESS but by the JUDICIARY presuming to negate laws even protecting human life itself=-- Roe V Wade. Many folks dont know that Roe V Wade over-turned the democratically passed laws of over 40 states in one fell swoop!

Nobody in this country is willing to stick their necks out and die for anything anymore except for some crazy patriotic malarkey coming from an unworthy federal executive who dances like a puppet to stringpullers. It's a perplexing and frustrating situation. I get no pleasure out of reading something to convince me of this yet again. I'd like to read something that causes the average Joe to give a damn, but this book doesnt sound like the trick, to be quite honest.

[Kahlil Gibran]

26642
Can't we just watch Braveheart again?

[bigjon]

This is a must read, I wish the mod's would make this one a sticky.

Thank's Great AG.

[The Great Ag]

Many folks dont know that Roe V Wade over-turned the democratically passed laws of over 40 states in one fell swoop!

Can I get a dancing bananna for that :banana:

Nobody in this country is willing to stick their necks out and die for anything anymore except for some crazy patriotic malarkey coming from an unworthy federal executive who dances like a puppet to stringpullers. It's a perplexing and frustrating situation. I get no pleasure out of reading something to convince me of this yet again. I'd like to read something that causes the average Joe to give a damn, but this book doesnt sound like the trick, to be quite honest.

I hope you are immortal because that is how long it may take a book for Avg. Joe to give a damn! :haha:

That is not the point. Never will there be 100% agreement. All that is needed, sociologically speaking, is 10%-15% to lead, and approximately 20% to follow, and the rest will come along, just because! At this time only 157 total views and 4 comments besides mine.

Not even close to 10% of active GIM members consider this important. Good lord, if GIMers do not take a stand, what hope is there for the avg. Joe?.

The Great Ag

[TonyG]

I'll post this here and then start a new thread of US vs us.

http://usa-the-republic.com/items%20of%20interest/US%20v%20USA/USA_1.html

Wish I could upload this image as a whole.

I've recieved the red amendment also. Need to keep in mind that the act of 1871 to establish a govt for the area of DC was cruicial to overtaking the country.

http://www.usa-the-republic.com
and
http://www.wealthforfreedom.com


TG

[Orion]

Good thread folks.

This is a serious question... Where does one go to get this story without the smacks of sarcastic fanaticism?

If we like to say we're 'opening people's eyes' and 'waking up the sheep', then could we do it without obnoxiously bright lights and blaring alarm clocks? The facts can speak for themselves...

Thanks,
Orion

[TonyG]

Good thread folks.

This is a serious question... Where does one go to get this story without the smacks of sarcastic fanaticism?

If we like to say we're 'opening people's eyes' and 'waking up the sheep', then could we do it without obnoxiously bright lights and blaring alarm clocks? The facts can speak for themselves...

Thanks,
Orion

Not sure what you mean? But several of those websites I mentioned have "LINK" sections. One of them is 'links to educate yourself'. That might be a good area. Is that what your refering to? Not sure what you mean by 'sarcastic fanaticism' or bright lights and blaring alarm clocks". Maybe those links will help though.
TG

[Orion]

TG,
I've been reading your links, all very good material. It's the delivery that I'm taking issue with (not yours, the cited links).

Put yourself in the shoes of a sheep with a choice to listen to someone trying to wake them up or to ignore them. They're used to being guided gently, not wacked upside the head with overwhelming quantities of raw, unprocessed facts (ever watch the local news). In addition, they've been conditioned to sense and chastize 'radicals' & people that sound like 'nuts', you know, us.

When you put in front of a flock of sheep most of this kind of material, they're interested right up until they start to smell a 'nut'. The key to getting through to the bleating is to not sound like a whacko.

My serious question is, where is this material that doesn't sound like it was written by some paranoid conspiracy freak?

Orion

[TonyG]

Good clarification.
When I approached my local grocer about the liberty dollar program and began to discuss the federal reserve system.... he got this weird look in his eyes. I said... not intersted?.. he said....nooooo, this sounds like some program that the michigan malitia would come up with. Then he made a statement that the worst thing for our country would be Obama to become president. That was the depth of his understanding of the federal reserve.

Anyhow.... I get your point, but I dont' know what the answer is.

