Social Security: Mark of the Beast!

Bigger text (+)Smaller text (-)
Translate this Page!

mobpreviousbutton.jpg (2648 bytes) mobnextbutton.jpg (2403 bytes) mobtablebutton.jpg (3326 bytes)


Appendix J


The term "the United States" is used in the first sentence of the 14th amendment as something you can be born into.  Don't be tricked by this.  The term “the United States” can mean either the name of the government or the name of a geographical place.  If a form asks if you were born in the United States, do not assume that this refers to a geographical place.  It is asking if you were born into the government.

There is a big difference between "the United States" as a geographical place surrounded by a border and "the United States" as the name of a political unit.  The border existed before the government existed.  The government did not create the border. Governments don't determine where the border is.  The people who created government already had the territory that the new servants were hired to defend. Government Servants cannot extend the established geographic "United States", they can only extend the political (or corporate) "United States".  They can, and did, extend their jurisdiction beyond their federal territories (of Washington DC, Guam, Puerto Rico, US Virgin Islands, American Samoa and Northern Marianas Island) to anywhere and anything receiving federal funds.  This is entirely voluntary, and is done with the consent of those who are governed.  

Since your Constitution limits your federal government to Washington DC and the territories, it would be unconstitutional to tax anyone within a state.  Thomas Jefferson, while he was Vice-President, in the Kentucky Resolves, reassured us that there are only three federal crimes that apply within a state.  The three crimes mentioned in your Constitution: piracy, treason, and counterfeiting.  James Madison, in the Virginia Resolves also concluded that states had a right to interfere with the federal government’s laws it considered unconstitutional. 

US Supreme Court in Foley Brothers v. Filardo, 336 US 281:

"It is a well established principle of law that all federal legislation applies only within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States unless a contrary intent appears"

The Buck Act (4 U.S.C. § 104 to 113) creates taxable "Federal Areas" within States wherever your federal government sends aid.  This includes Social Security.  Now read Springfield v. Kenny, 104 NE2d 65.  If you want proof that you are an "individual entity" that is classified as a property franchise of your federal government, read the Supreme Court case Wheeling Steel Corp. v. Fox 298 US 193, 56 S.Ct 773.  As long as you have a link to your federal government, you are in a "federal area" that is subject to federal laws.  You would otherwise be outside your federal jurisdiction.  As long as you have a SSN, a resident driver license, a federal bank account, or even a zip code or a two letter federal area (I've read that these two letter abbreviations were created by the Secretary of the Treasury in 31 CFR Part 51.2, but I could not find a copy of this repealed regulation), or if you confess that you are in an all capitalized STATE, then you are receiving taxable federal benefits within a federal area.  Also see Howard v. Commissioners of Sinking Fund, 344 US 624.  Keep in mind that your federal legislature can not make laws for state citizens.  Congress can only make territorial laws, with few exceptions.  American Banana Co. v. US Fruit Co., 213 US 347 (1909).  US v. Spear, 338 US 217 (1949).  NY Central RR Co. v. Chisholm, 268 US 29 (1925).  Foley Brothers v. Filardo, 336 US 281 (1948).

Now back to my original question.  Which "United States" were you born in: the geographical or the political? 

Hint #1: In 1887 the Supreme Court in Baldwin v. Franks, 7 S.Ct 656, 662; 120 US 678, 690 said that:

"In the constitution and laws of the United States the word `citizen' is generally, if not always, used in a political sense...  It is so used in section 1 of article 14 of the amendments of the constitution..."

Hint #2: The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on the meaning of the first sentence of the 14th Amendment in Elk v. Wilkins in 1884 (112 US 94)  "The persons declared to be citizens are `all persons born or naturalized in the united states, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.'  The evident meaning of these last words is, not merely subject in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of the United States, but completely subject to their political jurisdiction, and owing them direct and immediate allegiance."

Hint #3: BIRTH DOES NOT ESTABLISH CITIZENSHIP according to Edwards v. California, 314 US 160 at page 183: “... birth within a state does not establish citizenship thereof.”

