Starve the beast - solutions

[Miller]

Digital IDs Are HERE!! Why You Should Be WORRIED!!

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=uwRSzNTp2ko

11th December 2022

TIMESTAMPS -
0:00 Intro
0:56 What is Digital ID?
4:07 Who Is Pushing Digital ID?
9:00 When Will Digital ID Come?
14:45 Digital ID USA, EU, UK
19:41 Outcomes According To UN
23:15 Will Digital ID Succeed?
25:22 The Next Crisis
27:31 How To Escape Digital ID

A half-hour well spent, if you have the time to watch this informative, important video. It goes into great detail about Digital ID in a way that is easily understood, and pulls no punches about the intent of world leaders and what it will mean for us, the masses (as if we didn't know). It won't surprise you to know that there will be a separate Digital ID system for the Elite!

But at 26:35 the narrator makes a very interesting forecast and gives us hope for a much brighter outcome/future.

[palehorse]

Posted by Miller (here)
Digital IDs Are HERE!! Why You Should Be WORRIED!!

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=uwRSzNTp2ko

11th December 2022

TIMESTAMPS -
0:00 Intro
0:56 What is Digital ID?
4:07 Who Is Pushing Digital ID?
9:00 When Will Digital ID Come?
14:45 Digital ID USA, EU, UK
19:41 Outcomes According To UN
23:15 Will Digital ID Succeed?
25:22 The Next Crisis
27:31 How To Escape Digital ID

A half-hour well spent, if you have the time to watch this informative, important video. It goes into great detail about Digital ID in a way that is easily understood, and pulls no punches about the intent of world leaders and what it will mean for us, the masses (as if we didn't know). It won't surprise you to know that there will be a separate Digital ID system for the Elite!

But at 26:35 the narrator makes a very interesting forecast and gives us hope for a much brighter outcome/future.

Thanks Miller for posting the video here, I watched from 23 minutes til the end, I like his analysis and I think there is some truth regarding crypto currency, I am speculating it and trying to find what would be an ideal crypto currency for daily use, I mean for spending not for investing. So far Monero fits the bill, but adoption sucks, the best available today is Bitcoin in terms of adoption, but it is mainly the choice of investors and it is not really for spending (read buy groceries or ordinary daily expenses) + high fees.

I am of the idea if I don't hold it, then it does not belong to me, I mean custody in this case, if we are talking about self-custody then it would make a lot more sense, but having someone holding the keys does not give us the right of ownership and that is exactly what CBDC will do, they will hold everyone's money, unless we get self-custody right.

After all it is about financial education which most people on earth are illiterate, if they understood the debit system they are part of.. it would be a very different world.

I agree that there is already a very clear division from those top-down hierarchy and the ones from the down-top anarchists.

In this post there is a video talking about self-custody - I am not promoting anything here, it is just 1 example of what people are trying to do in order to bring down this top-down globalist filth scheme. If enough people adopt the idea of been their own baking system, the debit slave system will shatter like glass.
https://projectavalon.net/forum4/sho...=1#post1545010


¡Viva la libertad!

[shaberon]

Posted by ozmirage (here)
A U.S. national (like one born in Samoa) is not synonymous with an American national.

Explain, please?

And the supreme Court admitted that American people are subjects, whereas citizens are sovereigns, right?

The issue I found was not American, but State--also before the Constitution--that when any State was formed, whoever lived there was presumed a citizen of that State.

[ozmirage]

Posted by shaberon (here)

Posted by ozmirage (here)
A U.S. national (like one born in Samoa) is not synonymous with an American national.

Explain, please?

And the supreme Court admitted that American people are subjects, whereas citizens are sovereigns, right?

The issue I found was not American, but State--also before the Constitution--that when any State was formed, whoever lived there was presumed a citizen of that State.

Incorrect.
Let us start with this - - -

DO YOU KNOW THAT CITIZENSHIP COMES WITH MANDATORY CIVIC DUTIES?
.
And that those duties are presumed to be "voluntary"?
.
And that if they were mandatory, at birth, they would be "involuntary servitude" banned by the 13th amendment as well as contrary to the republican form of government?

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".

If not involuntary servitude banned by the 13th amendment, it must be VOLUNTARY SERVITUDE.

NO INFANT CAN BE "BORN A CITIZEN" WITH MANDATORY CIVIC DUTIES - STATE OR FEDERAL JURISDICTION - WITHOUT VIOLATING THE REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT.

