The girls spent a small fortune just to get legal

[palani]

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5iFwoVrdpCMJdVReFg1wAaYNQ2z0Q?docId=d39f084b6 86a4d62a44bea5a8d1a196c

Ky. sisters sue to get Social Security numbers

By BRETT BARROUQUERE, Associated Press – 1 day ago


LOUISVILLE, Ky. (AP) — According to the federal government, two sisters in rural Kentucky do not exist.

The women weren't born in a hospital, never went to public school and only recently obtained birth certificates after they sued the state. Still, that's not enough for Raechel and Stephanie Schultz to land legitimate jobs. The sisters need Social Security numbers, so they have sued the federal government.

"No one has ever heard of anything like this before," said their attorney, Douglas Benge. "When the girls first came to see me, it's one of those things of, 'What do I do now?'"

The Schultz sisters live with their parents in Lily, near the foothills of the Appalachian Mountains, in a county that includes the Daniel Boone National Forest and is known as the home of the first Kentucky Fried Chicken restaurant started by Col. Harland Sanders. Their family doesn't have a phone and their attorney gets a hold of them by calling an out-of-state relative, who in turn contacts the family.

Raechel Schultz, 29, was born in Madison County, Ky., about an hour or so away from where they live now. Stephanie, 23, was born in Sanford, Ala. Both were delivered at the family's home because of their religious beliefs, though Benge didn't know specifically what those were.

The births were recorded in a family Bible that has been marked up through the years, but some of the changes and deletions didn't pass muster with the Kentucky Office of Vital Statistics, Benge said.

That led the women to sue for a birth certificate. In 2009, Laurel County Circuit Judge John Knox Mills ordered DNA testing to prove the women were the children of American citizens. On Feb. 19, 2010, Mills ordered the state to issue birth certificates.

"The Court has no reason to not believe the testimony and finds no reason to suggest the plaintiffs are seeking this relief for an illegal or immoral purpose," Mills wrote.

When the sisters went to get Social Security cards that year, they were again denied. The Social Security Administration, in a letter, told the women "you have not given us documents we need to show U.S. Citizenship."

Benge accompanied the women on a second trip to the administration's office in May, but got the same result — not enough documentation to issue a card.

Frank Viera, a spokesman for the Social Security Administration in Atlanta, declined to comment on the lawsuit or the sisters' dilemma, citing privacy restrictions. On its website, the agency lists a variety of documents that may be used to prove identity, age and U.S. citizenship. The accepted records include a birth certificate, driver's license, state-issued identification card or U.S. passport, so it's not clear exactly why they haven't been able to get a number.

Robert Bruce, who retired as a district manager after 31 years with the Social Security Administration, said the age of the women combined with the lack of official documentation raises a suspicion of fraud.

Most people, by their 20s, have school and vaccination records or some kind of government identification, said Bruce, who retired in Portland, Ore., in 2005.

"Out of 330 million Americans, there's probably a few people who didn't do anything" to get official documents, said Bruce, who now runs a website from Murrieta, Calif., that helps people navigate Social Security benefits.

In what Benge described as a desperation move, the women tried to get U.S. passports with their birth certificates. They met the same results.

"The girls spent a small fortune just to get legal," Benge said. "I kind of feel sorry for them."

Check back with them in 30 years to see whether they feel the same then.

[po boy]

Yes I for see them kicking themselves later although if they don't see it now chances are they never will.

[palani]

Yes I for see them kicking themselves later although if they don't see it now chances are they never will.


Failure to appear is also the same as to not exist. I find myself appearing less frequently these days.

[Ponce]

Once in a while someone gets lucky and gets away.......but then makes the mistake of coming back.

[po boy]

Privacy is a rarely guarded commodity in these times.

[Joe King]

What people need to be asking is.....

If Social Security is voluntary, how is it that it becomes a pre-requirement to have one in order to do so much stuff that would otherwise be considered as a natural human Right?

As example, like the Right to be able to support yourself?


What is the exact mechanism at work here? What are these women asking for?
Permission, perhaps?

[osoab]

That led the women to sue for a birth certificate. In 2009, Laurel County Circuit Judge John Knox Mills ordered DNA testing to prove the women were the children of American citizens. On Feb. 19, 2010, Mills ordered the state to issue birth certificates.Huh??

[TheNocturnalEgyptian]

It's actually against the law to be denied employment specifically because you do not have a SSN. George Gordon has won this case before in the past.


But that doesn't mean it's easy to live w/o a SSN. It's incredibly difficult. The dentist, doctor, and hiring man will all look at you with a "WTF" look. You have to have the law already printed out showing that it's illegal to discriminate against non-SSN holders if you want to have a chance.



The births were recorded in a family Bible that has been marked up through the years, but some of the changes and deletions didn't pass muster with the Kentucky Office of Vital Statistics, Benge said.


This is supposed to be enough. A family bible is allegedly all you need. Looks like it wasn't such a great option in this case, however.

