Attention ATS! Know The Hidden Meanings Behind the Laws in America, Before it is Too Late!

reply to post by logician magician


Well if his info did originate from Jordan Maxwell's site, that would explain why I stumbled across his link in my research. I have stated that Esoteric Agenda is what launched me on my investigation. Jordan Maxwell was involved in the making of Esoteric Agenda.
Anything that is posted here is open for discussion and/or debate. Could I ask you to do it in a civil and adult manner?

reply to post by logician magician


Also, you have failed to explain why they put forth the mother's maiden name, as addressed in the 'bastard status.'
It's hard to take your responses seriously with all the laughing smiley faces.

Originally posted by refuter
all i can say is thar i am tempted to say we deserve what we get because we put up with it.

This is not entirely true. Consider that the government (& Corporate Interest) has been slowly & stealthily integrating such Unconstitutional actions into the legal structure for the past 3 generations or more...Those who are born into the modern generations never had the opportunity to learn & fully understand what previous administrations had done, and we had no opportunity to refute it either. Only by learning our history & getting up-to-date info will we have the chance to take back our own right to self-determination. Only we who live in current times can learn the mistakes made in history & resolve to not make the same mistakes again. The current situation is such that we need to correct the mistakes that are currently "on the books" before we can move forward on the path from which our ancestors were pushed away. We are under no obligation to endure the mistakes of our ancestors (or their governments), but if humanity is to achieve any progress we are under the obligation to correct those mistakes.

The US Founding Fathers were the architects of the real New World Order, in that they had created, for the first time in the history of human civilization, a system of government that would be servant to the People while securing certain basic Human Rights that could not be removed by either the People (during times of high social emotion or mere bad judgement) or the government itself. They also created a self-evolving system in the creation of laws & enforcing justice that is capable of adapting to the needs of the People. This system they created also placed certain limitations on the government to prevent the nation from devolving into tyranny...IMO, as our modern politicians tell us that we're heading into a "New World Order," they are instead working to re-establish the Old World Order (a system of Government over People) in America.

The key to this is Information; I've said this years ago, back in the final paragraphs of Future Shock. Those who control the spread (or suppression) of information can control others...So we must first learn then do, otherwise we'll be stuck in the loop of repeated mistakes. I think a thread like this gives us the chance to learn. Since it's a violation of ATS T&C to become activist here, we can still "learn" here, but must "do" somewhere else.

Originally posted by azblack
This subject matter discussed here is of upmost importance.. The bad thing is you can throw every law ever written on paper in the toilet because the biggest, baddest lawyers only care about the supreme court's decisions per individual law.

In truth, I don't seek to throw every law into the toilet...Only those laws that exist in contradiction to the Supreme Law of the Land (ie: The Constitution). I'll be the first to admit that there are plenty of Laws that enforce, uphold & in some cases even enhance Constitutional Laws...It's just that I seek to dig them up from the cesspool of "color-of-laws" that buried them & this seems like a good thread to do just that.

I also have links to a couple of other old thread of mine (besides Future Shock) that relate to this goal:
Concerns On Constitutional Violations
Concerns On Amendment Violations
A somewhat more humorous (although the issues have been treated seriously) attempt of mine along the same goal:
If I Am Elected President

[edit on 1-5-2008 by MidnightDStroyer]

reply to post by MidnightDStroyer


Hi,
Just wanted you to know how very much I appreciate your contributions here. You are always civil, even when refuting a response. Kudos to you.

reply to post by logician magician
Even if using your reasoning that it is listed that way in case the mother dies giving birth, and the father or doctor would then have to sign it it still makes no sense. The doctor has to sign the birth certificate regardless of wether or not the mother is alive. There is already a line for the attending physician's signiture, so the doctor has no need to sign under informant. The mother or father should sign on a line that is labeled for the mother or father, not labeled as informant. I looked at my birth certificate, as well as my children's & grandchildren's and they all say informant where the mother signs. They do not say mother or other informant, they just say informant. I also came across one from another state i believe it was SC ( correct me if i'm wrong) but it said informant on that one also. I tried looking on the website that you listed, for Massachusetts, i coudn't find any information though, maybe i just didn't know how to get to the right page. Massachusetts is a commonwealth, so some of thier laws may be different than in the rest of the states. I'm confused about something, why are you giving information on the birth certificate procedures in england & wales . The topic of this post very clearly says know the hidden meanings behind the laws in AMERICA, therefore the policies of england & wales don't apply to this subject.

