PDA

View Full Version : Define your nationality, a quiz and essay


Pages : [1] 2 3

The Great Ag
11-09-2007, 02:27 AM
How do you define your nationality? Are you a/an

1. American
2. United States citizen
3. National of the United States
4. Citizen of the United States
5. State National, e.g. Delawarean, Coloradoan. . .etc
6. Foreign National (Please explain)
7. No nationality (I am stateless)
8. (Other)I Don’t know, please help?

There is no right or wrong answer here. This thread is to educate GIMers regarding “nationality,” a concept most people do not think about, but has immense consequences. Have you ever thought, “How does the law see me?” or “How does the law define my existence?” perhaps you have asked “Why are my rights constantly being trampled on?” or “Why do foreign nationals, e.g. Mexicans, seem to have more rights than I?” Rarely does anyone think about their nationality and its repercussions. I can guarantee you the law/courts pay very close attention to your nationality. This thread is to answer the question posed and the answers’ implication on our everyday lives.

Read the answers to your choices below.

1. If you define yourself as an American, you can feel secure in the fact, that this term DOES NOT refer to nationality, insofar as the law is concerned. There is NO LEGAL definition for “American” in the United States Code. Atleast, none that I could find. For all intents and purposes, the term “American” has no legal meaning as it pertains to nationality. although it is abstractly defined in law dictionaries.

From Blacks Legal Dictionary 5th ed:
American: Of or pertaining to the United States.

From Ballantines 3rd ed:
American: Of the western hemisphere or, more particularly, the United States.

By claiming to be an American, you are not claiming any nationality, but are merely referring loosely to the United States. American is a general concept without specificity. To think the term “American” refers to nationality occurs only amongst the people. The law perceives you differently.

2, 3 and 4: If you chose US citizen, National of the United States or Citizen of the US, they are all equal to each other, and legally mean the same thing, i.e. A citizen of the United States.

From Section 1 of the 14th Amendment:
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. (Remember the word “reside;” it will be necessary later).

From USC 12, 1401
§ 1401. Nationals and citizens of United States at birth
The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:
(a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;

And USC 8. 1101
§ 1101. Definitions
(22) The term “national of the United States” means
(A) a citizen of the United States, or
(B) a person who, though not a citizen of the United States, owes permanent allegiance to the United States.

and by operation of law, owes his/her allegiance to the United States gov’t. A US citizen CANNOT lay claim to a country as the United States is NOT a country or a nation. The US citizen is subject to private law, i.e. the whims of Congress. For example USC 8. 1185(b):
§ 1185. Travel control of citizens and aliens
(b) Citizens
Except as otherwise provided by the President and subject to such limitations and exceptions as the President may authorize and prescribe, it shall be unlawful for any citizen of the United States to depart from or enter, or attempt to depart from or enter, the United States unless he bears a valid United States passport.

Notice the title of the section, Travel control of citizens and aliens. Only citizens of the United States are required to have a passport. Hmmm?

Did you think that you, a US citizen, is ACTUALLY and INFACT an enemy of the United States!? It is true.

Some may think there is a critical difference between a US citizen and Citizen of the US (Capital “C” versus lower case “c”), but it is merely a writing style and has NO legal difference. Terms 2,3 and 4 are identical and refer to one’s nationality, i.e. a citizen of the United States, a very dubious distinction to have.

US citizens are at a great disadvantage as they are subject to the whims of the US Congress. More about the disadvantages later.

5. If you selected State National, good for you, if you are truly a State National. A State National is NOT SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE UNITED STATES. A State national is considered “foreign” to the United States, and DOES NOT owe allegiance to the United States as evidenced by
From USC 8, 1101
§ 1101. Definitions
(3) The term “alien” means any person not a citizen or national of the United States.
(21) The term “national” means a person owing permanent allegiance to a state.

A State National is deemed an “alien” under US code. In international law this status is in relation to a man/woman who is foreign to a state or political jurisdiction, and means someone who owes “allegiance” to another country.

A state national is an alien to the political system of the United States, and alien to another state in the union, is foreign to the United States, and is NOT subject to the general statutory construction.

A state national owes his/her allegiance to his/her countrymen, i.e. fellow Delawareans, Coloradoans and NOT to a state government. This is the critical difference between a state national and a US citizen. Because of this difference in nationality, a state national IS NOT subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, and therefore is bound the State constitution of his/her state and the law of nations/international law. This is a good thing, as a state national has “rights” in contradistinction to “privileges” possessed by a US citizen.

