Here is Reality; No one likes reality. It is much easier to live in an illusion, such as the United States, than face reality. The problem with this is that reality does not change, nor does it forgive. It is a constant, and will reassert itself at some point. With or without your knowledge or understanding. And it does not matter if you are ready for it or not, because if you are living in an illusion, when reality kills you, you will not even be aware of the how and the why. But you will be just as dead, and just as unprepared.

Here is some reality; food has two purposes: It can either sustain life, or kill you. Food can serve no other purpose than these two. It is impossible.

In this regard, there is no nutrition in canned food. So, given this fact which you can confirm by studying the many books on health and nutrition available, what is the purpose of canned food? Right; profit. It serves no other function. Certainly, it serves no purpose in sustaining life.

Thus, when you buy all of your food in a multi-national profit center known as a "supermarket", what, exactly, are you doing to yourself and your family?

Let me list the major components of food found in supermarkets (perhaps you should start paying attention to the labels); processed white sugar (probably the single largest component); processed white flour (probably number two); processed fats; processed plastics (every artificial ingredient is a derivative, as far as I know, of oil, which means plastic; after all, this is by far the cheapest way to create a saleable product); pork (you would be surprised, and shocked, at how much pork is used in foods, most always under different names. For instance, marshmallows are made from a base of pork lard.); and, of course, chemicals. Let us never forget chemicals.

And of the "stuff" (I don’t know what it is, but it is not "food", so stuff seems appropriate) not affected above, how about irradiation to prolong the shelf life? Most spices are this way now, and, I am sure, many other foods as well, including most so-called "fresh" fruits and vegetables. Not to mention what has been done to the meat with hormones and drugs for the animals. I have a couple of friends who took a Geiger counter into a supermarket a while back. They won’t eat anything out of one any longer (they didn’t believe me).

One of the things most amazing to me is our "belief" that something labeled as food is actually food because of the taste, rather than as a matter of nutrition. I watch people ending their lives in great pain, crippled in mind and body, and recognize that there, except for the Grace of God, go I. And I know that what has happened is because we have trusted others to look after our well-fare, and then allowed those others to do so for their own economic interest. And I also know that those others, the ones at the top of the food chain, so to speak, understand exactly what they are doing, the pain they are causing, and the needless early deaths that are the result of their economic warfare.

So, once you begin to understand, the command to be separate from "them" is not a racial command; it is for health and for wealth. You can not feed the beast through profits on the food he produces for profit and be either healthy or wealthy. This, my friends, is a scientific fact, which you can confirm with very little study. The problem is that most writers, counselors and advisors will not put it in this way. They will tell you to buy your food carefully, and study the labels, maybe from a health food store (which is in business for profit), but no source I know of will give you a complete picture. First, they probably do not understand most of the picture because they learned enough to make some money so why continue, and second, because this information is not palatable to most, and they do not want to offend their customers. It limits sales, particularly of books.

Let me give you another look at Scripture from my view point. At the beginning of Part X, I quoted Scripture, about food. In Scripture, we are given a list of foods we may eat. We can have faith, without further study, that this list of food, without alteration from man, and this includes hybridization, is beneficial for our bodies. Given a few other facts, such as direct from the ground to us and without being in cold storage for 30 or 60 days before it reaches our "store" and without the addition of chemicals, additives and irradiation.

In other words, natural foods without the profit motive having been added in.

But then we are told of other foods that we can not eat. Oh, we can, of course, if we wish to. Like mushrooms. I know, Scripture says nothing about mushrooms, but it does speak of fruits and other things that are good, and it does not mention fungus, like mushrooms. What can we deduce from this?

Well, if foods that are good for us are beneficial, then other "things" put on this earth for other purposes are not beneficial for us to eat. That means we can gain nothing from eating them. Nothing. And after having seen the writings on the studies done with pork, and how our bodies can not digest pork, I begin to understand. Eating those other "things" is no different than eating poison, because if there is no benefit, under His Law in the eating, then it is safe to assume, vengeance being His, that there is a decided down side to doing the eating. I think that our reduced life span and the great pain I see many people in as their years advance is all of the warning I need.

These are the things that the "churches" should be teaching us, and this is the first reason I left the Catholic church. As I began to learn some of the essential facts about health, and how they corresponded so closely with Scripture, I started to wonder what was wrong with this picture. I attended a Catholic school when I was young, went through confirmation, Communion, learned the Catechism well, served Mass, and generally did all of the things that good Catholic boys are supposed to. Except, I never learned one thing about His Law and the reasons for it. Not one thing. Oh, there was prattle about the Ten Commandments, but no real teaching of the essential nature of the law. (After learning this, when I finally found out that even the Ten Commandments had been altered by the Roman Church, I wasn’t really that shocked.)

What can we deduce from this? Religion are a work of man. Not that hard to figure out, really. What is the most wealthy organization on the face of the earth? Probably the Roman Catholic church, or religion, if you will. All of these "religions" will take one or two pieces of Scripture and concentrate on it, telling you, if you will listen, that this is the key to heaven, and it is the most important part of Scripture. And pass the offering plate, please. (I’ve asked, but I have never gotten an answer; What, then, is the least important part of Scripture?)

On the other hand, Christianity has nothing to do with Religion. As I said before, the Bible is a book of science; His Science. The science of economics, of nutrition, of government, of nurturing the land, of... well, pretty much of everything that is essential for us to live a long, prosperous life. In other words, Christianity, through Scripture, is a way of life, and not a religion. And this is what your choice comes down to, you can not live a full, clean, prosperous life among the heathen. You must congregate with those of like mind.

So, once again, we find that the answer comes down to you. You must want to learn. You must be willing to study. You must be willing to change, or the studies will stop, and stop fast!

And let me make one point here that is necessary at this time: Your life is going to change. Probably, it is going to change dramatically. There is no way to avoid this truth. If you had the understanding that I do of economics, you would see as clearly as I do this fact of life. The only thing for you to decide is if you and your family are to be the agents of that change, or if you are going to let other, outside forces bring the change to you. Because change you will.

Are you worried about your children being able to attend college? Why? What is taught in colleges today? What real life skills are taught in schools today? Do your children really need to learn how to prosper in a credit world? A credit world is an illusion; it is an aberration, which does not exist in the real world. It depends upon the predation of the earth and of those who work and produce from the earth for the survival of the system. History has proven time and time again that these types of systems only exist for short periods of time. America is no longer a producer, and we are told time and time again that we can survive as a service and information nation. But this is true only as long as the true producers of real food and real material wealth do not catch on to the lie that is known as the Federal Reserve Note.

The United States is now the largest debtor nation on the face of the earth, by a large margin. The United States has, by far, the largest imbalance of trade in history. This is the reason for the new international reserve currency, the Euro. More on this later. All of these things again bring us to the illusion that is known as the United States.