reply to post by logician magician
Actually the link that you provided isn't the miniker case, it is two seperate cases being looked at together. I read it all top to bottom, two times. Both cases went to an appeals court, one case was reversed, one wasn't. Both cases concerned a subpoena to appear and be a witness. In both cases the subpoenas were invalid. They were invalid for the same reason, they were trying to make these people testify against themselves before there was even a case in court. Difference was in minikers case it was more extreme, they tried to subpoena him not to appear in court, but rather to be questioned in an office, which is illegal in itself.Knowing that it was illegal to subpoena these people as witnesses they proceeded anyway. They were in fact trying to coerce them through order of the court. He didn't twist the statement around, he simply put in into laymens terms, both statements say the same thing. If you read it thouroughly you wil see that in both cases the immigration agent was indeed trying to coerce these people with invalid subpoenas. These types of coercive tactics go on inside our legal system everyday, most people receive a subpoena and automatically assume that is is a legel command of the court and they obey it without question, something that our judicial system is very well aware of.

reply to post by chise61


That seems to be some really intensive work you have done, Chise61. As a new member, I applaud your efforts. Ordinarily I would check these myself, but have some other things demanding my time, at the moment. Thank you.

How do we know that what is being cited here as "the law" is being presented accurately?

If it is being presented accurately, wouldn't all the stuff in this thread just represent someone's interpretations of the "law"?

Do we know of anyone who has ever fallen victim to these laws? Would the interpretations of these "laws" survive judicial review?

America has a Supreme Court.







[edit on 1-5-2008 by Electro38]

reply to post by sizzle
You are quite welcome, And thank you. I've have always felt that if you want to know the truth then you must seek it yourself. We can't expect that our goverment is going to reveal things to us that is against thier best interests. They've already proven to us that they won't. You have obviously put a lot of time and effort into this, things pertaining to our legal system can be very hard to research, as well as understand. As you stated i am new here, so i'm sure i will make some mistakes, but I'll try to keep them to a minimum. You have opened the door if we want to know what's true & what isn't we must step through & find that out on our own.

Originally posted by MidnightDStroyer
Consider that the government (& Corporate Interest) has been slowly & stealthily integrating such Unconstitutional actions into the legal structure for the past 3 generations or more...Those who are born into the modern generations never had the opportunity to learn & fully understand what previous administrations had done, and we had no opportunity to refute it either. Only by learning our history & getting up-to-date info will we have the chance to take back our own right to self-determination. Only we who live in current times can learn the mistakes made in history & resolve to not make the same mistakes again. [edit on 1-5-2008 by MidnightDStroyer]

I completely agree. I think that it is the nature of government to try to become bigger and more oppressive. The only way to prevent this is to be informed, and I hope more people are trying this. I once thought that most people are blind sheep, but I've been seeing more and more people that know that there is a problem and want to change things.

I've been doing more and more reading on this stuff lately, and I came across an interesting site. It's www.preventtyranny.com.... It looks pretty new, but it has some really interesting information...

Danny

reply to post by Electro38
We won't know unless we do the research ourselves. One of them at least we know is true, we know that you need a licence to get married. Why do you think that is? Marriage is not illegal & until recently had nothing to do with the goverment. People didn't need a licence to get married 100 years ago, why now? If the state has no ownership of our children then why is it so easy for them to take peoples children away from them? And yes they do it all the time, very easily. Think about it for a minute if child services THINKS that there may be a problem, they take the child. The parent is usually not allowed to keep the child throughout the court procedings and wait for child services to prove them unfit, but rather the child is placed with strangers ( that are often unfit) and the parents must prove to the state that they are fit. That is essentially saying that they are guilty. What doesn't innocent until proven guilty apply to parents?People's children are taken away from them before it even goes to court. That's basically equavilent to sentencing a person to jail time without a conviction. Where is the parent's due process, where is the child's. A few years back, here in illinois, the governor had to create a task force to find hundreds of children that child services had taken into "protective custody" and then lost. Yes we do have a supreme court, but isn't that what they do, interperate the law.

Sizzle thanks for such an eye opening thread.

First I would like to ask, What really can we do about these unjust laws? You HAVE to have a social sercurity card to work just about anywhere decent. And alot of this there is really nothing we can do about it. (like when they stamped our foot print as babies.) And you cannot enroll your children in school, or take them to the doctor unless you have a social sucurity number.

