Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [tips_and_tricks] Admissibility of certificates, etc.

Expand Messages
  • Frog Farmer
    ... ... Forget looking for stuff for the land. Just worry about what you can find for the imaginary state of California. The land was here way
    Message 1 of 2 , Dec 24 6:37 AM
      Crgpntr wrote:

      > Admissibility of certificates, etc.
      > I have been searching for a corresponding act or statute here for the
      > land known as California.

      Forget looking for stuff for the land. Just worry about what you can
      find for the imaginary "state" of California. The land was here way
      earlier, and will remain way later. Natural law here is still supreme.

      > I so far have not even been able to find a
      > copy of an act or statute that spells out where this certification is
      > admissible as facts/truth and admissible in court.

      I'll look for something that will make it clearer for you. It's all in
      the witnessing of the oaths, of course, and if you read this list for
      any time at all, you know what's going on with them in California.

      > Specifically, what would make a Certificate of live birth admissible
      > as truth/facts of that event so certified?

      "Certified" MEANS it is true! But (if law is important to you) you
      still need real officers to "admit" it, so there's "no problemo"
      (California lingo), unless you NEED someone to approve of something for
      you. I don't need approval, so I do not suffer from the vacuum of
      qualified acceptors for certificates of any type. See California
      Constitution Article XX, section 3. Most Californians handle this
      vacuum the way a few die-hard East Germans handle the lack of that old
      Wall. They pretend things are the way they'd like them to be, and they
      pretend that mere neighbors are really state officers, so they can thus
      secure "approval".

      > At this time I am not in the position to give pictures of debt notes
      > for this information.

      Who wants mere pictures?! Send the debt notes themselves! Registered
      ones ("certified") would be nice!

      > Payment for this information by pictures of debt notes would not be an
      > option for me.

      Nor for anyone!

      > I am a tile setter and would be willing to trade if remuneration is
      > needed.

      I am a man capable of setting tile, but am in no way limited to that
      single activity and could never be pigeon-holed thusly. If I had to
      describe myself by the things I do in trade for food, clothing and
      shelter, it would take a small book. "Jack of All Trades" is the
      shortest I could do, but that carries such a negative connotation today
      when specialization seems to be the preferred method of securing ones
      temporal comforts.

      I think your answers lie in dictionaries and archived posts and Google
      results and would never want remuneration to answer your simple
      question, "that spells out where this certification is admissible as
      facts/truth and admissible in court." There is only a court in
      California if you pretend there's one, filled only by "officers" you
      elevate to the position out of your own necessity. Anyone relying
      solely upon law and fact will have to point out to you that any
      "judgments" rendered by your imaginary court and imaginary "officers"
      cannot be enforced upon them sans their own consent, the same way a few
      old East Germans remain behind the imaginary Wall they choose to pretend
      still exists. What used to be, not always IS. Nothing is quite as sure
      as change. Relax, if you're in California, you can be free (if you
      really want to be)! NOTE: the majority here does NOT value freedom
      enough to read and heed their own laws, so don't go by appearances! It
      really does not matter what the majority "thinks" because the truth is,
      THEY DON'T! And nobody takes the polls to determine current majority
      consensus anyway, and by the time they did, it would have changed. As
      Grace Slick sings in the song "Mexico", "no, no no no no no nobody


    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.