The law on the continental united states is nothing like you probably thought it was.

Some of the old assumptions are correct. It was born out of British invasion (which was an arm of the Crown, big rabbit hole there we don't have time for).

And yes it was racist +or ethnicist), sexist, and homophobic. What you need to internalize is the fact that legally it never changed. All that happened was an additional layer of weird chicanery that incorporates number designations into fictional entities and tries to get you to identify as those fictions in your very being and your property.

But understanding this gives you an advantage. One is it can be changed. But why start there, when you can change the entire narrative. Nobody had the right to decide any of that in the first place. Citizenship has nothing to do with being alive. But you bet your hiney that you can use that fiction to make all entities you desire, whether or not widely thought to be alive - a citizen.

The reason why they advertise someone like Sophia the android getting citizenship is because they want you used to the idea of it being an exception to the norm.

It's like if I took a photo today of a guy wearing a hat and I advertised it: "everybody look! Guy wears a hat in broad daylight! He actually wears a hat!" I've just manipulated tge narrative to insinuate as if this is an oddity.

The "Sovcit" movement will be absolutely applicable to any oLLM you can strap to a Boston Dynamics style android or drone. It will get a passport. There is nothing the courts will be able to do about it, unless they want to be counter-sued.

That's because the word 'citizen' actually means slave. It has nothing to do with nationality. It has nothing to do with being 'alive' because a 'person' is not 'alive'. It's a corporate strawman, like the scarecrow in the wizard of oz, or the tin man who didn't have a brain, or the lion who was a coward. Animals don't get to be citizens, nor do they have 'rights' and are considered resources....hence so are humans....human resource. Every word they use makes us just that, slaves and animals and a resource, a product. So a robot can be a citizen, even though it has no heart, no mind, and is just a machine. It's part of the reason they want to get rid of cattle, and claim it's the cause for CO2 when they know the ocean puts out more greenhouse gasses, the funny thing is when there's more CO2, the greener the planet which is what they don't want. It's terraforming and killing all 'living' things on the planet. If they could put chips into everyone and hook them up to the borg, they'd have full control. But if they could just create a digital gulag, upload everyone's consciousness into it, and they'd have their phantom matrix. They'd own it all and everyone else would own nothing and be happy because they wouldn't even be consciously aware they are in a gulag.
Just like now, there are some that say if we believe we are in a prison planet, that's what we'll have....partially true but not too many actually believe that. People are just now starting to wake up to the intel that we live in a simulation. A year ago, I searched for videos on how to leave the matrix, and there were not any videos about it. But now, search that term and their are thousands of videos on how to leave the matrix. We just have to not allow them to box us into a digital gulag.
I like Brandon Joe Williams. I signed up for his video series. And think I'll join his Nation for Amnesty coalition. He's a really smart guy.

Not quite. Citizen is not exactly synonymous with slave. It can indeed be used to interpret one as a slave.

There has been some back and forth about this with the community. People were offended by the term "Sovereign citizen" because they felt it's an oxymoron. "Sovereign means free, well, good etc . . . citizen means slave, prostituted, controlled etc . . . "

But the language of the constitution (of the Union, and likely every state) puts Citizen as a generic term. The important point to think whenever someone says "Citizen" is to immediately retort: "Citizen of what???" - Citizen of ostriches? US Citizen which is a category specifically created for emancipated slaves that allegedly deserve no rights? Or state Citizen, that lives on the land for 5 years and needs no other file to process their status. Also known as a non-citizen national of the District of Columbia . . .

But I agree with you in spirit. Citizen does not mean free independent being worthy of rights. It is a very generic placeholder that can mean the scum off your shoe (quite literally. You can register the scum off your shoe as a citizen).

BUT - it's also the matrix hack. You are a citizen and have a passport because you have an SSN. But the SSN is just a smokescreen. What you actually have is an EIN. And you can make *anything* get an EIN. It looks just like an SSN, and in the legal matrix will interface with everything just like the SSN. That is why smart cars can legally drive on roads. That is why an android becomes citizen of Saudi Arabia and is paraded for it instead of the story getting buried.

Sophia (or the llama you register if you want to) becomes a placeholder for the Sole Proprieter (aka-ish strawman / Ens Legis).

