The United States of America, incorporated [Archive] - The Project Avalon Community Forum

View Full Version : The United States of America, incorporated

Unified Serenity

6th July 2012, 21:52

Ok, I am trying to find the facts about the subject of the United States of America becoming THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, INC or a derivation thereof. I hate legal mumbo jumbo and have read lots of sites on this issue. This article below is one saying, "NO, it's not incorporated".

I know we have some lawyers present and other keen minds who can blow through this or substantiate it. If anyone has real documentation about the government incorporating, please post it.

Dear Friends,

For an entity to become a corporation under federal law,
there must be an Act of Congress creating that corporation.

There are no Acts of Congress expressly incorporating
either the "United States" or the "United States of America".

In 1871 Congress did expressly incorporate the District
of Columbia, but D.C. and the "United States" are not
one and the same. In that Act of 1871, Congress also
expressly extended the U.S. Constitution into D.C.:

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/gilberts/intentm3.filed.htm#1871

In United States v. Cooper Corporation, 312 U.S. 600 (1941 (http://laws.findlaw.com/us/312/600.html)),
the Supreme Court wrote:

http://laws.findlaw.com/us/312/600.html

"We may say in passing that the argument that the
United States may be treated as a corporation
organized under its own laws, that is, under the
Constitution as the fundamental law, seems so strained
as not to merit serious consideration ."

Some of the confusion rampant on this subject may have
originated in the definition of "UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA" in Bouvier's Law Dictionary (http://www.supremelaw.org/ref/dict/index.htm) here:

http://www.supremelaw.org/ref/dict/bldu1.htm#union

See Paragraph 5 quoted here:

"5. The United States of America are a corporation
endowed with the capacity to sue and be sued, to convey
and receive property. 1 Marsh. Dec. 177, 181.
But it is proper to observe that no suit can be brought
against the United States without authority of law."

Note that the plural verb "are" was used, providing further
evidence that the "United States of America" are plural,
as implied by the plural term "States". Also, the author
of that definition switches to "United States" in the second
sentence. This only adds to the confusion, because the
term "United States" has three (3) different legal meanings:

http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/hooven/hooven.htm#united.states

However, the decision cited above is Justice Marshall issuing dictum,
and it is NOT an Act of Congress. Here, again,
be very wary of courts attempting to "legislate" in the absence
of a proper Act of Congress. See 1 U.S.C. 101 (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/1/101.html) for the
statute defining the required enacting clause:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/1/101.html

And, pay attention to what was said in that definition here:
"no suit can be brought against the United States
without authority of law". That statement is not only
correct; it also provides another important clue:
Congress has conferred legal standing on the "United States"
to sue and be sued at 28 U.S.C. 1345 (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/1345.html) and 1346 (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/1346.html), respectively:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/1345.html
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/1346.html

Congress has NOT conferred comparable legal standing
upon the "United States of America" to sue, or be sued,
as such.

Furthermore, under the Articles of Confederation, the term
"United States of America" is the "stile" or phrase that was used
to describe the Union formed legally by those Articles:

Articles of Confederation and perpetual Union between the States
of New Hampshire, Massachusetts bay, Rhode Island and Providence
Plantations, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania,
Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and
Georgia.

Article I. The Stile of this Confederacy shall be
"The United States of America."

Article II. Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom,
and independence, and every power, jurisdiction, and right,
which is not by this Confederation expressly delegated
to the United States, in Congress assembled.”

[end excerpt]

When they came together the first time to form
a Union of several (plural) States, they decided
to call themselves the "United States of America".

Note also that those Articles clearly distinguished
"United States of America" from "United States"
in Congress assembled. The States formally
delegated certain powers to the federal government,
which is clearly identified in those Articles as the
"United States".

Therefore, the "United States of America" now refer to
the 50 States of the Union, and the term "United States"
refers to the federal government.

The term "United States" is the term that is used consistently now
throughout Title 28 to refer to the federal government domiciled
in D.C. There is only ONE PLACE in all of Title 28 where the
term "United States of America" is used, and there it is used
in correct contradistinction to "United States":

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/1746.html

Because Title 28 contains statutes which govern all federal courts,
the consistent use of "United States" to refer to the federal
government carries enormous weight. Title 28 is the latest word
on this subject, as revised, codified and enacted into positive law
on June 25, 1948. Moreover, the Supremacy Clause (http://www.supremelaw.org/ref/whuscons/whuscons.htm#6:2) elevates
Title 28 to the status of supreme Law of the Land.

To make matters worse and to propagate more confusion,
the entity "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA"
incorporated twice in the State of Delaware:

http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/usa.inc
http://www.supremelaw.org/cc/usa.corp

The main problem that arises from these questions is that
United States Attorneys are now filing lawsuits and
prosecuting criminal INDICTMENTS in the name of the
"UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" [sic]
but without any powers of attorney to do so. Compare
28 U.S.C. 547 (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/547.html) (which confers powers of attorney to represent
the "United States" and its agencies in federal courts):

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/547.html

They are NOT "United States of America Attorneys", OK?

First of all, they do NOT have any powers of attorney
to represent Delaware corporations in federal courts;
Congress never appropriated funds for them to do so
and Congress never conferred any powers of attorney
on them to do so either.

Secondly, the 50 States are already adequately represented
by their respective State Attorneys General; therefore,
U.S. Attorneys have no powers of attorney to represent
any of the 50 States of the Union, or any of their agencies,
either.

They are "U.S. Attorneys" NOT "U.S.A. Attorneys", OK?

Accordingly, it is willful misrepresentation for any U.S. Attorney
to attempt to appear in any State or federal court on behalf
of the "UNITED STATES OF AMERICA" [sic]. And,
such misrepresentation is actionable under the McDade Act
at 28 U.S.C. 530B (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/530B.html):

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/530B.html

There are quite a few "activists" running around the Internet
claiming that the "United States" and the "United States of
America" are both corporations. These claims are not correct,
for the reasons already stated above.

A similar error occurs when these so-called “activists” cite
the federal statute at 28 U.S.C. 3002 (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/3002.html) as their only “proof”
that the “United States” was incorporated by Congress.
Here’s the pertinent text of that statute:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/3002.html

As used in this chapter:
...
(15) "United States" means --
(A) a Federal corporation;
(B) an agency, department, commission, board, or
other entity of the United States; or
(C) an instrumentality of the United States.

[end excerpt]

First of all, note well that the stated scope of this definition
is limited to “this chapter” i.e. CHAPTER 176 of Title 28 (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/) –
Federal Debt Collection Procedures. Overlooking the
limited scope of such definitions is a very common error
among many, if not all self-styled experts. At best, this section
cannot be used as evidence that the federal government
should be treated as a valid corporation for all other intents
and purposes. It takes a LOT more text than this one limited
definition to create any federal corporation! Compare the
original Statutes at Large that created the Union Pacific
Railroad Company, for example.

Secondly, from the evidence above it should already
be clear that the “United States” (federal government)
is not now, and never has been, a federal corporation.
The statute at 28 U.S.C. 3002 (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/3002.html) merely defines the
term “United States” to embrace all existing federal
corporations. Because the United States was not
an existing corporation when Congress enacted
section 3002 (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/3002.html), that statute did not create and could
not have created the United States as a federal
corporation in the first instance.

Thirdly, in Eisner v. Macomber (http://laws.findlaw.com/us/252/189.html) the U.S. Supreme Court
told Congress that it was barred from re-defining
any terms that are used in the federal Constitution.
“United States” occurs in several places, because it is central
to the entire purpose of that Constitution. Therefore,
the legislative attempt to re-define “United States” at
section 3002 (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/3002.html) is necessarily unconstitutional, because
it violates the Eisner Prohibition.

Fourthly, section 3002 (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/28/3002.html) also exhibits 2 subtle tautologies,
which render it null and void for vagueness. Here they are,
in case you missed them:

“United States” means … an agency, department, commission,
board, or other entity of the United States;
or
“United States” means … an instrumentality of the United States.

It is a fundamental violation of proper English grammar to use
the term being defined in any definition of that term, and such a
violation has clearly happened here. If you don’t yet recognize
the tautologies, then change one part of this definition to read:

The term “United States” here also embraces any instrumentality
of the federal government.

At the very least, this minor change eliminates the tautology and
removes the vagueness. Nevertheless, such an attempt to re-define
the term “United States” still violates the Eisner Prohibition.

For a newspaper-level Press Release which further explores some
of the many legal ramifications of these widespread errors, please
see this Internet URL:

http://www.supremelaw.org/press/rels/cracking.title.28.htm

Sincerely yours,
/s/ Paul Andrew Mitchell, B.A., M.S.
Private Attorney General, Criminal Investigator and
Federal Witness: 18 U.S.C. 1510 (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1510.html), 1512 (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1512.html)-13 (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1513.html), 1964(a) (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1964.html)
http://www.supremelaw.org/decs/agency/private.attorney.general.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/index.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/support.policy.htm
http://www.supremelaw.org/guidelines.htm

Unified Serenity

6th July 2012, 21:57

cloud9

6th July 2012, 22:46

I was listening to this lecture today and it was the first time that I heard that all rights are available to the People of the Us but only some privileges are granted to the US citizens. I was in shock.... the day I received my citizenship the person conducting the ceremony said: from now on, you have the same rights as any person born in the United States. In this lecture, Mr. Thorton (spell?) says that citizens have no rights whatsoever.

Now I'm considering that the people born in the US have lost their rights as People, perhaps when their parents registered the child and a certificate of birth was given? It's said that when you register something you are really giving it to the government and so the new citizens are their property.

He also says that the Constitution is a trust, meaning all the wording in it is similar to how a corporation is created, he didn't say it was the creation of the US though.

8HdGdSdKViI

PEOPLE or CITIZEN WHICH ONE ARE YOU?

PEOPLE
The Preamble does not specifically define the word "People." Nevertheless, the definition becomes apparent in the context of the other words and prior history.

HISTORY

Before the United States existed, there was no legal government. A group of representatives, acting "in the name and by the authority of the good people of these colonies," declared the independence of the colonies from the British Crown and the state of Great Britain.

From the beginning, in the 1776 Declaration of Independence, the people were acknowledged as the source of authority, i.e. the sovereignty which authorized the Declaration of Independence.

Next came the 1778 Articles of Confederation. The states that existed by the authority of the people, created those Articles while in Congress assembled. That didn't work as well as expected.

In 1787 the people themselves came forth "to ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America" [see Preamble]. On September 17th, 1787, the states held a convention and all those present unanimously joined in. [see last paragraph of U.S. Constitution]

So, in 1787, unanimous concurrence was achieved and the Constitution was born, later to be ratified.

PREAMBLE

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

STRUCTURE OF PREAMBLE

TRUSTOR: We the People [trustors]

VENUE: of the United States

PURPOSE: in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty

BENEFICIARY: to ourselves and our Posterity,

ENABLING ACTION 1: do ordain [declare the law]

ENABLING ACTION 2: and establish [bring into existence]

WHAT: this Constitution [articles of incorporation for trust]

TRUSTEE: for the United States of America. [trustee]

ANALYSIS OF PREAMBLE

The Preamble defines the context in which the remainder of the Constitution must be interpreted. Most of it is self explanatory. Here's an explanation that points to popular sovereignty:

After the Declaration of Independence, but before the ordainment and establishment of the Constitution, the people of the United States pretty much handled their own affairs using the common law. They were not subject to any higher authority other than the authority of the common law as administered by the people themselves (self governance). Although the states did exist, they only existed by the authority of the people. Every man was a king, and every woman a queen--and none had any subjects. Upon declaring our independence, we all became sovereigns and members of the peerage (nobility).

"The people of this State, as the successors of its former sovereign, are entitled to all the rights which formerly belonged to the King by his prerogative. Through the medium of their Legislature they may exercise all the powers which previous to the Revolution could have been exercised either by the King alone, or by him in conjunction with his Parliament; subject only to those restrictions which have been imposed by the Constitution of this State or of the U.S."

Lansing v. Smith, 21 D. 89., 4 Wendel 9 (1829) (New York)
"D." = Decennial Digest
Lansing v. Smith, 4 Wend. 9 (N.Y.) (1829), 21 Am.Dec. 89
10C Const. Law Sec. 298; 18 C Em.Dom. Sec. 3, 228;
37 C Nav.Wat. Sec. 219; Nuls Sec. 1`67; 48 C Wharves Sec. 3, 7.
NOTE: Am.Dec.=American Decision, Wend. = Wendell (N.Y.)

The enabling actions in the Preamble are significant because there is simply nothing in the use of those words to imply that the People relinquished any of their own power and authority. The People declared the law (ordain) without taking away from themselves the authority to declare law again in the future. The People established the Constitution without taking away from themselves the authority to establish anything else in the future. In other words, the people gave birth to the Constitution without giving up any of their own power and authority.

What was before, continues to be so today.

From the context of the Preamble, one may conclude that the laws of the United States do not apply to People. The People, as ordainers and establishers of the country are sovereigns of the country, may not be involuntarily subjected to the laws of the United States.

Because of Amendment X ("The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people," the government has no authority, and cannot assume any authority over the People. Government powers may not reach beyond that which is constitutionally granted. In order for the government to subject People to its law it is necessary for the People to relinquish their sovereignty. Sovereignty is a natural right which cannot lawfully be relinquished involuntarily. Any removal of sovereignty must be accomplished voluntarily by the subject himself.

DEFINITION OF CITIZEN OF THE UNITED STATES

HISTORY

Before ratification of the Amendment XIV , there was no legal definition of the term "citizen of the United States." The term was used, but only generally. After the Civil War the slaves were freed but there was no legal basis to recognize them as having any rights. Amendment XIV partially solved that problem.

"Free the slaves," was the rallying cry combined with the Civil War that resulted in Amendment XIV. Amendment XIV created a new class of person called "citizen of the United States." Any ex-slave could now claim citizenship, and, by the way, so could any of the People if they so chose to do. Amendment XIV made possible the voluntary relinquishment of personal sovereignty.