HOW DO WE KNOW THIS TO BE TRUE?

It was “the LAW” from day one.

"What I do say is that no man is good enough to govern another man without that other's consent. I say this is the leading principle, the sheet-anchor of American republicanism. Our Declaration of Independence says: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."

- - - Abraham Lincoln, Speech at Peoria, Illinois (1854)

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Abraham_lincoln

As Lincoln reminds us, under the republican form, promised by the USCON, described by the Declaration of Independence, NO MAN (nor American government) is good enough to govern you without your consent.
You were endowed, at birth, by your Creator, with the rights to life, liberty (natural and personal), absolute ownership of private property, inherent powers, etc, etc, etc.

BUT citizens don't have endowed rights !

Geo.Wash. Sums it up nicely in 1783 - long before the constitution
. . .

“It may be laid down, as a primary position, and the basis of our system, that every citizen who enjoys the protection of a free government, owes not only a proportion of his property, but even of his personal services to the defence of it, and consequently that the Citizens of America (with a few legal and official exceptions) from 18 to 50 Years of Age should be borne on the Militia Rolls, provided with uniform Arms, and so far accustomed to the use of them, that the Total strength of the Country might be called forth at Short Notice on any very interesting Emergency.”
- - - George Washington; "Sentiments on a Peace Establishment" in a letter to Alexander Hamilton (2 May 1783); published in The Writings of George Washington (1938), edited by John C. Fitzpatrick, Vol. 26, p. 289.

[... Every citizen ... owes a portion of his property ... and services in defense ... in the militia ... from 18 to 50 years of age... ]

IN SHORT,
The American citizen has no endowed right to life, nor liberty, nor absolute ownership because, as a subject, he can be ordered to train, fight, and die, on command (militia duty), and was obligated to give up a portion of his property (qualified ownership of estate, via ad valorem taxes, etc). .. by his consent to be governed.
Shut up, sit down, pay and obey.

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;

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, ... under 45 years of age who are ... CITIZENS of the United States

= = = = =
CONSENT OF THE CITIZENRY

“ Our theory of government and governmental powers is wholly at variance with that urged by appellant herein. The rights of the individual are not derived from governmental agencies, either municipal, state or federal, or even from the Constitution. They exist inherently in every man, by endowment of the Creator, and are merely reaffirmed in the Constitution, and restricted only to the extent that they have been VOLUNTARILY SURRENDERED BY THE CITIZENSHIP to the agencies of government. The people's rights are not derived from the government, but the government's authority comes from the people. The Constitution but states again these rights already existing, and when legislative encroachment by the nation, state, or municipality invade these original and permanent rights, it is the duty of the courts to so declare, and to afford the necessary relief. The fewer restrictions that surround the individual liberties of the citizen, except those for the preservation of the public health, safety, and morals, the more contented the people and the more successful the democracy.”
- - - City of Dallas v Mitchell, 245 S.W. 944

https://casetext.com/case/city-of-dallas-v-mitchell-1
. . .
The rights of the individual / national / non-citizen / inhabitant / non-resident are not derived from government, but are Creator endowed... (i.e., republican form of government)
But once consent to be governed is granted, via citizenship, that endowment has been surrendered / waived by the citizenry. Why? Because mandatory civic duties abrogate endowed natural rights, natural and personal liberty, absolute ownership of private property, etc, etc. That’s the consequence of migrating to their [socialist] democratic form of government, where a majority can legally persecute a minority... or tax the snot out of them.

Lastly, nationality.

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

FEDERAL CITIZENSHIP - Rights and obligations accruing by reason of being a citizen of the United States. State or status of being a citizen of the United States. A person born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof is a citizen of the United States and of the State wherein he resides. Fourteenth Amend., U.S. Const.
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Ed., p. 610

CITIZEN - One who, under the Constitution and laws of the United States, or of a particular state, is a member of the political community, owing allegiance and being entitled to the enjoyment of full civil rights. 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.
U.S.Const., 14th Amend. See Citizenship.


"Citizens" are members of a political community who, in their associated capacity, have ESTABLISHED OR SUBMITTED themselves to the dominion of a government for the promotion of their general welfare and the protection of their individual as well as collective rights. Herriott v. City of Seattle, 81 Wash.2d 48, 500 P.2d 101, 109.
- - - Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Ed., p. 244

Most Americans presume that being a "CITIZEN" is a great thing... thanks to the propaganda ministry. But let's consider this FACT - citizenship comes with mandatory civic duties that include MILITIA DUTY - the obligation to train, fight, and die on command.