6. Perhaps you chose foreign national. If you are a “foreign national” than you were born outside the United States of America, i.e. in Europe, South America, Asia. . .etc. Legally, a foreign national is NOT subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and, INFACT. has more rights under the US Constitution than a US citizen possesses. For example, I live near Rehoboth, Delaware, an ocean front summer resort town, that draws thousands of eastern European 20-somethings who work for the summer and earn more than their parents earn throughout the year. Taxes are withheld (illegally, if they did not volunteer to have the taxes withheld), but when the worker returns to his/her country he/she can petition the United States through his/her consulate and receive ALL the taxes withheld.

Foreign nationals are generally NOT subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, unless they elect/volunteer to be under its jurisdiction.

7. Only a foolish person would honestly select to be “stateless,” without nationality. As whatever jurisdiction a “stateless” person happens to be in, can claim jurisdiction over him/her and pretty much do whatever that jurisdiction wants. Hopefully those who chose this did so to be funny, as a stateless person would truly be up shit creek without a paddle. Everyone has a right to choose nationality, and must do so. This is considered a natural right that is from time immemorial, and is well versed in the law of nations/international law. From the socialist instrument, the UN Charter Article 15, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, December 10, 1948 :
Everyone has the right to a nationality. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.

You can choose whatever nationality you want, but you MUST CHOOSE. That is the rule.

8. Finally, I tossed in “other”. WTF? Are you a carrot? Go play somewhere else, unless you are Sukhoi_fan and he can tell you in far more detail his solution.

If you have read this far, I thank you, and I hope this has been educational. You may ask, “So what? I have gone this far in my life, and everything seems fine. Why should I care about my nationality? I am an American, no matter what the law says!”

ANSWER: Because you were poorly educated, and have been lied to think that way.

The following is the LEGAL REALITY as it pertains to ALL US citizens.

As has been established above, all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to its jurisdiction is a national/citizen of the United States.

The next question is to ask, “What is the United States?” An appropriate answer might be to state what it is NOT.
The United States IS NOT a country
The United States of Amer ica IS NOT a nation
So what is the United States? The United States of America is a federation of 50 sovereign states or nations coming together for their own protection and benefit under the Articles of Confederation and finally the Constitution.

From the US code,
USC 28, 3002 (15)A)
§ 3002. Definitions
(15) “United States” means—
(A) a Federal corporation;
From various legal cases and definition
Volume 20: Corpus Juris Sec. § 1785: "The United States government is a foreign corporation with respect to a state". NY Re: Merrian, 36 N.E. 505 1441 S.CT. 1973, 41 L.Ed. 287.

The United States is defined as "A Federal Corporation" in the United States Code, Title 28 - Judiciary and Judicial Procedure, Subchapter A - Definitions and general provisions, § 3002 - Definitions, at number 15 (a).

"The United States Government as such is fictitious and thus includes the States Government." Blacks Com. 133, Bouvier`s law dictionary, page 1215 (1914).

To be more definitive, the United States is a corporation, specifically a municipal corporation. From Blacks Legal Dictionary 5th ed.
Corporation: An artificial person or legal entity created by or under the authority of the laws of a state or nation, composed, in some rare instances, of a single person and his successors, but ordinarily consisting of an association of numerous individuals. Such entity subsists as a body politic under a special denomination, which is regarded in law as having a personality and existence distinct from that of its several members, and which is, but the same authority, vested with the capacity of continuous succession, irrespective of changes in its membership, either inpertuity or for a limited term of years, and of acting as a unit or single individual in matters relating ot the common purposed of the association, within the scope of the powers and authorities conferred upon such bodies by law.

Municipal corporation has a dual character, the one public and the other private, and exercises correspondingly twofold functions and duties - one class (public) consisting of those acts performed by it in exercise of delegated sovereign powers for benefit of people generally, as arm of state, enforcing general laws made in pursuance of general policy of the state, and the other (private) consisting of acts done in exercise of power of the municipal corporation for its own benefit, or for benefit of its citizens alone. italics mine

From Ballantine’s 3rd
Municipal Corporation: A body politic and corporate constituted by the incorporation of the inhabitants of a city or town for the purposes of local government thereof. The body politic created by organizing the inhabitants of a prescribed area, under the authority of the legislature, into a corporation with all the usual attributes of a corporate entity, but endowed with a public character by virtue of having been invested by the legislature with subordinate legislative powers to administer local and internal affairs of the community, and established as a branch of the state government to assist in the civil government of the state 37 AM J1st Mun Corp 3.