It was also during the mid 1800's that the various governments took control of the school systems. The curriculum shifted from civics (the study of natural rights and common law) to American government (the study of civil privileges and statutory law). Emphasis was also refocused on "good citizenship". To blunt the people's perception, the civil privileges were called civil rights. The transition from teaching "natural rights" to teaching "civil rights" took about 100 years (from the 1850's to the 1950's). During the 1950's the school systems changed the courses named from "Civics" to "American Government." Hardly anyone now is aware of the subject of civics as a school course.

The phrase, "citizens of the United States," is defined in the Constitution for the United States of America, Amendment XIV:

AMENDMENT XIV

Section 1. "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Section 5. "The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article."

STRUCTURE OF AMENDMENT XIV

WHO: All persons

QUALIFICATION:
(A) born or naturalized in the United States, and
(B) subject to the jurisdiction thereof

PURPOSE: No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

ENFORCED BY: The Congress

ENFORCEMENT METHOD: Legislation

QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS OF AMENDMENT XIV

As discussed above, the People are sovereign. The People are not subject to the jurisdiction of the federal government, even though they are born in the United States.

Amendment XIV inverts the relationship. One of the qualifications to be a citizen of the United States is that one must be born or naturalized in the United States. Another qualification is that one must be, "subject to the jurisdiction thereof." It is not possible to be a citizen of the United States without being born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof. But, if you are born or naturalized, and if you are subject to the jurisdiction, then you automatically qualify as a citizen of the United States.

From the point of view of the federal enforcers, the qualifications are worked in reverse. They reverse-interpret Amendment XIV as saying that if you say you are a citizen of the United States, then that automatically means you are totally subject to its jurisdiction [and have been born or naturalized]. This opinion is not shared by the judicial branch. See 14 C.J.S. 426, 430:

The particular meaning of the word "citizen" is frequently dependent on the context in which it is found[25], and the word must always be taken in the sense which best harmonizes with the subject matter in which it is used[26].

"One may be considered a citizen for some purposes and not a citizen for other purposes, as, for instance, for commercial purposes, and not for political purposes[27]. So, a person may be a citizen in the sense that as such he is entitled to the protection of his life, liberty, and property, even though he is not vested with the suffrage or other political rights[28].

"[25] Cal.--Prowd v. Gore, 2 Dist. 207 P. 490. 57 C.A. 458.
[26] Cal.--Prowd v. Gore. 2 Dist. 207 P. 490. 57 C.A. 458.
La.--Lepenser v Griffin, 83 So. 839, 146 La. 584
N.Y.--Union Hotel Co. v. Hersee, 79 N.Y. 454
[27] U.S.--The Friendschaft, N.C., 16 U.S. 14, 3 Wheat. 14, 4 L.Ed. 322
--Murray v. The Charming Betsy, 6 U.S. 64, 2 Cranch 64, 2 L.Ed. 208
Md.--Risewick v. Davis, 19 Md. 82
Mass.--Judd v. Lawrence, 1 Cush 531
R.I.--Greeough v. Tiverton Police Com'rs, 74 A 785, 30 R.I. 212
[28] Mass.--Dillaway v. Burton, 153 N.E. 13, 256 Mass. 568"

In any case, if you fail to object to the government's view of citizenship, then you will most certainly be subjected to the laws of the government. That means no rights, only privileges. To see a list of privileges granted or denied to the citizens (there is no list for the People's natural rights because the People automatically have all rights), see People's rights vs citizen's rights

ONE OF THE PEOPLE OR ONE OF THE CITIZENS?

The first issue to be resolved in any court proceeding is that of jurisdiction. Does the one entity have jurisdiction over the other entity? One should never go into court without a clear understanding as to whether he is there as a citizen, or there as one of the people.

If you claim you are a citizen of the United States, then it is strongly implied (though not necessarily true) that you are subject to the laws of the United States. On the other hand, if you are one of the People, then it is legally implied that you are a legal king, with a sovereignty superior to that of the United States, and subject only to the common law of the other kings (your peers). In short: the People are superior to the government, the government is superior to the citizens. That is the hierarchy.

PEOPLE ---> GOVERNMENT ---> CITIZENS

As a king you "are entitled to all the rights which formerly belonged to the King by his prerogative." You can do what you want to do when you want to do it. You have your own property and your own courts. There is no limit as to what you may do other than the natural limits of the universe, and the sovereignty of a fellow sovereign. You should treat the other sovereign in accordance with the Golden Rule, and at the very least must never harm him. Your sovereignty stops where the other sovereignty begins. You are one of the owners of the American government, and it is their promise that they will support your sovereignty (i.e. they have promised to support the Constitution and protect it from all enemies). You have no allegiance to anyone. The government, your only [public] servant, has an allegiance to you.

As a citizen, you are only entitled to whatever your sovereign grants to you. You have no rights. If you wish to do something that would be otherwise illegal, you must apply for a license giving you special permission. If there is no license available, and if there is no specific permission granted in the statutes, then you must apply for special permission or a waiver in order to do it. Your only allegiance is to your sovereign (the government), and that allegiance is mandated by your sovereign's law (the government, though not absolutely sovereign, is sovereign relative to you if you claim to be a citizen of the sovereign).

Here is a typical example:

As one of the People you have a right to travel, unrestricted, upon the public highways. You have right to carry guests with you in your automobile. You have a right to own a gun and that right shall not be impaired by your servant, the government. You have a right to a grand jury indictment and a trial by jury, that is a trial directly by the people, not the government.

As one of the citizens, you may not travel by automobile unless you are either a licensed motor vehicle driver, or you are a passenger with permission to be on board. Gun ownership is a privilege subject to definition and regulation. You do not have a right to a jury trial in all cases, and no right to grand jury indictment--a trial is a trial by the government, not the people.

http://1215.org/lawnotes/lawnotes/pvc.htm

crested-duck

7th July 2012, 00:02

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/bcolony.htm----- THE UNITED STATES

IS STILL A BRITISH COLONY

EXTORTING

TAXES FOR THE CROWN!

A DOCUMENTARY REVIEW

OF CHARTERS AND TREATIES

August 17, 1996

An introduction by the "Informer"

This is the latest from a man who visits me quite often. He

and another man researched my theory that we have never been free

from the British Crown. This disc shows the results. I have

states that we will never win in their courts. This shows

conclusively why. We have the hard copy of the treaties that are

the footnotes. This predates Schroder's material, my research of

the 1861 stats by Lincoln that put us under the War Powers

confiscation acts, and John Nelson's material. All our material

supports that the real Principal, the King of England, still rules

this country through the bankers and why we own no property in

allodium. This is why it is so important to start OUR courts of

God's natural (common) Law and break away from all the crap they

have handed us. This is one reason Virginia had a law to hang all

lawyers but was somehow, by someone, (the King) set aside to let

them operate again. Some good people put in the original 13th

amendment so that without the lawyers the King could not continue

his strangle hold on us. James shows how that was quashed by the

King. I am happy that James' research of six months bears out my

theory, that most people would not listen to me, that we are still

citizen/subjects under the kings of England. My article called

"Reality" published in the American Bulletin and the article of

mine on the "Atocha case," wherein Florida in 1981 used it's

sovereignty under the British crown to try to take away the gold

from the wreck found in Florida waters supports this premise.

James makes mention of the Law dictionaries being England's Law

Dict. you will not is lists the reign of all the Kings of England.

It never mentions the reign of the Presidents of this country.

Ever wonder Why? Get this out to as many people as you can.

The Informer.

*****full articles and info found in link above****Rob

Unified Serenity

7th July 2012, 00:17

Great replies you two. I think it can be as you say duck, but does that negate it being a corporation? I am trying to get the actual incorporation as compared to the incorporated area of Washington D.C. in the act of 1871. Any idea on that?

crested-duck

7th July 2012, 01:06

Try this link and scroll down you will find answer in here:http://www.apfn.org/apfn/bcolony.htm

Unified Serenity

7th July 2012, 01:21

Thanks Duck, I see lots of states incorporated and other incorporated issues, but maybe I did not search hard enough, I did not see the aspect of THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, INCORPORATED or a variation thereof. Still this is an excellent document and I appreciate you sharing it.

humanalien

7th July 2012, 01:30

All people in america are considered a corporation. Every legal
document that you sign will have your name in all caps. Using
all caps means that you are JOHN DOE the corporation.

I'll assume that you already knew that though.

Sorry. I'm not much help here....

Unified Serenity

7th July 2012, 02:16

Yeh, I know that much HA. I am looking for the actual legal creation of THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, INC.

Thanks

turiya

7th July 2012, 02:50

Ok, here is another issue I have. There is a difference in a U.S. citizen and being an American Citizen. One is someone who has placed themselves subject to the rules and laws of the 10 mile square area and territories of Washington D.C., and that was done by conning the American People into getting a Social Security Number. That takes them out of being an American Citizen with full rights thereof, and makes them U.S. citizens. That is why you are not asked on government paperwork or IRS tax forms if you are an American Citizen, but are you a U.S. citizen. Most people think they are the same, but they are not. You can opt out of U.S. citizenship and file a W8 as a foreigner even though you are an American. W4 and W2's are for U.S. citizens.

This is not entirely true, Unified S.

The so-called "income" tax only applies to "taxpayers" (as that term is defined within the IRC), whether U.S. citizens or not.
No one, not any individual, not even an IRS agent, has the authority to determine who is subject to (liable for) a revenue tax.
The only authority there is that determines who is subject to (liable for) a revenue tax is the Internal Revenue Code.
The so-called "income" tax is an Excise tax. This means that it is a tax with regards to an 'activity', event and/or privilege.

The Internal Revenue Code is clear in showing which persons are liable for a tax. For example, 26 USC 5701(a)(1) states:

The manufacturer or importer of tobacco products shall be liable for the taxes imposed theron by section 5701.

Another example,

Sec. 5005. Person liable for tax.
(a) General. The distiller or importer of distilled spirits shall be liable for the taxes imposed thereon by section 5001(a)(1).
26 U.S.C. 5005. (Emphasis added.)

There has to be a numbered statute within the IRC that describes the activity or event that makes one liable for the taxes imposed. If there is no
numbered statute that describes such an activity that you are involved in, then there is no liability. For instance, try to find a code section number that describes taxi cab driving. I can tell you that there is none. But don't take my word for it. Look and try to find one... do this for whatever activity you may be involved in.

The 1943 House Congressional Record reiterates the basic fact that the so-called "income" tax is an excise tax.

The income tax is, therefore, not a tax on income as such.
It is an excise tax with respect to certain activities and
privileges which is measured by reference to the income
which they produce. The income is not the subject of the tax:
it is the basis for determining the amount of tax.
House Congressional Record, 3-27-43, page 2580. (emphasis added)

The United States Supreme Court explains an excise tax.

Excises are "taxes laid upon the manufacture, sale or
consumption of commodities within a country, upon
licenses to pursue certain occupations, and upon corporate
privileges." Cooley, Const. Lim., 7th rf., 680.
Flint v. Stone Tracy Co., 220 U.S. 107, at 152 (1911). (Emphasis added.)

W4/W9 & W2's are IRS documents. The same with a W8 Form, it is an IRS document.
If you fill out & sign any of these IRS Forms, then that is providing the IRS with prima facie evidence that shows you are a "taxpayer".
By doing so, you are falling under the purview of the IRS.
Never sign any IRS document if you don't want to fall under their purview. This I cannot stress enough.

Much of what has gone on since the mid 50s is that people have been misled to believe things that are not true. Most all employers are led to believe that they will be held liable for anything that is not reported. Because of this fear generated by the IRS, it causes employers to act as their agents by coercing prospective employees to sign IRS W4/W9 Forms.

Please note there are certain court cases that can clear up misunderstandings one may have.
The courts have clearly stated the revenue laws relate only to those who are subject to and liable for a tax.

For example:

The revenue laws are a code or system in regulation of tax
assessment and collection. They relate to taxpayers and
not to nontaxpayers. The latter are without their scope.
No procedure is prescribed for nontaxpayers, and no attempt
is made to annul any of their rights and remedies in due course
of law. With them Congress does not assume to deal, and they
are neither of the subject nor of the object of the revenue laws.

Note 3: The term "taxpayer" in this opinion is used in the
strict or narrow sense contemplated by the Internal Revenue Code
and means any person who pays, overpays, or is subject to pay
his own personal income tax. (Se section 7701(a)(14) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1954.) A "nontaxpayer" is a person who does not
possess the foregoing requisites of a taxpayer.
Economy Plumbing and Heating Co. v. United States, 470 F2.d 585,
589-590 (U.S. Court of Claims, 1972). (Emphasis added.)

Please be careful to not confuse people any more than they are.
The best way to "get off the plantation" (as Sherry Peele Jackson says) is to stop working for employers that are acting as arms of the IRS, and start working for yourself. Do not accept credit card payments, or payroll checks. Keep your customers close & personal. Do not offer your services to larger companies or corporations, as they will want to report what they pay you.

Cheers -*-

we-R-one

7th July 2012, 03:06

Unified Serenity

7th July 2012, 03:06

Turiya, those who fill out W8 forms are not subject to the tax laws as those who find themselves in the control of Washington D.C. citizenship. Now, in Title 26 even those in that U.S. citizen status need to be aware that wages as per title 26 does not mean money you are paid for working, wages at directly tied to Federal Government pay. When I helped a friend set up a common law trust back in the early 90's it was believed that Ted Kennedy who did fall under the "wages" aspect actually had his common law trust sue him so it could garnish his "wages".

I do agree it's best not to fill out any forms as it's a "voluntary" filing, but people who try to play this game and keep their ssn or have title 26 wages are in for a world of hurt.

