• Same story, different day...........year ie more of the same fiat floods the world
  • There are no markets
  • "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding high finance, politics, constructionist Constitution, and mental masturbation of all types"

Redeeming Lawful Money

Joined
Aug 18, 2010
Messages
3,384
Likes
1,583
#81
You are welcome!


If you ever want to implement the full Lesson Plan get a look here.




Rights to a common law remedy ....


Missouri Revised Statutes
TITLE I
LAWS AND STATUTES
August 28, 2012

Chapter 1
Laws in Force and Construction of Statutes

Sections:
1.010. Common law in force--effect on statutes.

Common law in force--effect on statutes.

1.010. The common law of England and all statutes and acts of parliament made prior to the fourth year of the reign of James the First, of a general nature, which are not local to that kingdom and not repugnant to or inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States, the constitution of this state, or the statute laws in force for the time being, are the rule of action and decision in this state, any custom or usage to the contrary notwithstanding, but no act of the general assembly or law of this state shall be held to be invalid, or limited in its scope or effect by the courts of this state, for the reason that it is in derogation of, or in conflict with, the common law, or with such statutes or acts of parliament; but all acts of the general assembly, or laws, shall be liberally construed, so as to effectuate the true intent and meaning thereof.



The bold text points to the days before the Dutch West India Company ???
 

plata_oro

Seeker
Seeker
Joined
Aug 15, 2012
Messages
249
Likes
88
Location
Panamint Mountains
#82
Absolutely awesome thread! So much info to take in. Good to hear many other people keeping on watchful eye on the banking system. :cheerful:
 

David Merrill

Seeker
Seeker
Joined
May 15, 2010
Messages
245
Likes
71
#83




Rights to a common law remedy ....


Missouri Revised Statutes
TITLE I
LAWS AND STATUTES
August 28, 2012

Chapter 1
Laws in Force and Construction of Statutes

Sections:
1.010. Common law in force--effect on statutes.

Common law in force--effect on statutes.

1.010. The common law of England and all statutes and acts of parliament made prior to the fourth year of the reign of James the First, of a general nature, which are not local to that kingdom and not repugnant to or inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States, the constitution of this state, or the statute laws in force for the time being, are the rule of action and decision in this state, any custom or usage to the contrary notwithstanding, but no act of the general assembly or law of this state shall be held to be invalid, or limited in its scope or effect by the courts of this state, for the reason that it is in derogation of, or in conflict with, the common law, or with such statutes or acts of parliament; but all acts of the general assembly, or laws, shall be liberally construed, so as to effectuate the true intent and meaning thereof.



The bold text points to the days before the Dutch West India Company ???

The Charter was 1629.


 

TRYNEIN

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
2,538
Likes
7,345
Location
third cove on the right
#84

David Merrill

Seeker
Seeker
Joined
May 15, 2010
Messages
245
Likes
71
#86
According to one suitor's account several bank employees were fired at a local bank over the non-endorsement verbiage on the backs of checks and signature cards.
 

David Merrill

Seeker
Seeker
Joined
May 15, 2010
Messages
245
Likes
71
#88
This Libel of Review (LoR) is obviously still my intellectual property but it has been laundered through two different authors. The first author was a suitor but a bible scholar who fashioned what I call generic counterclaim Yisrael. That template was picked up by a stranger to me, Mark Edward and he was working as counsel for Fred Francis who was indicted on several federal felonies.

I call it Hundredth Monkey as now people I do not know are using the Libel of Review process to exonerate other people.


Mark Edward seems to either be a disciple of David Wynn MILLER - or more likely he paid David to apply his Quantum Language technology. Scroll to the end of the LoR (Doc 13) and see the Refusal for Cause (R4C).


Notice also how that R4C was signed two weeks after the federal judge had ordered that Fred could have no more communication with Mark, indirectly or directly!

Appearance Bond Entered as to Fred F Frink (1) Pretrial Supervision remains in effect. Court adds condition of supervision: No direct or indirect contact with Mr. Mark Edward Hill. All other conditions to remain in effect. SEE BOND FOR COMPLETE CONDITIONS. (cc: PTS/USPO/USMO) (AE) (Entered: 11/30/2012)
 
Last edited:

David Merrill

Seeker
Seeker
Joined
May 15, 2010
Messages
245
Likes
71
#89
That case above seems to have been a clerical error. A suitor called the clerk inquiring and the clerk changed the Charges to Active.
 

