Why does everyone need a passport to travel?

[midnight rambler]

I know. Who else knows?

If you know, simply post, "I know." There's a VERY long history regarding the use of passports. The universal mandatory use of passports has not been a requirement dating back to the original usage and intent, the universal requirement for passports is relatively recent. Who else knows why? We'll re-visit this after a few folks have weighed in.

[crimethink]

By having a passport, you admit you "need" the System's permission to travel.

So much for you not submitting to the State.

[midnight rambler]

By having a passport, you admit you "need" the System's permission to travel.

So much for you not submitting to the State.

Wrong answer. Passports have been around a whole lot longer than jooish corporate states.

Passports* exist for a SPECIFIC purpose, what is it?

*in conjunction with that other travel document that has a higher authority than a passport

[crimethink]

Wrong answer. Passports have been around a whole lot longer than jooish corporate states.

What passport did Joseph and Mary use to flee to Egypt?

[boogietillyapuke]

Passports* exist for a SPECIFIC purpose, what is it?

Control?

[JohnQPublic]

To pass through the port?

[midnight rambler]

Check articles 42 and 42 of the Magna Carta to see how the common law applied at that time.

"...in time of war..."

[Glass]

I had heard that passports were a military occupation document. Papers please!. Got nothing to cite on this one though.

And I've also heard that other documents could be acquired that allowed international travel but in our "legal statute" (roman catholic "civilized") world the knowledge of these has disappeared.

[Ponce]

Because we don't want six millions Cubans in the US?...... wait a minute, never mind.......Ponce <---- six million and one Cuban in the US.

V

[midnight rambler]

I had heard that passports were a military occupation document. Papers please!. Got nothing to cite on this one though.

And I've also heard that other documents could be acquired that allowed international travel but in our "legal statute" (roman catholic "civilized") world the knowledge of these has disappeared.

You can view the incomplete history of passports on wikipedia which will shed some light on the matter.

There is a travel document superior to a passport, but since the joo world odor has taken over since the turn of the 20th century very few are aware of it and it has fallen out of the lexicon (yet can still be found buried deep in US Army FM 27-10 The Law of Land Warfare). However it was used in Vietnam (air dropped) as a means to prompt the NVA and VC to defect.

[Glass]

According to that never to be trusted on anything resource - Wiki - fair waning disclaimer.

The King Henry V issued the first travel documents to travelers which included a request for safe passage of his subjects.

I know my passport which is a commonwealth one still carries that message in the front. Obviously from QE II and not KH V.

Another suggestion was to provide a means of recording that the holder had been in other countries. I think that's interesting. It could mean: Prove that the money I paid you for that expedition or exploration was actually used as you described? Although I think brining back artifacts and spices etc would help answer that question.

I'm wondering if that aspect also had anything to do with Cestui que vie trust. A trust created on the establishment that some one was lost at sea. Usually takes the passing of 7 years before the trust could be created. The passport might be evidence the holder was overseas for the period? Seems to me like a sundry kind of purpose and not a primary reason to have one.

I'm wondering if what we know as the modern visa is what people were referring to as these other documents. Even if you have a passport you still need a visa for most countries and they are only good for that country. So a letter and a visa might be suitable for travel between 2 specific countries.

[crimethink]

You can view the incomplete history of passports on wikipedia which will shed some light on the matter.

There is a travel document superior to a passport, but since the joo world odor has taken over since the turn of the 20th century very few are aware of it and it has fallen out of the lexicon (yet can still be found buried deep in US Army FM 27-10 The Law of Land Warfare). However it was used in Vietnam (air dropped) as a means to prompt the NVA and VC to defect.

Presumably, you are referring to a safe conduct pass (27-10, 456). They're collectables for Vietnam War buffs.

It's "superior" only to the point that military commanders are willing to honor it. It doesn't work off the battle theater / occupied land, and doesn't work for normal travel, so it's useless for most people who want to "follow the law."