Disclaimer, anything I say is my ignorant opinion and not given as tax advice. For that seek a professionally trained government lacky called a CPA.

Unified Serenity

7th July 2012, 03:15

I think it's a double whammy. The BC is also part of the scheme. This may help a bit:

All of us are originally born a natural ‘sovereign free man.’ As soon as you sign the Social Security SS-5 form, you start your very own trust account in the Corporation of the UNITED STATES. This is where you officially separate yourself from your original status as sovereign born free man. Each time you sign for a license or permit, you are signing a contract to do whatever the state or federal government tells you is legal.

The government is now assigning the social security number in the hospitals at the time of birth of a natural free man, thereby getting them into the system as early as possible. You see even today babies are originally born with the status of sovereign freeman. They will remain free man until they accept benefits from the government. The government officials depend upon you remaining in the dark about your true nature.
One thing that you should to remember, there is no law forcing you to get a SS number or to give the SS number to anyone except the Social Security administration. The only laws that have been passed concerning Social Security numbers are intended to force companies to ‘ask’ you for the number. All of this is covered in the Privacy Act of 1974.
After that date no law could be passed to compel you to give your social security number for any reason other than Social Security. The government knows this, so they skirt the issue and go after your SS number in a roundabout way by forcing employers (and others) to basically force you to give it to then in order to work or otherwise be employed. Again all you have to do is stand up to the employer and tell him that you will not comply.
At that point, if he continues to force you to give a SS number, you can take him to court and force him under the threat of summary judgment to do whatever you were asking. What the employers do not understand is that the 1974 Privacy Act gives you the power to take any government organization or private company to court with a stipulated summary judgment attached if it is proved that they violated the Privacy Act.

Slavery by Contract:

The one drawback of this Constitution for the United States is the ability of federal government to contract with the people. In a perfect world this would work just fine. But, in our world, unscrupulous government officials have formulated contracts under statute law to take away your freedom since the 1860’s. Unfortunately, there have always been unscrupulous people that have worked against the sovereign people of the United States. Therefore, contracts were devised to actually take away our sovereign rights.
You need to understand, that we in this country, are the only people in the world that were originally given sovereign rights. That is why others in the United States and Europe have been working to undermine our status. Once our sovereign status is removed, we all become slaves to the government; so that a new world order or one world government can eventually be implemented.

A New World Order can never be implemented if a part of the world has a higher status than the other people around the world? The problem that the ‘One Worlders’ have, is that they must keep our sovereign status hidden until they actually implement the one world government. If you remember, President Bush Sr. (41) slipped and talked about this during his presidency.

What Does It Say?:

Another important fact to remember, when reading any government document, especially if it is a ‘legal document’; you have to know the meaning of the words being used. The accepted meaning is not always the same as what is being used in contracts and legal documents. I use a 4th edition Black’s Law Dictionary to define the terminology. This is especially important if the meanings of certain words have not been clearly defined in the body of the document that I am reading. This is very important! It can give you a false sense of security. You may think the contract says one thing but, because of the different meanings of words “in law” it may have an entirely different meaning. These documents once signed by the individual, become valid and either support or help take away your God given sovereign rights.

For instance normal use of the word “person,” is ‘individual,’ ‘people,’ etc. But, in government documents it means “citizen of the UNITED STATES Corporation”. Most of us never even think of this when reading a government document. The reason they have redefined the word person is to make you think they (the government) are talking about a sovereign individual. This gives you the feeling that you are free, but in reality you have become a slave to the corporate state.

Other examples of the differences in words and their meaning is the word “Freeman” vs. “Free man”. On the surface they look the same. But when consulting Black’s law dictionary, you find two completely different definitions.

• ‘Freeman’ is defined in modern legal phraseology, as the appellation of a member of a city or borough having the right of suffrage, or member of any municipal corporation invested with full civic rights.

• ‘Free man’ on the other hand is a lawfully competent sovereign that can act as juror and is also an allodial proprietor, as distinguished from a vassal or feudatory.
CITIZEN vs Citizen vs citizen:

• CITIZEN: All caps CITIZEN is generally defined as a Corporate Entity unless qualified with a specific explanation.

o All CAPS generally refers to Corporate or Federal designations.

• Citizen: Capitalized Citizen is defined as Sovereign Citizen or free man

• citizen: Lower case citizen is generally defined as an individual and relies on the explanation for context.

Individual:

Individual is also dependent upon the explanation and context.

PERSON, Person, person: A Person is always defined as belonging to the corporation.
Your Rights are “Self Evident”:

At the end of the Revolutionary War it was recognized that “We the People” (each individual) was a sovereign. Notice that no constitution [state or federal] has ever provided the people with any rights. The people possessed these rights before the Constitution was formed. Therefore, all constitutions (contracts with the people) state the limits of which government may exercise control of the people. In fact it is the existence and recognition of these rights that give the people authority to form both federal and state constitutions.
The existence and recognition of preexisting rights can be can be found in:

• The Magna Carta (June 15, 1215)
• The Declaration of Rights in Congress, at New York (October 19, 1765)
• The Declaration of Rights in Congress, at Philadelphia (October 14, 1774)
• The Declaration of Independence (July 4, 1776)
• The Articles of Confederation (November 15, 1777)
• The Treaty of Paris (September 3, 1783)
• This Constitution for the United States of America (September 17, 1787 )
• And, The Bill of Rights including the 9th and 10th Amendments (December 15, 1791)

Throughout these documents, it can be seen that ‘the people are not subservient to the government, but rather that the government it subservient to the people.’
Think about this for just a second. Do you feel that the government is subservient to you, or is it the other way around? Today it is just the opposite of what our forefathers fought and died for. They fought to give us all sovereign freedom. Instead our government has given us government slavery. You see, the definition of freedom is the jurisdiction of common law, and title to one’s land. We have lost both.

It's a 30 page document and covered some of what I learned back in the 80's.

http://www.ourinterestingworld.com/HowtoBecomeaSovereign.pdf

I don't think we are at odds, at least not in my mind. The whole law of the sea or Admiralty law with it's wording all plays a part. We could do a thread again on this topic. Do you know where to find the legal documents where they specifically incorporated the U.S. of America?

shadowstalker

7th July 2012, 03:16

Disclaimer, anything I say is my ignorant opinion and not given as tax advice. For that seek a professionally trained government lacky called a CPA.

LOLOL hahaha Sorry but that line was just to cute, I had to chuckle a tad...

we-R-one

7th July 2012, 03:34

Ok, US, see my edit above in red.

As far as your other question in regards to when the other states were incorporated, I want to say it was the late 60's, like 1967 to 1970. I'm trying to remember what it was called....crap....it had something to do with the counties voluntarily joining........they were woo'ed in by being given federal funding for acquiescing into the system. Of course the money came at a price and that's where federal mandates came in to play. There are 3,141 corporate counties in the US.

It was my understanding that a county could rescind its participation merely with a letter of withdrawal. The problem is, finding someone who has enough balls to do it, is another story. Many counties are bankrupt (supposedly) and don't want to be cut from federal funding. So that's how the Federal government gets it's policies and programs implemented by threatening to pull funding. Additionally the mandates are what's causing some of these counties and cities to go bankrupt!

Still looking......I have more info for you, but not sure if it will post properly on the form. Let me see what I can do....

ghostrider

7th July 2012, 03:47

America is an extention of England, we don't speak american , we speak English. IT feels like a corporation. Check out Jordan Maxwell he has alot of info in the area your looking at .

turiya

7th July 2012, 04:32

All of this is covered in the Privacy Act of 1974.
After that date no law could be passed to compel you to give your social security number for any reason other than Social Security. The government knows this, so they skirt the issue and go after your SS number in a roundabout way by forcing employers (and others) to basically force you to give it to then in order to work or otherwise be employed. Again all you have to do is stand up to the employer and tell him that you will not comply.
At that point, if he continues to force you to give a SS number, you can take him to court and force him under the threat of summary judgment to do whatever you were asking.

The Privacy Act of 1974 only applies to government agencies, not private companies. The way the gov't agencies/employers skirt this is by making it part of their Administrative Policies & Procedures to require an SSN before anyone can be hired. If you go into court on this, you will have to go as pro se, as you would be hard-pressed to find an attorney that would be willing to represent you according to how you want to be represented on this issue. For the most part, they are only willing to represent clients according to how they (the attorneys) want to do the representing.

The ACLU steers well away from getting involved with this SSN stuff.

regards t

bekrah

7th July 2012, 04:36

we-R-one

7th July 2012, 04:54

we-R-one

7th July 2012, 05:01

Ok, so I found a link to what I had that might somewhat simplify the information. I've been wanting to start a thread on this for a long time, but it's complicated and you really have to lay it out in such a manner so people can understand. Often the one's who really "get it" are so advanced that they can't simplify it enough for others to follow. Maybe when we get enough solid information we can start a thread with it all layed out in some type of logical order so everyone can grasp the idea.

I have some other documents I want to look at US but they're at home and I'm not going back for a few days. If I can find them readily I'll post what I have. Until then, take a look at this:

http://www.gemworld.com/USAvsUS.htm

+EDIT+
You might want to copy and paste this for your own use in case this link is shut down. I posted some great information not too long ago about attorneys and they shut down the site shortly there after, so it wouldn't surprise me if this link got the same treatment.

turiya

7th July 2012, 05:08

...in Title 26 even those in that U.S. citizen status need to be aware that wages as per title 26 does not mean money you are paid for working, wages at directly tied to Federal Government pay.

I reiterate what the 1943 House Congressional Record states - the basic fact that the so-called "income" tax is not a tax on income, wages, remuneration, etc. per se. It is an excise tax with regard to an activity or an event. The income derived from that activity is used to determine how much tax is owed by the "taxpayer".

The income tax is, therefore, not a tax on income as such.
It is an excise tax with respect to certain activities and
privileges which is measured by reference to the income
which they produce. The income is not the subject of the tax:
it is the basis for determining the amount of tax.
House Congressional Record, 3-27-43, page 2580. (emphasis added)

If one is not involved in a revenue taxable activity (no numbered code section describing the activity), then one is not a "taxpayer". Any amount of income, remuneration, wages, etc., that is received is a mute point when it comes to the Internal Revenue Code. Because one lies outside of the purview of the Internal Revenue laws.

The revenue laws are a code or system in regulation of tax
assessment and collection. They relate to taxpayers and
not to nontaxpayers. The latter are without their scope.
No procedure is prescribed for nontaxpayers, and no attempt
is made to annul any of their rights and remedies in due course
of law. With them Congress does not assume to deal, and they
are neither of the subject nor of the object of the revenue laws.

Note 3: The term "taxpayer" in this opinion is used in the
strict or narrow sense contemplated by the Internal Revenue Code
and means any person who pays, overpays, or is subject to pay
his own personal income tax. (Se section 7701(a)(14) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1954.) A "nontaxpayer" is a person who does not
possess the foregoing requisites of a taxpayer.
Economy Plumbing and Heating Co. v. United States, 470 F2.d 585,
589-590 (U.S. Court of Claims, 1972). (Emphasis added.)

This has nothing to do with whether someone is a U.S. citizen or not. It has everything to do with whether one is involved in a revenue taxable activity or not.

peace
t

Unified Serenity

7th July 2012, 05:48

Turiya, I understand what you are saying, but I don't think you understand the impact of the SSN and placing oneself into the employee status of Washington D.C. by having an ssn. This article may help. I really am not sure we are at odds in this, maybe a twist here or there or semantics in ideas. BC and SSN are both tools to get you under control of Washington D.C. to put you in that special catagory as a U.S. citizen.

The TRUTH About SOCIAL SECURITY (FICA)
Social Security tax or FICA (Federal Insurance Contributions Act) is another tax taken out of your paycheck with withholding, or self-assessed as self-employment tax. Where's the authority for this and who does it apply to?

IRC (Internal Revenue Code) 3101. Rate of tax.
(a) Old-age, survivors, and disability insurance. In addition to other taxes, there is hereby imposed on the income of every individual a tax equal to the following percentages of the wages (as defined in section 3121(a)) received by him with respect to employment (as defined in section 3121(b) --
Again, this is just another excise tax imposed on income, in addition to other taxes, and has nothing to do with any type of insurance. Since an excise tax is a tax on a privilege, then what's the privilege here? The privilege is wages received with respect to employment. Is employment a government granted privilege? Yes, since the government property (U.S. citizen) is employed by a business, that makes every employer a government employer. But notice that, again, the tax is a percentage of wages. Do you receive wages?
Well, since 'wages' and 'employment' are words of art here, with statutory references to definitions, let's check them out first, along with a few others. This is Chapter 21 (Federal Insurance Contributions Act) of the IRC (Internal Revenue Code). NOTE: The definitions of 'employer' and employee' and 'wages' we previously examined in Chapter 24, Sect. 3401 withholding, do not apply to this Chapter 21. So we have new definitions to contend with.
Remember, when we go through these definitions, that the word "includes", when used in a definition, means that all the words in the definition will fall into the same category, while the word "means" is limited to exactly what is defined. For example: The definition of fruit that says,"Fruit includes apples, pears and oranges", would also include other "fruit" in this category, such as cherries, but would 'exclude' potatoes, which are vegetables and not fruit. But if the definition says, "Fruit means apples and pears", then the definition is limited to what is actually described. It would NOT include oranges or cherries. Be aware of this distinction!

IRC 3121. Definitions.
(a) Wages. "For purposes of this chapter, the term "wages" means all remuneration for employment, . . . "
(b) Employment. "For the purposes of this chapter, the term "employment" means any service, of whatever nature, performed (A) by an employee for the person employing him, irrespective of the citizenship or residence of either, (i) within the United States,, or (ii) on or in connection with an American vessel or aircraft under a contract of service which is entered into within the United States . . ."
So far, we have seen that 'wages' are pay for 'employment'; and 'employment' is performed by an 'employee'; and it only applies within the 'United States'. Since employment applies to employees, let's see what an 'employee' is in this chapter on Social Security tax.

