Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
1) Which law states I gave consent? 2) If a law states I gave consent, does that mean I gave consent?
Let's test your reading comprehension.
You probably heard of the draft, aka conscription, aka selective service, aka militia duty.
And that duty to train, fight, and die, on command is limited to citizens.
To illustrate:
Title 10 USC Sec. 311. Militia: composition and classes
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, CITIZENS of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.
Title 50 USC Sec. 453. Registration (Selective Service)
(a)...it shall be the duty of every male CITIZEN of the United States, and every other male person RESIDING in the United States, who, on the day or days fixed for the first or any subsequent registration, is between the ages of eighteen and twenty-six, to present himself for and submit to registration at such time or times and place or places, and in such manner, as shall be determined by proclamation of the President and by rules and regulations prescribed hereunder.
Art. 1, Sec. 8, USCON (1789)
Congress shall have power ... To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;
Articles of Confederation, VI. (1777)
...every State shall always keep up a well-regulated and disciplined militia, sufficiently armed and accoutered, and shall provide and constantly have ready for use, in public stores, a due number of field pieces and tents, and a proper quantity of arms, ammunition and camp equipage.
Do you note that citizens = militiamen?
The Supreme Court has held, in Butler v. Perry, 240 U.S. 328 (1916), that the Thirteenth Amendment does not prohibit "enforcement of those duties which individuals owe to the state, such as services in the army, militia, on the jury, etc." In Selective Draft Law Cases, 245 U.S. 366 (1918), the Supreme Court ruled that the military draft was not "involuntary servitude".
"MANDATORY DUTIES" ARE NOT INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE
If they’re not involuntary servitude, they MUST be voluntary. But they only apply to citizens. How did we volunteer to be citizens?
UPON EVERY GOVERNMENT FORM WHEREIN IT ASKS IF YOU ARE A CITIZEN AND YOU CHECK OFF [YES].
And when you exercise any privilege that is limited to citizens, you are giving consent.
If you thought you were "born a citizen" then you cannot give consent, and all those supreme Court rulings and citations are heifer dung.
Furthermore, no government instituted to secure endowed rights, can impose citizenship that abrogates the very endowment that they were instituted to secure.
WERE YOU TRICKED INTO BELIEVING YOU WERE "BORN A CITIZEN"?
To be fair, in government approved curricula, there is never much discussion about those folks who haven't consented to be governed, like American nationals / free inhabitants domiciled upon private property. All we hear about are US citizens / US residents residing at residences, upon real estate, held with qualified ownership, by folks who signed up with FICA / Socialist Insecurity. And if you carefully read Form SS-5, it is only available to US citizens / US residents. American nationals / free inhabitants / non-residents cannot apply - even if they were foolish enough to do so.
It's all in the law.
READ LAW.
LEARN the FACTS.
: : : : : : : : : : :
FACTS that contradict our indoctrination:
From the Declaration of Independence, we learn that all men are born equal and have Creator endowed rights. And at the end of that same document, we see the undersigned who pledged their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor, to serve the government instituted to secure rights of the people.
Those founders and subsequent citizens have no endowed rights to life, liberty or property, having PLEDGED THEM TO THE GOVERNMENT. That's how conscription is 100% consensual.
From Art IV of Confederation, we learn about the distinction between "free inhabitants" and "free citizens."
FYI : an inhabitant has a domicile (a permanent legal home). A citizen can only "reside" at a "residence" (less than domicile).
NATIONAL - A person owing permanent allegiance to a state. 8 U.S.C.A. § 1101.
The term "national" as used in the phrase "national of the United States" is broader than the term "citizen". Brassert v. Biddle, D.C.Conn., 59 F.Supp. 457, 462.
- - - Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Ed., p. 1024
NATIONALITY. That quality or character which arises from the fact of a person's belonging to a nation or state. Nationality determines the political status of the individual, especially with reference to allegiance; while domicile determines his civil status. Nationality arises either by birth or by naturalization. See also Naturalization.
- - - Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Ed., p. 1025
Oh, and by definition, a citizen is a SUBJECT of a sovereign (i.e. government). But American people are "sovereigns without subjects".
“... at the Revolution, the sovereignty devolved on the people, and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects, and have none to govern but themselves.”
- - - Justice John Jay, Chisholm v. Georgia, 2 U.S. 2 Dall. 419 419 (1793)
It will be admitted on all hands that with the exception of the powers granted to the states and the federal government, through the Constitutions, the people of the several states are unconditionally sovereign within their respective states.