As posted before - 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".

If not involuntary servitude banned by the 13th amendment, it must be VOLUNTARY SERVITUDE.

If one has not volunteered to be a citizen, one retains all endowed rights to life, liberty (natural and personal), absolute ownership of private property, inherent powers, yada yada yada yada.

Most Americans are never told that 'THE PEOPLE' and 'the Citizenry' are mutually exclusive.
American people (nationals) are sovereigns, served by government.
American citizens are subjects of a sovereign (government).

In case you're wondering where the 14th amendment comes in - consider for whom that "citizenship" was created... former privately owned chattels.
Furthermore, the "jurisdiction" of the United States government is very limited.

Oh, and don't get confused over what the "United States" refers to. It is deliberately vague for a reason.

[] 13th amendment, Section 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.

{United States, in the plural, means the States united aka "USA"}

Involuntary servitude shall not exist within the United States (of America) or any place subject to THEIR jurisdiction.

Yet:
[] 14th amendment.

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.

Why didn’t the writers use “and in any place subject to THEIR jurisdiction?”

Because the “United States” was a direct reference to the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, a “foreign corporation” with respect to a state or any of them.

Title 28 United States Code, §3002. Definitions,
(15) “United States” means -
(a) a Federal corporation

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.

"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 its own..."
- - - United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875)

For whose benefit was the 14th amendment enacted? Certainly not those citizens in the States united. It was for those who were subjects of the Federal government, emancipated (not manumitted) slaves.

So if you were not born subject to FEDERAL sovereignty, you were not “born a U.S. citizen” and subject to the Federal government.

Imposition of citizenship at birth would violate the Declaration of Independence, the republican form of government, as well as the 13th amendment.

Under the republican form, American PEOPLE (non-citizens) are sovereigns and who can DIRECTLY exercise their sovereignty, as inhabitants with domiciles. They aren’t residents residing at a residence in a state.

Which comes back to "U.S. national" versus "American national."

31 CFR 800.227 - U.S. national.
§ 800.227 U.S. national.
The term U.S. national means a citizen of the United States or an individual who, although not a citizen of the United States, owes permanent allegiance to the United States.

A U.S. citizen IS a U.S. national.
BUT
An AMERICAN NATIONAL is not a citizen.

HOW DO WE KNOW THIS?

Title 8, USC Sec. 1502. Certificate of nationality issued by the Secretary of State for person not a naturalized citizen of the United States for use in proceedings of a foreign state.
“ The Secretary of State is authorized to issue, in his discretion and in accordance with rules and regulations prescribed by him, a certificate of nationality for any person not a naturalized citizen of the United States who presents satisfactory evidence that he is an AMERICAN NATIONAL and that such certificate is needed for use in judicial or administrative proceedings in a foreign state. Such certificate shall be solely for the use in the case for which it was issued and shall be transmitted by the Secretary of State through appropriate channels to the judicial or administrative officers of the foreign state in which it is to be used.”
- - - -
An American national is NOT a citizen. Whereas a U.S. national can be a citizen.

- - - -
The U.S. national who is not a citizen is one within FEDERAL jurisdiction.

8 U.S. Code § 1408 - Nationals but not citizens of the United States at birth
Unless otherwise provided in section 1401 of this title, the following shall be nationals, but not citizens, of the United States at birth:
(1) A person born in an outlying possession of the United States on or after the date of formal acquisition of such possession;
(2) A person born outside the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are nationals, but not citizens, of the United States, and have had a residence in the United States, or one of its outlying possessions prior to the birth of such person;
(3) A person of unknown parentage found in an outlying possession of the United States while under the age of five years, until shown, prior to his attaining the age of twenty-one years, not to have been born in such outlying possession; and
(4) A person born outside the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a national, but not a citizen, of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than seven years in any continuous period of ten years—
(A) during which the national parent was not outside the United States or its outlying possessions for a continuous period of more than one year, and
(B) at least five years of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years.
The proviso of section 1401(g) of this title shall apply to the national parent under this paragraph in the same manner as it applies to the citizen parent under that section.
= = = = =
Note: the definition of geographic jurisdiction is “The United States and ITS outlying possessions.” It does not state “within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.” as found in the 13th amendment.