The legal definition of the word Birth has two meanings, natural birth or coming into legal existence.  Example: a corporation has a birth.  Birth is the event, such as signing a form that creates legal existence in the eyes of the law.  [It is a lot like Jesus telling Nicodemus that he must be born again, and Nicodemus couldn’t understand that Jesus was speaking of corporate law].  We become officers/employees/agents of the corporate body by such events as “entering into society” or “initiation” or “being recognized” or “coming into legal existence” not by natural birth. 

Now reread the first sentence of the 14th amendment and tell me if you were both (1) born or naturalized into the government (2) AND SUBJECT TO the jurisdiction thereof ?   

The Supreme Court in Roe v. Wade correctly stated, although irrelevant to the case, that the:

"... word `person' as used in the Fourteenth Amendment does not include the unborn." 

As I show in Appendix D, the word `person' does not include the Christian either.  To suggest that non-persons can be killed, is the same kind of laws that Hitler used. 

Persons have names in all capitalized letters.  Christian names are not in all capital letters. 

I am now going to prove that getting a Birth Certificate surrenders the child to the government. Don't take my word for it, just become familiar with the terminology, and then look at a birth certificate.  Try to get a copy of the document signed by the doctor, not just the computer printout.  

Black's Law Dictionary,

"Christian name": "The baptismal name as distinct from the surname.  The name which is given one after his birth or at baptism, or is afterward assumed by him in addition to his family name.  Such name may consist of a single letter."

Black's Law Dictionary, "Surname":

 "The family name; the name over and above the Christian name. The part of a name which is not given in baptism.  The name of a person which is derived from the common name of his parents.... The last name; the name common to all members of a family."

Gregg's Manual of English purportedly states:

 "A name spelled in all capital letters or a name initialed, is not a proper noun denoting a specific person, but is a fictitious name, or a name of a dead person, or a nom de guerre.”

Read that again.  A name spelled in all capital letters is the name of a dead person.  Your government considers you to be either a dead person or a fictitious name.

Black's Law Dictionary

"Fictitious Name":  "A counterfeit, alias, feigned, or pretended name taken by a person, differing in some essential particular from his true name (consisting of Christian name and patronymic), with the implication that it is meant to deceive or mislead."

Oxford Dictionary:

·         "nom": Used in expressions denoting a pseudonym, a false or assumed name."

·         "Nom de guerre": War name.  A name assumed by or assigned to a person engaged in some action or enterprise.

·         "Guerre": War, and as a verb, to wage war.

The US Government Style Manual, Chapter 3 requires only the names of corporate and other fictional entities, or those serving in corporate capacities to be in all capitalized letters.

For a deeper study on this capitalization topic, study

Now look at a birth certificate.  Is the baby's name in all capital letters?  Did the father name the baby or did the doctor, while exercising his duties as a licensed government agent, assign the name to the baby?  Is there any hint on the legal document that the father named the baby?  Does an all capitalized name differ in some essential particular from his true Christian name?  If so, the implication is that it is meant to deceive or mislead.  If not, then you've acknowledged that the all capitalized name is his true name, which cannot be a Christian name.  Does your state birth certificate laws use the word 'person' when referring to the name on the certificate?  

The government now has proof that the baby is a PERSON.  PERSONS have legal existence in the eyes of the law, and are subject to the statutes written by the legislature.  Sovereigns are above the law written by their servants.  The PERSON on the birth certificate will not be able to exercise the rights of a non-person.  You, like Esau, gave up your birthright, which will not pass to your children. 