As usual, you're just playing more word games.

[crimethink]

According to that never to be trusted on anything resource - Wiki - fair waning disclaimer.


Wikipedia is a "working document," that can be edited by anyone. In many cases, it is reliable, and for mundane trivia, it's a good teaching source. But since it can be modified/rewritten by anyone, it's not authoritative.





I'm wondering if what we know as the modern visa is what people were referring to as these other documents. Even if you have a passport you still need a visa for most countries and they are only good for that country. So a letter and a visa might be suitable for travel between 2 specific countries.

A visa is permission to enter to a foreign national (this is identical in international law to a "citizen" despite the ramblers insistence to the contrary). A passport is the identification of a foreign national to another state's agents. A royal letter would have served as both, especially since forging it was a capital offense.

[midnight rambler]

Presumably, you are referring to a safe conduct pass (27-10, 456). They're collectables for Vietnam War buffs.

It's "superior" only to the point that military commanders are willing to honor it. It doesn't work off the battle theater / occupied land, and doesn't work for normal travel, so it's useless for most people who want to "follow the law."

As usual, you're just playing more word games.

No. See, you're wrong yet again. Safe conduct was allowed for in The Lieber Code, and of course it extends back in time because it involves the common law aka Jus Gentium aka the Law of Nations aka International Law aka God's Law.

The distinction:

a passport allows ONLY for passage of someone's body and whatever personal effects one can carry on one's body (generally), but excluding property

a safe conduct allows for the passage of someone AND their property (which could certainly include several conexes stuffed full - PROVIDED the enemy country/territory is willing to issue a safe conduct

The 'safe conduct pass' air dropped over N. Vietnam was strictly a spin-off of the original meaning of a safe conduct travel document and merely a means to get the enemy to defect.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9a/2009-7-32_Pass%2C_Safe_Conduct%2C_Vietnam%2C_Obverse.jpg/440px-2009-7-32_Pass%2C_Safe_Conduct%2C_Vietnam%2C_Obverse.jpg

[midnight rambler]

A visa is permission to enter to a foreign national (this is identical in international law to a "citizen" despite the ramblers insistence to the contrary). A passport is the identification of a foreign national to another state's agents. A royal letter would have served as both, especially since forging it was a capital offense.

The bold is where Fred refuses to see anyone as anything other than a 'citizen' whereas there are non-citizens in abundance and not at all that unusual. Hey, this 'non-citizen national' status is even included on the application for a US passport, so it is definitely recognized by the State Dept. Only a dyed-in-the-wool member of the Death Cult Caliphate would assert everyone has to be a 'citizen' somewhere*, that is just not the case.

*apparently according to Fred ONLY the corporate state can determine one's status...DEATH TO THE INFIDELS!!! lol

[ximmy]

A

The King Henry V issued the first travel documents to travelers which included a request for safe passage of his subjects.




This would be my thought, that the passport intends to show the traveler/subject belongs to a certain country and the weight of the country intends to protect its subject from capture or slavery when traveling through other governments.

[midnight rambler]

The reason why passports are now universal and mandatory is because the United States has been in a state of national emergency (war powers) since March 9, 1933* however the set-up to that perpetual state of war begin in earnest around the time of 'the war to end all wars' which in reality was the kick-off for a perpetual state of war. Historically, at least at the time of the Magna Carta, travel documents/passports were only required during 'time of war' and when the 'time of war' ended that was the end of the need of passports. And YES, it is all about control, but the ultimate control is the fear of the boogey-man Emmanual Goldstein.