Somewhere I saw a point or quote that was made that the average citizen of the early 1800's knew his bible and studied law in a way that some people know programming computers or know 'amerca's idol' .....for lack of a better current analogy. Or as Thomas Jefferson said "A country cannot be both ignorant and free..."

We are told in scriptures that we need to be wiser than serpents and more cunning than a fox.. (if I remember correctly) and woes are given to lawyers...pharisees etc. For many many years, since the civil war and then again with the establishment of the federal reserve and the overtaking of the media's the average citizen has been dumbed down by tv, sports, excessive work or lack of information. The information has been available, but it has not had easy access such as now.

When I first started hearing about the 14th amendment slave....social security, etc etc it was from a motorcycle mechanic friend of mine. I would sit with him as he worked on motorcycles and he would talk about dual citizenship, strawman legalities, the united states as a corporation, 2 levels of the courthouses, fringe on the flag and all this stuff that he had heard on shortwave radio. I would listen and say...uh huh... yeah.. I understand... etc... and think .... someday they might show up with the white coats... But actually he did a pretty good job of introducing me to the logic behind it. But for a common person to walk in the midst of our conversation, we would have had to shut up because they would have thought we were some kind of 'conspiracy nut.

I think sometimes it is good if we remember that there was and is an actual conspiring behind closed doors to overtake the freedoms of the Republic. Weather the center of those conspiracy is the 'communist manifesto' or the 'protocols for the learned elders of zion' (international banksters) or from the knights of malta, rosicrucians, the illuminati, the jesuits, the bohemian grove, skull and bones, Bilderbergers or 'The committe of 300', I dont' know......most likely 'all of the above. Believing that the original declaration of Independence and constitution where mostly biblically based containing the ideas that the kingdom of God is within an individual and not in a form of a govornment lordship and oppression causes me to consider that these 'conspiracies' against our country originate in not in flesh and blood, but with principalities and powers in high places. The Magna Carta also had an influence on the principles of the country.

Here seems to be the centerpoint of the 'conspiracy'. It is from the start page of http://www.wealth4freedom.com

The problem that caused full circle lies in the original Constitution. It is Article I, Section 8, Clause (17): Powers of Congress:

To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such district (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of congress, become the seat of government of the United States, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings; and (18) To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof.

The foregoing exclusive delegated power is the authority to do anything the legislature desires to do within the District (Federal Zone) without Constitutional restraints. The legislature has taken advantage of those delegated powers for their personal and political benefits. In 1861, during the Civil War, Congress adjourned sine die. That term means forever, never to return. The Republic was under Martial Law and President Lincoln appointed representatives for the southern states and forced the legislature to again sit. The 13th Article of Amendment pertaining to Nobility was removed from the Constitution and replaced with a new Article of Amendment that prohibited slavery. That Article was ratified on December 6, 1865. In 1868 the rump legislature incorporated the District as a private municipal corporation. The charter was revised slightly in 1871. Following the incorporation of that government, the legislature adopted the 14th Amendment and promulgated a Civil Rights Act to give privileges to it's new inferior class of U.S. citizens. The results of these Acts were the end of the Republic and the beginning of the Democracy - and they were Constitutional for the Federal Zone They changed the form of our government. The 14th Amendnt made U.S. citizens? out of American Citizens and also made them subject to the legislature. A government of 'we, for, and of the people' came to an end. The corporate Democracy has its own Constitution (Constitution of the United States}. The Articles of Amendments from 12 upward are of the Democracy and not the Republic. The Organic Constitution only had 12 Amendments and the Democracy has added many. Now we have two United States with different Constitutions.


I guess what I'm saying is that some of the information is tied to the conspiracies because the 'conspiracies' are factual and real and will sometimes be part of the information. Removing one 13th article of amendment and replacing it with another doesn't happen without planning or intent. The fact that these happenings occured during a wartime leads one to consider the phrase..."out of chaos, new world order".

But to try to answer your question as to where find the information without alot of the associated hoopla and obvious accusations and bannering........
the book that the great Ag mentions.... "the red pill" would be good one to start with and also http://www.freedomradio.us/Joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=70&Itemid=119
But this is a program to help you step away from being a federal citizen and being an independant sovereign. That's quite a big step.