COMMENTS:

[APFN NOTE] Treasury Secretary Lloyd Bentsen (Former longtime Senator form Texas) During the Waco hearings had to take the "OATH of TESTIMONY" before the committee after a heated discussion. The first video about Waco provided by Dr. Gregg Sali & Ken Fawcett had a researcher providing documented proof that the Secretary of the Treasury did not take the "OATH OF OFFICE" to the United States of America. He takes an "Oath of Officer" to the "International Monetary Fund" (IMF). This researcher further states that all Treasury takes that Oath. This would include the BATF and the IRS. Thousands of people have seen that video. I have not seen any follow-up to the fact or fiction to the above. APFN@netbox.com

Please be advised that the information above is true. Simply stated, there is NO OATH of Office for "Secretary of Treasury", and the reason why there isn't will become clear after reading the material that follows. What you will find is an appointment as "Governor" of The Fund and The Bank, which is all under the UNITED NATIONS Monetary and Financial Conference dated July 22, 1944. (See: 22 USC 286, 22 USC 286a(a)(b)(c)(d), 22 USC 286c, 22 USC 286d, 22 USC 286e, etc.) The title, "Secretary of Treasury" exists under PRETENSE of name only. From the Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents for the Administration of William J. Clinton for Monday, February 1, 1993, Volume 29 - Number 4, page 113, you will find the following:

Submitted January 28

Lloyd Bentsen, of Texas, to be U.S. Governor of the International Monetary Fund for a term of 5 years; U.S. Governor of the International Bank For Reconstruction And Development for a term of 5 years; U.S. Governor of the Inter-American Development Bank for a term of 5 years; U.S. Governor of the African Development Bank for a term of 5 years; U.S. Governor of the Asian Development Bank; U.S. Governor of the African Development Fund; and U.S. Governor of the European Bank For Reconstruction And Development.

No where is there to be found any "appointment" to "Secretary of Treasury".

Officers of the United States are required pursuant to 5 USC 3331 to subscribe to an Oath of Office, to file an Officer Affidavit pursuant to 5 USC 3332, and an Employee Affidavit pursuant to 5 USC 3333.

Since some of those on your list may not have the ability to receive attachments, I have assembled here a few excerpts from several monograms on related subject matter that will reveal some of the more important elements. The thing to keep in mind while reading the following material is that the ENTIRE governmental structure as ordained and established by the Constitution FOR the United States of America (1787) has been SUBJUGATED and OVERTHROWN economically: (This is incorrect; the fact is that the United States corporate governemnt is the majority stock holder in the IMF. You may want to think about that; a government owning stock in a bank? Remember when I told you that the UNITED STATES was not a government? It is a corporation; corporations are formed for profit. Follow the money. Remember Part II. - David)

Article I, Section 10 of the Constitution for the United States of America declares that, "No State shall make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts." The emergency, subjugated, compact "state of Washington" is a party to the compact and the officer writing the ticket is the "charging agent" of the compact state. We now have a series of problems arise, as Article IV, Section 27 of the "Constitution of the State of Washington" (1889) states that ALL PROCESS shall be, "The State of Washington," and all prosecutions shall be conducted in ITS name and by ITS AUTHORITY. The fact that the "state of Washington" is a party to various "compacts" and its use of SDR's (Federal reserve notes) means that the REAL PARTY OF INTEREST is NOT in the courtroom, and the process is NOT under its AUTHORITY. The Federal Reserve note is valued to SDR's by international organizations, not by Congress. (Technically correct, but missing the one real piece of information necessary to understand; Federal Reserve notes are valued because everyone has to have them to repay debts, for which their property is held as collateral. When this state of affairs is altered, and when Federal Reserve notes are no longer the "reserve currency" needed to repay debts, things will alter quickly and radically, and the real value of Federal Reserve notes will become apparent. - David)

The emergency, subjugated, compact "state of Washington", as the extended territory of the United States, is raising revenue and collecting FORCED CONTRIBUTIONS for and on behalf of FOREIGN PRINCIPALS, and is in fact and law, pursuant to the rule of instrumentality, the ALTER-EGO of "The Fund" (IMF) and "The Bank" (World Bank) - both of which are under the direction and control of the alien, corporate "Governor", a.k.a., the "Secretary of Treasury" who is paid by the United Nations, through its fiscal depository agent, the Federal Reserve. (Actually, the United States Treasury is now the banking apparatus for the IMF. - David) Additionally, the "charging agent" is receiving emoluments or remuneration from agents of a foreign principal. IF he has an Oath of Office, as required by Article VI, Clause 3 of the U.S. Constitution and the domestic laws made in pursuance thereof, such as 4 USC 101, he would necessarily be in felony breach of that oath. One cannot serve TWO masters. Cinema 5, Ltd. vs. Cinerama Inc., 528 F.2d 1384.

Further, much of the so-called "federal" funding received by the "state of Washington" through the Governor thereof, for and on behalf of the Criminal Justice Training Commission through which all law enforcement personnel must qualify, is administered under the Crime Control Act of 1973 and amendatory acts, by the Attorney General of the United States, Janet Reno, who is the permanent representative of INTERPOL which is based in Lyons, France. Under Article 30 of the INTERPOL Constitution and regulations, agents of INTERPOL are required to renounce their allegiance to their respective Countries and State and are therefore EXPATRIATES. The Attorney General is NOT paid by the United States, but rather receives emoluments or remuneration from "The Fund" and "The Bank". The alien, corporate Governor of "The Fund" and "The Bank", Robert Rubin, is the ALTERNATE representative of INTERPOL. See: Memorandum of Understanding, U.S. Government Manual 1996/97, pg. 351.

Because the "Treasury of the United States of America" was DISSOLVED upon the creation of the INDEPENDENT TREASURY, by Act of Congress on May 29, 1920 (41 Stat. Chapter 214, pg. 654), neither Ms. Reno or Mr. Rubin are Officers of the United States of America. They can't be, because no viable treasury exists, one of the basic requirements of a sovereign nation. They are not paid pursuant to the Constitution for the United States of America and the domestic laws made in Pursuance thereof.

The United States REDUCED its character and capacity to that of an ALTER-EGO and PRIVATE PARTY when it became a voting share stockholder in International Organizations such as The Bank and The Fund -- UN operations (22 USC 286e). Other organizations, such as the "Nature Conservancy" (IUCN) organizations, and the individuals who are members of the organizations, associations and corporations, have REDUCED their characters and capacities. An artificial entity is NOT a Citizen and cannot be extended the Liberties, Rights, Privileges, Immunities and Powers of the Citizen, and when working in "collaboration" with or under the direction, control, or financial assistance of such International Organizations -- they become AGENTS of FOREIGN PRINCIPALS and POWERS. The Constitution for the United States of America DOES NOT DELEGATE the Power to any Public Office to create or grant such entities special privileges, immunities or franchises, nor does the Constitution for the United States of America authorize those in Public Office to INDIRECTLY commit acts which are DIRECTLY PROHIBITED. (No, but the Constitution does directly authorize Congress "exclusive jurisdiction" in Washington, DC, and they can do whatever they wish. This means that nothing is prohibited, and it can not be said to be un-Constitutional. Further more, this is an accurate picture of the real United States, and if anyone thinks that the King is going to give up this pot of gold without a struggle, or return freedom to those with no understanding easily, well, they have a shock coming. Everyone talking about restoring Constitutional government to America is actually providing support for exactly what they say they dislike so much. I hope you understand what I mean. - David)

Those operating under the United Nations Organizations direction, control, subsidy, or financial assistance, are unlawfully within the domestic jurisdiction of the United States of America and the several States of the Union. Public Law 330, 69 Stat. 624, makes it a FELONY for ANY PERSON to accept or hold a public office or to be employed by any agency of the government who advocates the overthrow of our constitutional and Republican Form of Government in the United States, or belongs to an organization that advocates overthrow. A "de facto" government cannot lawfully contract or obtain dominion over property, nor are commingled "chameleon" like characters and capacities allowed in law and it has been determined that NO OBEDIENCE is due to such entities. Texas vs. White, 74 U.S. (7 Wall) 277. (Whew! A real mouthful, except... It is not "them" who violated His Laws; it is we who contracted with them. So, who is at fault? - David)