Goldhedge

Moderator
Site Mgr
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
31,086
Likes
38,715
Location
Planet Earth
#90
Welcome back David.

I'm not sure what the case above means. Why'd the guy call the clerk? Is it being 'active' a good thing?
 

TRYNEIN

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
2,538
Likes
7,345
Location
third cove on the right
#91

David Merrill

Seeker
Seeker
Joined
May 15, 2010
Messages
245
Likes
71
#92
The new suitor was in contact with Fred who gave no credence to the case having terminated charges and is pleading out. So the suitor called the clerk and asked about it and the clerk paused a long time and then reinstated the terminated charges.

I think that Fred's attorney might have tried abating on the technicality or just not showed for trial based on it and then tried to leverage the clerk error. That would likely have failed to produce anything productive. Probably wouldn't have hurt considering it was a blatant clerk error though.
 
Last edited:

AGG

Seeker
Seeker
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
467
Likes
121
#93
Agg said:
Though not used in a banking transaction but at the bottom of a billing;

"Payments recieved in Lawful Money from without the [federal] United States and from non sect 871 sources."

See 26 cfr 1.1-1 a-c
You verify that the real diversity of citizenship is between those in contract with the Fed and those non-endorsing the Fed.
If that were all that were presented, your point would have some foundation. But sect 871 refers to
taxes on non resident aliens (non 14th amendment 'citizens') on U.S.(federal) source income, income effectively connected, or from certain work performed within the actual territorial district. Thus by including mention of that section, the alienage (diversity) of citizenship apart from 14th amendment (or even state nationality) is suggested.

Other info and specifics about the nature of the diversity and alienage could be (are) provided elsewhere. [W-8]

The inequity of the fed is an extension of the U.S. citizenship, not the primary root of diversity.

This is why I question if a 14th amendment 'subject' of 'just war theory' and exclusive allegiance to congress as if living in an area of article 1 sect 8, clause 17 etc. etc. can rightfully redeem lawful money. If they can, then they would be the ones who affirm their diversity of citizenship is founded within a disagreement with and non endorsement of the fed.

See http://www.goldismoney2.com/showthr...e-Jurisdiction&p=526125&viewfull=1#post526125
and
http://www.goldismoney2.com/showthr...e-Jurisdiction&p=525606&viewfull=1#post525606
 
Last edited:

David Merrill

Seeker
Seeker
Joined
May 15, 2010
Messages
245
Likes
71
#94
If that were all that were presented, your point would have some foundation. But sect 871 refers to
taxes on non resident aliens (non 14th amendment 'citizens') on U.S.(federal) source income, income effectively connected, or from certain work performed within the actual territorial district. Thus by including mention of that section, the alienage (diversity) of citizenship apart from 14th amendment (or even state nationality) is suggested.

Other info and specifics about the nature of the diversity and alienage could be (are) provided elsewhere. [W-8]

The inequity of the fed is an extension of the U.S. citizenship, not the primary root of diversity.

This is why I question if a 14th amendment 'subject' of 'just war theory' and exclusive allegiance to congress as if living in an area of article 1 sect 8, clause 17 etc. etc. can rightfully redeem lawful money. If they can, then they would be the ones who affirm their diversity of citizenship is founded within a disagreement with and non endorsement of the fed.

See http://www.goldismoney2.com/showthr...e-Jurisdiction&p=526125&viewfull=1#post526125
and
http://www.goldismoney2.com/showthr...e-Jurisdiction&p=525606&viewfull=1#post525606
I get busy with new suitors, sorry. When I find the time I enjoy surfing around and catching up!

Just as Income Tax on your SSN, by whatever initials will transfer for aliens we seem to be able to transfer that contract with whatever central bank. The Federal Reserve is just the name of the US central bank.

I liked this line of thought from Minimus:

The default judgement ... and a lien ... ?

And yes, the G10 (now the G20) banksters power grab over international debts (international debt consolidation), that's quick footwork on your part to secure it from their clutches, tell them to stick their bogus claim where the sun don't shine !

I can only imagine how fragile this document could be without eternal vigilance ...


Could yours be the most valuable bill of exchange in existence ?

The suit was won by default. The lien has cured ? The bill has been sent but there's no real money to pay the debt.

