Birth Certificate Estate-Two Birthdates Exposed!!!

Also worth noting that the "X" is also a reference to Christ on the cross. Even more importance to being reborn, yes?

If you have a suggestion for a anon one use email provider I'd consider setting something up and posting the address.

send an email or contact here:

[email protected]

interesting.

so i wonder if the chi rho mark i previously mentioned is considered to them as an "X" also?

frances bacon had a crafty pen name (will i am shakes spear)his spear of choice was a might pen indeed.

im not sure yet about removing oneself altogether, obtaining that white stone seems more workable to me.

Looks like it. Old news that the Catholic church is deeply tied into the origins and continued administration of the system though. None of that symbolism surprises me.

I guess that depends on what one considers as removing altogether. Removing altogether sounds like actual (not metaphorical) death so no, not that.

is the BC actually property of the BAR instead of the state?

it was mentioned somewhere that the deceptive BC practices may be grounds for the largest class action suit in history but if the information that was recently released is correct (owned by BAR) then bringing a class action against them probably wouldnt work out too well.

many think the system is corrupt, probably more than not at this point. i think some locals are more than others and it depends on the people (agents/officials) in each sub system (county)

this is why iamsomedudes ideas are appealing to me but KWs also and maybe moreso because his approach seems easier and more direct.

anyway, the latest recording on legaldeceptions talkshoe conference call, a guy who goes by "blue lotus traveler" added a new angle. well worth a listen IMO.

was pro "authentication" though. Im still undecided about that.

does anyone know of other documents that might also be subject to the same authentication process?

can a land patent or other alodial title to something be recorded, then a certified copy of that made, then someone take that certified copy (other than the actual owner) and have it authenticated?

because, if that is the case and the authenticated copy is just as good as the original then there would be two owners with full title (supposedly) to the same property. that cant be correct.

anyone here have an idea of how we could test (prove)this authentication process?

it seems that if it is possible to make a certified copy as good as the original this way then then maxim "first in time, first in line" would kick in and the original if still held, would still be valid and the authenticated copy would not.

but maybe the authentication on the BC works because those who hold the original would not dare to step up? otherwise it seems to me it wouldnt work.

Curious has anyone actually filed for the Live BC? If so did it allow you to have anymore rights that previous? Some say it causes the 3letter dudes to come knocking.. and bank accts to be messed with.. (and these are those who have filed). I am so curious what is the easiest and best way to become sovereign... and have it actually afford one the right to protect their assets and the living breathing being.


Also is there a place where those who KNOW the truth meet outside this Forum (online of course)? A place where the facts are laid out for all to see?

I will read from the Beginning.. To say that I have it all figured out... NO WAY..

I have thought i had it figured out and then I saw my friends be put in jail. One friend is no longer even searchable in the sys.. and no one knows where he is. SO until I see someone who has actually had success there is NO sane way for me to say with any authority that I have it figured out.. and yes.. regarding my last posts I have been at this for a while.. and recently I was asked to fill out a doc.. which I am happy to share with you via email.. called a Certificate of Live birth. This is pertaining to David Wynns material.

We have used something called a Copyclaim

[link to dwmlc.com]

Last Edited by EarthKin on 05/16/2016 05:36 PM

what do you mean by "filed for the Live BC"?

ive directed readers here to in depth info and discussion on this topic, some of that gets into the visits by men in black and bank accounts, also asset and life protection. i was hoping others would review it so we could kick around some of the ideas here.

read this thread, or at least the reply to your previous post here please. judging from your past threads here, I thought you had it figured out more than this. LOL

FWIW some of the "facts" as i comprehend it, are not to be published/publicized/public.

has anyone copyrighted their signature?

anyone know when/where the initial usage of last name first followed by first name then middle name?

example DOE, John Henry

I just have noticed your editions. very sorry to read about your friend. stuff like that is why i take this seriously and also why Im so sad that these serious topics have so little response here.

who asked you to fill out a COLB? was not a COLB filed out and recorded when you came out of your mother? or are you saying you had trouble obtaining the COLB so you had to get a court order to obtain the COLB?

I think DWMs process has merit for sure but way to complicated to be of much use in the short term. his usage of present tense words only is solid i think but he takes it way beyond just that.