The violation of "The Code Of Ethics For Government Service", Public Law 96-303, 94 Stat. 855, would be obvious and appropriately applied against those who devised and conjured into existence the various "environmental programmes" and "strategic plans" -- IF -- they really were in "Government service" of the United States of America. The United Nations is, however, a separate entity conjured into existence through certain known, unauthorized and unconstitutional acts and omissions and by certain corrupt and profligate FACTIONSwhose interests and agenda wasadverse and diametrically opposed to the ordained Constitution for the United States of America, and the Laws made in Pursuance thereof, and to the necessary Law of Nations (The so-called Law of Nations is actually International Law under Maritime Jurisdiction, and is really Roman Church Law. - David). All of the United Nations officers, employees and agents are required to "EXPATRIATE" from their nation upon grounds that the United Nations and its sister International Organizations, such as The World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, claim EXEMPTION from the LAWS OF ANY NATION OR STATE. There is NO ALLEGIANCE to the People or to the Union of several States of the United States of America by the denizens of the International Organizations.

The concept that the principal is not bound or obligated by the secret agreements of the agent is as old as the fundamental concept that governments are formed and established only by the CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED. It is obvious that the International Organizations, Corporations, Associations and combinations are of aristocratic form and have been historically and presently known for despotism and tyranny. The Constitution for the United States of America, Article IV, Section 4, ONLY SECURES a "REPUBLICAN FORM" of governance. The Organizations are UNCONSTITUTIONAL AND UNAUTHORIZED. Likewise, the principal that "no man can serve two masters" as applicable as the obvious conflict of allegiance and interest. No officer, employee, or agent of the United States of America is allowed to directly or indirectly act as an agent of a foreign principal, 22 USC 611. Violations are subject to criminal pains and penalties under 18 USC 219, to wit:

"WHOEVER, being an officer or employee of the United States in the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of government or in any agency of the United States, including the District of Columbia, is or acts as an agent of a foreign principal required to register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, as amended, shall be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than two years, or both." (See also: 18 USC 951)

It is to be specifically noted that an "Agency" is NOT an integral part of the government, U.S. vs. Strang, 254 U.S. 491, and raises immediate and serious questions and concern as to WHO the "PRINCIPAL" and real party in interest is. It is NOT the "United States" pursuant to the Constitution for the United States of America and the domestic Laws made in Pursuance thereof. NO, it is The World Bank and The Fund who are the true "principal", and it is The World Bank's POLICY that is being implemented by and through the various "intergovernmental" (INTERNATIONAL) agencies in accordance with the "Brady Plan", and pursuant to the "Multilateral Economic Assistance Act of 1989", Public Law 101-167, 103 Stat. 1195, and as specifically declared under the subheading of "Environmental Concerns" found as 103 Statutes at Large, pages 1227 and 1228. Further evidence of direct involvement by The World Bank is found in the "Convention On Biological Diversity", Articles 21 and 39, Treaty Document 103-20, among others.

Furtherance of the scheme is evidenced by the unlawful debasement of the domestic Coin in 1965 under pretense of "scarcity", the disavowing and dishonoring of notes and obligations under Public Law 90-269, 82 Stat. 50, on March 18, 1968, using the same repudiated notes and obligations as a fraudulent security for international letters of credit under Special Drawing Rights Acts such as Public Law 90-349, 82 Stat. 188, June 19, 1968, embezzlement of the intrinsic metals and laying the repudiated debts and loss off on others not signatory parties nor privy to the secret meetings and agreements, all being accomplished and implemented under pretense of such Acts as the "Par Value Modification Act", Public Law 94-564, 90 Stat. 2660, October 19, 1976; and further, while inducing and forcing others to aid and abet in the systematic scheme and criminal enterprise, the corporators conspired together and with each other, to breach the domestic duty and perfect obligation to maintain the integrity of foreign and domestic securities and Coin under pretense of Public Law 95-147, 91 Stat. 1227, October 28, 1977; and did in fact continually hold the CITIZENS and THEIR PROPERTY LIABLE and as COLLATERAL ON THE INTERNATIONAL SPECULATIONS, LEVERAGING, and arbitrary extensions of CREDIT of the corporators of The Fund and The Bank, and their agents.

The Fund and The Bank and its associations and combinations are claimed and admitted to be the "instrumentality", and are fundamentally engaged in activities which are of a "private nature", Osborn vs. The Bank Of The United States, 6 L.Ed. (9 Wheat) 204. They are NOT exempt from judicial process in the State Courts, nor from liability under the "International Organizations Immunities Act", 22 USC 288-288f, for TORTS or contractual obligations. (And just what "court" would you take them to? - David)

THE BOTTOM LINE: The Fund and The Bank, its corporators and agents SOLICIT and COLLECT CONTRIBUTIONS, LOANS, MONEY, OR OTHER THINGS OF VALUE, FOR OR IN INTEREST OF FOREIGN PRINCIPALS AND POWERS. (See: 22 USC 611; 26 USC 6103(k)(4); Multilateral Economic Assistance Act of 1993, Public Law 102-391, 106 Stat. 1633).

NO OFFICER, EMPLOYEE OR AGENT OF THE UNITED STATES CAN ACT AS AN "AGENT OF A FOREIGN PRINCIPAL" WITHOUT CRIMINALLY VIOLATING FUNDAMENTAL DOMESTIC LAW. The Supreme Law of the Land specifically declares and limits the use of force and taxation to "the general Welfare and common defence of the United States." See: Constitution for the United States of America, Preamble; Article I, Section 8, Clause 1. NONE of the funds solicited or collected through forced contributions of the Internal Revenue Service are returned to the de jure office of "Treasurer of the United States." (See: Public Law 94-564, 90 Stat. 2660, Legislative History, Senate Report 94-1148, pg. 5967; Reorganization Plan No. 26, 15 Federal Register 148; 26 USC 7804(a)). The funds solicited, collected and contributed by the corporators, and all proceeds of the operation, remain in the International Organization's exclusive possession and control. (See: Public Law 102-391,106 Stat. 1633).

The "Secretary of Treasury" is undeniably and admitted to be the "Governor" of the International Bank For Reconstruction and Development (The Bank) and the International Monetary Fund (The Fund) 22 USC 286a, and numerous other international organizations, and whose officers, employees and agents owe their PRIMARY ALLEGIANCE to the respective organizations AND TO NO OTHER AUTHORITY. (See: Articles Of Agreement Of The I.M.F., 60 Stat. 1401, et seq., Article IX; Articles Of Agreement Of The Bank, 60 Stat. 1440, et seq., Article VII; Mendaro vs. The World Bank, 717 F.2d. 610; see also Constitution And General Regulations For INTERPOL, Article 30; 22 USC 263a). Under PRETEXT and PRETENSE of "Reorganization" (BANKRUPTCY) the position also includes the exercise of the powers of the President under the "Trading With The Enemy Act" of October 6, 1917, 50 USC 1, as "Alien Property Custodian." (See: Executive Order 9095, as amended, Executive Order 11281, 31 Federal Register 7215).