And now the funny money creditors have become your debtors ?
I have been entertaining some revelation about DMT (dimethyltryptamine), imagination and the pineal gland. I just finished a book - Kabbalah, The Pineal Gland & Jerusalem of the Mind by Joel David BAKST.
 

Attachments

AGG

Seeker
Seeker
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
467
Likes
121
#95
Re: Diversity of citizenship;
I stumbled across this today.
28 USC § 1332 - Diversity of citizenship; amount in controversy; costs

Please note the definition of States for this section.

e) The word “States”, as used in this section, includes the Territories, the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico.
{Art 1 sect 8, clause 17; {} = my addition}


This chapter 85 of USC 28 has alot of information.
 

David Merrill

Seeker
Seeker
Joined
May 15, 2010
Messages
245
Likes
71
#96
Here is a new more streamlined approach.

Click Here.

The next step is to file the original four-page document back into the Miscellaneous Case evidence repository with several copies for the USDC clerk of court to mark up and return in the prepaid self-addressed envelope. These marked up copies can be served on the banks and credit unions.

Any time in the future the suitor can buy certified copies from his USDC evidence repository if he needs to notify anybody.


Regards,

David Merrill.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Goldhedge

Moderator
Site Mgr
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
31,086
Likes
38,715
Location
Planet Earth
#97
Is anyone redeeming lawful money? Share your experience.
 

TRYNEIN

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
2,538
Likes
7,345
Location
third cove on the right
#99
As intelligence nexus for a brain trust (sensory nodes) of suitors the process is more like a carefully regulated release valve on the highly compressed information infrastructure called money - the illusion that debt has value.

Click on this interesting article.
The voluntary use of private credit is the condition precedent which imposes the irrecusable obligation to file a tax return. If private credit is not used or rejected, then the operation of law which imposes the irrecusable obligation lies dormant and cannot apply.
 

Po'boy

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 6, 2010
Messages
4,582
Likes
2,275
Is anyone redeeming lawful money? Share your experience.
I did for a while till BOA refused didn't feel like a court battle and I'm already on enough lists.

just quit accepting checks, problem solved.
 
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
2,990
Likes
1,466
I did for a while till BOA refused didn't feel like a court battle and I'm already on enough lists.

just quit accepting checks, problem solved.
Account with BOA = participation in private credit system = contractual obligation = "taxpayer".
 

Po'boy

Midas Member
Midas Member
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 6, 2010
Messages
4,582
Likes
2,275
Account with BOA = participation in private credit system = contractual obligation = "taxpayer".
I did not have an account with boa.

It was a check I was given.

Where did you read I said I had an account with them?

Just don't take checks and you won't have to play all the games.

I studied enough, try it yourself and let me know how it works out for you in real life not just on the interweb.

Heck this stuff was one of my first posts here.

Been there how bout you?

Bueler? Bueler?
 

AGG

Seeker
Seeker
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
467
Likes
121
Account with BOA = participation in private credit system = contractual obligation = "taxpayer".
I don't know about this. The obligation stems from being a 14th amendment ' federal 'U.S." citizen, voluntarily and knowingly giving allegience to their principlrs, thus becoming "subject to" "its" jurisdiction. The fed reserve act did.'come around till 1913, along with "citizens" obligating themselves to be federal citizens by votiing for 'U.S.' senators AND the eventual broad (and wrong) applicatiin of the 16th.

I don't know if participation in the money system for the federal zone without any promoted alternative is what establishes the 14th amendment citizenry and thus 'liability' for fed and state "income" tax as a tax on federally connected (internal) income, either by source (federal source; sec 471, locatiion/reaidence within a federal zine of art 1 sec 8, clause 17, OR obligatiin/libility by having given alleguenece and naturalized to U.S. citizenry . Though some may declare that it constitutes an 'appeal' to said money system and thus jurisdiction.

I believe all amendments after the 14th are only applicable to 14th amendment "citizens" of exclusive congresaional jurisdiction as if living in an area of art 1, sect 8, clause 17, or having given their allegience to just war theory at the control of whim and overlord of congress and their controllers.
 
Last edited:

TRYNEIN

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Joined
Sep 16, 2012
Messages
2,538
Likes
7,345
Location
third cove on the right
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
2,990
Likes
1,466
I don't know about this. The obligation stems from being a 14th amendment ' federal 'U.S." citizen, voluntarily and knowingly giving allegience to their principlrs, thus becoming "subject to" "its" jurisdiction. The fed reserve act did.'come around till 1913, along with "citizens" obligating themselves to be federal citizens by votiing for 'U.S.' senators AND the eventual broad (and wrong) applicatiin of the 16th.