Here are some that are titled: Links to educate yourself, but there is probably an air of anti-conspiracy jargon in many of them. http://www.wealth4freedom.com/truth/links2educate.htm

Just to mention it, not all the sites agree with each other. For instance the American Patriots friends network has a link for you to visit to sign up to vote. Other Independent sovereign sites advocate not registering to begin with. By registering, your entering into the federal system and lose your Natural independent status. State citizens of the Republic were probably by nature able to vote.

Hopefully, someone else (maybe Ante Ep) has a better answer for your (and my) question as I really dont' know where to point you towards.

Here are some other links to sift through:

Some books on becoming a sovereign American:
http://www.freedomradio.us/Joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=20&Itemid=62

Pages of links from a guy who has apparently become a soverign american.
http://members.tripod.com/~Autarchic/files/links.html
http://autarchic.tripod.com/files/indexpage.html

Here is an article of his that reaffirms how the 14th amendment got it's start, at the hand of bankers who found a loophole in the original Constitution.
http://autarchic.tripod.com/files/freeman.html

As I find more pertinent links, I'll post them, but the information.

Some of these sources and links come down to the idea of removing ourselves from the Corporate Federal UNITED STATES of AMERICA and re-establishing ourselves as a citizen of the Republic (pre-13th or pre 14th amendment citizen) Some say that using the Act of expatriation (FORTIETH CONGRESS, Sess, II, Ch. 248,249,1868, CHAP.CCXLIX. - An Act concerning the Rights of American Citizens in foreign States) is the correct way to do this.
However, others feel (and I am learning) that it may be better to simply affirm our state and individual citizenship rather than to 'expatriate'. Some careful reading and study of the history of the act needs to be undertaken.


Here is the actual act that the 40th Congress made followed by some paragraphs of commentary.

The law: FORTIETH CONGRESS, Sess, II, Ch. 248,249,1868, CHAP.CCXLIX. - An Act concerning the Rights of American Citizens in foreign States.

Whereas the right of expatriation is a natural and inherent right of all people, indispensable to the enjoyment of the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and whereas in the recognition of this principle this government has freely Received emigrants from all nations, and invested them with the right of citizenship; and whereas it is claimed that such American citizens, with their descendants are subject of foreign states, owing allegiance to the governments thereof, and whereas it is necessary to the maintenance of public peace that this claim of foreign allegiance should be promptly and finally disavowed: Therefore,

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, that any declaration, instruction, opinion, order, or decision of any offices of this government which denies, restricts, impairs, or questions the right of expatriation, is hereby declared inconsistent with the fundamental principles of this government.

Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That all naturalized citizens of the United States, while in foreign states, shall be entitled to, and shall receive from this government, the same protection of persons and property that is accorded to native born citizens in like situations and circumstances.

Sec.3. And be it further enacted, That whenever it shall be made known to the President that any citizen of the United States has been unjustly deprived of his liberty by or under the authority of any foreign government, it shall be the duty of the President forthwith to demand of that government the reasons for such imprisonment, and if it appears to be wrongful and in violation of the rights of American citizenship, the President shall demand the release of such citizen, and if the release so demanded is unreasonably delayed or refused, it shall be the duty of the President to use such means, not amounting to act of war, as he may think necessary and proper to obtain or effectuate such release, and all the acts and proceedings relative thereto shall be as soon as practicable be communicated by the President to Congress. Approved July 27th, 1868. (which is one week before the 14th amendment)
Please note that a foreign state is any union state outside of the Federal Zone: i.e. Virginia, Maryland, California and etc. The state of Puerto Rico or Guam are not foreign because they belongs to the government. Also, each of the union states is foreign to each other. .

The question leaps out to be answered: How can Congress by proposal and resolution, with or without the state legislatures, alter the established rule of citizenship, done in convention of the people, without the people in convention approving this change in their body, as required by Article Five, Constitution for the united States of America. No conventions of the people (free white) were held according to the procedures required by Article Five, and the procedures actually used could only purport to be valid as a procedure for ratification under Article I, Section 8, Clause 17. The citizens purportedly created by the 14th amendment are not a proper subject matter under Article I, Section 8, Clause 17, and therefore, must be considered as unauthorized. Within the original meaning and intent of the constitution only an American and a State citizenship are authorized. The District of Columbia is not a state; it is not authorized to create any citizen within its exclusive jurisdiction. In conclusion, the Act of July 27, 1868, Ch. 249, 15 Stat.223-224, is not a "resolution", but an "act;" is of no use to the natural white citizen, and doesn't provide a means "whereby a citizen could declare his independence from the 14th Amendment; " and, in fact, said statute, if taken advantage of, by declaration of expatriation, by such natural white citizen, could very well be detrimental to future protection of his or her inalienable and unalienable rights as an American citizen within the original meaning.

