How To Become A Moorish American: Fill & Download for Free

Perhaps the real question should be “Why would you want to follow sovereign citizen beliefs?”For those that are not aware of who or what “Sovereign Citizens” are … They are a group of anti-government people that believe in various pseudo-law concepts and various conspiracy theories about the US Government, such asThe US is not a country but a bankrupt Corporation and ALL laws are contracts that you must consent to in order for them to apply to youThey believe in various fraudulent scams, like A4V (Accepted for Value) and using “secret” US Treasury Accounts to pay bills and mortgages (some of those that have used these scams have been charge with fraud and sentenced to hefty prison time)Sovereign Citizen often refuse to pay taxes or abide by any law they don’t agree with (and its always the laws that have a financial responsibility attached to them)Many drive without driver licenses or vehicle registration because they believe they have a “Constitutional Right” to TRAVEL (which every American does, but it refers to the right to travel from state to state without tax, toll or permission (providing you are under no court ordered restrictions such as probation/parole), In other words, no state can charge you to enter or exit nor deny you passage through their territory on your way to another state, for example, if you are traveling from California to New Mexico, Arizona can not charge you a fee to enter or exit or pull a Gandalf and say “You Shall Not Pass”Sovereign Citizens and their “Moorish Sovereign” counterparts philosophies originate from White Supremacists Anti Government groups dating back to the 1960’s and 1970’s (See Posse Comitatus Organization and the Committee of the States)Bottom line is that if you want to become a Sovereign Citizen, you must be prepared for the legal and financial troubles that accompany it. Many Sovereign citizens have had their vehicles impounded and had to pay hefty court penalties for driving without a valid Driver Licenses, valid registration or valid insurance. Many sovereigns have served serious prison time for crimes like tax evasion, bank fraud, mortgage fraud, and even murder, including ALL of the “founders” of these types of fake legal theories.Your best bet is to abide by the current laws and if you disagree with any law, use the courts and the political process to change or abolish them.Sovereign Citizen type beliefs :https://extremism.gwu.edu/sites/...

As an American demographer who has worked on both sides of the Atlantic, I have tackled this question myself and can possibly give some insight into this as I have seen it first-hand. There are a number of reasons for this phenomenon, and although education and professional level between the USA and Europe can be a factor, it is not the major one. (Nor is it sheer numbers, in fact Muslim immigration to the USA in recent decades, like that from Africa, has been much higher than to European countries, while more and more Muslims in Europe are leaving.) Instead, the reason has to do with the different histories of United States and Europe, specifically, USA is a settler-based country— or at least, the (currently) dominant group, ie. Anglo-Americans and whites in general, came as settlers to a foreign land where they were not indigenous, whereas whites in Europe are indigenous to the continent, and were frequent targets of Muslim invasions in the past, for ex. the Arab and African Moorish Muslim conquests in Spain, Portugal and southern France, and Ottoman Turkish invasions of eastern and central Europe.This is a key difference and it means everything for Muslim immigrants and eventual acceptance into society. European countries are something like ethnostates where the population called “whites” are indigenous to those lands and began their history as cultures and nations. Therefore they have very strong ties to the land, and it’s difficult for any outsiders, not just Muslims, to become “native” to those countries beyond very small numbers, perhaps around 3–5 percent tops as far as total non-ethnic European population. This isn’t a bad thing, it’s just how these countries have evolved historically, and of course it’s not only Europe that’s like this—most countries in the world, including in Asia and Africa, have long been populated and nations formed by their indigenous groups. Koreans would be equally resistant to hosting a growing Muslim population or any non-east Asian population beyond around 2–3%, as would Vietnamese, or Nepalese in their country, as would Arabs themselves in for ex. UAE or Bahrain (where non-Arab temp workers cannot naturalize).To put this another way, Denmark has been Danish for thousands of years, and the country and cultural region came into existence from the Danes who’ve been there since before the start of history, the same with ex. Finland, Germany, France and Italy. The people of these countries are descended from their indigenous peoples, and they have nowhere else to go to continue to be Danes, Finns, Germans and others in their nations. Even other white Europeans are only accepted into Denmark, to extent that they can become Danes after a generation or so. Thus a non-Christian population like Muslims, even if they themselves are white (which many Mideastern and North Africans are, ex. Syrians and Iraqis), cannot be taken into Denmark in any significant numbers, beyond ex. 2–3%, without fueling furious resistance, same thing would happen in most Asian and African countries. And their descendants will have a very hard time “becoming Danes” in future generations unless they not only physically resemble the Danish population, but strongly embrace Danish culture (including full conversion to Christianity) and history in all its respects, which is not easy for outsiders to do and virtually impossible for ex. for a family that wants to stay Muslim. Again nothing wrong with this, it’s just the history evolution of Europe and most other countries in the world outside the Americans and Australia/NZ. Add to this that in Europe’s case, again Europe’s indigenous peoples have battled multiple attempts at conquest and enslavement by Muslim invaders of Spain, Portugal, France, Italy, Hungary, Austria, Germany, Poland, Russia, Greece, Albania. Bulgaria, Slovenia and many other nations, and you also have countless countries in what is now the EU that in many ways define themselves based on resistance to Islam, and you