A couple points to add to my earlier posts:

Interesting scene in Men in Black when Smith's BC, all caps name, etc are deleted. He says he is now above the system. It's interesting how movies seem to convey much different messages after learning about the "system".

Regarding COLB/BC authentication, according to 28USC1733 (33, eh?), authenticated documents are considered equal to originals for evidentiary purposes. Iow, authenticated COLB/BC carries the same authority as the original. If you possess an authenticated birth record then you possess the original.

Oops, my mistake. Didn't read the recent posts yet. Someone already mentioned the 1733 reference a few posts above.

Perhaps the "Men in Black" refers to the Saturnalia priests.

Hmm, "bugs" that take over, consume every living thing, running around lower Manhattan...lol...could he be talking about bankers? Interesting movie to rewatch if you haven't lately.

i dont recall that sceen from MIB but that is interesting and would seem to be more inline with voiding the BC instead of authenticating, no? and maybe a reference to Revelation 2:17

"He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it"

pay special attention to the word "overcometh" in this passage, could that be what Smith is saying "now above the system"?

heres where Im at with the authentication proccess. from my post above:




at this time, i think an authenticated instrument is only equal to an original if the original is lost or the holder of the original is not willing for whatever reason (fraud exposure?) to present the original.

Interesting question.



Refer to your state's Secretary of State website. According to mine, anything signed by notary can be authenticated. Some documents such as court records, vital records and corporation commission documents can be authenticated but can not be notarized. Seems most anything can be authenticated as long as it's notarized.



Neither you nor the original holder are the owners unless the property was purchased with lawful money. Even the individual that -thinks- they are the owner (unless it's the Crown, of course) is only a tenant according to the Deed of Trust. Interesting idea though and worth exploring! Reminds me further of the piracy angle.

^^^Dammit, I can figure out the matrix but can't figure out the stupid quote system on glp. smh

that could be argued either way and there seems to be more evidence for FRNs than against by an overwhelming margin.

Ive seen no evidence that specifically shows otherwise to support the "lawful money" theory. i get the concept but dont buy it.

if that were absolute truth though, there would be plenty of very specific evidence on record of it. why is such evidence so illusive?

My thoughts in bold. Btw, red text guy gave me a bum email address! 550 mailbox not available message. Weird.

Any way:



28USC1733 doesn't say that, however. Just says it's equal to the original. Of course, the holder of the original or subsequent copies wouldn't present it like you say. The original, from my understanding, is held by the issuing state and only copies are circulated. Subsequent copies wouldn't be presented either because they've probably been rehypothecated a hundred times over, like bankers are known to do with every asset they get a hold of.

I'm in the process of ordering the various records.

I'm not clear what you mean to convey in this post. The use of FRNs can never purchase anything, only take useful possession but never title. The title remains with the creditors. Same reason that an auto loan means the automobile title is turned over the first lien holder, the bank, and the second lien holder, the state. You only receive a copy of the title even after it is "paid off". Funny money can't buy anything, only provide useful possession. Clarify?

well, like i said (wrote) i get the concept but why is finding any official state evidence that specifically backs up basically what you just wrote?

this LM "theory" only seems to be proposed by a small handful of people and not by any major players, corporations, states or nations.

trade (commerce) makes the world go round and FRNs have played the largest role in that for a long time now. if there was any truth to the LM theory, finding any verifiable evidence that supports it would not be illusive, it would be common knowledge.

FWIW ive ben editing quoted posts with html tags manually.

to break up a quote section into multiples, ive been copy/pasting the leading and trailing code in brackets of the quote to add into the quote to split it up.

not sure if you can do it some other way here if javascripting is enabled because i dont enable it here.

i cant stress to you enough that the data dump with KW stuff is pure gold. the guy nails it with just the facts. the facts that are beyond question.

it takes some time to digest and im going over the audios for the second time now.

the jist of it is this though: the COLB is a life certificate and the BC is a death/debt certificate.

ive learned more concrete facts from KW on this subject in a very short time than I have in years from all other combined.

Ive shared several solid gold tid bits that ive picked up from him here but nearly all of them have been overlooked. not by you specifically but lack of comments in general.

lack of comments on this topic here from the many bright minds on GLP is sad, but lack of comments on KWs stuff by the few who are posting on this thread is astonishing to me.

oh well.. Im not sure how long the data dump will be there either, its private info and im sure it was not supposed to be published. probably got posted publicly available by by accident but that accident has helped me more than i can put in words here and thats why I keep sayin'

seems those who are ment to have that info will get it. just hope the honorable and diligent seekers here dont mis out on it. we are the rarest of the rare and this is for us IMO



keep us posted!