In answer to the question posed by the title to this article: No, you should not renounce your citizenship! Instead, one should claim and clarify the citizenship of his birthright, outside purview of the statutory 14th amendment. Both Robert W. Wangrud and I have had our citizenship Judicially noticed, without purview of the statutory 14th amendment, and without a declaration of expatriation

Here are some other takes on expatriation and the 'expatriation act'

http://www.wealth4freedom.com/truth/Expatriation.htm
http://www.directblackaction.com/expat_form.html
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/expatriation.htm

As you can see, there is alot of info for us to go through.

[TonyG]

My serious question is, where is this material that doesn't sound like it was written by some paranoid conspiracy freak?

Orion

I've just seen that a poster named Barnacle Bob has covered alot of this stuff in previous posts and in a better fashion than I. Check out some of his posts. They are full of links.
Also just found this one today that might be what your looking for without much of the conspiracy side of it.

http://www.originalintent.org/edu/

TG

[Veritas]

Also notice that the opening sentence states "are (1) citizens of the United States (corp) and (2) of the State in which they reside".

Most people are mislead to believe that this sentence is stating that people "are both citizens of the United States as well as citizens of their individual state they reside in".

HOWEVER - this is NOT what the sentence is stating. It is stating that people are citizens (debtors/slaves) of the corporation called United States and they are residents (they live in) of a particular State.

Read the rest carefully! Scrutinize each sentence. The men who wrote these contracts were lawyers. You need to think like one to truly understand it.

[The Great Ag]

Also notice that the opening sentence states "are (1) citizens of the United States (corp) and (2) of the State in which they reside".

It is stating that people are citizens (debtors/slaves) of the corporation called United States and they are residents (they live in) of a particular State.

Excellent point Veritas.

I would like to piggy back on Veritas' comment. I am at work, and do not have Black's dictionary handy, but there is a difference between the words "reside" and "domicile."

A person has only ONE domicile, but may have many residences. A "domicile" is what you call home, to which you will at some time return and dwell there permanently. One may "reside" in many states within the United States or reside in foreign countries as well. That person will return to his/her domicile at some point in the future. A "residence" is a transitory or temporary place to live.

Those are the major differences between "domicile" and "residence."

You are a US citizen, and a US citizen of the state in which you "reside."

By correcting your status, you will become a state National, and will not reside in that state, but be domiciled.

See the difference? Definitions are key.

The Great Ag

[mjk1971]

Without the 14th Amendment in conjuction with the 13th and 15th Amendments, these fascist (I use that word correctly) gov'ts could not accomplish the theft of our rights.


"Political power proceeds out of the barrel of a gun."

-- Mao

Paper documents neither guarantee nor restrict rights. Only political power, backed by force, guarantees or restricts rights.



This type of flagrant gov't behavior can happen because of the 14th Amendment.


This type of government behavior happens because:

1) they have more guns than we do, and more willingness to use them.
2) the People have ALLOWED them to do it.



Prior to 1868 the term "United States citizen" or "citizen of the United States" did not exist.


Bullshit. It's as simple as that.

"No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President..."

Constitution of the United States, Article II, Section 1

Further, in 1810, a Constitutional Amendment was proposed (and could still be ratified today - 26 more States must ratify) which stated:

"If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive or retain, any title of nobility or honour, or shall, without the consent of Congress, accept and retain any present, pension, office or emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of them."

This is known as the "Title of Nobility Amendment" or the "Missing Thirteenth Amendment."


No one claimed to be a "US citizen" as none existed. Each state was/is a nation, and that is who each human owed political allegiance, not the federal gov't.


As demonstrated above, this is either blatant ignorance or an unashamed lie.