have another reason why Muslim immigrants fare poorly in Europe.The United States is very different because the Anglo settlers, who became the dominant group in North America, Australia and New Zealand by the mid-1800’s, is not indigenous to that continent and in fact were often in conflict with the indigenous peoples. The ties to the land are much weaker, and it’s much more difficult for this dominant group to make sound arguments (and thus make policy) to keep immigrant groups out, or accuse Muslims or any other group of being “foreign” when they, in many ways, are foreign themselves. Thus in a major sense, Muslim immigrants to the United States are “just another immigrant group” no more or less native to the land than the (at least formerly) dominant Anglo-Americans themselves, and they are thus able to maintain their Muslim identity and culture while not appearing un-American. Or in other words, it is virtually impossible for Muslims even after many generations to "become Danes" (or Czechs, Poles, French, Germans or Austrians) since Danes have a characteristic look and culture that have defined them since the start of Danish history. More broadly, these European peoples are indigenous to their countries, and have a characteristic physical appearance, culture and traditions going back thousands of years to the start of their countries' history. So outside of a small percentage of Muslim immigrants who are themselves white (ex. from Syria, Lebanon, Turkey, Kurdish regions, parts of Morocco, Iraq or Berber regions in North Africa) and eventually convert to Christian denominations (which a huge fraction of Syrian refugees in Europe have indeed done), Muslims in ex. Denmark would always be foreign.The difference is that "USA Americans", like Brazilians, don't have a major defining physical background or history due to the USA's history as an immigrant nation--or more exactly, a settler-based nation where the dominant Anglo ethnic group is not indigenous and often even found itself in confrontation with the indigenous peoples (and, in recent years, is more and more becoming a minority itself). So it's much harder to call Muslim-Americans "foreign" or "not American" when in many ways, Anglo-Americans themselves are "foreign" and not native to the American continent themselves, and so Muslims can thus be fully American even when they're not white and still openly practice Islam. The same goes for other settler-based countries like Australia, New Zealand (despite Brenton Tarrant and the Christchurch shooting, which was roundly condemned by New Zealander society) and Canada with their own large and ancient aboriginal and First Nations populations. Anglos in those countries can’t tell Muslim immigrants that they’re “foreign” or “less Australian” (or less Canadian, New Zealander..) when the Anglos themselves are foreigners, historically often in confrontation with the countries’ indigenous peoples. So Muslims in the USA, Australia, New Zealand and Canada can fully embrace and openly practice their Muslim faith, speak their ancestral languages, and raise their children and future generations Muslim, and yet still be full citizens and equally “American” (or Australian, New Zealander, or Canadian) just the same as any Anglo-American, Anglo-Australian, Anglo-New Zealander and Anglo-Canadian. This will never work the same in an ethnostate populated by its ancient indigenous peoples, which is the case for countries in Europe, Africa or Asian countries like South Korea, Taiwan or Vietnam. Muslims will always be foreigners there no matter how many generations they stay there, and thus Muslim immigrants face the grim fact that they can invest generations in the country, only to eventually have to leave since they and their descendants will never be Danish, or Zimbabwean, or Korean, Taiwanese or Vietnamese. Several of my own Muslim European colleagues, for example, cited this recognition in ultimately deciding to move their families to Australia and Canada (or in some cases back to North Africa and Turkey), trying to plant roots in Germany, France or Sweden was ultimately futile because they would always be different from the ancient founding peoples of the country, while in Australia, Canada, the USA and of course back home in the Middle East or North Africa, they could be full citizens without question, to the same extent as white Anglos in Australia, Canada or the USA for example. Again, nothing wrong with these different situations, it’s just the way things are due to the different ways these countries’ different histories have evolved.On top of this, law and policy in the USA virtually guarantee relatively open immigration for Muslims. US immigration even today remains dominated by a law called the Hart-Celler Act, passed in 1965, and successor laws that build on its foundation, which opens immigration to the US from all portions of the world. Keep in your mind that even Trump, who has been more hostile to Muslim immigration, has had very little effect on Muslim immigration--his travel ban is very limited in part due to tough limitations from the courts, and even the small number of countries on Trump's list are still able to send people to the US after screening. This is very, very different from immigration to the European Union, which due to EU policies and traditions is overwhelmingly dominated by immigrants from other parts of Europe. (This also includes countries outside the EU, where for ex. Ukrainians, Russians, Serbs, Moldavans and Armenians have various ways of expedited immigration into the EU and are a major source of immigrants to countries like Italy, France, Germany, Spain, Austria, Belgium and the Netherlands.) Then on top of this, Europeans also give expedited visas and even citizenship to their descendants in the Americas and other regions outside the EU. Venezuelans and other South Americans of Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, French and German descent often can get rapid visas approved in the countries or their ancestors, the same goes in the USA for Italian-Americans, Irish-Americans, German-Americans, Swedish-Americans, Hungarian-Americans, Polish-Americans and other "diaspora" who get favorable paths to residency and citizenship. Not the case for the USA itself, where immigrants can come from anywhere in the world on the same terms.Interesting, the rapid demographic growth of Muslim-Americans is occurring simultaneous to we might call a "re-indigenizing" of