- - - Ohio L. Ins. & T. Co. v. Debolt 16 How. 416, 14 L.Ed. 997
Citizens are NOT sovereigns
CITIZEN - ... Citizens are members of a political community who, in their associative capacity, have established or SUBMITTED themselves to the dominion of government for the promotion of the general welfare and the protection of their individual as well as collective rights.
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Ed. p.244
"... the term 'citizen,' in the United States, is analogous to the term "SUBJECT" in the common law; the change of phrase has resulted from the change in government. ... he who before was a "subject of the King" is now a citizen of the State."
- - - State v. Manuel, 20 N.C. 144 (1838)
SUBJECT - One that owes allegiance to a sovereign and is governed by his laws.
...Men in free governments are subjects as well as citizens; as citizens they enjoy rights and franchises; as subjects they are bound to obey the laws. The term is little used, in this sense, in countries enjoying a republican form of government.
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 1425
- - - - - -
If you've signed any government document, especially one "under penalty of perjury" wherein you claimed to be a US citizen / US resident, and / or signed up with FICA, or applied for permission (license) as a "resident", you have given your consent.
It may have been given in ignorance, but ignorance of the law is no defense.
If you doubted that you were indoctrinated by the world's greatest propaganda ministry - - -
An example of the lost knowledge of our forefathers comes from “The Devil’s Dictionary”, by Ambrose Bierce, a collection of humorous definitions, originally published in a weekly paper starting in 1881.
Apparently his audience knew what he was writing about, though today’s reader would not.
.................................................. ...............
ALIEN, n. An American sovereign in his probationary state.
- - - - “The Devil’s Dictionary” (1906), by Ambrose Bierce
(download available from www.gutenberg.org)
.................................................. ...............
His audience knew what an “American sovereign” was, to understand the joke.
(Hint: The United States government is a FOREIGN corporation with respect to a state. Ergo, an blank blank is ALIEN to blank blank.)
"We have in our political system a government of the United States and a government of each of the several States. Each one of these governments is distinct from the others, and each has citizens of it's own..."
United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875)
"A citizen of the United States is a citizen of the federal government ..."
Kitchens v. Steele, 112 F.Supp 383
FEDERAL CORPORATIONS - The United States government is a foreign corporation with respect to a state.
- - - Volume 19, Corpus Juris Secundum XVIII. Foreign Corporations, Sections 883,884
"The United States and the State of California are two separate sovereignties, each dominant in its own sphere."
Redding v. Los Angeles (1947), 81 C.A.2d 888, 185 P.2d 430.
So exactly who are the people who were "BORN SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION OF A FOREIGN CORPORATION" that were US citizens at birth? Ask your public servants to explain THAT.
P.S. - there is no such thing as a "sovereign citizen" - that's an oxymoron. (Like "vegetarian cannibal")
A sovereign and a citizen are mutually exclusive.
I agree and it's sad. Race is a very important topic, no doubt about that. Sadly, I've reached a point in my life where I don't listen to all the race talk. I ignore it because it only serves to further divide us all. All this talk started out with good intentions but when the left plays the "blame game", it drives a wedge between us all. I don't see it stopping any time soon.
It's also simply an inevitable result of increasing "diversity"...
Almost like no society ever lasts when it becomes too "diverse". Unity and commonality are ultimately better for a society in the long run...
I couldn't agree more. Some diversity is ok and mind you I'm not talking about race but culture. Too much diversity in culture just creates clash and divisiveness not unity.
White is a superior culture and don't you forget it, woke culture Marxists. You wouldn't even have electricity and running water if it wasn't for this so called nonexistent culture. Bite the hand that feeds you? We will bite back.
How about all white males quit their jobs and stop doing anything to contribute to societal progress...how would you feel about that? How long would society last if that happened? Give me a guess here in this thread.
Of course I respect all races and cultures and judge people based on the individual. The woke are the ones that segregate people into 500 different subgroups and tell us with their supposed intellectual and moral superiority which ones matter or not, which ones are oppressed or not.
This post is a joke, right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bergun
I bet that all those White Students who bought into all the liberal BS views that’s being forced on them “AND” without them having the ballz to questioning it. I’m still waiting for some 22 y/o college student with ZERO life experience to tell me about “White Rage” and I’m not even WHITE!!! Ha!! Too funny since you can’t make this “sheet” up!!