The control of the entire "essential economic engine" was relinquished and surrendered to the "Governor" of "The Bank" and "The Fund" under pretense of Reorganization Plan No. 26. (See also: 26 USC 7804(a)). The numerous international agreements were NOT "made under Authority" in accordance with the tenor of the commission as expressed in the Constitution for the United States of America, Article VI, Clause 2. The forced CONTRIBUTIONS through the IRS cannot be vindicated as a "TAX" under the Constitution for the United States of America, Article I, Section 8, Clause 1, nor under the 16th Amendment, nor under the Law of Nations. The Internal Revenue Service is NOT an Agency of the United States. But . . . if you have a Social Security Number, also known as a "Taxpayer Identification Number", YOU have licensed and contracted to trade with the enemy. Social Security is an INTERNATIONAL agreement, and is controlled by the IMF and World Bank -- both UN Organizations. ALL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS, i.e., YOUR LOCAL BANK OR CREDIT UNION -- all of them, are under the EXCLUSIVE direction and control of the "Governor" of "The Fund" and "The Bank" -- the United Nations. Now, would YOU like to have a bank account or a loan?

They have no money. There are NO"dollars" in their (YOUR) accounts and YOU are NOT being PAID AT LAW for YOUR LABOR. A "dollar" is a specific weight of metal, either silver or gold; it is NOT paper, unless it is redeemable for the silver or gold Coin. Federal Reserve Notes, also called "SDR's" (Special Drawing Rights) are NOT "dollars". The fundamental Law of the Land, Article I, Section 10 of the Constitution for the United States of America, as ordained and established, REQUIRES that "No State shall emit Bills of Credit or make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts."

Where is the silver and gold Coin? It will be appropriate to repeat here that "TYRANNY IS ALWAYS CLOAKED IN COMPLEXITY." Afterall, we are speaking here of a "systematic scheme" that was given birth in the early 1900's, with the institution of "elastic currency" and overseas banking and lending, also known as "edge banking". (This is totally incorrect; see the First Bank of the United States in 1792. - David) Shortly thereafter, more paper monetary obligations were circulating abroad than could be redeemed. This in turn created a balance-of-payment problem and, in large part, gave rise to the "Great Depression" of the late 1920's. (Again, incorrect. It did lead to the bankrupcy of the United Staes government. More on this a little later. - David) The created economic condition resulted in the passage of: (1) the "Emergency Banking Relief Act" of 1933, whereby the gold Coin was TAKEN from the People; (2) the "Agricultural Adjustment Act" of 1933, whereby the private Federal Reserve banks' irredeemable (floating) paper was declared to be "legal tender" for all debts, and where marketing boards and price controls were started; and, (3) the "Gold Reserve Act" of 1934, which created an exclusively controlled Fund where the gold was deposited and held for settlement of international balance-of-payments.

The "public lands" were also "withdrawn" from use and settlement during this time and fees were imposed for the use and enjoyment of natural resources (duck stamps, grazing fees, park entrance fees, etc.).

On June 12, 1934, the Office of President was given statutory authority to enter into EXECUTIVE, INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL AGREEMENTS without the consent of the Senate. Franklin D. Roosevelt used this new power to negotiate the London Agreement on Gold. The intent of the London Agreement was to "NATIONALIZE" (meaning to "take") and then to "INTERNATIONALIZE" the gold and silver Coin. The agreement could not be implemented because it would destabilize the domestic economy of the United States of America. As a result, Roosevelt sought passage of the "Gold Reserve Act" of 1934 to GIVE EFFECT to the London Agreement and other INTERNATIONAL agreements to be made in the future. Section 10(b) of the Gold Reserve Act created the "Exchange Stabilization Fund" under the "EXCLUSIVE CONTROL" of the Secretary of Treasury. Moreover, any operations or transactions taking place under this clause are "not reviewable by any other officer of the United States". The gold taken (nationalized) from circulation during the mid 1930's, was deposited in this Fund. Section 10(b) also declares that whatever is deposited (the term "deposit" has very direct meanings under law, and the property becomes the property of the holder of the deposit - David) in the "Exchange Stabilization Fund" SHALL REMAIN in the Fund, including any interest or other profits made from its use. THIS ACT PERMANENTLY REMOVED THE GOLD FROM CIRCULATION AMONG THE PEOPLE and CONVERTED IT TO THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF THOSE ENGAGED IN INTERNATIONAL TRANSACTIONS! (Could that be handy for the international banks and the corporations owned by them? - David)

The "future" INTERNATIONAL agreements did not surface until 1945, when the International Bank For Reconstruction And Development (World Bank) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) were established as sister International Organizations of the United Nations by the Bretton Woods Agreement. The United States took the gold that it nationalized (expropriated) from the People in the 1930's, and purchased voting share stocks in the World Bank and IMF. The United States was, and is, the LARGEST voting share stockholder in both the World Bank and the IMF. It is absolutely imperative to remember that when a government becomes a stockholder in any corporation, IT WAIVES ITS SOVEREIGNTY, and operates under and according to the corporate charter of the organization. The United States thus became the "alter-ego" of "The Fund" and "The Bank" under the rule of instrumentality.

By 1965, the balance-of-payments DEFICIT had grown to such immense proportions that Congress had to debase the silver Coin of the United States to pay the international debt. On March 18, 1968, via Public Law 90-269, the United States declared that there were no more funds left for the redemption of their obligations, and a few months later, Congress amended the Gold Reserve Act of 1934, which became the foundation of the "Special Drawing Rights" (SDR) accounts in the IMF.

Special Drawing Rights (SDR's) are used for many things. It has recently been used to provide funding to implement the Uruguay Round Trade Agreement in the United States, and to pay Mexico's debts after it defaulted on its international balance-of-payments. An SDR is a "blank check" written against someone else's account. Technically, an SDR is an "international letter of credit" issued by the Secretary of Treasury (a.k.a. the "Governor" of the Fund and Bank) in whatever amount he determines. The SDR is then deposited in a central bank, such as the Federal Reserve Bank. The Bank then issues the EQUIVALENT in PAPER FEDERAL RESERVE NOTES. The funds received from the Banks are deposited in the "Exchange Stabilization Fund" where they remain at the exclusive disposal of the "Governors" of the G-7, that is, the seven corporate "Governors" of the World Bank and IMF (United Nations). The International Organizations are NOT obligated to repay the SDR, however, the funds taken out and borrowed from the central banks through the "system" become, and are, OBLIGATIONS of the Nation. When an SDR is issued against the United States, the People and businesses feel the effects through INFLATION and the DEPRECIATED PURCHASING POWER of their irredeemable paper money.

As "human resources" and "institutional units", the People are held liable for the entire indebtedness, PLUS interest. Simply said, both the initial funds for the loan and the loan payments are collected through forced contributions from the People of the United States through taxation, fees, and other exactions.

President Clinton used the International Organizations Act to grant IUCN "immunity from suit" on January 18, 1996, via Executive Order #12986. These special privileges and immunities provide the IUCN and its agents with the equivalent of a "Title of Nobility" which is prohibited by the Constitution for the United States of America. It is to be noted that the members of IUCN still use FAMILIAR DOMESTIC front names such as "U.S." Forest Service, "U.S." Fish and Wildlife Service, "U.S." Bureau of Land Management, "U.S." Environmental Protection Agency, "U.S." Park Service, and "U.S." NOAA and National Marine Fisheries Service, etc. Much of the public is deceived as to whom the organizations and agents REALLY ARE and what their REAL AGENDA and program IS. The facts and law of the situation indicate that all of these so-called "U.S. Agencies" are each, DIRECTED, CONTROLLED, FINANCED AND SUBSIDIZED by AGENTS OF A FOREIGN PRINCIPAL, and have NOTHING to do with the "United States of America", as you and I know it.