the USA, as Latinos--who are overwhelmingly descended from the indigenous peoples of the Americas (as shown by blood and haplo studies)--are once again becoming the dominant demographic group in large parts of the USA for the first time in 150-200 years, especially in regions, like the Southwest USA, Texas and Florida where they had been the founding demographic and cultural groups before Anglo settlement. Texas for example is only 43 percent white and falling rapidly, and soon Latinos will return as the primary demographic group for the first time since the Texas Revolution and Mexico-American War back in the 1830's and 1840's. In similar fashion, African-Americans--who in many ways experienced what my field calls "ethnogenesis" when they were stripped of ties to Africa, as a new people indigenous to the American South--are more and more becoming the dominant ethnic group in many parts of that region, while even traditional native American groups and tribes are re-asserting their dominant status in ex. parts of the Dakotas, Oklahoma and Montana where they have long been resident.These processes of course have all been accelerated by the unusually rapid decline of the US white population, not only in percentage terms but also in absolute numbers, with whites in many communities, esp. Anglo-Americans essentially collapsing while new immigrant and established African-Americans communities replace them. (Read for ex. Hillbilly Elegy to see a picture of this, although the same malaise is striking even educated and wealthy urban Anglo-American whites.) Even we in the professional demographer community aren't sure why this is occurring, but there is clearly a sharp drop in the US white birth rate accompanied by a rapid increase in deaths among American whites--likely accelerated by US business practices which favor mass immigration and policies like the H-1B visa, which sharply reduce wages for white communities esp. in childbearing age, as well as by the devastation of the meth and opiate epidemics, lack of universal healthcare and low-cost college (both of which are supported across the political spectrum in Europe, with far better life expectancy and general health than the US) and policies like the USA divorce and family court system, which impose increasingly harsh financial penalties for divorce esp. for American whites, and thus discourage marriage and family formation, This is obviously of huge historical importance as it means the now inevitable demographic transformation of the United States from a largely white, Western country into more of a mixed demographic country, something like Brazil, Colombia, Turkey, Ecuador or Venezuela.Therefore this represents another reason that Muslims are better able to fit into the USA, since America itself (that is the United States) is more and more becoming a nation of pluralities, without a dominant racial or ethnic group. Therefore even "assimilation" itself loses meaning in the USA since there is no longer a dominant, defining "American" culture to assimilate into, and again Muslims are able to become American while staying Muslim. In addition, there is no conflict with the re-indigenizing of the USA (for example in the Southwestern USA, Texas and Florida, or the Dakotas and Montana) in part because Muslims have tended to concentrate in regions like Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Massachusetts and New Jersey that are outside the areas with the most concentrated Latino, African-American or native American populations. Muslims in Michigan for ex. can essentially reside in a community that is more and more like Arab Muslim countries back in the Middle East, speaking Arabic as a business language (Somalis can also do this in parts of Ohio and Minnesota), embracing Muslim dietary and cultural practices while still being American, having the right to vote and other benefits of citizenship. The same goes for Muslims who migrate and settle in Australia, New Zealand or Canada, who often do even better.There are some other factors behind Muslims’ higher success in Australia, New Zealand and North America (compared to Europe, Africa and Asia) too, for ex. Muslims in the United States, Canada and the other settler-based colonies in the Americas and Oceania are often eligible for affirmative action preferences and benefits, similar to those enjoyed by African-Americans, native Americans and Latinos in the US (as well as so-called visible minorities in Canada). Affirmative action simply would not work in Europe, since this would mean giving preferences to migrants over the indigenous peoples of Europe, which would never be acceptable politically, ethically or socially. (A couple countries in Europe tried this in the 1990’s and it led to disaster, and the complete destruction of the political parties proposing it. However, Britain has been a slight exception, with a few successful affirmative action programs for ex. Muslim Pakistanis, though these have been relatively small.) However, this is likely a relatively minor factor overall, the main reasons as I’ve described have to do with the countries’ fundamental histories and are thus much deeper.

Socialism among the college/university elite as if it was the only way America should have the country run, President Trump, how far we’ve come in just over 30 years and how ignorant people have become in that same time period (Flat Earthers, Sovereign Citizens, Moorish Americans), the immigration make-up in ethnicity and that radical Islamic elements have turned into such rampant terrorists.The fact that the late night talk show hosts who are really not worth watching have no viable opposition as they are pretty much just the same as each other, just with different hairstyles and the fact that the ratings of their shows are really pathetic.That FOX News is the biggest ratings cable news show and what happened to CNN and MSNBC for instance - where did they go wrong? But I’m a bit sketchy about cable news shows, maybe they weren’t around back then?The fact that BLM has become a thing when back in 1984 it was mostly settled. That SJW’s achieved notoriety and undeserved fame for their nonsense. That a group like Antifa started off as an anti-fascist and turned very quickly into fascists. That people could be harassed at their homes and while out at restaurants by abusive and sometimes violent demonstrators who really have no cogent argument or even sometimes make any sense whatsoever.