"All persons born in the US and subject (as in a feudal system) to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States." You just lost your state nationality, and have become a ward of the federal gov't.


WRONG.

You purposely left out "....are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."



Not only that, but you no longer have rights, but privileges granted to you by the gov't. Look at how the fed gov'ts jurisdiction has expanded beyond the Constitututional 10 mile square boundary. Also notice the use of pronoun "its" rather than "their" which would signify the several States. "Its" refers to the federal gov't jurisdiction. Can you begin to see how the gov't can do anything it wants? Can you begin to see how we are in a feudal system?


Your "argumentation" tactics here are called SOPHISTRY.




By voting you are automatically deemed to be in rebellion of the gov't.


More bullshit.

The Fifteenth and Nineteenth Amendments both address the RIGHT to vote.



Section three, this is hardest section to get your head around as it involves future, present and past tenses in a single sentence.


Section 3, taken within context, applies to those Congressmen or similar government officials who, in the view of the United States Government, violated their oaths of office when they "defected" to the Confederate States of America.



Can you see how insidious the plot is to bring down the States of the Union? Can you begin to see that you should not vote for any political candidate, local or federal again?


I can see your faulty logic and deliberate obfuscation & sophistry of these pretty plain & clear clauses.



That is why "habeas corpus" is gone, as are many other rights.


Habeas Corpus is gone because Banditos like Speedy have "reinterpreted" the Constitution to suit his agenda.



Here is the last part of section 4


...which clearly deals with a guarantee to creditors that debts incurred by the authority of the Congress will be honored, but that debts incurred by the Confederate States of America or its component States or its supporters shall NOT be guaranteed, and are in effect void.


This type of bollocks is among the worst nonsense that gives Libertyfolk a terrible reputation in the minds of those we should be able to convince to join us. Just like the phony "Liberty Dollar."

[mjk1971]

Paragraph two compels Congress to take all appropriate means to enforce slavery or involuntary servitude upon criminals.


It most certainly does not.

The drafters of the Thirteenth Amendment were brilliant. They appear to have prophesied the nonsense we see today with criminal-rights supporters whining whenever a crook is punished. This Amendment indicates that "slavery" (compulsory work without compensation) is permitted, not required, for criminals who have been Constitutionally-convicted.

Without that terminology, criminal-rights SOBs would claim that chain gangs were unconstitutional.

[mjk1971]

Good thread folks.

This is a serious question... Where does one go to get this story without the smacks of sarcastic fanaticism?

If we like to say we're 'opening people's eyes' and 'waking up the sheep', then could we do it without obnoxiously bright lights and blaring alarm clocks? The facts can speak for themselves...

Thanks,
Orion

The claims are NONSENSE, and you need only go to the TEXT of the Constitution to see they are so:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.overview.html

[mjk1971]

When you put in front of a flock of sheep most of this kind of material, they're interested right up until they start to smell a 'nut'.

It is not outside the realm of possibility, maybe even probability, that bullshit like these "theores" are cooked up by PRO-GOVERNMENT operatives to make Libertyfolk look like nuts.

[mjk1971]

When I approached my local grocer about the liberty dollar program and began to discuss the federal reserve system.... he got this weird look in his eyes.


If you tried to peddle those things to me I would get a weird look in my eyes.

The CORRECT approach to the ignorant is to show them the US Constitution, and point this out:

"No State shall...make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts..."

Pimping "Liberty Dollars" will appear, reasonably so, to be a MARKETING SCHEME/SCAM to decent people.

[Orion]

Fair and balanced guys; gentelmens debate...

Both of you raise good points. One guy reports his readings and another points out what he thinks are errors in interpretation.

Thanks for the links TG!

Personally, I think there is a good book to be written here. The existing materials fail to take the average readers mindset into account :sheep:, and hence the average reader isn't seeing the material. A good, simple, well thought out text which is engrossing and pertinent to today's issues would go a long way to opening eyes and starting debate. (Something that says the beer can is warm and almost empty and the TV is on the fritz in Kahlil's picture above) That alone would start to put our employees (government) on notice.