IRC 3121 (d) Employee. For purposes of this chapter, the term "employee" means --
(1) any officer of a corporation; or
(2) any individual who, under the usual common law rules applicable in determining the employer-employee relationship, has the status of an employee; or
(3) any individual (other than an individual who is an employee under paragraph (1) or (2)) who performs services for remuneration for any person --
(A) as an agent-driver or commission-driver engaged in distributing meat products, vegetable products, fruit products, bakery products, beverages (other than milk), or laundry or dry-cleaning services, for his principal;
(B) as a full-time life insurance salesman;
(C) as a home worker performing work, according to specifications furnished by the person for whom the service are performed, on materials or goods furnished by such person which are required to be returned to such person or a person designated by him; or
(D) as a traveling or city salesman, other than as an agent-driver or commission-driver, engaged upon a full time basis in the solicitation on behalf of, and the transmission to, his principal . . . of orders from wholesalers, retailers, contractors, or operators of hotels, restaurants, or other similar establishments for merchandise for resale or supplies for use in their business operations;
if the contract of service contemplates that substantially all of such services are to be performed personally by such individual; except that an individual shall not be included in the term "employee" under the provisions of this paragraph if such individual has a substantial investment in facilities used in connection with the performance of such services . . . or if the services are in the nature of a single transaction not part of a continuing relationship with the person for whom the services are performed; or
(4) any individual who performs services that are included under an agreement entered into pursuant to section 218 of the Social Security Act.
I'm glad they made this definition simple, aren't you? Notice the definition qualifier word, 'means'. It only applies to what is actually listed. So what is it really saying? With so much fog, they must be trying to hide something. What is it? I think the purpose is to spend so much time figuring out who is an employee, and who is not, that you lose sight of the real question: Who does the tax apply to? Definition #2 pretty wells sums it up. Any employee in the usual common law meaning of employer and employee, has the status of employee. This is a different definition for employee than found in section 3401 - Withholding, because it is for a different kind of tax. This is basically a tax for old age insurance, or retirement. Or, as it is commonly known, a Social Security tax. It is a form of pension benefit or privilege an employer pays to his employee. In this case you help pay your own pension benefit. Do pension benefits ever apply to non-employees? No. The government considers everyone (every U.S. citizen) THEIR employee.
Go back to Sect. 3101 - Rate of Tax. It says the tax is on individuals receiving wages from employment. What is 'employment'? The definition says it is services performed by an 'employee' 'within the United States'. We just read the definition of 'employee' and that applied to pretty much everybody, so let's check the definition of United States.
What is the United States, and where is it? Remember from an earlier chapter, there are several different definitions for the United States, and that the geographical jurisdictions of the 50 United States of America are different from the federal United States government. Which one are we talking about here?

IRC Sec. 3121 (e) State, United States, and citizen.
For purposes of this chapter --
(1) State. The term "State" includes the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and American Samoa.
(2) United States. The term "United States" when used in a geographical sense includes the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa.
An individual who is a citizen of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (but not otherwise a citizen of the United States) shall be considered, for purposes of this section, as a citizen of the United States.
Oh, the fog is clearing a little. The geographical United States, in this definition, 'includes' the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa. The word 'includes' means that it includes only things that are in the category mentioned in the definition, and excludes everything else. Even the definition of 'State" 'includes' only U.S. possessions and territories. Neither definition says anything about the 50 states. So the only logical conclusion you can make is that the Social Security tax applies only to government employees in U.S. possessions and territories, and not to the 50 states. If you remember, these employees would be 'persons' under the 14th Amendment and therefore subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal government. This is that special class of citizenship that has 'privileges and immunities' that are protected. Employment in the United States possessions is one of those privileges you are being taxed for as a citizen of the United States.
Again, the big question. Can you claim that you are a U.S. citizen, 'employed' in one of the 'United States' possessions and apply for Social Security? When you sign the Social Security application, do you, under penalty of perjury, declare that you are a United States citizen, as legally defined under this section? Yes you do! Is your name spelled in all capital letters on the SS card? Yes it is. The definition says that if you are a citizen of Puerto Rico, then you shall be considered to be a citizen of the United States. Are you a citizen of Puerto Rico? No? Then do you live in the 'United States', as defined?
Remember, that people in U.S. possessions and territories are also subjects of the federal government. And, as subjects, they are under the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States government. Remember from the 14th Amendment, what people under the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States are called? United States citizens. And if you are a citizen of Puerto Rico, you are also considered to be a U.S. citizen.
So this Social Security tax applies to government employees working in the United States. Government 'employee' includes everyone, and the United States is limited to Washington D.C. and 4 possessions. The 50 states are not mentioned.
Apparently this tax is only for U.S. citizens living within the geographical jurisdiction of the United States government. The official definition of United States does not include the 50 states. And this is true. BUT, under martial law, that jurisdiction is extended to the 50 states and now the tax applies to everyone who claims to be a U.S. citizen/subject of the federal government.
A quick review of the 14th Amendment:

U.S. Constitution 14th Amendment. Sect. 1 All persons born or naturalized in the United States AND subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; or shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
So, again, a U.S. citizen is under the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States, with no mention of 'rights'. What do you call a person who is subject to the government? Subject? Slave? Employee? Property? All four? How about U.S. Citizen. And only these U.S. citizens have SS #'s (slave/subject #). I believe that it is the application for a Social Security number that creates the contract for U.S. citizenship, and waives your American Citizenship. The U.S. citizen was created at birth, but he is not actually confirmed, until he contracted to get a Social Security number. That is why an employer insists that you get a Social Security number before you start work. The government wants proof that you are now under their jurisdiction, should they ever need it, like if they wanted to assess income tax on you. With so many kids having money these days, the government realizes that they are engaged in commerce at an earlier and earlier age all the time, and they are missing out on some tax revenue. So now when a child is born, the government wants you to contract for a Social Security number right away, so there is no question of jurisdiction. After all, even kids have to pay income tax if they make over a certain amount of money.
THE SOCIAL SECURITY INSURANCE SCAM Another way to look at this is: What does "Social Security" really mean? Social means 'public'. A security is stock of a corporation. Stock is a publicly traded security regulated by the SEC. So when you get a social security number, you are activating or creating the public stock (security) of the corporation known as the United States, stock created for you to use, which adds to their collateral. By getting a social security number you declare yourself to be public stock of the U.S. government! You ARE a social (public) security, with a security number, you do not GET social security insurance! If you will look at the latest issued SS cards, you will see a red number on the back, just like the red registered security numbers on the back of a stock certificate! What's the difference? None! They are both public securities!
What do you call a person who delegates powers to the government via a constitution? A sovereign. Can a sovereign also be a citizen of his own government? Is a king also a subject to himself? Does a sovereign pledge allegiance to any government if He IS the government? Remember the pledge of allegiance you recited in school? I pledge allegiance to the flag, of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, . . . You weren't pledging to the United States government, which is a democracy! You were pledging to the flag representing the 50 sovereign states, AND to the republics (states) for which they stand. Each separate sovereign state. Since the states are no longer republics, but corporations of the federal government, is the pledge of allegiance still valid? Or is it part of the con?
As we learned in chapter 6, the 14th Amendment was originally created for the freed slaves in the south (black and white) because slaves were property and had no citizenship. So the 14th Amendment created a new class of citizen, the U.S. citizen. Up to that point there were no official U.S. citizens. Citizens of the states were called United States of America (American) Citizens, or State Citizens, sovereigns in their state. The 14th Amendment created a new official class of United States citizen. Were they successful in making you think you were a U.S. citizen? Love those words of art! And these U.S. citizens had no inalienable rights secured by a constitution, just privileges and immunities secured by the good faith and credit of the federal government. Are YOU, by presumption, and by SS contract, a United States citizen?
How far, geographically, did the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States originally extend? We already examined this in detail, but let's do a quick review.

U.S. Constitution Article 1 Section 8 Clause 16. To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten square miles) as may, by Cession of Particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the States in which Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards and other needful Buildings;
Well, it looks like the exclusive geographical jurisdiction only extends to the District of Columbia and purchased properties (possessions and territories). Well that matches the definition of 'United States' above, doesn't it! Are these possessions and territories part of the federal United States? Yes. Are they part of the 50 United States of America? No. In fact, the federal government owns outright, over 40% of the land in America!
Can you live in the sovereign state of Maryland or Virginia, and work for the federal government in Washington D.C., a federal state? Yes. Then you would be liable for Social Security tax on your 'employment' income. You are employed in the federal United States, as defined. But remember, under martial law, all states are now federal states, under the jurisdiction of the federal government. So technically, we all live in a government possession, and claim U.S. citizenship, just like the people in Puerto Rico do. More on martial law in the U.S. Bankruptcy chapter.
Remember, this is information on Social Security tax, not income tax. But you can volunteer for Social Security tax just like you can volunteer for income tax. It is the SS# contract that makes you taxable for FICA tax. It is claiming the privilege of 'employment', as defined, in one of the federal United States. The income tax still applies only to privileged activities with a tax imposed on them. The Social Security number just verifies that you are a U.S. citizen.
When you tried to rescind your social security number, you cannot. The number belongs to the government and was assigned to a public security. All you can rescind is your original signature on your Social Security application/contract. The number is still valid. And the first time you use the number, the number is automatically activated again, because it reactivates the contract! So keep the number, but reserve all your inalienable rights when you use it. It is mandatory to have for most jobs and for getting a bank account and in many states for a driver's license. Therefore, you are forced to sign the SS contract if you want to operate in the world, and any contract signed under force, or under fraud, is null and void from the beginning. Fraud, because did you think you were REALLY getting an insurance policy for retirement? FICA is just a tax, not an insurance policy. To call it insurance is fraud.
Think about it. If you made your whole living investing in the stock market or in real estate, you would have no self employment tax and no Social Security tax. When you retire, do you then qualify for Social Security if you had no other income over the years? No. Why? Since you were not 'employed' anywhere, and never paid anything in to the program, you do not qualify. Why? Retirement benefits only apply to those employed by an employer.
The TRUTH is that Social Security is just a fringe benefit, for any U.S. citizen who is a subject of the federal government. And the qualifications for Social Security are easy! You just have to be a U.S. citizen/subject and pay in for 10 years! In the Supreme Court case of Flemming v. Nestor, 363 U.S. 603 (1960) the Supreme Court ruled that Congress is paying Social Security benefits under the same constitutional authority that it doles out Aid to Families with Dependent Children and to those receiving food stamps. The Court said that workers have no legal claim to either their accrued contributions or to their anticipated benefits. And that Congress can stop these benefits at any time they want. Remember, privileges and immunities for citizen/subjects can be granted and withdrawn by the government at will. You have no 'right' to Social Security benefits, even if you paid in for 50 years, because it is NOT insurance. It is just a tax, to be doled out as willed. You are just on welfare, being paid from the income made by others! It is a giant pyramid scheme that would be illegal if you tried to implement a retirement program like this yourself. And it can be discontinued or changed at any time.
Remember, the social security tax is an excise tax on a privilege. The privilege is; being employed by the government in the jurisdiction of U.S. federal territory. Can you be forced to accept a privilege, so you can be taxed on that privilege? No. To engage in a privilege is still voluntary. But, the government is working on that. They have made it almost mandatory to accept the privilege of Social Security. After all, you can't get 'employment' in the 'United States' without one. And if you go to the doctor, they want your Social Security number. And in some states your can't get the "privilege" of liberty (driver's license) without a social security number. You didn't know that liberty was now a privilege, and not an inalienable right? United States citizens have this 'privilege' of liberty. American sovereigns have the inalienable right of liberty. They can drive to the grocery store without permission (driver's license) from the government. Another whole book subject!
If you will remember, the government, in 1894, tried to tax property income with an excise tax, and this lead to the famous Supreme Court case of Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust (1895), that we previously read of. If you remember, the court ruled that property income, real or personal, could only be taxed with a direct tax with apportionment. So the government went back to the drawing boards. The problem? The court had also ruled in other cases, that even corporate property can only be taxed with a direct tax. The solution? The 16th Amendment (1913). It simply stated that all income, from whatever source, such as property, 'connected' to an excise activity, like a corporation, could be taxed with an excise tax. That took care of corporate income. But what about personal income? Another problem? How can we tax property income with an excise tax? The solution? Create a public corporation for every person in the United States, and have them claim all income received to be connected with that corporation, and thereby subject to an excise tax. But the people would not agree to that if they knew about it, so we must make it look like an old age insurance benefit that they can apply for, since it is practically impossible for an older person to get life insurance. Result? The Social Security Act of 1935, two years after the U.S. bankruptcy.
By creating social security account, what is really happening is that the government has created a legal fiction (name in all caps), a corporation, for you to use, without your knowledge. WHY? Because they can legally tax the property income of a corporation with an excise tax! They cannot tax the sovereign's property income with an excise tax, it can only be done with a direct tax, according to the Constitution. And you voluntarily apply for and use that SS number on everything that you do! It is tied to all income you receive and voluntarily report on tax returns! When you file a tax return, you are declaring that you, the U.S. citizen (corporate property) had income, and corporate property income is taxable with an excise tax!. HAVE WE BEEN SCAMMED OR WHAT! That is why it is so important to make a legal distinction between you, the sovereign American Citizen, and the legal fiction (U.S. corporate citizen, name in all caps) that you have contracted to be!
Your Social Security number cannot be used for identification, by law, any more than you can use a stock certificate as identification. The IRS cannot use your Social Security number for identification purposes, since the number belongs to the Social Security Administration. But they can issue an identical number and just call it a taxpayer ID number instead. It's not any different than you being a United States of America Sovereign and just calling it U.S. citizenship. Or a sovereign claiming to be a slave so he can get a few free handouts. A Social Security number is not required on a tax form, unless you are liable, but you can volunteer to supply it if you want.
If you are not liable for employment tax, then a Social Security number's purpose is to convert your private property income to taxable corporate income. It all revolves around 'corporate employment' in the jurisdiction of the United States government. Banks want the number, so they can report to the IRS any interest they paid to you, as taxable income. But think about it. Is opening a checking account or savings account, or investing in a certificate of deposit, a government granted privilege that a tax has been imposed on? Not that I know of. The government is insuring your bank balance from loss with the FDIC, so I suppose they could call that receiving a privilege, but there would still need to be a tax imposed on it first. There is none. So I guess the privilege would be corporate income earning interest on that account.
Should you still have just Social Security tax taken out of your paycheck so you can receive SS benefits when you retire? Are you a corporate U.S. citizen, subject to employment tax? Then you are also subject to income tax and social security tax. The Princeton Economic Institute states that "under today's terms, if you are under 55 you have a greater chance of being abducted by aliens than ever seeing your first Social Security check." With those odds, do you still want the tax withheld?
Remember, studies have shown that if you invest the same amount of money in the stock market, as you pay into your own social security (stock) account, that your return would be much greater than the social security benefits you would receive. The problem is most people don't have the discipline to save money, so they let their master force then to do it instead.