IN case you were unaware, the term "United States" can have many different meanings depending on context and legislative intent.
But "the United States of America" is not vague or redefined.
An "American national" refers back to the USA, not the US.

If you go back to the Articles of Confederation *1777*, it's pretty clear.

★ Article I. The Stile of this confederacy shall be "The United States of America".

★ Article II. Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every Power, Jurisdiction and right, which is not by this confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.

The States united is distinct from the United States, in Congress assembled.

Guess who "We, the People of the United States" really referred to? (Preamble to the USCON)

Not the people of the United States of America, that's for sure.


Some of the legalese is hidden in redefinition of terms like STATE.

STATE - A people permanently occupying a fixed territory bound together by common-law habits and custom into one body politic exercising, through the medium of an organized government, independent sovereignty and control over all persons and things within its boundaries, capable of making war and peace and entering into international relations with other communities of the globe.
- In its largest sense, a "state" is a body politic or a society of men.
- The section of territory occupied by one of the United States.
- One of the component commonwealths or states of the United States of America.
- - - Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Ed., p.1407

See it? Two explicitly different references for "United States" and "United States of America."
. . .
We know that there are 50 States united (component commonwealths) in the United States of America. And that federal territories and districts are NOT states.

Yet we see these curious definitions:

Title 8 USC Sec. 1401 (36) The term `State' includes the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands of the United States.
(38)The term `United States', except as otherwise specifically herein provided, when used in a geographical sense, means the continental United States, Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands of the United States.

42 USC Sec. 410. Definitions relating to employment
For the purposes of this subchapter -
(h) State. The term `State' includes the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa.
(i) United States. The term `United States' when used in a geographical
sense means the States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa.

. . . .
What about the 50 states united, the “several states”?

50 USC Sec. 466. Definitions
(b) The term `United States', when used in a geographical sense, shall be deemed to mean the several States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Guam.

7 U.S.C. Sec. 390b.
As used in sections 390a to 390j, inclusive, of this
title -
(1) the term `State' means each of the 50 States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, and the Virgin Islands of the United States;

12 U.S.C. Sec. 2277a (6) State
The term `State' means any of the 50 States, the District of Columbia, any Territory of the United States, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, or the Virgin Islands.

20 U.S.C. Sec. 3005 (b) Special rule
(2) the term `States' includes the 50 States, the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.

42 U.S.C. Sec. 12522 (f) Definitions
For purposes of this section: (2) State. The term `State' includes the 50 States, the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.

It is apparent that the government is quite capable of distinguishing between itself (the Federal state, and its possessions) and the 50 States united (“the several states”). Don’t be fooled.

That "foreign corporation" has no jurisdiction inside any commonwealth State of the Union except for the limited delegations of power in Article 1, Section 8, USCON.

And pursuant to the republican form of government, no government instituted to secure endowed rights can impose citizenship AT BIRTH, with mandatory civic duties that abrogate those endowed rights. . . without consent of the governed.

YUP, we were tricked.


Link to post about "sovereigns without subjects" who absolutely own private property, etc, etc.

https://projectavalon.net/forum4/sho...=1#post1532153

[ozmirage]

NOTE: For those who were misled to assume that the Declaration of Independence was NOT law, please check your own constitution, to verify if it includes verbiage that directly complies with the Declaration.

CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION

Article I Declaration of Rights [Section 1 - Sec. 32]
( Article 1 adopted 1879. )
Section 1.
All people are by nature free and independent and have inalienable rights. Among these are enjoying and defending life and liberty, acquiring, possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety, happiness, and privacy.

PENNSYLVANIA CONSTITUTION
http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/...0&div=0&chpt=1
Article 1, Section 1. Inherent Rights of Mankind

All men are born equally free and independent, and have certain inherent and indefeasible rights, among which are those of enjoying and defending life and liberty, of acquiring, possessing and protecting property and reputation, and of pursuing their own happiness.

- - - - - -
I expect that you will find that EVERY state constitution specifically recognizes endowed rights of the PEOPLE (sovereigns), including natural rights, natural and personal liberty, inherent powers, absolute ownership of private property and so on.

HOWEVER, if one has consented to be governed, as their citizen, all bets are off.
Shut up, sit down, pay and obey.
(It's even worse if you have signed up with socialist insecurity for an account and number. Eligibility for public charity makes one a pauper at law and a status criminal.)

[ExomatrixTV]