From the above authorities, the United States is a municipal corporation. Let us briefly look at a typical corporation. Answer this question for yourself, “Does the corporation exist for the benefit of its workers, or for its benefactors?” The corporation must give some benefits to its workers, or it would not have any. Benefits are usually structured for the type of worker the corporation wants to hire. The same answer applies to the United States. Does the United States, a municipal corporation, operate for the benefit of its citizens, or does it have an agenda? Answer that question for yourself. Yes, the United States gives benefits to its citizens (SS, medicare, medicaid, subsidized programs called entitlements. . .etc).

Clearly the United States is a municipal corporation, and a citizen of the United States owes his/her PERMANENT allegiance to that corporation.

From the 14th Amendment:
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.

From Ballantine’s 3rd legal dictionary:
Citizen of a state:
A citizen of the United States, residing in any state of the Union
14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States
see citizens resident in the state
Citizens Resident in the State
Natural persons who are citizens and residents, and
corporations chartered in the state.

From Black Law Dictionary 5th ed.
Federal Citizen: Rights and obligations accruing by reason of being a citizen of the United states. A person born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein he resides.

From those codified and legal definitions there is one word common to all of them. Did you spot it? It is crucial to understand the legal definition of that word. It is the word, “Reside” or “Resident.”

From Ballantines;
Reside: To dwell in aplace. To be a resident.

From Blacks:
Reside: Live, dwell, abide, sojourn, stay, remain, lodge. To settle oneself or a thing in a place, to be stationed, to remain or stay, to dwell permanently or continuously, to have a settled abode for a time, to have one’s residence or domicile; specifically, to be in residence, to have an abiding place, to be present as an element, to inhere as a quality, to be vested as a right.

There is a duality with the word, “Reside. . .” to dwell permanently or have a settled abode for a time. Is it temporary or is it permanent. It is both depending on usage. Let us look at “Resident” for further clarification.

From Blacks:
Resident: Any person who occupies a dwelling within the State, has a present intent to remain within the State for a period of time, and manifests the genuineness of that intent by establishing an ongoing physical presence with the State is something other than merely transitory in nature.

Residency does not necessarily imply permanency, but a willingness to “stay” for a “certain” period of time to gain the status, “Resident.” In Delaware, it is one year. As a citizen of the United States who resides therein, you do not have a “true” permanent home, but will always be a “Resident.” What do I mean by “true” permanent home, let us look at the word “Residence.”

From Blacks
Residence: Personal presence at some place of abode with no present intention of definite and early removal and with purpose to remain for undetermined period, not infrequently, but not necessarily combined with design to stay permanently. Residence implies something more than mere physical presence and something less than domicile.

Domicile, what’s that, and what is the difference?

From Blacks:
“Domicile” compared and distinguished” As “domicile” and “residence” are usually in the same place, they are frequently used as if they had the same meaning, but they are not identical terms, for a person many have two places of residence, as in the city and country, but only ONE domicile. Residence means living in a particular locality, but domicile means living in that locality with intent to make it a fixed and permanent home. Residence simply requires bodily presence as an inhabitant in a given place, while domicile requires bodily presence in that place and also an intention to make it one’s domicile. “Residence” is not synonymous with “domicile” though the two terms are closely related; a person may have only ONE legal domicile at one time, but he may have more than one residence.

To “reside,” to be a “resident” or have a “residence” are all terms associated with that of a United States citizen. To be able to participate (vote) you must reside within a State for a certain period of time. To be of a temporary nature, a US citizen never has a true home; he is not “domiciled” in the country, per se, as the United States is not a country. Therefore a US citizen has been granted privileges by the sovereign or corporation in this case.

“Residency” is one of the key traps the gov’t uses to continually ensnare its citizens by having you believe that “residency” is the status to have. Read your state’s code and every benefit you can receive is due to your “residency” status, i.e. drivers license, voting requirements. . .etc. Search the code for the word “domicile.” Good luck finding it. In Delaware’s code, I found it in the code concerning horse racing, and the definition for “domicile” was two years. Odd place to put it, don’t you think?