SUMMARY Social Security tax is on 'employees' employed in the 'United States', as these terms are legally defined in this section of the IRC. Social Security tax is one of the several 'employment' taxes on 'employees' working for the government in the jurisdiction of federal United States.
A SS# makes you liable for a tax on income received, since it is now corporate income. The government also claims that working for them in a federal state is a privilege, taxable with a social security tax. Obtaining the number is a privilege. Privileges cannot be mandatory. But the government can make it so you cannot get along without the privilege!
Ironically, the federal government does not collect social security tax from its own federal employees. It has its own pension plan. It only collects from U.S. citizens not directly employed by the government.
Getting a Social Security number creates the contract that you are, under penalty of perjury, a corporate United States citizen/subject, working for the government in a federal state, even if you live elsewhere. By the way, voting does also. Check your voter registration card and see if you swore you were a U.S. citizen. The same applies to gun purchases. You declared yourself to be a U.S. citizen, thereby waiving your second amendment right to bear arms. Another book subject!
A social security account number is just a public stock account number, (corporate legal fiction whose name is in all caps) created by the federal government for you, as a means to collect revenue through you , the sovereign, legally. It is an end run around the Constitution, where they can impose a legitimate 'excise' tax on the property income of a corporate legal fiction, where only a 'direct' tax could formerly be imposed on the property income of a sovereign.
Remember, it is a Social Security number that makes you liable for the excise income tax. And it IS also government employment in the federal U.S. that makes you liable for a Social Security tax.
http://usa-the-republic.com/revenue/true_history/Chap7.html

we-R-one

7th July 2012, 06:02

Something else to note....supposedly your ss# is printed on bond paper. You are worth millions of dollars and just don't know it! They are monetizing your signature!!! Which means they have a bond out in your name, .....which means every time you sign for a credit card or a mortgage, that signature is releasing the money from the bond and going right to the crimminals.....which means, you are paying for the debt at least twice plus interest when it has all ready been paid for at the moment of signing!!! And you wonder why they don't care how many soliders get killed in war? They're cashing out on their bonds........$#!$^*&$%!!

Unified Serenity

7th July 2012, 06:13

Great site with the flags info etc... I found this image very interesting. I already was upon the admiralty flag, but not the civil flag. Imagine we actually had civil flags to show we were under civil law:

http://www.gemworld.com/Flags/Flag--SF-CustomsHouse1913.jpg

http://www.barefootsworld.net/graphics/civilflag.gif

We the People of the United States,
actually have two national flags, a military flag and a civil flag for peacetime.
They have several important distinctions and meanings.
Almost all Americans think of the Stars and Stripes "Old Glory" as their only flag.

http://www.barefootsworld.net/uscivilflag.html

http://www.gemworld.com/Flags/Flag--CorrectSizeRatio1x1p9.gif Military flag --Horizontal stripes, white stars on blue background
Has no fringe, braid (tassel), eagle, ball, spear, etc.

http://www.gemworld.com/Images7/FLAGwGoldFringe.gif Not the original
USA Military flag
Some say it is a flag of Admiralty/Maritime type jurisdiction and is not suppose to be used on Land. Others say it’s not a flag at all, but fiction.
However, the gold fringe which surrounds the flag gives notice that the American flag has been captured and is now being used by the corporate so-called government to give notice of its jurisdiction.

The flag shown above appears to be a "USA flag" but has one or more of the following:

Gold fringe along its borders (called "a badge")
Gold braided cord (tassel) hanging from pole
Ball on top of pole (last cannon ball fired)
Eagle on top of pole
Spear on top of pole

The flag shown above is Not described in Title 4 of USC and therefore is illegal on land except for maybe (1) the President since he is in charge of Naval Forces on high seas, and (2) naval offices and yards.

President Eisenhower settled the debate on the width of the fringe.

The so-called justification for a Naval/Maritime flag to be on land is that all land was under the high water mark at one time even if it was eons ago.

Flags on poles flying at the same height as other flags have equal status. A flag flying higher than the flag below indicates superiority over the flag below. Note that corporate state flags fly below the US flag.

Keep in mind that the states were originally Sovereign over the central government and only the state flags were flown except in the District of Columbia not exceeding 10 miles square, its territories, forts, dockyards, arsenals, and other needful buildings, such as Post Offices, purchased with the consent of the legislature of the affected state.
(Constitution, Section 8, Clause 17)

The people in the geographic continental USA are at peace but the corporate government continues to be at war to exist, to increase and perpetuate debt, and to enrich others through Defence contracts.
http://www.gemworld.com/USAvsUS.htm

This is why we always have a war on something... poverty, terror, drugs

we-R-one

7th July 2012, 06:28

This is my last post for tonight, I swear, lol......I've got a couple more, but will wait till tomorrow. I'd put the link up for the article below, but like many of these they have mysteriously disappeared and are no longer in use. Thank God for copy and paste!

Truth Talk from a Judge, I don't know the name, but may be worth considering, came from a good source...
• Posted by ҨΕlizabeth Trutwin₪ on February 18, 2010 at 9:52pm
• View ҨΕlizabeth Trutwin₪'s blog

YOU SHALL KNOW THE TRUTH AND THE TRUTH SHALL SET YOU FREE

By: no name (hidden for his safety)
INTRODUCTION:

During my twelve years service as a Judge, I always insisted on the truth and placed justice above law and order!

More evidence of our Slavery is as follows:
a) The primary control and custody of infants is with the corporate state government
through the filing of government issued Birth Certificates, which are held in a State Trust and therein each applicant is recorded under the Department of Transportation as a State owned Vessel and financial asset. A government issued Birth Certificate was never needed as proof of birth because a baptismal record or a family bible entry of birth, was and is an exception to hearsay and constitutes legal proof of birth! Had your parents never applied for a government issued Birth Certificate, none of the Federal or State Statutes, Codes or Regulations in place, would be enforceable against you, and no government official or agency could ever tell you how to raise your children; declare you an unfit parent, or take your children away from you! We all made fun of the Amish of Pennsylvania and yet the government cannot touch them because they do not participate in anything these corporate governments have to offer. The title to their land is recorded as an Ecclesiastical Trust. The Vatican (the Holy Roman Church) actually owns all the land, territories and insular possessions called America and as long as the Amish remain an Ecclesiastical Trust and remain a passive Christian Society, the Vatican will protect them. The Holy Roman Church possesses the power toprotect or crush anyone and anything! [See: Tillman v. Roberts, 108 So. 62 [and] Title U. S. C. 7701 [and] 18 U. S. C. Section 8].

b) Social Security is not a Trust or Insurance policy or Insurance against disability. The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that Social Security is a government giveaway program funded by a government Tax; which is why and how the Congress can periodically dip into the assets of the fund anytime they want and never have to pay it back! The back of the Social Security card states that the card is the property of the government and not you! Your birth name appears on the front of that card and has been modified, the same way as your birth certificate; from upper and lower case letters to all capital letters, pursuant to the U. S. Government Printing Manual, which instructs government agencies on how to subtly convert a living man into a corporation. The actual Director of our Social Security Fund and Administration is the Queen of England and from which she is paid a generous salary. Your Social Security Card is issued by the United Nations through the International Monetary Fund and your Social Security Number is actually your International Slave Number! On the reverse side of that card is an “E” letter followed by eight numbers. That is a “cusip” number, which is required on all securities! Yes! You have been converted into a marketable security, like a bond, and your person was offered for sale and sold to domestic and foreign corporate investors!

c) A Marriage License Application is a request to your “Masters” for permission to marry.
If you ever had any claim of sovereignty before that date; you lost it completely when you applied for and married under a marriage license. Sovereignty means: “To assert ones independence and to claim to be self-governing.” The license isn’t necessary and never has been because a marriage has always been just a contract, witnessed by God, between a man and a woman! Who told you that you must apply for a license? It is the official you chose to conduct your ceremony? The official just happens to be a licensed government official and his license prevents him from conducting marriage ceremonies without the issuance of a marriage license. Did Moses or Jesus ever say or profess that a marriage is not recognized by God, without a license?

Here’s the Fraud behind the License:
Those who apply for and marry pursuant to a marriage license have now added a third party to their marriage contract! The third party is the Master, by and through his Agent, the Corporate State. The marriage license bestows the State with the legal right to decide the fate of the husband, wife and the possessions they procured during their marriage, should the marriage fail. Their divorce must now be decided by and through the States Corporate Court by a Corporate Judge, and the Judges first and foremost concern is the “interest of the State.” The interest of the bride and groom is now secondary. [See: VanKosten v. VanKosten, 154 N.E. 146]. A comment by the Judge deciding this divorce says it all! “The ultimate ownership of all property is the State: individual so called ownership is only by virtue of government, [i.e.] laws amounting to mere use must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the necessities of the state.” [Also See: Senate Document No. 43 of the 73rd Congress, 1st Session] and [Brown v. Welch, U.S. Superior Court].

d) The term “license” is defined in law as, “A permit to do something illegal.” [See: Blacks Law Dictionary, 6th or 7th Edition]. Therefore, all licenses are permits to violate the only real law! Inalienable rights are the rights bestowed upon all living men, by God at birth! All other laws are subordinate to God’s law. The controlling government wants us to rely on their laws, so they demand that we apply for a license! Another example is a “Drivers License.” It is your God given right to travel the roadways of this nation and no government has any right to restrict, tax or license your pursuit of happiness! The only exception is a Driver of a Commercial Vehicle. The governments have a right to regulate Commerce, which means trade. Anyone operating a vehicle in Commerce must be licensed but all others are absolutely free to travel without one! The foreign Agents in power; have changed the common meanings of words to encapsulate and control every Sovereign. They succeed in this intimidation through the corporate courts and police enforcement by officers who have been brainwashed and reinforced by mandatory training programs.

e) The use of “Trusts” by the Masters and their Agents; is for a good reason! A Trust by law is secret and neither the Masters nor their agents [the Corporate Government and Courts] can be compelled to expose the rules or regulations of the Trust and those regulations can change with the wind, without notice to the participants! [See: The Law of Trusts].

f) Slaves cannot own property. Look at the Deed to your home. You are identified as the[Tenant] of the property and never the Owner and your Local and State land tax is actually a “rent or use fee” assessed by the State for the lease on the land. You gave them the land after closing via your Lawyer. Did he ever tell you that?
After closing, your Lawyer recorded the deed with the Court. The law only suggests recording the deed, it doesn’t mandate it! Upon recording, you gave the land back to the State, who then leases it back to you for as long as you live there! Isn’t that where you have constructed your home, your castle? I’m paying for it, doesn’t that make the land mine, you ask? If you fail to pay the States assessed “rent or use fee,” which has been cleverly disguised as a direct state tax; you will be evicted from your castle and land, and the state will take title and sell your home under commercial law. Commercial Law ordains that, "Anything permanently attached, is retained by the owner!” Who is the owner of the land? Why the State because you so graciously donated it to them.

Oh, I almost forgot; your Lawyer receives a fee from the State for recording your deed for their use and benefit! How do you feel about your lawyer now? Didn’t you pay him to represent “your interests” at the closing? Now you see why lawyers are the brunt of numerous jokes and have such a poor reputation! Its because they deserve it!

g) Foreclosures are nothing more than evictions, based on a different kind of fraud. The illusion of a debt [Mortgage] that never existed! No individual or family who has beenforeclosed on and evicted from their home in the United States is legal! The only exception to this is owner-financing! Other than owner-financing, the people who purchased their homes through a Mortgage Company, actually owned their homes “completely” on the day of the closing. The real legal definition of a “closing” means that all legal interest as to title is concluded. [See: any reputable Dictionary from the 1800’s]. The definition has been changed by our government lawyers to conceal the fraud.

[Explanation of the above statement]
First you must know that the federal government took America off the gold standard in 1933, during a staged bankruptcy called the “Great Depression” and replaced the gold with an economic principle known as, "Negotiable Debt Instruments." [YES, THE GREAT DEPRESSION WAS STAGED!] The government needed to create a catastrophe to implement standards that were designed to steal your possessions and God-given rights! The process of creating a catastrophe was discovered by behaviorists! Take away a persons food, comfort and safety long enough and they won’t care or question the illusion provided, as long as their stomach is full, they have shelter, a comfortable bed and the means (real or imagined) to keep or continue their comfort!

President Roosevelt unconstitutionally collected America’s gold by Executive Order and sold it to the Vatican by way of China, to conceal its true ownership. The gold in Fort Knox belongs to the Vatican and not the United States! Absent a gold base, Commerce now essentially trades in “debts.” So if you borrowed money for a Mortgage and there’s no gold or real value to support the paper called U. S. Currency; what did you actually borrow? Factually, you borrowed debt! The Mortgage Company committed the ultimate fraud against you because they loaned you nothing to pay off the imaginary balance, not even their own debt instruments. TThey then told you that you owe them the unpaid balance of your home and that you must pay them back with interest, in monthly installments!