*section 5(b) of The Trading With the Enemy Act of 1917 was amended to include all US citizens as 'enemies' of the United States, additionally every single president since FDR has extended the war powers, even after CONgress passed the War Powers Act in 1973 (CONgress included a loophole so large in the War Powers Act it rendered the act essentially meaningless and POTUS just continued extending the national emergency every single year around the end of August, and yes that definitely included Reagan, all these annual extensions used to be listed on the Whitehouse.gov website but all that was scrubbed off there several years ago)

[palani]

the weight of the country intends to protect its subject from capture or slavery when traveling through other governments. At the end of WW I (phase deuce) an American with a British passport traveling to Germany before the war and there assisting the Germans in their promotion of war was convicted of treason by the British. The use of the British passport was presumed and never proven but it did exist so was the basis for the conviction.

You carry a passport ... you better not act outside the interests of the country or entity that gave it to you.

[midnight rambler]

Fred, your problem is that while you're a wearing that persona/mask issued to you by the jooish corporate state you're also a belligerent - which is NEVER a good thing to be when viewed by the occupation forces. Occupation forces are there to crush belligerents.

Me, I'm a foreign neutral, came to that conclusion 17 years ago. Got a 17 year old document to that effect. I couldn't care less what the belligerents do, just so long as they leave me out of it.

Here's something I've found extremely interesting, and it's codified into US Army FM 27-10 The Law of Land Warfare, so it's DEFINITELY still in effect.

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/hague05.asp

Chapter 1 is real fucking fascinating. As Fred has correctly pointed out, words have meanings, however it's the meanings going back into antiquity that make all the difference, NOT what words have morphed into in the joo whirled odor. It's crucial to note what the 'old' definition (like in Bouvier's 1856 Law Dictionary) of the word 'territory' is.

Neutrality, formally declared, is powerful stuff. Far better than painting a target on one's back by being a mouthy belligerent.

[palani]

Ignorance is of two sorts:
1) Fact
2) Law

Ignorance of law, consists in the want of knowledge of those laws which it is our duty to understand, and which every man is presumed to know.

Ignorance of fact, is the want of knowledge as to the fact in question. Ignorance of the laws of a foreign government, or of another state; is ignorance of a fact.

You certainly are entitled to be ignorant of foreign laws. Where you get in trouble is when you make foreign laws domestic. You might want to examine the mechanism of how you perform this ritual sacrifice. If you can avoid making foreign laws domestic then you are dealing with want of knowledge of FACTS instead of LAWS. Not having knowledge of a fact is never a criminal act.

Would you care to consider the role of possession of a passport in this process?

[crimethink]

The bold is where Fred refuses to see anyone as anything other than a 'citizen' whereas there are non-citizens in abundance and not at all that unusual. Hey, this 'non-citizen national' status is even included on the application for a US passport, so it is definitely recognized by the State Dept. Only a dyed-in-the-wool member of the Death Cult Caliphate would assert everyone has to be a 'citizen' somewhere*, that is just not the case.

*apparently according to Fred ONLY the corporate state can determine one's status...DEATH TO THE INFIDELS!!! lol

You are an expert sophist - that means expert liar to those not in the know. Your primary method is to play word games. The document you sign under penalty of perjury defines you as a "US Citizen," and by signing it you are admitting as such. Your delusion only in your mind does not change anything from the Federal regime's standpoint. You are not a "non-citizen national," which are people born in specifically-defined foreign territories (like American Samoa).

You can believe whatever utter bullshit you want to believe, and retain such delusion in your head, but the word of the day is "RECOGNITION." Does the Federal regime recognize your delusions? No. Did you not understand this when you submitting for a passport? No. Hence, you admitted you are a subject of the Federal regime. And this is why I do not get a passport. Yet you purport to be "superior" to me.

[crimethink]

At the end of WW I (phase deuce) an American with a British passport traveling to Germany before the war and there assisting the Germans in their promotion of war was convicted of treason by the British. The use of the British passport was presumed and never proven but it did exist so was the basis for the conviction.

You carry a passport ... you better not act outside the interests of the country or entity that gave it to you.

Indeed. Submitting for a passport means you give an implicit oath of allegiance, but the endless rambler simply refuses to admit this. He is now OWNED by the Federal regime, and can be convicted of treason solely on the basis of his submission for a passport.