As stated in the IUCN's book entitled, "The Easement As A Conservation Technique" ...."Broadly speaking, the need for an approach like that permitted by CONSERVATION EASEMENTS is occasioned by limited OBJECTIVES OF LAND-USE CONTROL, the achievement of which does not require assumption of full proprietary ownership of the land. THIS NEED ARISES FOR GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES WHEN THE OBJECTIVES ARE BEYOND THEIR POWER to impose sufficient restrictions on property WITHOUT COMPENSATION....The United States federal and state constitutions require 'just compensation' to be paid to a landowner whose property has been EXPROPRIATED or condemned for public purposes."

The plans, programs, collaborative projects, etc., are many times referred to as "INTERGOVERNMENTAL" activities. The "Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973, Section 8; Money and Finance Act of 1982, Chapter 65; and the International Forestry Act of 1990" -- ALL OF THESE are examples of "INTERGOVERNMENTAL" operations. The media buzzword "intergovernmental" has a definition and meaning that is quite different from what it conveys to the mind of most people. The term "Intergovernmental" is defined in the Vienna Convention On The Law Of Treaties, Part I, Article 2, Section 1(i) as: "'INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION' means an intergovernmental organization. "The use of benign words that have hidden meanings are frequently intended to persuade the ignorant to give their tacit consent.

The "strategic plan" of the International Organizations is a SUBJUGATION PROCESS and is more on the order of the "unconventional warfare" operations of the Agency for International Development (USAID), which is misrepresented as being a "U.S." Agency. The A.I.D. is directly connected to The World Bank and International Monetary Fund and oversees and controls THE BANK'S INTERESTS in the host recipient country (THESE ARE U.N. OPERATIONS). It also operates as a paramilitary support unit for U.N. multinational military operations (see: 22 USC 287d) and is sometimes referred to as the "country team."

The international systematic scheme was devised and stealthily implemented over the course of the last 100 years or more. This scheme is nothing more or less than a ploy to nationalize, then internationalize and expropriate property and rights to property under the guise of "saving the earth" and "endangered species". Nationalization and expropriation is AGAINST THE LAW OF NATIONS and the declared Public Policy of the United States. Public Law 88-205, 77 Stat. 386, 387, Section 602(e). The INTERNATIONAL OPERATIONS are also prohibited by Congress from seriously impairing the economic stability of the United States, Public Law 472, 62 Stat. 137, or adversely affecting production in the United States, Public Law 99-190, 99 Stat. 1306, Section 523. ANY ACTIVITY WHICH VIOLATES THE PUBLIC POLICY OF THE UNITED STATES IS CONSIDERED AS VOID AND UNENFORCEABLE. (See: 54 Am Jur 2d, "Money", Section 35).

The "Land Acquisition" program (Act of March 1, 1911, 36 Stat. 961, as amended, Public Law 94-588, 90 Stat. 2949, Section 17) coupled with other Acts such as the "Endangered Species Act" (Public Law 93-205, 87 Stat. 884) have been systematically used as an ILLEGAL "EMINENT DOMAIN" proceeding, and have been wrongfully and fraudulently used to nationalize, expropriate and internationalize large amounts of valuable property belonging to the Citizens and others. The International organizations under the U.N. have unlawfully and fraudulently used these sequestered private and public lands and natural resources as COLLATERAL in the "loan portfolios" of international lending institutions, which are under the direction and control of the alien, corporate "Governor" of The Fund and The Bank, Robert Rubin and his predecessors, Lloyd Bentsen and Nicholas Brady (also "known" as the "Secretary of Treasury"), including, but not limited to, The International Bank For Reconstruction and Development, the Inter-America Development Bank, The African Development Bank, The Asian Development Bank, The African Development Fund, The Export-Import Bank, and their many subsidiary financial institutions.

The "Brady Plan" was devised and implemented to insure and guarantee international lending institutions from losses because of their own cupidity and unsafe and unsound banking practices. Public Law 98-181, 97 Stat. 1153, House Report 98-175, pg. 1906. THE DEBTS AND LOSSES OF THESE INTERNATIONAL AND PRIVATE LENDING INSTITUTIONS (22 USC 286d) WERE PASSED OFF ON THE "U.S. TAXPAYER." As recorded in As recorded in the Congressional "Hearing Before The Subcommittee On International Economic Policy And Trade", April 19, 1989, concerning the "INTERNATIONAL DEBT CRISIS: A REVIEW OF THE BRADY PLAN", at page 3:

"In the second place, I don't think the AMERICA TAXPAYER SHOULD HAVE TO ASSUME THE RISK FOR THE COMMERCIAL BANKS. Under the Brady Plan, if the debtor nations default on their reduced loans, the IMF and the World Bank will offset the losses incurred by the commercial banks. BUT AS WE ALL KNOW, U.S. TAXPAYERS CONTRIBUTE 20 PERCENT OF THE FUNDS TO THE IMF AND THE WORLD BANK. So if the debtor nations default on their refinanced loans, THE U.S. TAXPAYERS WILL HAVE TO PICK UP A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THE TAB. The taxpayers did not share in the profits in the 1970's made by the commercial banks on their loans to Third World Countries. Why, then, should the taxpayers have to absorb some of the banks' losses?"

The "Plan" and underlying scheme is meant as a revenue raising measure for FOREIGN PRINCIPALS AND POWERS and to secure international lending institutions and organizations from losses. Such activity has been PROHIBITED since the time of Lord Mansfield, 54 Am Jur2d, "Money", Section 35, and is a CRIMINAL ACT under 18 USC 219 & 951. NO OFFICER, EMPLOYEE OR AGENT OF THE UNITED STATES CAN ACT AS AN AGENT OF A FOREIGN PRINCIPAL. The underlying international scheme is not "for the general Welfare and common defence", nor is it meant to pay the debts of the United States and is therefore OUTSIDE of the DOMESTIC revenue raising Powers of Congress, Article I, Section 8, Clause 1.

This is only part of the sordid story. /s/ John R. Prukop

The above is probably, except for a brief that I saw written by John Nelson, the best description of what the United States really is that I have ever seen, if you look at it from that point of view. And, thus, what it really means to be a United States citizen. The United States is an illusion, and nothing more. It is an integration of self-interest for the profit of a few very rich and powerful men. If this knowledge were general throughout the population, what do you think would happen? Unfortunately, all too few will look.

This description given above is the refined essence of man’s government. Any time you give man the privilege of writing his own law, the above is exactly what happens. Greed, corruption, the accumulation of wealth at the expense of others, all of these things together doom any such attempt. This is why every kingdom, every empire, and every so-called government has failed on this earth. The greed becomes so great, and the thirst for ultimate power becomes so overwhelming, that eventually nothing is left. It is all destroyed, and we start over, each time a little dumber than the time before.

And because we are a little dumber each time, the accumulation of power in the hands of the few grows greater with every attempt. Until you have what is planned for today, when every action taken is to be monitored and approved before hand. Where every credit dime possessed by any man or woman on the face of the earth is subject to taxation and confiscation at the whim of any bureaucrat.