Here’s how they did it.
At your Closing, the Mortgage Company had you sign a “Promissory Note” in which you promised your sweat, your equity, full faith and credit against an unpaid balance. Then without your knowledge, the Mortgage Company sold your Promissory Note (your credit) to a Warehousing Institution such as, Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. The Warehousing Institution uses your Promissory Note (your credit) as collateral and generates loans to other people and corporations with interest. Collateral is essential to a corporation because corporations have no money or credit. They’re not real, they’re a fiction and require the sweat, the equity, the full faith and credit of living individuals to breathe and sustain the life of the corporation. Corporate Governments operate under the same principle.

The Warehousing Institution makes money off the “Promissory Note” (your credit) and even though the profits made are nothing more than new (Negotiable Debt Instruments), those instruments still have buying power in a (Negotiable Debt Economy).

These debt instruments are only negotiable because of the human ignorance of the American people and the human ignorance of people in other countries of the World, who have all been lied to, told this has value, and the people don’t know the difference!

Did you ever give your permission to the Mortgage Company to sell your credit? So where is your cut of the profits? If the Mortgage Company invested nothing of their own in the purchase of your home, why are you making a monthly Mortgage payment to them with interest? And where do they get off foreclosing on or against anyone or threatening to foreclose?

They do it by fraud and the Masters and their Agents (the governments, the courts and the banks) all know it! Everything done to us and against us is about sustaining their lives, the lives of the corporate governments they command and to keep “We the People” under their complete control! They accomplish this control by taking away or threatening to take away your comfort and independence! They all use fraudulent means, disguised as law!

Note: When you applied for a Mortgage, the Mortgage Company ran a credit check on you and if you had a blemish on your credit record, they charged you points (money) to ease their pain and lighten the risk (a credit risk) of their loaning you a Mortgage! More Fraud!

Why are you paying points, when they never loaned you a dime! The credit report is just another scam. If you have a high credit report, the government and banks identify you as an “Obedient Slave” and yet your “Promissory Note” sold for the same value as the “Promissory Note” endorsed by the man who is (a credit risk)! Credit didn’t matter. The fact that you are a living person is what matters!

More Fraud:
The Mortgage Company maintains two sets of books regarding your Mortgage payments. The local set of books, is a record that they loaned you money and that you agreed to repay that money, with interest, each month. The second set of books is maintained in another State office, usually a Bank because the Mortgage Companies usually sell your loan contract to a Bank and agree to monitor the monthly payments in order to conceal the fraud! In the second set of books, your monthly Mortgage Payment is recorded by the bank as a savings deposit because there is no real loan! When you pay off the fraudulent mortgage, the Bank waits (90) days and then submits a request to the IRS. The request states: “That someone, unknown to this facility; deposited this money into our facility and has abandoned it! May we keep the deposit?” The IRS always gives their permission to the bank to keep the deposit and your hard earned money just feathered the nest of the Rockefeller, Rothschild and eleven other wealthy families in the world!

Equity Law, which once controlled Americas’ Corporate Courts, has been replaced with Admiralty/Maritime Law, pursuant to Title 28 of the United States Code and the Judiciary Act of 1789. This is the Law of Merchants and Sailors.Under Admiralty/Maritime Law; the Courts presume you owe the Mortgage or the Tax or that you committed a crime defined as a Criminal Statute and it is your obligation to prove you’re innocent! (This means, you’re guilty until you prove you’re innocent), which is the same standard and procedure used in a Military Court Martial. Haven’t we always been told that, “You are innocent - until proven guilty?” Lies, Lies and more Lies!

We are not free men; we are slaves, and bound to our Masters by adhesion contracts and secret Trusts. The goal of the Masters and their (agents) our elected officials, is to keep the people oppressed and subservient to them! As the Masters agents, they utilize propaganda techniques through government controlled schools; churches; the media and mind control by force and or the threat of force through the courts and police enforcement! Police officers in America have been pumped full of more bull**** than a manure spreader and because of their trust, public school conditioning and training, they haven’t the ability to see what is going on! Many have been conditioned by previous military service, not to think for themselves but just follow orders, which makes many of them as dangerous as aTerrorist! Now ask yourself; who are the real Terrorists in America? Guess what; “the Constitution isn’t for the Police either” and still they are forced to swear an oath to defend it!” The more regulations, statutes and codes created, and the greater the number of regulatory officers and agencies created to enforce them; the greater the Masters control over their Slaves and that is mind control by force and threat of force, by the very people we rely on, to protect and serve!

At some point in history the foreign Agents in control of our Federal Government, decided that they needed to create Federal Police Agencies to protect them! I can’t blame them! If I was a part of a conspiracy that could result in the American people hanging me for Treason, I’d want bodyguards too! Now, if you are one of these public officials; how do you justify the employment and expense of bodyguards, when nobody is trying to injure you, and you don’t want anyone to know that you are committing Treason? Instead of confessing your motives; you must find a way to accomplish your objective and blame it on someone else! HENCE: The birth of a bad law,
The Volstead Act and the beginning of “Prohibition!”

Enterprising people began to make money and others organized. Those who organized became mobs and when the mobs began killing each other, the free lance boot-legers and innocent people in drive by shootings; our federal officials sat back and enjoyed the show! They did absolutely nothing until the public was literally breaking down the doors of the Capitol Building: [Just like they had planned it!] The FBI existed before this time. They were a small investigative unit under the Attorney Generals Office. The Agents had no arrest powers and were prohibited from carrying guns. Their only authority was to investigate federal employees and make reports to the attorney general, who then decided if the matter was serious enough to concern the government and whether to prosecute the employee! The FBI was eventually armed, expanded and provided national jurisdiction to fight the gangsters! None of which would have been necessary had it not been for The Volstead Act! Slowly, the agency has grown into the giant it is now and ironically; the Legislature never authorized their expansion. Everything was done by the AG administratively! Where does it say in the Constitution that a federal employee has the authority to create law, create a police authority or expand a current one?

Do you see how our government has circumvented the restrictions placed upon them by the Constitution and manipulated the American people? Every catastrophe, calamity or disaster has been planned and financed by our so-called public representatives with an ulterior motive in mind. The creation of Homeland Security was done in the same way! A Terrorist attack was staged by hired men having connections to the Middle East. I’m not going to go into the conspiracy, other than to say that President Bush and the FBI were as guilty as the men who high-jacked the commercial airplanes! The director of the FBI confessed to the Congress of his Agencies involvement under Presidential Order. He was relieved of his position and Congress took no action against President Bush and the media did not report any of this to the American people! Treason charges were filed against President Bush,Vice-President Cheney and the FBI by a two star General from the Pentagon and no action has ever been taken and nothing was ever reported to the American public, upon the orders of President Obama.

This was just another government catastrophe designed to make you (the public) beg the government to come to your aid and protect you! Each time one of these catastrophe’s are staged; our representatives steal more of our liberty and freedom from us, but America doesn’t care because now they feel safe once again! And that’s what these foreign Agents want us to believe and feel! We complain today that government has eroded our rights! It’s true because we were lied to directly and indirectly and told to believe something other than truth! The correct term here is: "Propaganda" and all government controlled entities and institutions mentioned,are quite expert in the use of it! When I was a child; during a period labeled “the Cold War;” I remember my teacher’s telling the class how expert the Communists are in the use of “propaganda!” I can say now with absolute certainty that no one is as expert as the American government! In fact I believe that our government officials taught the World! I don’t blame my teachers. Most of them were subjected to and spoon fed the same propaganda under direction of these foreign Agents and corporate entities that now employ them. Our teachers are simply spoon feeding our children with the same propaganda that was fed to them! Naturally, if a teacher becomes too creative and steps outside the box, or thinks outside the box, the penalty for such creativity is the termination of employment,their future profession and benefits! Generally, the reason used for termination is: “Failure to adhere to the established curriculum and or meet the needs of this establishment!” Who established the needs and curriculum? Why the government agents under the U. S. Department of Education, acting through the foreign Agents representing the Masters! During the Bush Administration, a Treaty called the North American Alliance was negotiated and signed but the content was not reported to the American public. The Treaty guarantees that the boundary lines dividing Mexico, the United States and Canada will dissolve and become one country to be called North America, upon the installation of the New World Order Government! The currency for North America is being manufactured by the United States Mint. They are gold coins called AMEROS. I have pictures of these coins being minted, that were taken by an employee and smuggled out! Everything in your life has been controlled from birth and you’re still being controlled! The free-thinkers of the world have either been murdered or institutionalized in asylums. Freethinkers are a detriment to the Masters and their Agents! They have the potential to become (Martyrs), especially if the populace begins to pay attention to what the free-thinkers have to say or teach! Look at what happened to Jesus; John Kennedy; Bobby Kennedy; John Kennedy, Jr. and Martin Luther King, Jr.! If you believe John Kennedy, Jr. was an accidental death, then you probably believe that on 911, the attack on the twin towers was a real Terrorist attack!

crested-duck

7th July 2012, 12:28

This whole subject can be historicaly traced back to the RCC and their papal-bull claiming ownership of every soul on earth, since it was written..... As far as the lawyers...... They all take a test to pass the "British Legal Bar assoc."... so they are representing the british empires laws and statutes that are all currently in effect because we are a british colony. I proved that with the info in link ......all relevant today, and actual documents exist still today...Rob.....ADDED: The founding fathers of usa(Ben Franklin and the good ol boys) were financed and directly connected to the crown, thereby making us forever indebted to the british empire. The Mass. Bay Colony was funded by the members of the colony only, with no ties or indebtedness to the empire and RCC. See the difference??? Understand now why the empire wanted to destroy the Mass Bay Colony and their Mass Bay Compact/constitution to return the people to the rank of serf/debt slaves once again????

Unified Serenity

7th July 2012, 14:55

truthseekerdan

7th July 2012, 15:31

Great thread Unified Serenity :thumb:

cfnJ1rOFK7o

genevieve

7th July 2012, 17:08

I've heard/read that when someone dies, the Social Security Administration sends a letter to the next of kin (NOK) offering them some amount of money (around $250?). And naturally the NOK accepts that offer.

But what just happened is the NOK has closed their access to the account with the SSA, which now has access to LOTS and LOTS of money that rightfully belongs to the NOK.

I'm sorry I don't know more about this, but it sounds plausible. Does anyone else know?

Peace Love Joy & Harmony,
Genevieve

P.S. Hats off to you folks who can read more than a couple lines of the legal gobbledygook! :hail:

we-R-one

8th July 2012, 22:56

Unified Serenity

8th July 2012, 23:20

Unified Serenity

9th July 2012, 05:40

This is an interesting primer:

XHl4j5xF-Js

Unified Serenity

9th July 2012, 05:55

You're gonna love this....

From Ballentine's Law Dictionary, 1948 Edition. 'Human Being' is defined as follows: 'See monster' . From the same dictionary, 'monster' is defined: 'A human-being by birth, but in some part resembling a lower animal.'

See, this is why I just love lawyers. I have 3 daughters who all think they are lawyers and love word games. So, it goes on to say:

human being. See monster.
monster. A human-being by birth, but in some part resembling
a lower animal. "A monster...hath no inheritable blood, and
cannot be heir to any land, albeit it be brought forth in marriage
but, although it hath deformity in any part of its body, yet if it
hath human shape, it may be heir." 2 Bl. Com. 24.

Law Dictionary with Pronunciations.
by James Ballentine, Professor of Law in the
University of California, 1948 Edition, The
Lawyers Co-operative Publishing Co.

It sounds like genetic experimentation, as though they are speaking
of a Frankenstein creature having the form of a man.
Human. 1. Of, belonging to, or characteristic of man. 2. Of the
nature of man; that is a man; consisting of men. 3. Belonging or
relative to man as distinguished from God or superhuman beings;
pertaining to the sphere or faculties of man (with implication of
limitation or inferiority); mundane; secular. (Often opposed to
divine.)

A New English Dictionary on Historical
Principles, edited by James A. H. Murray, Oxford:
At the Clarendon Press., 1901
Notice the words “often opposed to divine”. Modern writers on
ancient history having studied ancient manuscripts, writings on stone
tablets, scrolls, and ancient history passed down from generation to
generation. They have found there were attempts to reduce man to a
condition of slavery, to serve a race that wished to be masters or
controllers over the planet. There are also indications of genetic
manipulation in ancient history. If we knew more of our history, we
would not be so surprised at the information contained in this writing.
Also, if we knew this history, we would not be so easily misled.

Ok, this is all too weird, but it explains why the elite treat us like animals. To them, they have us as monsters legally. Just amazing stuff, to read it. You can take up this article, quite interesting. http://thefederalmafia.homestead.com/files/2_society_of_slaves_1.ps.pdf

aISryEYvfzw

Unified Serenity

9th July 2012, 06:05

You can verify all of this on your own. From Forbidden Knowledge (http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/ultimate_delusion.htm), this is long but worth it:

Queen Elizabeth controls and has amended U.S. Social Security, as follows: S.I. 1997 NO.1778 The Social Security (United States of America) Order 1997 Made 22nd of July 1997 coming into force 1st September 1997.

See APFN Web Pages: http://www.apfn.org/apfn/knighthood.htm (http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/Dial%20Protected) ; http://www.apfn.org/apfn/queen.htm (http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/Dial%20Protected)
At the Court at Buckingham Palace the 22nd day of July 1997. Now, therefore Her Majesty an pursuance of section 179 (1) (a) and (2) of the Social Security Administration Act of 1992 and all other powers enabling Her in that behalf, is please, by and with advise of Her privy Council, to order, and it is hereby ordered as follows:

"This Order may be cited as the Social Security (United States of America) Order 1997 and shall come into force on 1st September 1997."
Does this give a new meaning to Federal Judge William Wayne Justice stating in court that he takes his orders from England?
This order goes on to redefine words in the Social Security Act and makes some changes in United States Law. Remember, King George was the "Arch-Treasurer and Prince Elector of the Holy Roman Empire and c, and of the United States of America." See: Treaty of Peace (1783) 8 U.S. Statutes at Large 80.. Great Britain which is the agent for the Pope, is in charge of the USA ..'