[Joe King]

It's actually against the law to be denied employment specifically because you do not have a SSN. George Gordon has won this case before in the past.


But that doesn't mean it's easy to live w/o a SSN. It's incredibly difficult. The dentist, doctor, and hiring man will all look at you with a "WTF" look. You have to have the law already printed out showing that it's illegal to discriminate against non-SSN holders if you want to have a chance.

The problem comes in the fact that they have convinced the people to think they have to volunteer. {because the people quit thinking for themselves}
....and those that have, apply social pressure in order to get others to volunteer too. ie the person who refuses to hire without one.

[midnight rambler]

In 2009, Laurel County Circuit Judge John Knox Mills ordered DNA testing to prove the women were the children of American citizens. lol They should have simply cited the case of the alleged Kenyan pResident in D.C.

Further proof that the inmates are running the asylum (as if anyone needed any more).

*It appears to me that anyone who is without enumeration and decides to get it after not having it their entire life has been brainwashed by the beast - likely too much of the lobotomy box.

[osoab]

lol They should have simply cited the case of the alleged Kenyan pResident in D.C.

Further proof that the inmates are running the asylum (as if anyone needed any more).

Yeah, but the chicks weren't "made" like Obummer. Just a couple hicks from Appalachia.

I just don't understand what is the DNA marker for American citizens.

[Joe King]

I'm pretty sure the DNA testing was used to determine paternity.
ie to prove that they are indeed their parents actual children, as the parents claim to be, and are already recognized as, US citizens.

Edited to add: a US citizen is what they are applying to be recognized as.

[Gaillo]

Too funny!

They're suing to get WHAT? ???

Many here would sue to NOT have a birth certificate (warehousing receipt) or Social Security Numbers (Federal property serial number), or 14th amendment U.S. Citizenship (Federal Slave Status)!

One person's treasure is another's trash, I guess! ;D

[osoab]

I'm pretty sure the DNA testing was used to determine paternity.
ie to prove that they are indeed their parents actual children, as the parents claim to be, and are already recognized as, US citizens.

Edited to add: a US citizen is what they are applying to be recognized as.

There is nothing in the article that says the parents are citizens. Source?

[Joe King]

Who else would they check them against? {their DNA} The tooth fairy? lol

[Joe King]

Since every minor, yet obvious, detail isn't spelled out in the OP, apparently I have to do everyones homework for them. ::)



Because they do have their birth certificates, which they got after submitting to a DNA test to prove they are children of U.S. citizens


http://news.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474979827877

[osoab]

Since every minor, yet obvious, detail isn't spelled out in the OP, apparently I have to do everyones homework for them. ::)



http://news.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474979827877

Once again, the article doesn't explicity state that the parents are citizens. It states
which they got after submitting to a DNA test to prove they are children of U.S. citizens Maybe I am being thickheaded, but the lack of quotes from the parents seems odd. If they went to great lengths to keep SS#'s from the kids, why would they submit to DNA tests to help prove it for them?

[Joe King]

They didn't go to great lengths to keep them from having them. The problem is that the girls were born at home in a rural area and the parents never got bothered to get them documented.

[Joe King]

If they can prove they are children of US citizens via a DNA test, their parents can obviously show that they are US citizens.

Why else would you perform a DNA test for paternity if the parents themselves couldn't show US citizenship?

[palani]

If they can prove they are children of US citizens via a DNA test, their parents can obviously show that they are US citizens.

So the parents are either black or born within the District of Columbia. Unlikely on both counts. If black they wouldn't have to prove ownership/citizenship and if white probability has it that the parents were born in the region.

Push comes to shove ... few people can prove they are U.S. citizens because they were not born within the jurisdiction of the United States. All these gals got was a piece of paper from some court saying they were citizens ... smacks of the Wizard of Oz ... You don't need a brain .. you need a college degree.

[Joe King]

So the parents are either black or born within the District of Columbia. Unlikely on both counts. If black they wouldn't have to prove ownership/citizenship and if white probability has it that the parents were born in the region.

Push comes to shove ... few people can prove they are U.S. citizens because they were not born within the jurisdiction of the United States. All these gals got was a piece of paper from some court saying they were citizens ... smacks of the Wizard of Oz ... You don't need a brain .. you need a college degree.

The point being that those people are asking for federal benefits.
....and the fed gov is typically happy to extend them.

[osoab]

So, DNA isn't proof of citizenship. Good to know.

Oh and Joe,

For all we know the girls snagged some hair from the parents' hair brushes. Once again, the article doesn't explicitly state that the parents gave up a sample.

[Joe King]

The only reason to test the DNA is to see if it matches the people who claim to be their parents.

If the parents are US citizens, it is sufficient proof that their children are eligible for federal benefit. Same as your children are eligible for it too, if you as their parent claim US citizenship status yourself.