There is something even more sinister here.  Government cannot know about matters of childbirth.  According to the Supreme Court’s famous Roe v. Wade decision “State criminal abortion laws... violate due process clause of Fourteenth Amendment protecting right to privacy”. That’s right!  The Supreme Court says childbearing must remain strictly private.  Why then is the doctor informing the government that a child was born?  I suspect that the doctor is required to register government property.  The government wants to secure another loan on the national debt and it needs collateral.  A UCC-1 financing statement is not necessary because pursuant to UCC 9-302:

 “The filing of a financing statement otherwise required is not necessary or effective to perfect a security interest in property subject to (1) A statute or treaty of the United States which provides for a national or international registration or a national or international certificate of title or which provides a place for filing different from that specified ...”

Is the doctor giving the baby to whoever owns the government?  2 Peter 2:3  (KJV)  "And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you ..."  Now, if you don't think the government is owned, look at a birth certificate and tell me why the STATE NAME is all capitalized.  Hint: it's not all capitalized in your original state constitution. 

Fictitious names exist for a purpose.  Fictions are invented to give courts jurisdiction.  Snider v. Newell, 44 SE 354.  That's right.  Corporations are fictions created by government.  Persons are also fictions created by government.  However, real Christians, being non-fiction, were protected against the courts.  They governed themselves. 

Can a Christian use an all capitalized fictitious name knowing that to do so is "...with the implication that it is meant to deceive or mislead"?  Now look at your driver's license or passport or birth certificate or voter registration.  Can a Christian use an all capitalized fictitious name on any ID?  Now go and try to get a government ID or birth certificate with a Christian name and see what happens.  You cannot do it.  Government cannot issue any ID with your Christian name on it.  CHRISTIANS CANNOT GET A GOVERNMENT ID CARD.  Christians are not part of their system, and DO NOT EXIST IN THE EYES OF THEIR LAW.  Only non-Christians can get an ID (mark) of the beast.  Only non-Christians can have a name of (of= created by) the beast.  Only non-Christians can get the (ID) number of the Beast's name (name=authority).   

Do you now confess that you have a mark of a beast, a name of a beast, and a number of his name? 

Fictions give courts jurisdiction.  Could a fictitious, all capitalized, name of your state government be an image of the beast?  The Greek word for image that is used in Revelation’s image of the beast is the Greek word icon (Strong’s 1504).  Synonyms: image, artifice, and fabrication.  Also see: ruse, expedient.  This icon that receives worship is not the same thing as an idol, which can also receive worship, although both are made by the hands of man. 

Without an ID card you will notice that you are denied the right to travel by car or by airline.  Nor can you cash a check or open a bank account or get a home phone.  Nor can you rent a Post Office Box (per Domestic Mail regulation DMM 951.142 even though the Post Office cannot accept a Social Security Card as identification).  You can still officially get a job without a SSN.  But soon, you will be officially unable to get a job.  Your papers are not in order.  Christians will be persecuted.  

If you want to try an exercise in frustration, try to get the phone company to send you your bill with your real name on it to your real address.  You cannot do it.  You must worship the state god in order to get phone service.  The state is the god that created the corporation.  Real people don't exist in the eyes of the law. 

Conclusion: as suggested by the Baldwin case quoted above, claiming that you are a US citizen (with a Birth Certificate, or on an SSN application) is enough proof that you were born into your federal government.  "A citizen of the United States is a citizen of the federal government..." (Kitchens v. Steele, 112 F.Supp 383).

Real people do not exist in the eyes of the law, because people are sovereigns, and the legislature cannot and does not write laws for their masters (Matt 10:24, and John 15:20).

Most government forms ask for a date of birth.  A date of birth on a government form is not the date you took your first breath, it is the date the instrument was signed that made you property of the government.  The UN is involved in "the official birth registration process" per Title 20, Code of Federal Regulations, section 422.103(b)(2).  

Here is further proof that government forms do not ask for the day you took your first breath: Hearsay is inadmissible in court.  Although you were present on your born-day, you were not aware of any specific calendar system on that day, nor does your memory serve you well.  It would be subornation of perjury for any government officer (with or without a form) to coerce you, under penalty of perjury, for inadmissible hearsay that you cannot recall.  Federal Rules of Evidence rule 602 prohibits you from telling them your birth day.  However, family records are admissible.