Actually, I think it comes down to a feeling of helplessness. The guv has us by the 'goffeys.' When it comes right down to it, what are you going to do, short of some type revolution or uprising. And on that note, I think the guv has gotten everyone much too complacent for that (or most people) not ALL.

In respnse to you all posting important threads and getting no responses, both of the threads you were talking about I would have loved to read, there is so much information here on ATS maybe it just got overlooked. Another thing is alot of people don't want to believe certain things (like that some vaccines cause autism) , so they dont even read it because there is not much you can do about it, and "they" don't want to believe that they have put their children and themselves as risk.

There have been some hints that there is a child-slavery ring within CPS. I do not know how one would go about proving it, but an attorney in Austin, first brought it to the attention to some friends of mine, when their little girl was taken.

In response to sizzles post about CPS I have a story I would like to share with you all. Last year my fiance's neighbor attacked him with an ice pick and my fiance shot him at point blank range. My fiance was arrested and my fiance's 11 year old saw the whole thing. He was pretty upset, but he agreed with his dad's desicion since the guy had threatened our livelyhood more than once. I bailed my fiance out of jail the next day and he was charged with assult with a deadly weapon. (they tried to charge him with attempted murder but with my fiance being ex military my fiance bluntly told the police that he had 14 rounds left and was an expert marksman and if he had wanted him dead he would be) (The night we bailed him out we also bought him a new gun) The next week CPS showed up at our door with two cops. My fiance answered the door wearing his sidearm as he always does. My fiance told them to leave, and if they wanted to talk to him they could call and make an appointment. When they returned at their appointed time we met with them and they spoke with his son and we had gotten his son counsiling and were doing everything they said. Two weeks after the shooting the charges against my fiance were dropped. The police said it was self defense. But CPS would not leave us alone. They upgraded our file to serious or something like that and said they were going to take his son. My fiance spent hours screaming at the workers and their suppervisors. Since it was proven self defense why were they still trying to take his son? My fiance finally refuse to do anything they asked and told CPS that if they wanted to meet with any of us again they would have to get a warrent or he would take them to court. They droped the case.

I hope this give some insight into CPS. If you let them take your child to begin with, there is nothing you can do. Rip up the papers, stay armed and make CPS fearful. It worked for us.

edit for typos


[edit on 1-5-2008 by 4thefight]

reply to post by 4thefight


You are very welcome, 4thefight. As soon as I have some ffree time, I have more things to post here. Just really busy, but still trying to keep tabs.
I see from your above post, that you are a fighter in more ways than one.

I am aware that there are those involved on this thread who are reluctant to believe what is posted. That is okay. Hopefully, we still have the right to choose to believe or disbelieve.

For those who haven't read the story about your fighting spirit, I would encourage them to click on your sig' link.

reply to post by chise61


Very good points made here Chise,
This is exactly what is happening with the polygamists' sect here in Texas. That situation and the way it was handled, makes me very angry.

people have purchased firearms at gun shows, where unlicensed sellers are not currently required to conduct background checks or to ask for identification. I have personally seen a dealer sell a fully automatic Uzi with a silencer to a gangbanger with cash, and no background check. Its not hard to get enough firepower to resist those who would tread on your rights. Yeehaw, I love america.

You have to be careful doing this. There is more undercover cops at gun shows than you relize. The best way to get guns if you can not puchase them legally is from neighbors, friends, and relatives. You can be arrested and charged if caught puchasing an illegal weapon. Of course you can play ignorant and they cannot charge you but they can take your money and they weapon indefinatly.

Personally, I would still prefer to be involved with a group. I believe the chance of survival would be greater if you had others to commune with. That's just my opinion.

I would want to be in a small group minum 10 people who I would trust with my life. When groups get to big, you have more of a chance of being caught. ANd in my experences big groups tend to have more problems between members of the group. (like someone not pulling their weight)

All of that stuff you are posting is COMPLETE BS.

I suggest you do a bit more research before dissreguarding all the factual information in this thread

I've have always felt that if you want to know the truth then you must seek it yourself. We can't expect that our goverment is going to reveal things to us that is against thier best interests.

chise61 I absolutly love you logic. I do not believe anything I read until I have personally investigated it myself. You also must remember that alot of theories are planted to distract the general public from the truth.