What people do not know is that the so called Founding Fathers and King George were working hand-in-hand to bring the people of America to their knees, to install a Central Government over them and to bind them to a debt that could not be paid. First off you have to understand that the UNITED STATES is a corporation and that it existed before the Revolutionary war. See Republica v. Sweers 1 Dallas 43. and 28 U.S.C. 3002 (15)
The United States is not a land mass, it is a corporation.
Now, you also have to realize that King George was not just the King of England, he was also the King of France. Treaty of Peace * U.S. 8 Statutes at Large 80.

On January 22, 1783 Congress ratified a contract for the repayment of 21 loans that the UNITED STATES had already received dating from February 28, 1778 to July 5, 1782. Now the UNITED STATES Inc. owes the King money which is due January 1, 1788 from King George via France. King George funded both sides of the Revolutionary War.

Now the Articles of Confederation which were declared in force March 1, 1781 States in Article 12:

"All bills of credit emitted, monies borrowed, and debts contracted by, or under the authority of Congress, before the assembling of the United States, in pursuance of the present confederation, shall be deemed and considered a charge against the United States, for payment and satisfaction whereof the said United States, and the public faith are hereby solemnly pledged."

The Articles of Confederation acknowledge the debt owed to King George.

Now after losing the Revolutionary War, even though the War was nothing more than a move to turn the people into debtors for the King, the conquest was not yet complete. Now the loans were coming due and so a meeting was convened in Annapolis, Maryland, to discuss the economic instability of the country under the Articles of Confederation. Only five States come to the meeting, but there is a call for another meeting to take place in Philadelphia the following year with the express purpose of revising the Articles of Confederation On February 21, 1787 Congress gave approval of the meeting to take place in Philadelphia on May 14, 1787, to revise the Articles of Confederation. Something had to be done about the mounting debt. Little did the people know that the so called founding fathers were going to reorganize the United States because it was Bankrupt.

On September 17, 1787 twelve State delegates approve the Constitution. The States have now become Constitutors. Constitutor: In the civil law, one who, by simple agreement, becomes responsible for the payment of another's debt. Blacks Law Dictionary 6th Ed.

The States were now liable for the debt owed to the King, but the people of America were not because they were not a party to the Constitution because it was never put to them for a vote.

See APFN web page http://www.apfn.org/apfn/money.htm (http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/Dial%20Protected)

On August 4th, 1790 an Act was passed which was Titled.-An Act making provision for the payment of the Debt of the United States. This can be found at 1 U.S. Statutes at Large pages 138-178. This Act for all intents and purposes abolished the States and Created the Districts. If you don't believe it look it up. The Act set up Federal Districts, here in Pennsylvania we got two. In this Act each District was assigned a portion of the debt. The next step was for the states to reorganize their governments which most did in 1790. This had to be done because the States needed to legally bind the people to the debt. The original State Constitutions were never submitted to the people for a vote. So the governments wrote new constitutions and submitted them to people for a vote thereby binding the people to the debts owed to Great Britain. The people became citizens of the State where they resided and ipso facto a citizen of the United States. A citizen is a member of a fictional entity and it is synonymous with subject.

What you think is a state is in reality a corporation, in other words, a Person.

"Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is Person." 9 F. Supp 272 "Word "person" does not include state. 12 Op Atty Gen 176.
There are no states, just corporations. Every body politic on this planet is a corporation. A corporation is an artificial entity, a fiction at law. They only exist in your mind. They are images in your mind, that speak to you. We labor, pledge our property and give our children to a fiction. For an in-depth look into the nature of these corporations and to see how you also have been declared a fictional entity. See: AMERICAN LAW AND PROCEDURE. JURISPRUDENCE AND LEGAL INSTITUTIONS. VOL.XIII By James De Witt Andrews LL.B. (Albany Law School), LL.D. (Ruskin University) from La Salle University. This book explains in detail the nature and purpose of these corporations, you will be stunned at what you read.

Now before we go any further let us examine a few things in the Constitution.

Article six section one keeps the loans from the King valid it states; "All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation."

Another interesting tidbit can be found at Article One Section Eight clause Two which states that Congress has the power to borrow money on the credit of the United States. This was needed so the United States (Which went into Bankruptcy on January 1, 1788) could borrow money and then because the States were a party to the Constitution they would also be liable for it. The next underhanded move was the creation of The United States Bank in 1791. This was a private Bank of which there were 25,000 shares issued of which 18,000 were held by those in England. The Bank loaned the United States money in exchange for Securities of the United States. Now the creditors of the United States which included the King wanted paid the Interest on the loans that were given to the United States. So Alexander Hamilton came up with the great idea of taxing alcohol. The people resisted so George Washington sent out the militia to collect the tax which they did. This has become known as the Whiskey rebellion. It is the Militia's duty to collect taxes. How did the United States collect taxes off of the people if the people are not a party to the Constitution? I'll tell you how. The people are slaves! The United States belongs to the founding fathers, their posterity and Great Britain. America is nothing more than a Plantation. It always has been. How many times have you seen someone in court attempt to use the Constitution and then the Judge tells him he can't. It is because you are not a party to it. We are SLAVES!!!!!!!

If you don't believe read Padelford, Fay & Co. vs. The Mayor and Aldermen of the City of Savannah. 14 Georgia 438, 520 which states " But, indeed, no private person has a right to complain, by suit in court, on the ground of a breach of the Constitution, the Constitution, it is true, is a compact but he is not a party to it."

Now back to the Militia. Just read Article One Section Eight clause (15) which states that it is the militia's job to execute the laws of the Union. Now read Clause (16) Which states that Congress has the power to provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the Militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States.... the Militia is not there to protect you and me, it is their duty to collect our substance. As you can plainly see all the Constitution did is set up a Military Government to guard the King's commerce and make us slaves. If one goes to 8 U.S. statutes at large 116-132 you will find "The Treaty of Amity, Commerce and Navigation". This Treaty was signed on November 19th, 1794 which was twelve years after the War. Article 2 of the Treaty states that the King's Troops were still occupying the United States. Being the nice King that he was, he decided that the troops would return to England by June 1st, 1796. The troops were still on American soil because, quite frankly the King wanted them here.
Many people tend to blame the Jews for our problems, but they too are for the most part also slaves. Jewish Law does however govern the entire world, as found in Jewish Law by MENACHEM ELON, DEPUTY PRESIDENT SUPREME COURT OF ISRAEL, to wit: "Everything in the Babylonian Talmud is binding on all Israel. Every town and country must follow all customs, give effect to the decrees, and carry out the enactment's of the Talmudic sages, because the entire Jewish people accepted everything contained in Talmud. The sages who adopted the enactment's and decrees, instituted the practices, rendered the decisions, and derived the laws, constituted all or most of the Sages of Israel. It is they who received the tradition of the fundamentals of the entire Torah in unbroken succession going back to Moses, our teacher."

We are living under what the Bible calls Mammon. As written in the subject Index, Mammon is defined as ("Civil law and procedure").
Now turn to the "The Shetars Effect on English Law" -- A Law of the Jews Becomes the Law of the Land, found in "The George Town Law Journal, Vol 71: pages 1179-1200." It is clearly stated in the Law Review that the Jews are the property of the Norman and Anglo-Saxon Kings. It also explains that the Talmud is the law of the land. It explains how the Babylonian Talmud became the law of the land, which is now known as the Uniform Commercial Code which is private international law. The written credit agreement -- the Jewish shetar is a lien on all of the property in the world. The treatise also explains that the Jews are owned by Great Britain and that the Jews are in charge of the Baking system.

We are living under the Babylonian Talmud. It was brought into England in 1066 and has been enforced by the Pope, Kings and the various religions ever since. It is total and relentless mind control, people are taught to believe in things that do not exist. Private International Law, which is commercial law, only deals with fictions, known as persons. A person is a fictional entity at law, not a living being. See UCC 1-201.

Now before you scream that the UCC is unconstitutional I'm sorry people, you are not a party to any constitution. Read the case cite below.
"But, indeed, no private person has a right to complain, by suit in court, on the ground of a breach of the Constitution. The Constitution it is true, is a compact, but he is not a party to it." Padelford, Fay & Co., vs. Mayor and Aldermen of the City of Savannah 14 Ga. 438, 520 You have to understand that Great Britain, (Article six Section one) the United States and the States are the parties to the Constitution not you. Let me try to explain. If I buy an automobile from a man and that automobile has a warranty and the engine blows up the first day I have it. Then I tell the man just forget about it. Then you come along and tell the man to pay me and he says no. So you take him to court for not holding up the contract. The court then says case dismissed. Why? Because you are not a party to the contract. You cannot sue a government official for not adhering to a contract (Constitution) that you are not a party too. You better accept the fact that you are a Slave. When you try to use the Constitution you are committing a CRIME known as CRIMINAL TRESPASS. Why? Because you are attempting to infringe on a private contract that you are not a party to. Then to make matters worse you are a debt slave who owns no property or has any rights. You are a mere user of your Masters property!

Here are just a couple of examples:

"The primary control and custody of infants is with the government" Tillman V. Roberts. 108 So. 62
"Marriage is a civil contract to which there are three parties-the husband, the wife and the state." Van Koten v. Van Koten. 154 N.E. 146.
"The ultimate ownership of all property is in the State: individual so-called 'ownership" is only by virtue of Government, i.e. law amounting to mere user; and use must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the necessities of the State. Senate Document No. 43 73rd Congress 1st Session. (Brown v. Welch supra)

You own no Property because you are a slave. Really you are worse off than a slave because you are also a debtor.

"The right of traffic or the transmission of property, as an absolute inalienable right, is one which has never existed since governments were instituted, and never can exist under government." Wynehamer v. The People. 13 N.Y. Rep.378, 481

Great Britain to this day collects taxes from the American people. The IRS is not an Agency of the United States Government.

See APFN web page http://www.apfn.org/apfn/irstax.htm (http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/Dial%20Protected)

(http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/Dial%20Protected)
All taxpayers have an Individual Master File which is in code. By using IRS Publication 6209, which is over 400 pages, there is a blocking series which shows the taxpayer the type of tax that is being paid. Most taxpayers fall under a 300-399 blocking series, which 6209 states is reserved, but by going to BMF 300-399 which is the Business Master File in 6209 prior to 1991, this was U.S.-U.K. Tax Claims, meaning taxpayers are considered a business and involved in commerce and are held liable for taxes via a treaty between the U.S. and the U.K., payable to the U.K. The form that is supposed to be used for this is form 8288, FIRPTA-Foreign Investment Real Property Tax Account. The 8288 form is in the Law Enforcement Manual of the IRS, chapter 3. The OMB's-paper-Office of Management and Budget, in the Department of Treasury, List of Active Information collections, Approved Under Paperwork Reduction Act is where form 8288 is found under OMB number 1545-0902, which says U.S. with holding tax return for dispositions by foreign persons, of U.S. Form #8288, #8288a.

These codes have since been changed to read as follows: IMF 300-309, Barred Assessment, CP 55 generated valid for MFT-30, which is the code for the 1040 form. IMF 310-399 reads the same as IMF 300-309, BMF 390-399 reads U.S.-U.K. Tax Treaty Claims. Isn't it INCREDIBLE that a 1040 form is a payment of a tax to the U.K.? Everybody is always looking to 26 U.S.C. for the law that makes one liable for the so called Income Tax but, it is not in there because it is not a Tax, it is debt collection through a private contract called the Constitution of the United States Article Six, Section One and various agreements. Is a cow paying an income tax when the machine gets connected to it's udders ? The answer is no. I have never known a cow that owns property or has been compensated for its labor. You own nothing that your labor has ever produced. You don't even own your labor or yourself. Your labor is measured in current credit money, which is debt. You are allowed to retain a small portion of your labor so that you can have food, clothing shelter and most of all breed more slaves.

You see, we are cows, the IRS is company who milks the cows and the United States Inc. is the veterinarian who takes care of the herd and Great Britain is the Owner of the farm in fee simple. The farm is held in allodium by the Pope. Now the picture will become much clearer after reading the next few paragraphs. We will now show the Popes involvement in the scheme of things. "Convinced that the principles of religion contribute most powerfully to keep nations in the state of passive obedience which they owe to their princes, the high contracting parties declare it to be their intention to sustain in their respective states, those measures which the clergy may adopt with the aim of ameliorating their interests, so intimately connected with the preservation of the authority of the princes; and the contracting powers join in offering their thanks to the Pope for what he has already done for them, and solicit his constant cooperation in their views of submitting the nations." Article (3) Treaty of Varona (1822)

If the Sovereign Pontiff should nevertheless, insist on his law being observed he must be obeyed. Bened. XIV., De Syn. Dioec, lib, ix., c. vii., n. 4. Prati, 1844. Pontifical laws moreover become obligatory without being accepted or confirmed by secular rulers. Syllabus, prop. 28, 29, 44. Hence the jus nationale, (Federal Law) or the exceptional ecclesiastical laws prevalent in the United States, may be abolished at any time by the Sovereign Pontiff. Elements of Ecclesiastical Law. Vol. I 53-54. So could this be shown that the Pope rules the world?

The Pope (Vicar of Christ) claims to be the ultimate owner of everything in the World. See Treaty of 1213, Papal Bulls of 1455 and 1492.
Don't let this information alarm you because without it you cannot be free, You have to understand that all slavery and freedom originates in the mind. When your mind allows you to accept and understand that the United States, Great Britain and the Vatican are corporations which are nothing but fictional entities which have been placed into your mind, you will understand that our slavery is because we believe in fictions.