The sheep are the key, power in numbers. Wake them up and you've reawoken the sleeping giant, only this time it won't be the Japanese government that'll be worried... :bandito:

Orion

[The Great Ag]

The Matrix is a system Neo. that sytem is our enemy. And when you're inside and look around what do you see. . .Businessmen, Teachers, Lawyers, Carpenters. The very minds of the people we are trying to save. But until we do, these people are still a part of that system and that makes them our enemy. You have to understand most of these people are not ready to be unplugged. And many of them are so inured, so hopelessly dependent on the system, that they will figtht to protect it.
Morpheus, The Matrix


Originally Posted by The Great Ag
Without the 14th Amendment in conjuction with the 13th and 15th Amendments, these fascist (I use that word correctly) gov'ts could not accomplish the theft of our rights.

MJK's Response
"Political power proceeds out of the barrel of a gun."

-- Mao

Paper documents neither guarantee nor restrict rights. Only political power, backed by force, guarantees or restricts rights.

Then why have anything in writing? What is the purpose? Without something in writing stating here are the laws (codes) there would be chaos. This is not the WILD, WILD west. You do not see LEOs pulling their handguns out of their holsters to force a car driver to accept a ticket.



Originally Posted by The Great Ag
This type of flagrant gov't behavior can happen because of the 14th Amendment.
This type of government behavior happens because:

MJK's Response
1) they have more guns than we do, and more willingness to use them.
2) the People have ALLOWED them to do it.


True on both counts, but by correcting your status, you can force the courts to protect YOUR RIGHTS, regardless of what the gov't has done. Most codes apply only to US citizens and not to State Nationals.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Great Ag
Prior to 1868 the term "United States citizen" or "citizen of the United States" did not exist.

MJKs Response:
Bullshit. It's as simple as that.
"No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President..."

Constitution of the United States, Article II, Section 1

Further, in 1810, a Constitutional Amendment was proposed (and could still be ratified today - 26 more States must ratify) which stated:

"If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive or retain, any title of nobility or honour, or shall, without the consent of Congress, accept and retain any present, pension, office or emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States, and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of them."

This is known as the "Title of Nobility Amendment" or the "Missing Thirteenth Amendment."


Ah, I see. You are reading the term, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States" and making it semantically equal to the 14th Amendment "Citizen of the United States." There is a difference between the two. I strongly suggest you read the Red Amendment for the difference.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Great Ag
No one claimed to be a "US citizen" as none existed. Each state was/is a nation, and that is who each human owed political allegiance, not the federal gov't.

MJKs Response:
As demonstrated above, this is either blatant ignorance or an unashamed lie.

Prove me wrong. For example: Thomas Jefferson never referred to himself as a US citizen but rather a Virginian, and was proud of that moniker. I have been unable to find in any documentation that the Founding Fathers referred to themselves as anything other than that of the State they were domiciled in.
A US citizen is a specific creation of the 14th Amendment and owes his/her allegiance to the US gov't, and receives specific privileges of "life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." Prior to this a citizen owed his allegiance to the state he was domiciled, as that state was/is a nation and had rights granted by God and reinforced by the Constitution.


Quote:
Originally Posted by The Great Ag
"All persons born in the US and subject (as in a feudal system) to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States." You just lost your state nationality, and have become a ward of the federal gov't.
WRONG.

MJKs Response:
You purposely left out "....are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."

Read my prior response to Veritas' comment regarding "State where in they reside." Also look up in a legal dictionary, Black's will do, the definitions of "Domicile" and "Reside" or "Residence." This should help clear up and confusion.


Quote:
Originally Posted by The Great Ag
Not only that, but you no longer have rights, but privileges granted to you by the gov't. Look at how the fed gov'ts jurisdiction has expanded beyond the Constitututional 10 mile square boundary. Also notice the use of pronoun "its" rather than "their" which would signify the several States. "Its" refers to the federal gov't jurisdiction. Can you begin to see how the gov't can do anything it wants? Can you begin to see how we are in a feudal system?

MJKs Response:
Your "argumentation" tactics here are called SOPHISTRY.

Nice label, but how is my argument a false claim? I have broken down the reasons for my argument. You are refuting those arguments with a single word, sophistry. Please back up your claim.



Quote:
Originally Posted by The Great Ag
By voting you are automatically deemed to be in rebellion of the gov't.

MJKs Response:
More bullshit.

The Fifteenth and Nineteenth Amendments both address the RIGHT to vote.

