Understanding This Identification

Before we delve into the case file (expediente) that was denied to us on September 6, 2011, it is useful to define terms and get a proper understanding of state Identification. This identification (called a cedula in Costa Rica) is similar in use and effect as the social security number in the United States. This SS number was created in the 1930's as part of Roosevelt's 'New Deal.' The number was simply an identification of an individual's registration to participate in government entitlement programs. The number was a tracking number for an account with the government which had now expanded beyond its original purpose and had entered the world of commercial insurance.

This tracking number was required for the recipient to recieve the bounty of government entitlements. In many countries this number has become a universal commercial tracking number for engaging in commercial activity.

It should be well understood that this number is not mandatory, but voluntary, and understandably many people are lured into 'free' entitlements. Also understand that the need for such a system was surreptitiously compelled onto the nation in times of financial duress. We must recognize that the financial duress was promulgated by the implementation of fiat currency and private banking which manipulated volumes of money available to the nation.

In 1933, Roosevelt initiated a ban on gold as a monetary system claiming that this was the cause of the demise and collapse. Roosevelt allowed the private banks under a national reserve system to own and control the volume of money. This money (Federal Reserve Notes) became the new fiat currency and being privately owned, interest (usury) needed to be paid. These social security numbers also became tax ID numbers whereby the people were then compelled to pay the usury through a graduated income tax (established in 1917 as a provisional war tax.) The government could borrow as much as it needed for its maintenance, social programs and interest in new wars and then simply pay the interest (usury) on the volume in circulation to the private money owners.

Nations that claim the God of Israel as their moral basis protect that moral base with a constitution as Costa Rica does in article 75. This allows protection for those who do not wish to participate in comprehensive government schemes which limit personal liability. It allows for people to pledge allegiance to other kings or democracies yet protects those who do not wish to pledge new allegiances with gods foreign to that spoken of in the constitution.

Responsibility is the corner stone of freedom. When government servants insist that participation is mandatory, they have given leave of their oaths of office to remain as servants and drifted into totalitarianism. When such occurs, we Israelites (homeless soujourners for 2500 years) find our shelter in Law.

We are prohibited from receiving such entitlements or registering with foreign and alien gods to receive 'free' entitlements. Israelites are also prohibited from practicing surety for the debts that accumulate on these fiat loans which eventually bankrupt the nation whereby it falls into national captivity by commercial contracts (debt enslavement.)

The constitution and law support this philosophy. Certain people mistakenly think this means we are 'above the law.' No, in fact we can still be brought to penalty in matters both civil (commercial contracts) and criminal. However, no one may be complelled to participate in entitlement programs. Such entitlements are available, just like any other commercial insurance making a tender offer.

Roosevelt may have dealt the people a new deal, but they did not have to pick up the cards. They voluntarily accepted the new comprehensive social insurance contract.

It is also critical to understand this: We do not advocate others do as we do. I believe people should engage in what ever rainy day insurance activity makes them feel secure, so long as it does not affect me. As for us, our choices are simplified. We do not practice religion or idolatry and as such, do not re-liege or create registries with such systems because we, as Israelites, are compelled by Law to be responsible for our own selves and that of our families.

We are now testing this in court, for either the public servants intend to be subservient to their oaths in the constitution (art. 11) or not. The United Nations entry into this equation via contract is irrelevant as are their declarations. The reason is simple. The state of Costa Rica contracts with the United Nations. We have no contracts with either and article 25 prevents forced association, whatsoever.

This is why the question of jurisdiction is absolutely critical. We either gave our children to the state through registry, or we did not. The judge and all involved refuse to acknowledge our jurisdictional challenge, and as such refuse to acknowledge their oaths to the constitution. The trouble the public servants now find themselves is that their actions have adversely affected my family in a criminal manner. Not only are they in violation of the constitution, they have violated the United Nation laws that they are a tribunal to.