I read a brief article about an 1884 law textbook Parsons on Contracts with this quote from the chapter "Marriage is a Contract":

"since the state married them, the children were fruits of the state".

How did you delegate to your servants the authority to divorce man from wife contrary to Mark 10:9?  I knew that I could not cancel my neighbor's vows to God, so I knew that divorce court could not cancel anyone's vows to God.  It sounds too Catholic to me.  How can you delegate the authority to bastardize your neighbors' children? 

It turns out that we did not delegate this authority.  Apparently there are two meanings of the word `marriage', one meaning holy matrimony and the other refers to a status within the government. 

I always thought it peculiar that people who have a right to get married would have to beg civil servants for permission (license = permission) to get married.  I read the 1877 US Supreme Court decision Meister v. Moore, 96 US 76, that a marriage license was not required, nor do states confer the right to marry, and that marriage is based on contract.  This is consistent with the Bible, and it makes sense that the Supreme Court would confirm that this most sacred of family rights does not involve government.  Since your Constitution prohibits any state from impairing the obligation of contracts (Article 1, section 10), the sanctity of the family is safe from government interference. 

Then I read the 1888 US Supreme Court decision in Maynard v. Hill, 8 S.Ct 723, 125 US 190, where the Maynards had intermarried in the state of Vermont (meaning they had a license) and that marriage was NOT based on contract but upon a status, and the government could do whatever it wanted to do with the marriage because a state created the status of marriage.  Since this kind of marriage was not a commitment, there was no obligation of contract to be enforced.  Since there was no commitment of marriage, this bastardizes the children.  Sexual immorality is a crime against God. His punishment: Bastards cannot attend church even down to the tenth generation (Deuteronomy 23:2), and fornicators cannot go to heaven (1st Corinthians 6:9).  God has always abandoned any nation that allows sexual immorality. 

What is divorce?  Those who get married to the state can get divorced by the state.  Nowhere in the Bible does divorce cancel a marriage.  Divorce in the Bible refers to living separately.  Everywhere remarriage is mentioned in the Bible, it is equated to adultery.  Adulterers cannot go to heaven according to First Corinthians 6:9. Can a black robbed priest at your county synagogue cancel your vows to God? 

Family law is very diabolical.  The word “marriage” has several meanings.  Clergy that are authorized by the state to solemnize state licensed “marriages” can’t solemnize real marriages. They can only solemnize contracts with the state, the groom’s contract and the bride’s contract.  If you pay a fee for a marriage license, then you’ve agreed that you don’t have a right to marry, and furthermore, you’ve paid to have your family regulated by the state.  The presumption by the family court is that there has never been a commitment to a real husband-wife relationship, until death do you part.  Any evidence to prove that you had a commitment will be inadmissible.  Since there is no commitment, there is no marriage contract between the bride and groom.  Since there is no commitment, there is no man-wife relationship.  Since there is no commitment, all children are bastards.  The state claims all rights to bastards, therefore all children are subject to the state’s determination for “care, custody, education, and maintenance”

Perhaps children are indeed fruits of the state.  After all, when a slave owner allows two slaves to mate and they produce new property, the new property is registered in the owner's records.  Is your birth registered in your father's family bible, or is your birth registered in your owner's records? 

Asking for permission to get married is a confession that you do not have a right to get married.  By applying for a marriage license, you've waived your right to get married. 

Marriage is the joining together of a man and woman in order to raise a family.  GOD GIVES CHILDREN TO PARENTS (1st CHRONICLES 25:5 ).  PARENTHOOD IS A RIGHT GIVEN BY GOD.  By getting permission to marry, or by selling you children into slavery in order to get a tax deduction, or by accepting welfare, children become wards of the state.  1st Corinthians 7:23 says You were bought by Christ, do not become the slaves of men.  We are to be slaves to God (Romans 6:22, Galatians 1:10).  If you want to uphold the Lordship of Christ do not mark your children.