Nice single word response to debate. Well your BS is BS. :aetsch: Those Amendments specifically give the right to vote to others previously not able to do so. Those Amendments do not change what exists in the 14th.


Originally Posted by The Great Ag
Section three, this is hardest section to get your head around as it involves future, present and past tenses in a single sentence.

MJKs Response:
Section 3, taken within context, applies to those Congressmen or similar government officials who, in the view of the United States Government, violated their oaths of office when they "defected" to the Confederate States of America.

Good, an assertion made with a defense. Unfortunately, I cannot find the exact quote of the Supreme Court, but in essence it ruled that the southern States WERE NOT in rebellion. They were simply seceeding from the unioin which they had the authority to do. So Section 3 refers to whom I say it does and not to the State reps of the Confederate states.

Originally Posted by The Great Ag
Can you see how insidious the plot is to bring down the States of the Union? Can you begin to see that you should not vote for any political candidate, local or federal again?

MJKs Response:
I can see your faulty logic and deliberate obfuscation & sophistry of these pretty plain & clear clauses.


Granted I gave a very brief summary of the data contained in the Red Amendment. I did leave out large chunks of info due to space constraints. The treatise is 187 pages long and packed with info and footnotes. Perhaps you may read it some day, and then refute the claims made therein.

Originally Posted by The Great Ag
That is why "habeas corpus" is gone, as are many other rights.

MJKs Response:
Habeas Corpus is gone because Banditos like Speedy have "reinterpreted" the Constitution to suit his agenda.

Thank you MJK you have reinforced my point. The US code is civil or private law that can be changed willy nilly. Remember we, US citizens, have privleges, not rights. Those privileges can be revoked at any time thanks to the 14th Amendment.

The Great Ag

[The Great Ag]

It most certainly does not.

The drafters of the Thirteenth Amendment were brilliant. They appear to have prophesied the nonsense we see today with criminal-rights supporters whining whenever a crook is punished. This Amendment indicates that "slavery" (compulsory work without compensation) is permitted, not required, for criminals who have been Constitutionally-convicted.

Without that terminology, criminal-rights SOBs would claim that chain gangs were unconstitutional.

Perhaps both interpretations are correct.

The Great Ag

[TonyG]

If you tried to peddle those things to me I would get a weird look in my eyes.

The CORRECT approach to the ignorant is to show them the US Constitution, and point this out:

"No State shall...make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts..."

Pimping "Liberty Dollars" will appear, reasonably so, to be a MARKETING SCHEME/SCAM to decent people.

I actually wasn't peddling or 'pimping' them. I was trying to introduce the idea to him with the hopes of him considering becoming a lib merchant to both distribute and recieve them similar to AurumAg's business. I knew that he was a hunter and member of NRA and thought he might understand, but it turns out that fiat money, bankster loans and so forth had been the avenue of his mini-empire and he wasn't hearing anything negative about the fed. Alot of people can't see that paper fiat money isn't money, it's only paper that buys stuff. LOL I'm nuts. I think I'll quote myself on that.

We never got as far as the constitution, but that is a good point about showing the positive directives of the law first!. But that WILL lead to a discussion about our fiat based federal reserve money.

I think we should agree to not entertain further discussion about lib dollars in this thread. If the mods would put a section concerning gold and silver as currency, there we could discuss it and many other alternative gold/silver (and other types) of currency's popping up around the world. I was using the analogy of how easy it is to be considered a 'nut' if you even so much as question the federal reserve system. "Nut" was the topic. The lib dollar was just the context of how the grocer and I got into the discussion of the federal reserve. I shoulda known better.

By the way, I was thinking of you during those discussions on GIM rounds at $3.50 over spot :beer:

[TonyG]

Fair and balanced guys; gentelmens debate...

Personally, I think there is a good book to be written here. The existing materials fail to take the average readers mindset into account :sheep:, and hence the average reader isn't seeing the material. A good, simple, well thought out text which is engrossing and pertinent to today's issues would go a long way to opening eyes and starting debate. (Something that says the beer can is warm and almost empty and the TV is on the fritz in Kahlil's picture above) That alone would start to put our employees (government) on notice.