If you are a United States citizen, and if you give allegiance to and participate in what is described above, you are helping to create the beast. The beast is not coming to America; the District of Columbia has been at the fore front in creating the beast ever since 1792. This is why so many of the King’s allies, like German troops, fought in the Civil War on the side of the north. The south, even if they did not realize it, simply wanted shed of the king and his minions, and it was not allowed. The issue was state’s Rights, and the Rights of the People. Once government is moved away from the people, into a central establishment, the destruction of the people, and the government, is only a matter of time. This is why God's government on earth is built on the People themselves, and why we are given the task of enforcing His Law.

Back in the "old days," when human sacrifice was common and openly praticed, the men in charge knew that the god’s they were worshipping were not real. However, to the parents standing in the crowd watching their child killed on the altar or thrown into the flaming mouth of Baal, that god is very real indeed. And the men with the power to select that child, or someone else’s child instead, had the power of life and death in their hands. This is called rule by fear, and it is very effective. For reference, see the IRS.

It loses its effectiveness when the people lose their fear, or when the people become convinced that no matter what they do, no matter how closely they conform to what they think is the law, that their turn is going to come anyway. At that point, fear is no longer a factor. This is why you see judges talk about and being concerned with "the appearance of justice." They know that when the people become fully aware of the arbitrary nature of the law, that it is only a matter of time before the judge's days of privilege and power is done. It is only a matter of time before the people put an end, once again, to another of man’s government. That time is approaching in America. The problem that faces us is what do the People of America chose, after the United States government is gone, or a non-factor in the affairs of America. I fear what that answer is. For reference, see men fighting to save the Constitution, and other men fighting for the Constitution.

Contact the State Comptroller, and/or Treasury (with this State) official under a freedom of information act, and/or privacy act request, and secure a copy of the agreement that must be enforced in order for this State to act as a withholding agent on behalf of the United States.

Dan Meador put this question to test back in 1995 in the State of Oklahoma.

Would that make this State, an instrumentality of the United States?

Herein is the Act of Congress that empowers the United States to enter into equity attachments with the State wherein "Federal Employees" toil on behalf of the American Employer, and or an instrumentality thereof.

66 Statute Chapter 940, page 765 Public Law 587 AN ACT

July 17, 1952 [S. 1999]

Relating to the withholding for State income Tax purposes, on the compensation of Federal Employees. Withholding of State Income taxes by Federal agencies.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States United States of America in Congress assembled, That where- (1) the law of any State or Territory provided for the collection of a tax by imposing upon employers generally the duty of withholding sums from the compensation of employees and making returns of such sums to the authorities of such State or Territory, and

(2) such duty to withhold is imposed generally with respect to the compensation of employees who are residents of such State or Territory, then the Secretary of the Treasury, pursuant to regulations promulgated by the President, is authorized and directed to enter into an agreement with such State or Territory within one hundred and twenty days of the request for agreement from the proper official of such State or Territory. Such agreement shall provide that the head of each department or agency of the United States shall comply with the requirements of such law in the case of employees of such agency or department who are subject to such tax and whose regular place of Federal Employment is within the State or Territory with which such agreement is entered into. No such agreement shall apply with respect to compensation for services as a member of the Armed Forces of the United States.

Sec. 2. Nothing in this Act shall be deemed to consent to the application of any provision of law which has the effect of imposing more burdensome requirements upon the United States than it imposes upon other employers, or which has the effect of subjecting the United States or any of its officers, or employers to any penalty or liability by reason of the provisions of this Act. Approved July 17, 1952

MEADOR REPLY

When these issues were addressed in 1995 & '96, we were closing ground, but didn't get the banana -- I was allegedly "indicted" less than a month after my memorandum proving IRS is Dept. of the Treasury, Puerto Rico & no taxing statute in the Internal Revenue Code reaches the several States was published as legal notice in the Oklahoma City newspaper that sets across the street from the Arkansas-Oklahoma IRS "district" office. Maybe that was the straw that broke the camel's back -- "Time for Meador to take a vacation..."

Anyway, the whole Cooperative Federalism scheme seems to revolve around the Buck Act (4 U.S.C. 105-111) and the section that authorizes States to enter compacts (4 U.S.C. 112). You will note that there are no implementing regulations for any Title 4 section; Title 4 in the Code of Federal Regulations pertains to the General Accounting Office for the most part. GAO is responsible for resolving all claims of and against the United States, so maybe it is appropriate that GAO regs are in Title 4 CFR.

Anyway, virtually all State taxes (Sorry; not virtually all: ALL. - David) are predicated on Buck Act authority -- income tax, Social Security tax, fuel tax, even sales tax. The Buck Act doesn't apply to the several States, and even if it did, tax promulgated under Buck Act authority, read most liberally, would apply only on insular possessions of the United States which have been properly ceded to the United States. Consequently, State legislatures have made the States respectively vulnerable as when the law is unraveled, none of the State taxes apply to the geographical State except on insular possessions of the United States.

It's almost amusing that the State becomes the Achilles Heel to bring the whole scheme down once the judicial maze is sorted out.

The "compact" section at 4 U.S.C. 112 pertains to agreements for enforcing criminal law of the States respectively. It was originally 1934 legislation, and was classified in Title 18 of 1934 & '40 editions of the United States Code, but was moved into Title 4 thereafter and has been fraudulently used for such things as agreements pertaining to Social Security, etc., since. The whole Organization of States and other such organizations rest on this section in the Code -- it was the centerpiece behind the Intergovernmental Compacts in 1935 & '37. /s/ Dan Meador

So the illusion that is the United States extends to the several states, or what people think of as the states, now. There no longer is any taxing authority within the several states because no one is home in the states themselves, and this includes all of the so-called officers of those states. If you stop and think about this, you will see how this will be used to bring America into subjection by an illusion of law; an illusion so far from reality that most will never be aware of what has happened. This change from a number of republics has been going on since 1792, as the King and his minions move to restore the King's authority and privileges.

Sorry Hank but the below is totally wrong. We have confirmation from the supreme court administrative personnel that the last Article III non diminished salaried judge died in 1969. True, the courts are article III courts but NOT in a constitutional sense. I have obtained 7 federal judges Form 61. That form makes them civil servants like any other employee of the federal government. Every one including the supreme court judges are NOT, repeat NOT Article III judges. There is no more animal. For proof read the Terry Hatter case where 12 judges sued out as Article III judges. The Appeal court stated that not one of them could claim that, because since 1983 they were under the Social Security Act.

There are a host of cases below. And by the way I have studied and researched this animal for 20 years and hundreds of thousands of hours compared to the man who only spent two or three years? A court can only have article III powers if the judges have non diminished pay, hold no licenses of ANY kind, hold no social security as they all do as stated in the Judge Hatter case, and file no Form 61's, which they all do. The Tacoma Lumber case unequivocally states that NO U.S. District court is formed under the constitution as an Article III court but are "inferior courts" formed under article III and are not constitutional courts in that sense. The Informer

From: "Bruce Edward" bigmac@adelphia.net Subject: Re: RE; Federal Judges are Private

As one who has studied the federal court system for literally thousands of hours over several years, here is what I've learned.

All of the judges on the United States District Courts have been appointed under Art III. However, they have been assigned to courts whose jurisdiction flows only from Art I. All USDC's in the States are legislative courts vested with jurisdiction under Art I. Although the judges were appointed under Art III, Clause 1, they have been "neutered" of the "judicial powers of the US" that flows from Art III.