In summation, a United States citizen is at a purposeful disadvantage compared to other types of citizenship. By electing or choosing your citizenship you accept the benefits and consequences.

Common Law Maxim: CUJUS EST COMMODUM EJUS DEBET ESSE INCOMMODUM Translation; He who receives the benefit should also bear the disadvantages.

From United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875)
The citizen cannot complain, because he has voluntarily submitted himself to such a form of government. . .he owes allegiance to the two departments, so to speak, and with their respective spheres must pay the penalties.

All US citizens are corporate slaves, so to speak, and must obey the whims of the board of directors (US CONgress and the President). US citizens are subject to “private law.” When you say, how can the gov’t take away a right granted in the CONstitution, remember you are not technically subject to the CONstitution, but rather the dictates from rulers in the ten square miles of land known as the District of Columbia.

Please, do not complain and whine about the privileges that have been taken away. As a citizen to a private, municipal corporation you must do what the corporation says, or it is off to the hoosegow with you.

From this perspective, it is easy to see why the government appears to be trampling over rights. You never had any, only the illusion that you have rights.

I thank you for reading this far. Please think about what you have read.

I leave you with thes quotes:
The America once extolled as the voice of liberty heard around the world no longer is cast in the image which Jefferson and Madison designed, but more n the Russian image.
Chief Justice Burger, Laird v. tatum, 408 U.S. 1 (1972)

Oath all immigrants must make during naturalization ceremony:
I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce
and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate,
state, or sovereignty, of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject
or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of
the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic;
that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear
arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I
will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United
States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law(When can the gov't dictate (force) a person to work against his/her will?; and that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose
of evasion; so help me God.

eyeofliberty
11-09-2007, 02:38 AM
Heh, nice thread Ag.

Me: currently a U.S. citizen, working towards state national. But then, you knew that, didn't you? :wink:

The Great Ag
11-09-2007, 02:51 AM
I have voted, and I am currently a US citizen.

Here is more information regarding the swindle of "residency."

Listed under a couple of definitions was the word "inhabitant." The definition of "Municipal corporation" as in, "A body politic and corporate constituted by the incorporation of the inhabitants of a city or town;" "Residence" as in, "Residence simply requires bodily presence as an inhabitant."

What is an inhabitant?

The US CONstitution is subject to the law of nations, as seen in this example from the CONsitution.
Article I, section 10
10. To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offences against the law of nations:

What is the Law of Nations? It is a book consisting of agreed upon laws that nations generally accept as law, an implement within their own legal systems.

Vattel, a Frenchman, wrote these globally agreed upon rules in a book, entitled The Law of Nations in the 1700's and was translated in english in 1805. My copy is a reprint from the 1920's. The Founding Fathers were quite familiar with this book, and hence incorporated the term "Law of Nations" into the CONstitution.

Back to inhabitant. Vattel in chapter XIX section 213 writes:
The inhabitants, as distinguished from citizens, are strangers, who are permitted to settle and stay in the country, bound by their residence to the society, they are subject to the laws of the state, while they reside there, and they are obliged to defend it, because it grants them protection, though they do not participate in all the rights of citizens. They enjoy only the advantages which the laws, or custom gives them. The perpetual inhabitants (same as state residents in the US) are those who have received the right of perpetual residence. These are a kind of cintizens of an inferior order, and are united, and subject to the society, without participating in all its advantages. Their children follow the condition of their fathiers; and as the state has given to these the right of perpetual residence, their rigts passes to their posterity.

Are you an inhabitant in the United States? Do you have a Residence? Or are you domiciled in your state? How do you know?

Yes the Law of Nations is still valid, except now we call it International Law.

Something to think about.

The Great Ag

The Great Ag
11-09-2007, 02:56 AM
Heh, nice thread Ag.

Me: currently a U.S. citizen, working towards state national. But then, you knew that, didn't you? :wink:

Hey, Eye, thanks for the vote and yeah I still have to send you some info by email. I will get to it.

Hey, Infidel, thanks for that bit of info, very interesting the US code. When you gave that oath, did it have meaning for you, or was it something you said to get your citizenship? You do not have to answer, I ask out of curiousity.