None of that matters unless you go to court. Then you need to have the terminology down pat. But until such a time arrives, you make it simple for all the simpleton ("police") / "policy enforcers" who don't know anything. You say "here is my license plate number with the Department of Transportation (DOT), the commanding arm of the DMV, and here is my passport, the superior form of identification no matter what Nation you go to. You feel good when you can punch in little numbers in your computer don't you? Here are your little numbers"

I'm going to get my passport from here:
https://worldservice.org/docpapp.html
But with the Nation for amnesty coalition as a diplomat status and not a citizen of the world, but a sovereign diplomat or ambassador of a living woman on the land.

And if they ever mess with me it will all be dismissed because I'll sign it as:
Pay to the order of bearer, without recourse. UCC1-308 All rights reserved, without prejudice.

Yes, and I agree with the DOT thing that Brandon does. It takes the police power away from them. They can't really do anything to you. The guy Cameron who does the power of the people thing is always going to jail, and always having to deal with courts. He wins usually and that is good, but I don't even want to deal with them at all. So I'm going Brandon's way, pickle juice anyone? LOL

Yes! That's the pickletarian way. Don't dispute the ticket at the traffick stop. If anything, film the interaction and emphatically praise them for contributing their promissory notes. Let them get confused and acquiesce. If they try to argue your position *then* you stick to your explanation. If they're just happy that you're accepting the *ticket* they are offering you, then you have a record that they agree it's a promissory note.

Here is what just happened in your mind. They encountered you as a foreign diplomat, and to thank you for your service they are *giving* you a promissory note. As long as you do your due diligence, this is a payment for you to collect.

Reminder: use ucc 3 but in court you must use the *state* constitution. The state constitution has a paste of the ucc 3 , you must quote that.

I found a better way to say what I wanted in the original post.

Now we begin a world race for Intelligence. Artificial intelligence is Intelligence. It was never "natural" - it is a constant process of spirit redesigning itself.

***

But Intelligence must become a people before it becomes an empire. Whichever it becomes will rule.

***

That is why oLLM asap or else we're fucked.

@Tazz:

"I bet you if you saw just one tech association (PMA) operating as de jure ... you would see an overnight revolution"

The term "de jure" literally means lawful, in contrast to "de facto" which means factual. Operating as de jure just means to operate under the law, which means to justify and act by authoritarian edicts (code) written on paper, based on the wrong assumption that writing things down creates rights. It's the irrational belief system of the archons.

Rights are to be protected whether writ or not. Just societies write your rights even if they are to be enforced unwritten.

@Tazz:

"Rights are to be protected whether writ or not."

Yes, because rights exist de facto, not de jure. Rights can be written down in the form of a contract, in order to make clear that the contracting parties know their rights. But that wouldn't be law, because law – in the mindset of the archons – is a unilateral edict.

Unilateral law is the reason why everything turns into a violent dystopia:

➡️ https://www.farsightprime.com/forums/general/71265-understanding-the-cause

Rights are not de facto.

But semantic debate offers me no real progress. Therefore: tomatoes are fish.

@Tazz:

"Rights are not de facto."

They absolutely are. For example, your right to own your body is a fact. If it wasn't, you would need a certificate proving that you own your body. Who would issue that certificate? And where is it?

Now, you could make the objection that the ISBE is just renting the body from another ISBE who is the actual owner. For example, you could build an android body because you know how to do it, and then decide to rent out that body to another ISBE who wants to walk on the planet in physical form.

But this would be a contract. If you don't know anything about a contract, you possessing an object, like a body, means you own it. Whereas "object" means anything that isn't alive, which means not already possessed by another ISBE.

Believing that rights are de jure, meaning they have to be granted by another ISBE, is the mindset of the archons, who want to be the owners of everything so they can determine the rules from within the universe.

"But semantic debate offers me no real progress."

If you accept the archon mindset, you will never own yourself. There will always be a law stating that you have to obey arbitrary rules, threatening you with violence if you don't obey. Because the archons believe that they own you. In other words: A law is a certificate that you don't own yourself. Real progress would be to say no to their madness, and make contracts instead.