I don't know if participation in the money system for the federal zone without any promoted alternative is what establishes the 14th amendment citizenry. Though some may declare that it constitutes an 'appeal' to said money system and thus jurisdiction.only
I agree that they are two separate contracts; one of a commercial U.S. "citizenship", the other of using commercial paper, though it is all but impossible to participate in the second without evidence of participation in the first.

Holding a drivers license is taken as prima facie evidence that one is bound by the "citizenship" contract -- you must have an SSN to get one. Any sort of banking activity strongly suggests participation in this 14th Amendment "citizenship" contract for the same reason.
 

David Merrill

Seeker
Seeker
Joined
May 15, 2010
Messages
245
Likes
71
If you don't like dealing with tellers just notify the Federal Reserve Bank nearest you and then show that process whenever you feel presumptions of endorsement are being made.



http://img705.imageshack.us/img705/2922/noticeanddemand2012.pdf
http://img829.imageshack.us/img829/808/noticeanddemandboacorre.pdf
http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/8599/noticeanddemandmay2013.pdf


P.S. If you get interested in this enough you can learn about the Lesson Plan on Saving to Suitors' Club.


1) true identity
2) record forming
3) redeeming lawful money
 

AGG

Seeker
Seeker
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
467
Likes
121
I agree that they are two separate contracts; one of a commercial U.S. "citizenship", the other of using commercial paper, though it is all but impossible to participate in the second without evidence of participation in the first.

Holding a drivers license is taken as prima facie evidence that one is bound by the "citizenship" contract -- you must have an SSN to get one. Any sort of banking activity strongly suggests participation in this 14th Amendment "citizenship" contract for the same reason.
I'm not so sure your evaluations are totally accurate though this may be their perspective. And that perspective of 'citizenship by imposed nexus or contract may stem from a faulty evaluation of why the jews lost the kingdom and favir of God by an appeal to roman interventiin in a jewish dispute.

I don't think 'citinenship' of the soul/mind/spirit can be attatched by imposed participation in some of the 'evidences' of the contract and citizenship, though some members of the federal agencies may attempt to extort and convert ones property of labor and wealth by declaring it to be so.

In one of these threads, there was some links to information about challenging peesonal (and or subject matter) jurisdictiin.

One fault is that the American stes of the republic, nor the jurisdiction of the 'church'; I.E. Kingdom of the new covt have not establishe positive money systems nor seperate i.d,s and indtructions/practices (or identical ones) for vehicular use..etc.

Some of that may have been changing along with increasedknowledge and understanding.

Here may be a silly parallel.
All states have laws against murder, as well as other laws. If I go through life without 'murdering someone, does that mean I've contracted with the state as a state citizen or does it just mean that my own personal religious 'state' also has similar ordinances, though stated in the positive of love for humanity.

If the speed limit sign says 45 mph and I most often sliw to that or a lesser speed, does that mean I've agreed to contract with the state or the federal citizenry on all issues? Or does it mean that I understand that there is likely a good reason to slow taffic to that speed and agree to those likely good reasons in a general sense?

If my information that Iam given and imposed on me says that in order to use a car (firget the twisted semantics about travel vs driving for now) that I must have a ss #, a drivers "liscence" registration etc... and my state, "church" or brothers of the kingdom have previiusly told me no differently, ( such as w-8's or foreign itins through w-7 ,s) is that forced or imposed participation the action that naturalizes the person and subjugates him to all the other ideologies of the U.S govt , 14th amendment citizenry and its allegience and thus liability for the tax.

Evidence of a contract is not the nature and source of the contract.

I agree that it may be difficult to not participate in an evidence (B) while being a voluntary, knowing citizen (A) But (B) need not confirm or establish A if ther is evidence to contradict (A)
 
Last edited:

David Merrill

Seeker
Seeker
Joined
May 15, 2010
Messages
245
Likes
71
In and among the Lesson Plan a new suitor is admonished to renew his or her driver license and sign True Name only - first and middle names. If stopped and asked for the License Card the suitor stipulates: I am not showing you this card for Identification Purposes. I am showing it to you for competency purposes so that you know I have passed the driving tests and have a valid insurance policy. Furthermore I would like you to identify yourself clearly in case this goes to court so that you will testify that I have not given you this card to identify myself.