The sheep are the key, power in numbers. Wake them up and you've reawoken the sleeping giant, only this time it won't be the Japanese government that'll be worried... :bandito:
Orion

Keep in mind, there are many of the sheep who do not want to be 'woken up'. They are content in being 'slaves' and serving the system. It lets them eat, watch tv, complain about not being rich, but lets them dream of it by the lottery.... etc etc. I think it might be those with a high degree of moral responsibilty for their own life and destiny who are willing to 'wake up'.

I think you have a point about a simpler book. But what shall we call it.?

....How our countries(states) changed from Republics under God to a Democracy under Man for Dummies? (subheading.....and how to live like a King in a Serf's World)

Or 10 easy steps to understanding your Country's foundation and the deliberate twistings of Law that have eroded and now threaten to wash it away? (complete with teachers aides!)

For myself, It is easier to understand some of the ideas and differences of a Constitutional Republican (lawbased) Govt vs a Socialist Federal (man based)Govt because I am a 'Sheep' with a Good Shepherd. I know what it is to be Free biblically speaking and to understand the 'perfect law of Liberty" that James talks about. "If the son shall make you free, you shall be free indeed". I understand and accept that there are moral ramifications and responsibilities of our actions, reactions, attitudes, etc.. Being a slave to a governments changing interpretations of appropriate actions, behavior and conduct isn't freedom, but it's been the way things have gone more and more since the federal takeover in DC.

Here are a couple of suggested necessary chapters for the book as I currently understand them.

1.History of our Declaration of Independence, and the context of the times.
What did we declare independence from?
2.History of our Articles of Confederacy, Bill of Rights, and Constituion and the belief systems that shaped them.
3. State Govornments jurisdictions vs federal jurisdiction in the Organic Constituion, the power and the intent of each.
4. Differing uses of the word 'united states, Citizen, country and other important words in early law.
5. The 10 square miles of Washington D.C. and other territories of the United States and their power, position and jurisdiction under the organic constitution.
6. Overview of the 13th thru 15th amendments and other pertinent laws, Acts and Statutes that created the new Federal Govt during the Chaos of the Civil war. The history of the laws, who wrote them and the impact they had on the original intent of the Constitution.
7. Further amendments of Socialism since that time and their impact on our lives. Special focus on the Federal Reserve act, and the raping of the weath of the American people.

Actually, by gleaning some of the articles and information at the various links AND simplifying the english a little, a pretty good book could be organized. It would have to be in a real systematic progression.

Well, by now... the guy who has the empty beer can on the TV set has maybe read the outline for about 4 of the chapters and turned the tv back on. Some people like their sheep sleep.

TG

[SAUM]

I haven't finished it yet but it sounds to me as though The South Was Right would be very complementary to this book. I would suggest perhaps buying both. To even think that the war for southern independence was about slavery, and the high morals of the North made this nation great is to be a victim of revisionism.

[mjk1971]

I haven't finished it yet but it sounds to me as though The South Was Right would be very complementary to this book. I would suggest perhaps buying both. To even think that the war for southern independence was about slavery, and the high morals of the North made this nation great is to be a victim of revisionism.

I want to make clear, in case my comments above led one to believe otherwise, that I totally and unequivocally support a State, group of States, or even a Nation of People without a government, to secede from another political entity. "Permanent union" is a form a tyranny.

The CSA were completely justified in their actions, and their actions were Constitutional, as well.

The idea the Civil War was over slavery is absurd, and purely for political correctness. If Lincoln and the Northern Aggressors were interested in freeing the slaves, the Emancipation Proclamation (an illegal order) would have applied to the ENTIRE country, and not just "those areas in rebellion."

I say this as a Fifth-Generation Native Californian, and not as a Southerner. Though my mom's dad's family ultimately came to California from Virginia & Tennessee. :smile:

[TonyG]

The idea the Civil War was over slavery is absurd, and purely for political correctness. If Lincoln and the Northern Aggressors were interested in freeing the slaves, the Emancipation Proclamation (an illegal order) would have applied to the ENTIRE country, and not just "those areas in rebellion."

:smile:

Sec. 9. (I) The importation of negroes of the African race from any foreign country other than the slaveholding States or Territories of the United States of America, is hereby forbidden; and Congress is required to pass such laws as shall effectually prevent the same.

Where are these words found?

TG