[crimethink]

Me, I'm a foreign neutral, came to that conclusion 17 years ago. And yeah, got a 17 year old document to that effect.


But you're not. You are a "US Citizen" in the eyes of the Federal regime, and you submitted to this by submitting for a passport.



As Fred has correctly pointed out, words have meanings, however it's the meanings going back into antiquity that make all the difference, NOT what words have morphed into in the joo whirled odor.


Yes, words have meaning, and, again, the Word of the Day is "RECOGNITION." It all boils down to what the Federal regime defines it as, NOT YOU. It does not recognize your "non-citizen national" claim." It considers you its subject since you submitted to it.

And yes, what matters is what the Federal regime defines words as, until we decide to FORCE them to do otherwise. "Infringed" is a perfect example. As in the Second Amendment.

[palani]

I do have a response for the question "Are you a U.S. citizen?" It is another question.

"Am I a candidate for an office of public trust?"

After all, if I am not in an office or running for office then what matters whether I am a citizen or not?

[midnight rambler]

I'm wondering if Fred's issue is that misery loves company or if he is truly incensed that someone doesn't belong his Death Cult and worship his false god (in Fred's case that would be the jooish created corporate state) and therefore should be eliminated from this plane of existence - exactly like the goatfuckers and their Caliphate.

[7th trump]

I'm wondering if Fred's issue is that misery loves company or if he is truly incensed that someone doesn't belong his Death Cult and worship his false god (in Fred's case that would be the jooish created corporate state) and therefore should be eliminated from this plane of existence - exactly like the goatfuckers and their Caliphate.

You are playing your typical games again ramble ass...and I can safely say everyone here can see through your bullshit.
Why do you accuse anyone who questions you about your lies belongs to this "death cult" that you parade around?

Everyone whos been here long enough knows you're love affair with bolshevic death cult machines and how you hate America.
You always bring light to the US as this "death cult" while the real death cult are your beloved jewish soviet bolshevics you defend with vigor.

The US will smash the Russians any day....even Putin says America is way more powerful than Russia.
(Does Putin know you're in defiance of his authority)

[7th trump]

I do have a response for the question "Are you a U.S. citizen?" It is another question.

"Am I a candidate for an office of public trust?"

After all, if I am not in an office or running for office then what matters whether I am a citizen or not?

Rights of the "People" vs privileges of the "US citizen". So why do you try impressing the sheep that your intelligent when you make no intelligent comment?

[palani]

why do you try impressing the sheep that your intelligent when you make no intelligent comment?

In your world a question is a comment?

How retro is that?

[7th trump]

In your world a question is a comment?

How retro is that?

Your question says magnitudes about your mental reasoning to ask a question that stupid in the first place.
Then, as if you couldn't show being more fucked in the head, your response confirmed it.

And then ramble ass's endorsement of such a question confirmed his capacity.

Its a two for one. My lucky day!

[palani]

Its a two for one. My lucky day!
You keep making comments. I keep asking questions.

Who's the loser?

[Hint ... he will answer this post]

[7th trump]

You keep making comments. I keep asking questions.

Who's the loser?

[Hint ... he will answer this post]

I guess I'm the only one answering....nobody else understands your illogic, not even me and I dont have any problem addressing your mental state.

hey ramble ass....hows it feel to get mentally slaughtered by Crimethink?
The popcorn was good!

[govcheetos]

A vessel passes through ports.

Often times a home port of conveinence with a flag of the country the port is located.

A vessel without a home port, and not recognized by/do not recognize "authorities" are considered pirate vessels.

[crimethink]

A vessel passes through ports.

Often times a home port of conveinence with a flag of the country the port is located.

A vessel without a home port, and not recognized by/do not recognize "authorities" are considered pirate vessels.

A pirate is an "outlaw" - someone outside the "protection" of and obligation to "the law."

I am a "pirate" and proud of it. Hence, I need no passport, ARRRRGH!