Basically, the monster these people created is now turning on them… And I bet they’re now crying in their little“safe spaces” with huggable teddy bears, hot coco and tissues to dry those little eyes.
Can’t feel sorry for them, since “they” are also responsible for allowing this to happen AND allowing it to took root… So deal with it you little “sheet” birds!!
I'm curious how and where "]liberal BS views that’s being forced on them, is happening. Please explain.
Trump blatantly supporting white supremist, using racial slurs, denigrating any and everyone that dare disagree with him, his supporters razing the US capitol carrying confederate flags, spreading bigger and bigger lies every day but yet, but YET....its those damn democrats behind the hate and causing civil war.
How many times have we seen conservatives blame some one else for their crimes, for their sins. Their child mentality of disrespect and thoughtless acts only to blame some one else for their disastrous consequences is their standard mode of operation. If another civil war were to happen its pretty clear who the instigators are.
I see hate from both sides. If you don't, your not being honest with yourself. But its the fringe elements on both sides that spew hate... trust me, the moderate conservatives and liberals spew no hate and often you don't even know their political sidings but trust me, in 2024 you will see who controls congress, its the middle because anytime one side starts to lean to far left or right, there is a correction at mid terms... not hate, just common sense!
I see hate from both sides. If you don't, your not being honest with yourself. But its the fringe elements on both sides that spew hate... trust me, the moderate conservatives and liberals spew no hate and often you don't even know their political sidings but trust me, in 2024 you will see who controls congress, its the middle because anytime one side starts to lean to far left or right, there is a correction at mid terms... not hate, just common sense!
Agreed, I hate the extremes on either side. The way I see it, they are one and the same.
This is the key component. the level of hyperbole the left is spilling about how prevalent racism is comparable to some on the right who refer to anything that impacts the collective good "communist". For instance, European style single payer health care is a slippery slope to communist gulags. It's hysterical and stupid.
On the left, people want to be part of the "revolution", it's a right of passage for some young people to feel like the social justice heroes of yesteryear. You have to create new victims regularly to fight for, hence the hyperbole behind the BLM narrative about racist cops executing innocent unarmed black people.
When you exercise any privilege that is limited to citizens, you are giving consent.
1) This is precisely the social-contract theory.
2) Consent that is forced and extorted is not consent. Especially if people aren't aware that their acceptance of said privilege is tantamount to giving their perpetual consent. It is like offering a starving man an apple then enslaving him when he eats it.
3) If consent comes from being a citizen, then can't you simply renounce your citizenship? Isn't that what the south did when it seceded from the union?
4) Lysander Spooner explains clearly where consent comes from....
"The only idea they have ever manifested as to what is a government of consent, is this – that it is one to which everybody must consent, or be shot."
PS: You know no one ever gave their consent, but it doesn't matter. Our government controls this territory. If you want to live here you better do what you're told.
Last edited by Redshadowz; 09-29-2021 at 12:17 PM..
2) Consent that is forced and extorted is not consent. Especially if people aren't aware that their acceptance of said privilege is tantamount to giving their perpetual consent. It is like offering a starving man an apple then enslaving him when he eats it.
3) If consent comes from being a citizen, then can't you simply renounce your citizenship? Isn't that what the south did when it seceded from the union?
4) Lysander Spooner explains clearly where consent comes from....
"The only idea they have ever manifested as to what is a government of consent, is this – that it is one to which everybody must consent, or be shot."
PS: You know no one ever gave their consent, but it doesn't matter. Our government controls this territory. If you want to live here you better do what you're told.
I get the feeling sovereign citizens are types who could never get over the fact that they were told sit down and shut their mouths for 5 minutes in school. This obsessions with having to be subject to any rules whatsoever appears to often be evidence of extreme emotional immaturity. It's contrasted by the super-coddled on the left who make up the blue haired social justice warriors. They see each other as arch-enemies but simple fact is they are both nuts.
I get the feeling sovereign citizens are types who could never get over the fact that they were told sit down and shut their mouths for 5 minutes in school. This obsessions with having to be subject to any rules whatsoever appears to often be evidence of extreme emotional immaturity. It's contrasted by the super-coddled on the left who make up the blue haired social justice warriors. They see each other as arch-enemies but simple fact is they are both nuts.
I just wish their true motives were more noble.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