There is only 1 USDC that has been vested by Congress with both Art I and Art III powers. That is the USDC for the District of Columbia. See 28 USC Sec. 88, historical notes. I have 4 cases docketed on the "law side" of that USDC where the USA is the defendant.

Federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. Their jurisdiction is dependant upon 2 things; what Congress has vested in them and what jurisdiction was invoked by Plaintiff.

There is no such thing as an Art II court in the federal system. Hope this helps. ICE

Subject: Fw: RE; Federal Judges are Private

Just received....any comments...rebuttal? Haven't verified anything, just passing along for general information...

A court caseX-Status:

New To All. The Informer gave me parts of the briefs he wrote for a man that subsequently led to the IRS withdrawing the civil case against him after 3 years of not being able to obtain what they wanted under a 2039 summons in court. Mr. Houck is a District court judge and the man's name is XXXX and need not be divulged.

However the man was later indicted but the Informer did not participate in the writing of any of the pleadings.

Judges are not under the united states control and are therefore private.

The Congress (herein after United States), in Cromelin v United States, 177 F 2d 275, when asking for dismissal stated; "that the judge and the trustee in bankruptcy were not employees of the United States within the meaning of the Act." The District court judge agreed and stated; "I hold further that a federal district judge is not an employee of the United States, nor is his trustee in bankruptcy." On appeal the Fifth Circuit upheld. Therefore, all federal judges are private, thereby supporting the private law scenario supra, but are holding themselves out to the people, such as the cross libelants, as belonging to the United States government which is a crime under 18 USC 219 & 912. In a Constitutional sense the judges cannot exert judicial power, see infra.

JUDGES CANN0T EXERCISE ARTICLE III POWER

No federal court in this country has full Article III Power. For the above, and herein included facts, is another reason the IRS controls the "judges" of the courts. An adjudicated fact that supports this reasoning is Hatter v United States, 21 C1. Ct. 786 (1990), wherein 10 federal judges sought relief from Social Security taxes claiming they were Article III judges. The Claims Court dismissed, and they moved to the 'United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, case No. 91-5039. In the decision, Jan. 16, 1992, to remand back to the Claims Court, the court stated that neither the judges nor the court of appeals or district court judges were Article III judges. Ever since the erroneous reading of O'Malley v Woodrough, 307 US 277, which attempts to overthrow Evans v Gore, 253 US 245. Based on Woodrough's actions, IRS says that the Congress can tax every federal judge, inferring all "judges" were, and have been, stupid enough and uneducated enough to believe it. Thank you Mr. Houck

Footnote 1. "We think the holdings are correct .... He is in no sense an agent or employee or officer of the United States. The .judge is appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate and paid from the United States Treasury, but in trying cases he is a member of the independent .judiciary and is not under the control of the United States ....

for proving Evans v Gore principles are still alive and well by citing it, which disqualifies all you "judges" from Article III capacity. However, a close reading of the case and the relevant facts therein, reveal that judge Woodrough voluntarily claimed his compensation as "gross income" by writing the figure as "income" and then signed the form under penalties of perjury stating that the figures were true and correct. Any constitutional objections or protest, following a voluntary act with no evidence of duress are ill founded. Chesebrough v U.S., 193 US 253. So the reasoning was correct ONLY for that particular stupid "judge" who voluntarily filed a tax form. Already entered is proof that there never was a true Article III Court, see Wright, Miller & Cooper, Federal Practice and Procedure, Jurisdiction, West's Federal 13 B., Organization of Federal Courts, Judiciary Act of 1789, Ch 1 Sec. 3503 pg 9.2.

The supposed "judicial" Powers of all "courts" of this nation, federal, state, county (parish), or municipal are territorial courts, established by "Congress" under the "jurisdiction" of commercial government. The question now arises; if any judge who is to hear this action, being influenced by the colorable law fiction that he (judge) is required to pay any income tax on his guaranteed salary, then he will believe and rule that everyone is required to produce records and pay an income tax. The foregoing, apparently true by the actions of all judges, then said judge(s) have been directly influenced by the IRS (who he is beholding to) in an adverse manner, proving he is a private administrative judge, Cromelin supra, that violates the spirit of the framers' intent to keep the judiciary free from outside influences. But that only applies to the Supreme Court. But, again, even they pay an income tax.

Footnote 2 "Certain features of the First Judiciary Act deserve special comment. It was argued in Congress that there was a duty to confer on the federal courts the full judicial power granted by the Constitution. This view was rejected by Congress, and indeed at no time in history has the entire judicial power been vested in federal courts." There is a footnote to see Sec. 3526: Entire power never vested.

Footnote 3 "The United States district court is not a true United States court, established under article 3 of the Constitution to administer the judicial power of the United States therein conveyed… The resemblance of its jurisdiction to that of free United States courts in offering an opportunity to nonresidents in a geographical sense of resorting to a tribunal not subject to local influence does not change its character as a mere territorial court." Balzac v. People of Porto Rico, 258 US 298, 312. "In a sense that its jurisdiction is dependent on the will of Congress, the district court is a court of limited, rather than general jurisdiction,..." 36 A C.J.S. Federal Courts Sec. 308 /s/ Timothy I. McCrory

Web Site - Kay County Patriots: http://www.bigfoot.com/~tim_mccrory/

mailto:tim_mccrory@bigfoot.com

So once again we find that what we have been told is true is simply a lie. Once again we find that everything around us upon which we base our "faith" on earthly systems is false and an illusion.

What else does this tell us? Are you consumed with news of the world, and despair of changing the world? Why? Can you change the world? Does something happening in South Africa affect you? How about Iraq? Does that affect you? Or India? Or Bosnia? Can you affect change there? Then why are you worried about it, and why do you bother spending time thinking about it?

The purpose behind keeping news of the world in front of you is simple; As long as you pay attention to it, your feelings of inadequacy will increase. You will become convinced that you are helpless, and nothing you can possibly do will have any affect. This will include feeling that you can not even control your own life, and so you will stop trying and let outside forces make your decisions for you. Nothing could be further from the truth.

You control your life. You must surrender that control for the benefit of the elite and their minions before they can benefit from your labor. The single largest part of control of your life is self-education. That is the purpose of thinking. When you stop learning, it is because you have stopped thinking. Look at most of the people around you and you will understand exactly what I mean.

The Know Your Customer is the G8 program for policing the world:

The "G8" (formally the "G7") is a group of leaders from the major industrialized countries who meet regularly to develop international policy in conformity with United Nations Treaties. These leaders periodically issue policy directives that each member country is bound to comply with. One of the "cornerstones" of the G8's global governance policies is the "Know Your Customer" program which is their "solution" to money laundering and crime in general. They see the international KYC program as a method to control and combat trafficking in illicit drugs, illegal weapons transfers, official corruption, and "trafficking in human beings."