When the law says that the state cannot recognize a common law marriage, it doesn't mean you're not married.  It means the state cannot take your children nor divorce you.  God's laws prevail.  A common law marriage simply means that your family is not part of their corporation.  Your family does not have existence in the eyes of their laws.  But beware that there are multiple definitions of common law marriage.  They twist things around.  They will insist that a common law marriage is when a couple lives in sin.  In that case, there is no commitment, and the family court has jurisdiction.

Ignorance of the law is no excuse.  You should have known (as did the Supreme Court in Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 US 105 ) that "A state may not, through a license tax, impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the Federal Constitution."  By paying for a marriage license, you confessed that you did not have a right to get married.  The power to tax is the power to destroy.  What part of "let no man put asunder" don't you understand? 

Notice that the definition of a Christian name is a name that is given one after birth or at baptism, or is afterward assumed by him in addition to his family name.  You can assume a name that is not your government name.  Examples: Saul became Paul, Simon became Peter (Cephas in John 1:42), Zacchaeus became Matthew, Didymus became Thomas, and the Thaddaeus of Matthew 10:3 and Mark 13:18 became Judas son of James in Luke 6:16.  Even John the Baptist's father had to rename his son (Luke 1:63) after the Holy Spirit had filled him "even from his mother's womb" (Luke 1:15 KJV).  And when Joses became Christian, he was called Barnabas (Acts 4:36).  Just try assuming a Christian name and see what happens. 

There are dozens of early court cases to prove that you can use any name you want to.  However, merchants who control your buying and selling have been deceived by a beast power into asking for ID “proof that you are who you say you are.”  If these merchants were Christian, they should be saying: “I acknowledge your authority to be whoever you say you are.  Your authority to exist does not come from someone’s civil servants.  The government does not have a law impairing the obligations of contracts. 

Early court decisions confirm that Christians must have names, and must reveal their name in court, but non-Christians did not have to have names.  Non-Christians could be called anything, such as John Doe.  If a Christian was called by a name other than his own, he could abate the court proceedings by claiming that there was a “misnomer”.  Everything is backwards now.  Non-Christians get full government recognition with an all capitalized government name, and anyone who wants to keep their Christian name is treated as an enemy of the state.  And furthermore, contempt of court is a life sentence without a trial. 

More name games with children.  Government cannot know the names or birthdates or family relationships of your children.  Or even the existence of your children.  They cannot even ask!  Here are proofs that birth certificates are about government property, not about babies:

Roe v. Wade was a privacy case.  Government could not know about procreation or child rearing, thereby allowing abortion in the first trimester to go unpunished because the abortion laws were written in such that they “... violate due process clause of Fourteenth Amendment protecting right to privacy...”  Your family has a right to privacy.  Roe v. Wade went on to also state “Several decisions of this Court make clear that freedom of personal choice in matters of marriage and family life is one of the liberties protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.” 

Yeager v. Hackensack, 615 F.Supp1087, citing the authority of Roe v. Wade, confirmed that “Right to be free from compelled disclosure of names of household members is within right of privacy protected by Constitution.” 

Yeager v. Hackensack also confirmed that private utilities cannot request Social Security Numbers without first complying with the disclosure provisions of section 7(b) of the Privacy Act. 

Roe v. Wade cannot be an abortion case.  It is only a privacy case.  Proof #1: the Supreme Court will not hear cases unless the party is damaged (according to rules laid down in their Ashwander case).  Only Roe’s privacy was damaged.  Roe was not arrested for having an abortion.  Roe did not have an abortion, she gave birth to a son who remains an active critic of the abortion laws.  Proof#2: The abortion doctor who joined in the case was remanded back to state courts for his punishment. Roe v. Wade DID NOT legalize abortions.  A million repetitions of a lie do not make it true.