The Great Ag

The Great Ag
11-09-2007, 03:00 AM
Look at the definition from Ballantine's Legal Dictionary 3rd ed.
Citizens Resident in the State
Natural persons who are citizens and residents, and
corporations chartered in the state.

Interesting how corporations are regarded as citizens. Can a corporation vote? I do not know, but if an artificial entity, a fiction of law, can be deemed a citizen, what does that make us? By operation of law, we, too, are artificial entities, a fiction of law, so that we can be controlled by the state.

There will be some who will disagree, and that is fine. We are entitled to be blind.

The Great Ag

mooshcook
11-09-2007, 03:10 AM
There was no cooperations until Jefferson was born. Sorry folks, this IS my weekend. I'm just being Saturday Night Livish. Ooooh that last word looks wierd. weerd, weird, wered, oh gosh where are the writers?

Infidel
11-09-2007, 03:23 AM
Hey, Infidel, thanks for that bit of info, very interesting the US code. When you gave that oath, did it have meaning for you, or was it something you said to get your citizenship? You do not have to answer, I ask out of curiousity.



Curiosity is fatal to felines.

I describe the ceremony of the oath giving.

In Los Angeles it is a warehouse the size of a good indoor hokey field. Including the bleachers. A square of mostly non white people 70 - 100 to a side sit on folding chairs. That day it was mostly short brown people. Lots and lots of Chinese. There are pathways every 10 rows. An announcer on the stage reads some info and tells you to fill cards in a certain way.

Swearing in procedure. Pledge was read aloud and repeated/followed.

Announcer congratulated everyone and then showed smirking chimp on a HUUUGE monitor/projection screen that also congratulated on the completion of the ensla... errr.... change of ensla..... errr... status.

Then they played the national Anthem. Everyone stand again.

Oh and that huge monitor was also used. Eagles soaring oner the grand canyon, forests and cities, I think there was a bear.

It was probably close to 3 years ago now for me.

I was on GIM 3 years ago
http://goldismoney.info/forums/showthread.php?p=65008

P.S. In the pledge I omitted "god" and substituted that to "the imaginary construct to keep the unwashed masses in check through self doubt and to occupy them with some useless reading and memorization"

other than that the Pledge was given as directed

Infidel
11-09-2007, 03:24 AM
Look at the definition from Ballantine's Legal Dictionary 3rd ed.

Interesting how corporations are regarded as citizens. Can a corporation vote? I do not know, but if an artificial entity, a fiction of law, can be deemed a citizen, what does that make us? By operation of law, we, too, are artificial entities, a fiction of law, so that we can be controlled by the state.

There will be some who will disagree, and that is fine. We are entitled to be blind.

The Great Ag

The corporation

Carl
11-09-2007, 05:31 PM
"The US CONstitution is subject to the law of nations, as seen in this example from the CONsitution."

10. To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offences against the law of nations:

Wow, that's really "inventive" of you! You know, if you're going to make obviously erroneous shit up like that, then everything else you write becomes suspect. One might even get the notion that you're trying to run some kind of CONjob.



.

The Great Ag
11-09-2007, 07:49 PM
Wow, that's really "inventive" of you! You know, if you're going to make obviously erroneous shit up like that, then everything else you write becomes suspect. One might even get the notion that you're trying to run some kind of CONjob.



.
Inventive? What part am I making up? I know we see things differently, Carl, and will probably never come to an agreement.
10. To define and punish piracies and felonies committed on the high seas, and offences against the law of nations
What part of "offences against the law of nations" is "erroneous shit?"
Have you read the Law of Nations?

The Great Ag

Carl
11-09-2007, 11:27 PM
Inventive? What part am I making up? I know we see things differently, Carl, and will probably never come to an agreement.

What part of "offences against the law of nations" is "erroneous shit?"
Have you read the Law of Nations?

The Great Ag
"The US CONstitution is subject to the law of nations, as seen in this example from the CONsitution."

That's erroneous. Government agreeing to uphold the Law of Nations does not subjugate the Constitution to it, as that government would not exist to agree to anything without the Constitution. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land and it cannot be amended by treaty.


Where we differ is, you believe knowing all that crap makes a difference where I know it doesn't and it doesn't because all of it was written by lawyers who can make the law say and mean anything they want.

I also know that the Constitution is the only solution to all of it so stop trying to make into the problem.



.