[edit on 1-5-2008 by 4thefight]

This is exactly what is happening with the polygamists' sect here in Texas. That situation and the way it was handled, makes me very angry.

I am absolutly outraged about that mess. There may have been abuse but I have seen no proof of it. If you ask me the gov't didnt like the fact that they were a self-sustaining community so they made up some bull story to rip their lives apart.

reply to post by 4thefight
Thanks. And i agree with you that whole thing was a mess. I don't understand why the took the children away from thier mothers.I keep hearing them give the excuse that there were 15 & 16 year old girls that were pregnant, and that's all it is an excuse. This country is overrun with teenage pregnancies, they don't go around taking pregnant teenagers away from any other parents, taking little children away from thier mothers, why? Goes along with what i said earlier, these mother's are being condemed of child abuse before they've even been to court, and the innocent children are the one's that suffer. It's like sizzle's post said they allow you to keep your children until they deem that you have done something that they don't approve of.

Originally posted by sizzle
You are always civil, even when refuting a response.

As I see it, how can civilization advance anywhere if we can't even remain civil?

Originally posted by shorin
I think that it is the nature of government to try to become bigger and more oppressive. The only way to prevent this is to be informed, and I hope more people are trying this.

As quoted by Thomas Jefferson: "The People...are the only sure reliance for the presevation of our liberty." The Founding Fathers knew that the Constitution alone wouldn't keep the government in check; It would take the vilgilance of the People to keep the Constitution in force. The government won't obey their Oaths until they are forced to obey.

Originally posted by 4thefight
...Rip up the papers, stay armed and make CPS fearful. It worked for us.

In short, if you show them that you're fearful of the mere "color of law," then you've already lost the battle to defend your Rights, which are part-n-parcel of the Supreme Law of the Land. Kudos for not buckling!

Originally posted by 4thefight

This is exactly what is happening with the polygamists' sect here in Texas. That situation and the way it was handled, makes me very angry.

I am absolutly outraged about that mess. There may have been abuse but I have seen no proof of it. If you ask me the gov't didnt like the fact that they were a self-sustaining community so they made up some bull story to rip their lives apart.

IMO, what happened there is that the colony buckled under the "color or the law" which says that they're "guilty until proven innocent." The biggest problem I see here is that, once they let they're children get taken, it'll be hell to get them back because this particular "color of law" assumes that they've already labeled themselves as guilty enough to not stand up & defend their children.
The best thing any of them can do in the courtroom now, is that, when asked "guilty or not guilty?" they should reply "innocent," as described way back near the bottom of page 1 of this thread; This is because to enter trial under one of the court's pleas is to open yourself up to judgement without Due Process. They should also make sure to address the court with the declaration of retaining their Rights.

Originally posted by chise61
Yes we do have a supreme court, but isn't that what they do, interperate the law.

Yes, that's what they're supposed to do...But I've run across some indications that the Supreme Court is now beginning to refuse to perform this Duty.
An article about it is here & contains links to the related official documents. It's a disturbing problem that indicates that the Courts are now colluding with the Executive Branch to help cover up the real crimes & criminals.

Originally posted by 4thefight

All of that stuff you are posting is COMPLETE BS.

I suggest you do a bit more research before dissreguarding all the factual information in this thread

I agree...The truly wise man (& the best scientists too) will always remain skeptical, but must never be dismissive.

reply to post by chise61


I agree, that's not good. Some laws need to be changed.

Do you think the social workers who do take kids away from their parents are doing it to be malicious, or to "steal" children for the state? Or do they think they're protecting the children?


Does signing a marriage license give the state permission to do this?
I thought a marriage license was more for the sharing/ownership of property, etc.

Couldn't the "state" take anyone's kids away, regardless of a marriage license?

I agree with what you're saying, some of these laws need to be changed. There's no doubt we see some weird things happen in the name of the law. I brought up the supreme court because I thought they were supposed to protect against that kind of misinterpretation of the law.

reply to post by chise61


About this story, of the so called "Polygamists". If we look into this we might discover the real reason might be something to do with taxes, or weapons. Or someone wanted to make an "example" of these people.

What a sad image it was to see those little kids waving to their parents as the bus drove them away.

I wonder though, why can't these people at least wait until the women are 18 before getting married and having kids?

Regardless, those kids should not have been taken away before things were investigated. It seems as if they (the state) acted soley on an annonymous phone call from some unnamed accuser.

Not good.