Matters of child bearing or child rearing must remain strictly private.  This cannot be overemphasized.  Asking for the birth date of a child is such a gross violation of privacy, it is like asking to watch the birth!  I offer the following proof that matters of child bearing require this level of privacy: the Supreme Court in Bowers v. Hardwick recognized that sodomy laws must be enforced because “The right to privacy does not extend to acts of consensual sodomy between homosexual adults”.  Procreation is private.  Sodomy cannot be private.  Any bureaucrat who asks for a child’s birthdate is violating your most sacred family privacy.  Treat him like you would treat Herod. 

According to rules of evidence your family records, or records of religious organizations are just as valid as records of state vital statistics made to a public office (these are under the hearsay exception rules -- which say that hearsay is not admissible except for these three pages of exceptions which are admissible).  The main difference is that government documents are self-authenticating.

Here is a challenge: You can overturn Roe v. Wade if you can find ANY government form that compels the disclosure of a child’s name or birthdate or existence.  [Unless, of course, the child is the government’s child.  Government property must be regulated.  Which kind are your children?] 

Midwives are now “required” to report home births to government so that a birth certificate can be issued, and a SSN will be issued pursuant to the GATT treaty .  Midwives under Pharaoh were also required to report the birth of Moses; so that civil government could process him (Acts 7:19) but these midwives lied to their government.  Quiz: Is it right or is it wrong for Midwives to lie to government?  When Jesus was a baby, all little boys in Bethlehem were to be processed by civil government.  Is it right or wrong to escape lawful government processing of children? 

For the advanced student:

In Maynard v. Hill the Supreme Court referred to the Maynard's marriage with the term `status', and every occurrence of the term `status' was in italics.  I never found out what the italics signifies.  If you want to do some research, find out what italics means in Supreme Court decisions, and keep in mind that Social Security is also not based on contract, but upon a status. I was also about to study the Sheppard-Towner Maternity Act of 1921, 42 Stat 224, formerly 42 U.S.C. § 161-175, and the Federal Birth Registration areas of 1929, and Meeker v. US, 350 US 199, and Chapter 135 sect 9, 42 U.S.C. § 225 which gave the Children's Bureau power to enter homes and take children. 

Galatians 5:1  (NIV)  "It is for freedom that Christ has set us free.  Stand firm, then, and do not let  yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery."


mobpreviousbutton.jpg (2648 bytes) mobnextbutton.jpg (2403 bytes) mobappendixbutton.jpg (3341 bytes) mobtablebutton.jpg (3326 bytes)

NOTICE: Steven Dudley Miller, editor, is not affiliated with Freedom School.
NOTICE: If anything in this presentation is found to be in error a good faith effort will be made to correct it in timely fashion upon notification.
       Specialty Areas

All the powers in the universe seem to favor the person who has confidence.
More & Other Information - Resource Pages
Admiralty related items Belligerent Claimant
BondsAttention Signing the Constitution Away
Citizenship / nationality related itemsEducation
Jerry KirkAware
JurisdictionLaw related items
Lewis MohrLuis Ewing
MoneyOath related items
Reading MaterialReading Room
StuffTax matters
Travel related
AntiShyster MagazineVideo
NOTICE: The information on this page was brought to you by people who paid this website forward so that someone such as you might also profit by having access to it. If you care to do so also please feel encouraged to KEEP THIS SITE GOING by making a donation today. Thank you. Make donation with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure!

Freedom-School is not affiliated with the links on this page - unless otherwise stated.
This enterprise collectively is known and generally presented as "" - "we," "us" or "our" are other expressions of used throughout. "You" is in reference to the user / visitor.

This is the fine print that so important. Freedom School and other information served is so for educational purposes only, no liability expressed or assumed for use.
The information you obtain at this site is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice.
Freedom School does not consent to or condone unlawful action.
Freedom School advocates and encourages one and all to adhere to, support and
defend all Law which is particularly applicable.
Information is intended for [those] men and women who are not "US CITIZENS" or "TAXPAYERS" - continued use, reference or citing indicates voluntary and informed compliance. Support is not offered.