THE END

ThePythonicCow

9th July 2012, 06:40

You see, we are cows
Dang - I always knew I was a cow :) :cow: :).

humanalien

9th July 2012, 07:29

Well US. It looks like yo found what you have been looking for.

Come to think about it, i and a few others on another forum, found
all the same things that you just found out about this.

Aside from the jewish involvement part of what you posted, i already
knew about everything else.

The question now becomes, What can we as citizens of this country do
to get ourselves out of this situation.

bekrah

9th July 2012, 11:46

Very interesting thread, it's all way the heck over my head, but I'll read and do my best to understand it. Can't really say much more as I'm lacking in this subject, but thanks for bringing it up. Now to read....

It's very confusing how they've set it up, so don't feel bad. I've been looking at this for quite some time now, and I still don't have the complete flow yet. It's kind of like a language, you just have to expose yourself to it over and over again and then it kinda of comes together. The problem in this situation is the information isn't handy for all to find adding to the confusion and then of course interpreting some of this stuff can be difficult. I was fortunate enough to spend time with both a "reader" of the law and an "applier" of the law. The reader being the one who's good at interpreting and the applier the one who's good at just that, actually applying the law in court.

You definitely have the right attitude!

I wish I knew some people personally who could help me make sense of this stuff. My ignorance on this subject, isn't helping my confusion any. All I can really add of substance here is this: I am a pretty regular person. I graduated high school, I have some college under my belt, but no degree.

When it comes to stuff like this I'm dead in the water. I feel like these things are written in confusing jargon for that reason. Most people can't comprehend it, most people aren't trained to be able to interpret this stuff easily, and our school systems are not set up to allow people to understand any of it. The education is just getting worse not better. What an easy way to control the masses, dumb them down enough so they feel like they have no hope of understanding any of it. "Nothing to see here people, just go back to your regularly scheduled 'programming'."

Unified Serenity

9th July 2012, 15:07

For me, this has been a topic that I have dealt with off n on since about 1992. I have heard all the arguments, but not the place it happened, the legal case it is listed as precedent, the treaty signed and the laws or regulations put in place for it. I do not take what people say at face value, I want to verify it for myself. It is not that I do not believe them. I have believed we are exactly what these documents and videos share, but finding the proof for me gives me a firm foundation, and not talk about something and say, "Yeh, well so and so said, and so and so said" I mean that's what mindless robots do.

I have to be able to verify, and I am satisfied with what I have dug up. I hope it helps others too. If it's confusing, stop where you are, and go look up the words confusing you. Do not read over something and say, "I'll look that up later." I stop videos all the time in the middle of them because they make a statement and I want to look it up for myself. That how I found those documents. I would also say if a paragraph has you stumped, send it to a friend you trust and ask them what the heck they are saying in this paragraph. Or post it here. But, god knows what we will tell you. Make sure it's an opinion of someone you trust.

crested-duck

9th July 2012, 15:10

When and if we open mindedly seek we can find the answers to all , and the truth of the matter at hand !--Rob

Unified Serenity

9th July 2012, 15:20

Rob, I also want to thank you for the posts you have been sharing about what the hell is really going on politically. I knew where you were coming from, but I was looking for all those case law and legal mumbo jumbo. I can't tell you how many books I have read on some of this that talks about how it happened and where, but did not or I missed it, did not give me the specifics I was wanting. Maybe they did and I just wasn't searching enough.

I tell you what... a royal, leader, pope whatever better not get in front of me anytime soon, cause I will probably embarrass 90% of the world population telling them exactly what I think of their tin crowns, rings, and thieving families. They are the most arrogant pampered a$$holes in the universe imho.

mattymoto

9th July 2012, 15:39

Mind a little of my twisted humor?

bmc6tR2V1Vc

This is not meant to derail, US, but I saw this after I read your last post and I thought of you.

;)

Unified Serenity

9th July 2012, 15:43

Mind a little of my twisted humor?

bmc6tR2V1Vc

This is not meant to derail, US, but I saw this after I read your last post and I thought of you.

;)

What a hoot! Thanks, still snickering,

Serenity

we-R-one

9th July 2012, 16:39

LMAO, that's great Matty! They sure do fancy themselves don't they? It's so ridiculous.....all this hierachy crap not to mention what they stand for isn't what they preach.

humanalien

9th July 2012, 19:49

Unified Serenity

10th July 2012, 00:24

You're gonna love this....
From Ballentine's Law Dictionary, 1948 Edition. 'Human Being' is defined as follows: 'See monster' . From the same dictionary, 'monster' is defined: 'A human-being by birth, but in some part resembling a lower animal.'

Ballentines Law dictionary is just that, a dictionary, on legal phrases, not the actual law.

Yes, and law dictionaries explain the words used in law so we know what they are talking about and not assume we know. The same words we use everyday could mean something entirely different in law because they define the use of the word. Such as "wage" in Title 26 means something very specific and not just money you make from doing your job which is what most people assume it means.

humanalien

10th July 2012, 04:50

One way of opting out of government control and making
yourself a free man is to file for UCC Redemption Affidavit.

Here is an example Affidavit
http://www.think-aboutit.com/conspiracy/AFFIDAVITOFREVOCATIONANDRESCISSION.htm

This will pretty much explain the process to you.

Redemption Of Your Strawman Account!
Filing a UCC1 With The Treasury Department?
Is There A Treasury Bond In My Name?
http://reality-bytes.hubpages.com/hub/Redemption-Of-Your-Strawman

Let it be known that the government does not want you to file any
UCC Redemption Affidavit form. Once they receive the form, if it
isn't filled out perfectly, they will send your form to other offices of
government and sort of play the pass it along game. This could go
on for months or even years. If it is filled out perfectly, you could
expect visits from any of the alphabet agencies and they will try to
intimidate you into not pressing the issue any further. Some people
have tried getting there money back out of the government system,
probably worth millions and have wound up in prison. If you are going
to try something like this, let them keep the money or you will be the
next one going to prison.

Unified Serenity

10th July 2012, 05:43

crested-duck

10th July 2012, 13:12

Maia Gabrial

10th July 2012, 15:07

I thank you all and I bow to you all for this lesson.
I made copies of everything to study more in depth later. That is, when my brain stops spinning. Thank you, US. I can imagine what you must have gone through just to understand all of this.
I have nothing of relevance to add at this time....

humanalien

10th July 2012, 20:34

Great info, do you know anyone who has done it and what was the outcome. Did it benefit them in a tangible way?

I ran across another web page that was talking about two people that went through
this process.

The first man, while in the process of trying to become a free man buy filing his
UCC Redemption, also was trying to get back his millions that were made by using
his straw man name. You just know that the government will never admit to or give
you back the money made from your straw man name, so the government imprisoned
him on some trumped up charges.

The second man succeeded in becoming a free man, but he said that the fbi/cia were
always threatening him, to get him to stop the proceedings. I'm not sure how long it
took him to win his case but he is a free man now, as far as i know.

I don't know anyone personally that has tried this but i wish i did.

All i can say for sure is that if your going to try something like this, then expect
a big fight on your hands. Your paperwork will mysteriously turn up missing
and you may have to refile, your paperwork will be misdirected to the wrong
office because it wasn't filled out correctly or perfectly. You can expect the
fbi/cia and others to harass you and threaten you because the government doesn't
want to lose a money making straw man.

humanalien

10th July 2012, 20:42

H A-- didn't this thread just cover who is running the scam and how it's being done ????Let me kindly remind you of this very important point you seem to have missed or forgotten alreaddy. The one that created the very system you are trying to opt out of, also holds the highest seat in the legal system you are trying to beat. Opting-out makes for a nice daydream, but not realistic at this point in time...Rob

All i can do is tell you what i found on the internet. I'm certainly no expert in this area
and no-one should believe a word i say or what they find on the internet. The only way
to find out for sure is go through the process yourself or at least do your own research.

It would be of great help if someone has easy access to government laws, rules and regulations
and they knew how to search through these things.

Unified Serenity

11th July 2012, 00:27

From my limited experience with this stuff and knowing people who have challenged the right of the government to take them to court and such where they challenge they are not the ALL caps person, there are so many ways to screw up. If you don't dot every i and cross every t you are screwed, and most likely in prison getting the laundry treatment where you become very sick from working in the prison laundry and they move you from prison to prison while you file appeals and you get your paperwork at the old prison which means you miss a filing date. If you have a family you might have to kiss them good bye as the state steps in to take your children for whatever made up reason, and the IRS, FBI, and any number of other alphabet agencies harass you nonstop.

applecrusher1992

12th July 2012, 03:04

This seems like the place to ask this question:

What could someone do if they didn't sign their social security card?

Unified Serenity

12th July 2012, 03:12

Hey applecrusher,

*
Again, disclaimer, do not trust this idiot or any other idiot online about medical or legal information. I share what I have read and learned, but take no responsibility for what you do with it. This is for informational purposes only.

This was a common question in my group that came up. If you mean, they did not request it for themselves this is the answer.

First, no contract is valid that you did not sign or that you were not qualified to sign. Thus you have to be of age to sign a contract so all children with ssn's from birth or that their parents requested are really not contractually bound. As I remember business law, all details of a contract must be present when signing the contract. Thus, if you sign a form and you do not know that you are giving up x,y,z then it is not a valid contract either.

If you mean something else like an actual signature, I don't have one on my card. This is tricky business, and those who embark on this quest of "sovereignty" via trying to disentangle themselves from the "system" find themselves in a living hell for years. If you don't mind, they don't mind.

sigma6

12th July 2012, 13:04

Your question is more complicated then you may know, it touches on huge issues, one of the biggest secrets and most fundamental keys to sorting this out has to do with how trusts operate, and specifically before you jump on that wagon, private, non-statutory trusts in particular, this is a deeper topic then I can manage right now. But it is part of the equation...

To show how subtle and convoluted this is, Winston Shrout gives one of the most indepth explanations of how it started, he has dedicated thousands and thousands of hours of study to these concepts...

a thread I posted
http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?42741-Obama-his-Birth-Certificate-and-the-Hidden-History-of-the-United-States&p=452784&highlight=winston+shrout#post452784

This issue of Obama's BC is really secondary... 4shared.com now wants everyone who accesses a 4shared file, to have a 4shared account. Sucks, but it's ok, a free 10-15 GB of storage and you DON'T have to download anything to use it (I always uncheck any toolbar offers)... I believe if you watch the vid and download text file I dug up related to it, you will come as close as you ever have to understanding how a corporation came into existence.

Once you get to that level however, there is another question, what is the relationship of that corporation to the Constitutional Government and that is where Trust Law comes in and this is where the roadblock that keeps coming up for me is, as decent books on Trust are to found written in the late 1700 and 1800's and are typically around 1500 pages (about the same size as the bible...hmm), and are written in very cryptic archaic language (not surprisingly) Yet, however many months or years it would take to learn it would be well worth it imo, as it would be the key that unlocks the understanding of the entire system.

Remember this, we LIVE in an 'environment' where Trusts can come into existence without the knowledge of the Grantor, Trustee, or Beneficiary!!! (as per Gilberts - Law of Trusts) The implications of this is truly phenomenal... it's all based on self knowledge and self empowerment, and here is a maxim of law that goes with it. If you don't know what your rights are, then you have none... (ie. no one is going to uphold them for you, NO ONE, but YOU!) Thus this is why many fall into the 'citizen' trap with it's 'benefits and privileges'

This has to be a clear example of typical Roman philosophy, (let he who would be deceived, be deceived... doesn't sound very 'Christian' does it?) and evidence of the kind of world we live in today (although there is a relationship between the two, but that is 'another story'). Anyhow start with Winston's presentation as specific answer to your question re: evidence of origin/existance of the incorporation of US Government. Prepare to be stunned by the implications.

Unified Serenity

12th July 2012, 18:12

Hello Sigma 6,

You bring up some pretty interesting points. This site talks about the basics of contracts, and I am sure that a google of "what makes a contract valid' will give some more info and case law. I have watched judges throw cases out of court because of hearsay and not evidence. One party would say, we agreed xyz and the other would say, "your honor, that's just plain stupid, why would I agree to something that doesn't benefit me at all. I never agreed to that, and he knows it". The judge would say, do you have any evidence, and of course they didn't.

These are often the cases involving friends find out their buddy isn't so friendly or honest. Then, there are the other situations where nothing is in writing, but again common sense rules out most of the time. A woman starts dating a man, one of them starts giving the other money to help pay their bills, and says pay me back later. Of course later never happens, they fall out of love and the one who was giving money wants their money back. The one who got the money says, "it was a gift". I have rarely seen a judge agree with "it's a gift" when this happens. It sort of depends on the stories the parties tell, and most definitely any evidence.

Some people do really just say, "hey, baby don't you worry about it, I've got ya covered" and well, that's a gift, but of course when you get to court they are going to say, "Your honor, I explained to her that her bills are her responsibility, but I would help her out on occasion, and told her she had to pay me back, and she accepted the agreement". It's tough being judge sometimes, because I've seen some pretty slick people on both sides lie like crazy. I don't live in a big massive urban city, but a fairly small mid-sized city, and it's quite funny how stuff finally gets discovered "down" the road. I know that basically, all contracts must be agreed to. One offers, one accepts, and there is a mutual exchange of some value between the two.

Taurean

26th February 2013, 02:49

I've just found this excellent link to a site which lays it out in fairly plain English for us neophytes.

http://letsrollforums.com/u-c-c-uniform-t19999.html?amp

Virgo

26th February 2013, 03:58

I recently started reading American Freedom by Charles Erwin. The first two chapters can be download for free here http://www.americanfreedombooks.com/resources/resources.html Another resource I like a lot is Family Guardian. Link is here famguardian.org/