The officer usually goes to the privacy of his squad car for about ten minutes and returns the card, some times wishing the suitor has a nice day. However more than once the officer has called paramedics for a 'reality check' - Do you take medications etc...

In any event, if the ticket should make it to court the officer has failed to establish the suitor identified himself under the jurisdiction of the court.
 
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
2,990
Likes
1,466
In and among the Lesson Plan a new suitor is admonished to renew his or her driver license and sign True Name only - first and middle names. If stopped and asked for the License Card the suitor stipulates: I am not showing you this card for Identification Purposes. I am showing it to you for competency purposes so that you know I have passed the driving tests and have a valid insurance policy. Furthermore I would like you to identify yourself clearly in case this goes to court so that you will testify that I have not given you this card to identify myself.


The officer usually goes to the privacy of his squad car for about ten minutes and returns the card, some times wishing the suitor has a nice day. However more than once the officer has called paramedics for a 'reality check' - Do you take medications etc...

In any event, if the ticket should make it to court the officer has failed to establish the suitor identified himself under the jurisdiction of the court.
The DMVs will not issue a DL without an SSN, and your signed statement that you will comply with state codes. The DL is prima facie evidence that you are operating a motor vehicle for hire http://www.law.cornell.edu/anncon/html/amdt14b_user.html#amdt14b_hd34. This is how the cop and the system see you when you use a DL to identify yourself. You MAY be able to derail their machine in pretrial motions, but the onus will be upon you as one subject to the jurisdiction thereof.

An alternative would be to use some other way to identify yourself, take the inevitable ticket for driving without a license, then let THEM prove jurisdiction. You'll still have to make pretrial motions, but this way YOU ask the questions, and THEY justify their actions. You don't need to prove anything. Without the DL, SSN, and statement of commercial citizenship, they have no case.

Sorry if this is getting too far from the original topic.
 

AGG

Seeker
Seeker
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
467
Likes
121
In and among the Lesson Plan a new suitor is admonished to renew his or her driver license and sign True Name only - first and middle names. If stopped and asked for the License Card the suitor stipulates: I am not showing you this card for Identification Purposes. I am showing it to you for competency purposes so that you know I have passed the driving tests and have a valid insurance policy. Furthermore I would like you to identify yourself clearly in case this goes to court so that you will testify that I have not given you this card to identify myself.


The officer usually goes to the privacy of his squad car for about ten minutes and returns the card, some times wishing the suitor has a nice day. However more than once the officer has called paramedics for a 'reality check' - Do you take medications etc...

In any event, if the ticket should make it to court the officer has failed to establish the suitor identified himself under the jurisdiction of the court.
Evidence of having passed and understood the basic operating guidelines for traveling/driving could more rightly and objectively be done by terming it a a "diploma" or certificate of competancy on the same sized card. The word "liscense" seems to infer 14th amendment, federal, military, international and commercial law as if one is already a "bad guy" and needs a "liscense" for their activity.
That a "liscense" associated with federal 14th amendment U.S. citizenry is issued without other options (such as a diploma) being offered is an evidences of the fraud and extortiion being attempted.
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
2,990
Likes
1,466
Evidence of having passed and understood the basic operating guidelines for traveling/driving could more rightly and objectively be done by terming it a a "diploma" on the same sized card. The word "liscense" seems to infer 14th amendment, federal, military, international and commercial law as if one is already a "bad guy" and needs a "liscense" for their activity.
That a "liscense" associated with federal 14th amendment U.S. citizenry is issued without other options (such as a diploma) being offered is an evidences of the fraud and extortiion being attempted.
It's not a fraud, or extortion. It's merely the federal government assuring the states that their (U.S.) subjects will behave responsibly while conducting business upon the states' highways. It is a true license, meaning a permit to do something that the holder ordinarily would not be lawfully able to do otherwise, issued by a competent authority. Note the flag of the Commander in Chief while in their (U.S.) courts and DMV offices.

Again, sorry if this is outside the scope of the OP.
 

David Merrill

Seeker
Seeker
Joined
May 15, 2010
Messages
245
Likes
71
The DMVs will not issue a DL without an SSN...