Captain Morgan
11-10-2007, 10:48 PM
Currently a US Citizen with aspirations of becoming an ex-pat (I just got home from a vacation in the Keys...what can I say?) :D

The Great Ag
11-13-2007, 04:44 PM
"The US CONstitution is subject to the law of nations, as seen in this example from the CONsitution."

That's erroneous. Government agreeing to uphold the Law of Nations does not subjugate the Constitution to it, as that government would not exist to agree to anything without the Constitution. The Constitution is the supreme law of the land and it cannot be amended by treaty.


Where we differ is, you believe knowing all that crap makes a difference where I know it doesn't and it doesn't because all of it was written by lawyers who can make the law say and mean anything they want.

I also know that the Constitution is the only solution to all of it so stop trying to make into the problem.
Hey, Carl:

I was not saying the CONstitution was subjugated to the Law of Nations. Merely that the United States recognizes the law of nations, and if you have read the law of nations you will realize that many of the premises written in that book have been incorporated into the States' and United State's laws. Where discrepancy exists is called Conflict of Laws, and there are generally rules regulating the discourse of the conflict.

The CONstitution is part of the problem, Carl. Either it is what we think it is/ think it should be, or it has been powerless to prevent what has happened. I still believe there are "holes" in the CoNstitution that have been exploited. One of the bigger holes was the assumption that the people would control or restrain gov't, as it would be in their best interest. Obviously the "people" have been neglectful of their duties, this includes me, until recent.

As you have written, the CONstitution is the "supreme" law of the land. What about God? That law trumps man-made law everytime.

The Great Ag

Carl
11-13-2007, 05:28 PM
The Number One Problem with the Constitution is the 17th Amendment.

There was no way in hell the national government could have grown to what it is today without it. It is the Democracy that is killing this nation.

The 17TH AMENDMENT
IS YOUR LOOPHOLE TO
TOTALITARIAN DEMOCRACY




.

The Great Ag
11-13-2007, 06:49 PM
The Number One Problem with the Constitution is the 17th Amendment.

There was no way in hell the national government could have grown to what it is today without it. It is the Democracy that is killing this nation.

The 17TH AMENDMENT
IS YOUR LOOPHOLE TO
TOTALITARIAN DEMOCRACY

I agree the 17th is a real bugger of an amendment. When the "people" realized they could vote themselves wine and circuses they did. And politicians respond accordingly, "Vote for me and I promise to do. . ."

We disagree on this, but I still say the 14th stripped the citizens' state nationality, replacing it with federal citizenship and all the benefits and penalities that come with it.

The Great Ag

TaxHaven
11-13-2007, 08:40 PM
Sorry, but I don't live in the United States and have no wish to do so. Thus I checked "foreign national". All this playing with words and clauses is so much nonsense anyway. Our passports are our bodies, as (the former) Jerry Rubin used to say. I have two different passports and one "residency permit" but I refuse to be classified as living under this or that government.

The US Constitution is no more a sacrosanct document than is the bible, or any law or flag. Don't rely on them. All that counts is who holds the guns.

Carl
11-14-2007, 04:36 PM
I agree the 17th is a real bugger of an amendment. When the "people" realized they could vote themselves wine and circuses they did. And politicians respond accordingly, "Vote for me and I promise to do. . ."

We disagree on this, but I still say the 14th stripped the citizens' state nationality, replacing it with federal citizenship and all the benefits and penalities that come with it.

The Great Ag The 14th would've had little to no effect without the 17th creating the government that took advantage of the 14th.



.

The Great Ag
11-14-2007, 06:44 PM
The 14th would've had little to no effect without the 17th creating the government that took advantage of the 14th.

The 17th surely hastened our demise, without doubt. The results still would have been the same without it, merely slower, IMO.

How did a citizen become a senator under the old rules. The States' legislature elected them. This was post of favored importance. Can you imagine a state rep. campaigning for election stating, "vote for me and I will vote to elect John Smith as our senator to the US congress."

The 17th merely hastened the ongoing destruction brought about by the 14th. Politics is politics. Voting for your favorite senator is another perk of being a US citizen.

The Great Ag

Baldwin
11-25-2007, 01:27 AM
United States Serf for me.

Sovereign
12-03-2007, 03:49 AM
I would mark:

6. Foreign National (Please explain)
7. No nationality (I am stateless)
and...
8. (Other)I Don’t know, please help?

No. 6... All States are foreign to the United States, since it is merely a holding place of a confederation.