Freedom School is a free speech site, non-commercial enterprise and operation as
there is no charge for things presented. site relies on this memorandum and others in support of this philosophy and operation.

The noteworthy failure of [the] government or any alleged agency thereof to at any time rebut anything appearing on this website constitutes a legal admission of the fidelity and accuracy of the materials presented, which are offered in good faith and prepared as such by Freedom School and any and all [third] parties affiliated or otherwise. THIS IS AN ELECTRONIC AGREEMENT AND IS A LEGALLY BINDING CONTRACT, EQUIVALENT TO A SIGNED, WRITTEN CONTRACT BETWEEN PARTIES - If the government, or anyone else, wants to assert that any of the religious and/or political statements appearing on this website are not factual or otherwise in error, then they as the moving party have the burden of proof, and they must responsively meet that burden of proof under the Administrative Procedures Act 5 U.S.C. § 556(d) and under the due process clauses found in the Fifth, Sixth, and Seventh Amendments to the national Constitution BEFORE there will be response to any summons, questions, or unsubstantiated and slanderous accusations. Attempts at calling presented claims "frivolous" without specifically rebutting the particular claim, or claims, deemed "frivolous" will be in deed be "frivolous" and prima facie evidence that shall be used accordingly. Hey guys, if anything on this site is found to be in error a good faith effort will be made to correct it in timely fashion upon notification. is not responsible for content of any linked website or material.
In addition, users may not use to engage in, facilitate or further unlawful conduct;
use the service in any way, or manner, that harms us or anyone connected with us or whose work is presented;
damage, disable, overburden, or impair the service (or the network(s) connected to the site)
or interfere with anyone's use and enjoyment of the website.

All claims to be settled on the land - Austin, Travis county Texas, united States of America, using Texas Common Law.
All parts of this contract apply to the maximum extent permitted by law. A court may hold that we cannot enforce a part of this contract as written. If this happens, then you and we will replace that part with terms that most closely match the intent of the part that we cannot enforce. The rest of this contract will not change. This is the entire contract between you and us regarding your use of the service. It supersedes any prior contract or statements regarding your use of the site. If there exists some manner of thing missing we do not forfeit our right to that thing as
we reserve all rights.
We may assign, or modify, alter, change this contract, in whole or in part, at any time with or without notice to you. You may not assign this contract, or any part of it, to any other person. Any attempt by you to do so is void. You may not transfer to anyone else, either temporarily or permanently, any rights to use the site or material contained within.

GOOGLE ANALYTICS: While we do not automatically collect personally identifiable information about you when you visit the site, we do collect non-identifying and aggregate information that we use to improve our Web site design and our online presence.
Visitors to this site who have Javascript enabled are tracked using Google Analytics. The type of information that Google Analytics collects about you includes data like: the type of Web browser you are using; the type of operating system you are using; your screen resolution; the version of Flash you may be using; your network location and IP address (this can include geographic data like the country, city and state you are in); your Internet connection speed; the time of your visit to the site; the pages you visit on the site; the amount of time you spend on each page of the site and referring site information. In addition to the reports we receive using Google Analytics data, the data is shared with Google. For more information on Google's privacy policies, visit:
Here is Google´s description of how Google Analytics works and how you can disable it: "Google Analytics collects information anonymously, and much like examining footprints in sand, it reports website trends without identifying individual visitors. Analytics uses its own cookie to track visitor interactions. The cookie is used to store information, such as what time the current visit occurred, whether the visitor has been to the site before, and what site referred the visitor to the web page. Google Analytics customers can view a variety of reports about how visitors interact with their website so they can improve their website and how people find it. A different cookie is used for each website, and visitors are not tracked across multiple sites. Analytics requires that all websites that use it must update their privacy policy to include a notice that fully discloses the use of Analytics. To disable this type of cookie, some browsers will indicate when a cookie is being sent and allow you to decline cookies on a case-by-case basis."

Presentation Copyright© 2007, 2019
All Rights Reserved