If their parents didn't, it would serve no purpose to even do the DNA test.

Did you actually think there is a DNA "marker" for us citizens? lol

[osoab]

The only reason to test the DNA is to see if it matches the people who claim to be their parents.

If the parents are US citizens, it is sufficient proof that their children are eligible for federal benefit. Same as your children are eligible for it too, if you as their parent claim US citizenship status yourself.

If their parents didn't, it would serve no purpose to even do the DNA test.

Did you actually think there is a DNA "marker" for us citizens? lol

Actually if you go with the conspiracy that all kids DNA has been collected since the mid 70's, then yes, there would be specific markers that might show especially if you add in local mutations.

[Joe King]

Even if that were possible, and it's not, how would theirs have been collected if they had never been documented in the first place?

Home born, home schooled...etc etc



The women were not born in hospitals, never attended public school and only received birth certificates within the last two years after they sued the state.

[osoab]

Even if that were possible, and it's not, how would theirs have been collected if they had never been documented in the first place?

Home born, home schooled...etc etc

That is exactly where I was going with it. If the parents DNA was never cataloged, their would not be "proof" for the courts. Like I said it is the conspiracy side of it.

I truly find it odd that the parents are note quoted as saying "My little girl needs to get a job. she need to support her kids. I thought that the DNA thing would have settled it."

[Joe King]

That is exactly where I was going with it. If the parents DNA was never cataloged, their would not be "proof" for the courts. Like I said it is the conspiracy side of it. The parents have the documentation to show their citizenship status. So if the girls DNA test matches their parents, the Court is saying that it is proof that the girls are eligible for US citizenship, too.

Where are you getting this "database" thing from?



I truly find it odd that the parents are note quoted as saying "My little girl needs to get a job. she need to support her kids. I thought that the DNA thing would have settled it."

It will settle it if the girls DNA matches their mom and dads DNA and their mom and dad have their own documentation.

[osoab]

The parents have the documentation to show their citizenship status. So if the girls DNA test matches their parents, the Court is saying that it is proof that the girls are eligible for US citizenship, too.

Where are you getting this "database" thing from?




It will settle it if the girls DNA matches their mom and dads DNA and their mom and dad have their own documentation.


Currently I have no proof of the parents DNA. I haven't found anything with their statements.

It almost seems like a propaganda piece to "reassure" people that SS numbers are needed for a job.

[Joe King]

Currently I have no proof of the parents DNA. I haven't found anything with their statements.

It almost seems like a propaganda piece to "reassure" people that SS numbers are needed for a job.
The parents DNA isn't in question. The DNA is only used to establish paternity to someone who's status the girls are also wanting to claim as their own.

It's kinda like getting a passport....even if you lack sufficient documentation, you can establish eligibility by showing a lineage to known persons who already have the status you seek.

What other reason would there be for a Court to order DNA tests to prove they are children of U.S. citizens if the parents couldn't prove they were US citizens themselves?
It's all about establishing eligibility via lineage.



As far as reassuring people that SS numbers are needed to get a job, most people already accept that as fact......even if it's not true.

[osoab]

The parents DNA isn't in question. The DNA is only used to establish paternity to someone who's status the girls are also wanting to claim as their own.

It's kinda like getting a passport....even if you lack sufficient documentation, you can establish eligibility by showing a lineage to known persons who already have the status you seek.

What other reason would there be for a Court to order DNA tests to prove they are children of U.S. citizens if the parents couldn't prove they were US citizens themselves?
It's all about establishing eligibility via lineage.



As far as reassuring people that SS numbers are needed to get a job, most people already accept that as fact......even if it's not true.


Just like you refuse to see the data from chemtrails. (Documented I may add.)

I refuse to believe that the parents gave up a sample. (No documents in this case to prove either way.)

The fact that if the sample was proven to be kin, and still not accepted, says that DNA does not prove citizenship.

Bare minimum it is a psyop. SS#, rah, rah, rah, rah!

[BabushkaLady]

Amazing! For a reasonable amount of money, the ladies could have purchased "legal documents" from many sellers. Where do they think "illegals" get them??

[Joe King]

osoab,They obviously did give a sample if the State accepted a DNA test to give them a birth certificate.

Showing up to the test with hair from a comb does not connect a particular person to the hair.

The only way a DNA test could prove anything is for both parties to give a sample, with one of those persons having been previously documented by the State.

Some things can be inferred from the article.


Your chemtrail thing would be valid if samples from the actual trails were tested and documented. Which is what I was saying needs to be done in order to establish a source for what has already been found on the ground.
The theory of only testing what was on the ground and saying that it's proof of chemtrails without testing the trail too, would be like the girls taking random hair from a comb {your analogy} and just saying it is from their parents. The State would not accept that as it couldn't show a match to a known person.

Just like testing only samples from the ground cannot be used to show causation by what is in a "chem"trail at 30,000'
ie there isn't a known sample from a trail to match it to.