No. 7... Nationality is merely political in base.

You can choose whatever nationality you want, but you MUST CHOOSE. That is the rule."Must" is construed to mean 'may' or 'may not'. If you want it mandatory, then you write mandatory or required. :D

No. 8...

8. Finally, I tossed in “other”. WTF? Are you a carrot?...Nope... sovereign. :hello:

Peace...

The Great Ag
12-03-2007, 05:00 PM
I would mark:

6. Foreign National (Please explain)
7. No nationality (I am stateless)
and...
8. (Other)I Don’t know, please help?

No. 6... All States are foreign to the United States, since it is merely a holding place of a confederation.

No. 7... Nationality is merely political in base.

"Must" is construed to mean 'may' or 'may not'. If you want it mandatory, then you write mandatory or required. :D

No. 8...

Nope... sovereign. :hello:

Peace...
Welcome to GIM, Sovereign. It would seem you have a lot to contribute. For #6: Foreign National - I would agree that each of the 50 states is foreign to the US gov't, but I wanted to use a more common definition. You are absolutely 100% correct.

#7: Nationality is defined as a political base, but if you do not elect (choose) a status, one will be given to you. US citizenship is one such status.

May I ask how you have notified the US gov't (I am assuming you live in the Union) that you are a sovereign? What type of paperwork did you send. From what I can tell, if you have not notified the proper "authorities" concerning status, you have to prove time and time again that you are sovereign. A very time consuming task, indeed.

Again, welcome to GIM.

The Great Ag

UberNoob
12-03-2007, 06:21 PM
I am a National of the United States.....at least at this moment.....

Fred
12-04-2007, 12:56 AM
I am a citizen of the Kingdom of Heaven.

Christ is my King.

I just happen to be in the USA.

I don't necessarily agree with these folks, but they're taking Kingdom of Heaven citizenship one step further.

http://www.embassyofheaven.com/

Sovereign
12-04-2007, 10:39 AM
Welcome to GIM, Sovereign. It would seem you have a lot to contribute. For #6: Foreign National - I would agree that each of the 50 states is foreign to the US gov't, but I wanted to use a more common definition. You are absolutely 100% correct.Thank you Oh Great Ag... :adore:

#7: Nationality is defined as a political base, but if you do not elect (choose) a status, one will be given to you. US citizenship is one such status. Yes and no... From within the "system", that would be correct. From without, as in sovereign, that would be incorrect, as the "system" can not define that which created it. You are treading on the creator / creation relationship.

If every US citizen were sovereign, then the argument as to status being given would not exist. The status would only be used as a point of reference amongst sovereigns of different locales and external of the union (i.e. Canada, Mexico, ...). It works much in analogous to your last name being used to address you amongst those outside your circle and not being used amongst your family and friends, within reason.

The second part... They don't actually give one a status. They trick one into moving into the status they wish to "give". "Giving" would be "forcing", which is involuntary servitude (13th Amend., second time around); tricking one to 'move oneself into' is voluntary servitude, which is perfectly legal (the latter, moving oneself, not the former, tricking one, which is fraud.)

May I ask how you have notified the US gov't (I am assuming you live in the Union) that you are a sovereign? What type of paperwork did you send. From what I can tell, if you have not notified the proper "authorities" concerning status, you have to prove time and time again that you are sovereign. A very time consuming task, indeed.Oh I just gave them my two cents... :smokin:
Actually I recorded, at the County Records office, my declaration, oath, and revocation, then mailed (certified) the various agencies / departments copies of the recorded instruments with my statement. Waited for responses... :aetsch: ...and responded in kind. :pcguru:

Peace

-- A fool and his money are soon partying.

The Great Ag
12-04-2007, 12:10 PM
Thank you Oh Great Ag... :adore: You misunderstood my intent. I meant it complimentary in nature, as one person does not know it all, but with many minds new knowledge can be learned. From your first post, you have much to give here at GIM. I am not lauding my "greatness" :wink:. For those who know me here, I am not presumptious at all.

Yes and no... From within the "system", that would be correct. From without, as in sovereign, that would be incorrect, as the "system" can not define that which created it. You are treading on the creator / creation relationship.