I have downloaded the data but peeps only have so much time in a day to siphon through all of the info (and separate it from the mountains of disinfo out there also) while not getting burned out. Like you said previously there is no more complicated topic than this undertaking, particularly without mentors. It requires wearing the hats of a lawyer, a banker, a politician, a biblical scholar, etc all at once. Not an undertaking that many people are qualified for.

If the COLB is solely a record of being born (not "birth", since the "birth" is a maritime term) why is it on bank note paper and issued with tracking numbers? I agree there is another record issued from it but the COLB does have the markings of being more than solely a record of being born, imo.

Have you ever read Invisible Contracts? If not, add it to your reading list. It was one of the biggest eye-openers that started me on this path. Anything you consent to creates a contract, even if you aren't aware of the terms of the contract nor the history behind it.
[link to www.constitution.org]

I don't agree that a lack of state evidence means anything. Court cases are routinely suppressed from official records and only precedence setting cases (generally appeals courts or higher) are publicly published. I used the example of automobiles since it's something most everyone can relate to. You never hold title, only a copy that you transfer to another upon "sale". That is why the "buyer" with the notarized title is directed to go to the DMV for a "new" title. The state is simply updating who the renter of the automobile is for taxation purposes so it can be seized. Considering how few are even aware of such as concept (never mind exercising it) as lawful money I'm not surprised there's little concrete information about it, especially in official state publications.

It is becoming more out in the open, however.
[link to boingboing.net]

good, i suggest starting with the audio recoded last.

the COLB i have is not on bank note paper, i described it earlier here but it is a photocopy of the doc my mom filled out titled "Certificate of Live Birth" it is a form that she filled out, all the info is in her hand writing except the other signatures. it is old though since they got it from dept of health so I could be enrolled into 1st grade.

it does have "informants signature" box and a note that says "parent sign here" and that is where she signed it.

that last audio has two women that are not on all the others and they give some great info then KW comes in late and they discuss alot about it.

just be sure to review as much of that material as you can before doing anything. thats what im doing now. also consider it (and everything else on this topic) suspect and use discernment but also verify when possible, I havnt been disappointed with any of it yet.

im pretty sure at this point that i will be following KWs path but still need to iron out the details. i will keep you updated here when i get right down to putting it in writing officially.

I think I have read that and have it all in one .pdf somewhere.

im aware of the car title slight of hand and the financing scam of it too. a Bill of Sale is a title in fact but cant get that for a new auto, there is an MSO (Manufacturers Statement of Origin) for new autos that is title but very difficult to get.

but even if one gets beyond those scams, the name they use is at the heart of all this so if you have a perfect title even paid in the so called "lawful money" or gold for that matter, if the name is not yours then its all useless.

youve obviously got plenty of study in on this stuff, i have spent a great deal of time studying also so that has helped me quite a bit and so now with KWs insights, things are clicking into place like never before! i think you will feel the same about it. its been a huge relief for me also.

that deal with GM has nothing todo with lawful money, they are using the intellectual property copyright angle following the software examples to license autos instead of selling them outright. it will be that way with everything before too long.

This is anti Biblical. Gods law is based on consent, the fact that no living thing consents to being born. All that is on the father and the mother until the child is old enough to give informed consent. Jesus was 30 when he was baptized.

Jesus was real by the way. Your just finding the knowledge you seek to a specific topic, this makes you think Jesus was an allegory for banking. The Bible is the book of knowledge, apply any topic of confusion to it and you will find the truth you seek.

The GM/Deere article is conditioning for people to knowingly accept that they don't own anything and never will. No, it doesn't have anything to do with lawful money, per se, but it does show that when you use the imaginary debt currency to "purchase" something, you never actually "own" it, just became a licensee exercising useful possession. The issuer of the currency is the owner. The "buyer" never owns the "money" that enabled the possession so how can the "buyer" own whatever the "money" obtained? That principle will go into hyperdrive once everything is digital and controlled by software, including the money. I consider it one of those invisible contracts.