Untrue. Since Social Security has nothing to do with competency to drive I presume you will find a similar statute in whatever state you are.

C.R.S. §42-2-107 (3)(a) If the applicant does not have a social security number, the applicant shall submit a sworn statement made under penalty of law, together with the application, stating that the applicant does not have a social security number.
 

Juristic Person

They drew first blood
Platinum Bling
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
5,480
Likes
3,431
An alternative would be to use some other way to identify yourself, take the inevitable ticket for driving without a license, then let THEM prove jurisdiction. You'll still have to make pretrial motions, but this way YOU ask the questions, and THEY justify their actions. You don't need to prove anything. Without the DL, SSN, and statement of commercial citizenship, they have no case.
Has this worked for you? Consistently?
 

AGG

Seeker
Seeker
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
467
Likes
121
Untrue. Since Social Security has nothing to do with competency to drive I presume you will find a similar statute in whatever state you are.
I believe opening a checking accounr used ti be the same. If it is a non inteeest bearing account, there was no stipulatiins demanding a ss#.
The bank was to maintain an address of record and that was about all.
 

AGG

Seeker
Seeker
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
467
Likes
121
It's not a fraud, or extortion. It's merely the federal government assuring the states that their (U.S.) subjects will behave responsibly while conducting business upon the states' highways. It is a true license, meaning a permit to do something that the holder ordinarily would not be lawfully able to do otherwise, issued by a competent authority. Note the flag of the Commander in Chief while in their (U.S.) courts and DMV offices.

Again, sorry if this is outside the scope of the OP.
I believe tbey are inter-related issues.

The fraud, and conversion of identity and property does not occur by insisting on the completion of a reasonable drivers education and testing; but as you said yiurself, that this certification is then declared to be and imposed to be a prima facia evidence of being a 14th amendment citizen, participating in commercia, international business and thus liable for the tax.

Passing a reasonable drivers/travelers competency exam is not the nature of the cause for the liability of the tax. What you implied was that an atatchment to commercial law was imposed by the word "liscense" and thus the imposition of 14th amendment, federal citizenry.
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
2,990
Likes
1,466
Untrue. Since Social Security has nothing to do with competency to drive I presume you will find a similar statute in whatever state you are.
Where does it say that the DL is a certificate of competency? It's a license.

But I welcome the cite C.R.S. §42-2-107 (3)(a). I could have used it a while ago.
 
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
2,990
Likes
1,466
Has this worked for you? Consistently?
The one time this happened to me personally, I made a mistake on my court date and forfeited. Four hundred bucks for noting the 14th instead of the 12th.

No. I can't say that any of this will "work" at all. But the philosophy is to make THEM do the work, not me. My days of teaching the judge are over. Now I demand the moving party produce pertinent documents and demand that the court follow the law.
 
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
2,990
Likes
1,466
Reading C.R.S. §42-2-107 (3)(a) a second time, I find the phrase before your quoted passage takes the mustard right off the hot dog:

"... an application for a driver's or minor driver's license shall include the applicant's social security number OR INDIVIDUAL TAXPAYER IDENTIFICATION NUMBER ISSUED BY THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, ... If the applicant does not have a social security number, the applicant shall submit a sworn statement made under penalty of law, together with the application, stating that the applicant does not have a social security number."
Shall include. And those capitals are in the original, so it's not just me shouting. If there was ever proof that the registrant must be subject to the jurisdiction thereof this is it!
 

AGG

Seeker
Seeker
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
467
Likes
121
Reading C.R.S. §42-2-107 (3)(a) a second time, I find the phrase before your quoted passage takes the mustard right off the hot dog:



Shall include. And those capitals are in the original, so it's not just me shouting. If there was ever proof that the registrant must be subject to the jurisdiction thereof this is it!
Not so; Itin can include foreign itins applied for through w-7's for non resident aliens including non-immigrant non resident aliens.. I would also think that the last sentence clarifies and negates the "shall include" as a absolute demand.

There is possibly other ways to travel without dancing their dance, but their is some rational and reasoning behind the impositions and questiions of ones "nature", citizenry and allegience.

As noted before, some bad/incorrect teachings of the 'church' including subjugatiin to the state as"higher powers" of Romans 13 and "the render unto ceasar" passage rather than the new covanent kingdom being the dejure self govorning dominion for new covt, new heavens/earth people is part of the present problems for this people.