If every US citizen were sovereign, then the argument as to status being given would not exist. The status would only be used as a point of reference amongst sovereigns of different locales and external of the union (i.e. Canada, Mexico, ...). It works much in analogous to your last name being used to address you amongst those outside your circle and not being used amongst your family and friends, within reason.

The second part... They don't actually give one a status. They trick one into moving into the status they wish to "give". "Giving" would be "forcing", which is involuntary servitude (13th Amend., second time around); tricking one to 'move oneself into' is voluntary servitude, which is perfectly legal (the latter, moving oneself, not the former, tricking one, which is fraud.) Excellent point, Sovereign, and correct also. I should have stated, the gov't assumes one to be a US citizen unless one states to the contary. Most peoples' actions, mine included, support the gov'ts assumptions, i.e. drivers license, declaration on w-4 forms. . .etc.

Oh I just gave them my two cents... :smokin:
Actually I recorded, at the County Records office, my declaration, oath, and revocation, then mailed (certified) the various agencies / departments copies of the recorded instruments with my statement. Waited for responses... :aetsch: ...and responded in kind. :pcguru:

Peace

-- A fool and his money are soon partying.
Good for Sovereign, you did it rightly. As a sovereign, do hold any political status, i.e. Delawarean, Califorian. . .etc. Or do you claim any state as your domicile?

If you can, would you post a sanitized copy of your declarations. It would be very educative for many, including myself, as currently, I am still a US citizen in the processes of gathering all the data I can.

The Great Ag

Osaka
01-04-2008, 11:01 AM
American is an airline.

I'm a United States Citizen or a Citizen of the United States. Either way is OK, but the first is more common. US citizen is also OK.

Kruger_Man
01-10-2008, 01:32 AM
I chose state national, but not because I really think about this stuff. Mostly because I conceive of myself as a Marylander, and I don't really give much of a crap about any other state.

<SLV>
01-20-2008, 10:08 AM
I prefer to call myself American. I am so far removed from any immigration (and my ancestors are so inter-married) that "ethnically" I'm "American". I see it as a cultural distinction more than anything. I PREFER to speak of my nationality in cultural terms rather than legal terms -- it seems more humane.

The Great Ag
01-20-2008, 10:30 AM
I PREFER to speak of my nationality in cultural terms rather than legal terms -- it seems more humane.
Well said, SLV!

That is exactly my point, We, the People, think of ourselves as "Americans," and not anything else. "I am an American!" The law see us differently. There is a huge gap, in my opinion, between how the People view themselves and how the law views the people. The People see themselves as "sovereigns" and the law views the people as "subjects." Tragically the law is correct. A US citizen owes allegiance to a federal corporation, known as the United States.

Thank you for pointing out the difference SLV.

The Great Ag

JCarvingblock
01-27-2008, 12:37 PM
Interesting thread Great Ag, and it is obvious you have a pretty good grasp of the situation including the CON of the CONstitution including the (not "subjection" but) subordination of the US gov to the maritime law of nations.

@ Osaka who posts: "I'm a United States Citizen or a Citizen of the United States." Make that CITIZEN OF THE UNITED STATES so you have it properly capitalized as always found on the forms.

I for one, will be looking forward to your further series of posts; please PM me a notice and link; sometimes I miss significant threads.

*************** XXXXXXXX ***************

In January 2008 starting January 11 on the Sovereignty list and on January 15 on the Trusts groups, Ken Nicholson posted a series of posts that thread together and interlock and provide understanding of current events in the US of A.

These posts, together with associated MS Word and PDF files that have been placed in a common file folder in the Trusts and Agency yahoo group provide an in-depth understanding and an answer to the question: "Who is a Tax Paying Unit?"

I posted some of the Ken Nicholson material to another thread, and one respondent posted here on GIM that he "Wasn't going to waste time reading all of that..."

So, if your attitude is that you don't have time to read all of that, then please don't bother. Just file and pay your taxes and continue to be a good and obedient slave.

For those of you who suspect the time and effort is worth while because understanding is associated with regaining the freedom found with sovereignty:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/State_Sovereignty/ &
http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/TRUSTEES_AGENTS/

Carver

Addendum: Mercier; INVISIBLE CONTRACTS: http://www.constitution.org/mercier/incon.htm
Suijuris on Jurisdiction: http://www.suijuris.net/forum/court/13497-usd-courts-without-art-iii-judicial-power.html

.