Wherever you see reference to the "Recommendations," or the "forty Recommendations," it is referring to a particular list of international recommendations agreed upon for each member country to comply with. The Know Your Customer program is referred to as the "cornerstone" of the Recommendations. I have the Recommendations posted on the FtF web page. http://www.networkusa.org/fingerprint/page1b/FP-40-recommendations.htm

You must read the following in order to understand where KYC is coming from and the ultimate purpose for it's implementation - global control. You must "read between the lines" on each and every statement made below to understand the G8 plan for global government. Your must understand the underlying meaning in almost every word. Scott

DRUGS AND INTERNATIONAL CRIME

http://birmingham.g8summit.gov.uk/docs/crime.shtml

THE BIRMINGHAM SUMMIT: FINAL COMMUNIQUE - Sunday 17 May 1998

1. We, the Heads of State or Government of eight major industrialized democracies and the President of the European Commission, met in Birmingham to discuss issues affecting people in our own and other countries. In a world of increasing globalization we are ever more interdependent. Our challenge is to build on and sustain the process of globalization and to ensure that its benefits are spread more widely to improve the quality of life of people everywhere. We must also ensure that our institutions and structures keep pace with the rapid technological and economic changes under way in the world.

2. Of the major challenges facing the world on the threshold of the 21st Century, this Summit has focused on three:

To achieving sustainable economic growth and development throughout the world in a way which, while safeguarding the environment and promoting good governance, will enable developing countries to grow faster and reduce poverty, restore growth to emerging Asian economies, and sustain the liberalization of trade in goods and services and of investment in a stable international economy;

To building lasting growth in our own economies in which all can participate, creating jobs and combating social exclusion;

To tackling drugs and transnational crime which threaten to sap this growth, undermine the rule of law and damage the lives of individuals in all countries of the world. Our aim in each case has been to agree concrete actions to tackle these challenges.

Combating drugs and international crime

18. Globalization has been accompanied by a dramatic increase in transnational crime. This takes many forms, including trafficking in drugs and weapons; smuggling of human beings; the abuse of new technologies to steal, defraud and evade the law; and the laundering of the proceeds of crime.

19. Such crimes pose a threat not only to our own citizens and their communities, through lives blighted by drugs and societies living in fear of organized crime; but also a global threat which can undermine the democratic and economic basis of societies through the investment of illegal money by international cartels, corruption, a weakening of institutions and a loss of confidence in the rule of law.

20. To fight this threat, international cooperation is indispensable. We ourselves, particularly since the Lyon summit in 1996, have sought ways to improve that cooperation. Much has already been achieved. We acknowledge the work being done in the UN, the EU and by other regional groupings. We welcome the steps undertaken by the G8 Lyon Group to implement its 40 Recommendations on transnational organized crime and the proposals G8 Justice and Interior Ministers announced at their meeting in Washington last December. By working together, our countries are helping each other catch criminals and break up cartels. But more needs to be done. There must be no safe havens either for criminals or for their money.

21. We have therefore agreed a number of further actions to tackle this threat more effectively:

We fully support efforts to negotiate within the next two years an effective United Nations convention against transnational organized crime that will provide our law enforcement authorities with the additional tools they need.

We agree to implement rapidly the ten principles and ten point action plan agreed by our Ministers on high tech crime. We call for close cooperation with industry to reach agreement on a legal framework for obtaining, presenting and preserving electronic data as evidence, while maintaining appropriate privacy protection, and agreements on sharing evidence of those crimes with international partners. This will help us combat a wide range of crime, including abuse of the internet and other new technologies.

We welcomed the FATF decision to continue and enlarge its work to combat money-laundering in partnership with regional groupings. We place special emphasis on the issues of money laundering and financial crime, including issues raised by offshore financial centers. We welcome the proposal to hold in Moscow in 1999 a Ministerial meeting on combating transnational crime. We agreed to establish Financial Intelligence Units (FIUs) where we do not already have them, in line with our national constitutions and legal systems, to collect and analyze information on those engaged in money laundering and liaise with the equivalent agencies in partner countries. We agreed on principles and the need for adequate legislation to facilitate asset confiscation from convicted criminals, including ways to help each other trace, freeze and confiscate those assets, and where possible, in accordance with national legislation, share seized assets with other nations.

We agree on the need to explore ways of combating official corruption arising from the large flows of criminal money.

We are deeply concerned by all forms of trafficking of human beings including the smuggling of migrants. We agreed to joint action to combat trafficking in women and children, including efforts to prevent such crimes, protect victims and prosecute the traffickers. We commit ourselves to develop a multidisciplinary and comprehensive strategy, including principles and an action plan for future cooperation amongst ourselves and with third countries, including countries of origin, transit and destination, to tackle this problem. We consider the future comprehensive UN organized crime convention an important instrument for this purpose.

We endorse joint law enforcement action against organized crime and welcome the cooperation between competent agencies in tackling criminal networks. We agree to pursue further action, particularly in dealing with major smuggling routes and targeting specific forms of financial fraud.

We endorse the Lyon Group’s principles and action plan to combat illegal manufacturing and trafficking of firearms. We welcome its agreement to work towards the elaboration of a binding international legal instrument in the context of the UN transnational organized crime convention.

The origins of the present Group of Eight (G8) leading industrialized democracies lie in the Economic Summit convened by President Valery Giscard d'Estaing of France at Rambouillet in November 1975. President Giscard and Chancellor Schmidt of Germany, themselves both former Finance Ministers, were keen to establish an informal forum to discuss world economic issues, building on the 'Library Group' of Finance Ministers from Britain, France, Germany, Japan and the US (named after their meetings in the White House library), which operated during the early 1970s. This original 'Group of Five' were joined by Italy, Canada and the President of the European Commission in 1976-77. This configuration became known as the Group of Seven (G7).

Here is a lesson; it is THEIR credit. Whatever they want to install as controls of and for that credit is their business, and you can not argue any other way successfully. All of the necessary treaties are already in place for the type of control talked about above. Now that you are hearing about these controls simply means that all of the work is done and it is time to initiate action. It is far to late to complain. Besides, IT'S THEIR CREDIT!

Understanding this is also important in understanding the so-called income tax. (I have an excellent brief on this available separately if you wish to see it. - David) You can not argue the income tax under the Constitution, because the Constitution has no bearing on the subject. It is a tax which is contracted for, and you must argue on that basis. Also, to avoid it, you must use their laws, which are designed to do just that.

To give you a further idea of just how impossible it is to change the world, the following is offered.

This is, indeed, quite an interesting read, albeit lengthy. You must type or paste in the entire URL, through and including the words "Open Document" to bring up the page. ICE From: Freedom <Roamer@gbso.net>

Sirs, Having received many postings from you that have influenced my awareness of the goings-on in the world around me, I thought it best that each of you should know of the document and website I stumbled across couple of nights ago.

http://www.icrc.org/unicc/ihl_eng.nsf/52d68d14de6160e0c12563da005fdb1b/fb2c5

995d7cbf846412566900039e535?OpenDocument

The URL is stemming from a link on The International Committee of the Red Cross home page. On this website is listed every multinational treaty ever entered into since the 1800's. One document entitled :

Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 17 July, 1998, caught my eye. Due to the intricate wording of this treaty, and due to the fact that I am not an attorney, I realize the importance of many things in here might escape my attention. Just from a cursory browse through it, however, as that is all I have had time for so far, there appears here to be sufficient proof for all to see that the implications of One World Government in the future coming to pass are now no longer able to be denied. I pass this on to you in hopes that either you, or people whom you deem more able can break this treaty down into more understandable pieces that we all can understand. I realize that from a Christian perspective this news is not surprising. However, now is no better time to fall to ones knees and ask for the wisdom with which to make the all important everyday decisions that would cause those around us to be fully aware of whom we serve.....

This message has been posted to APFN MESSAGE BOARD: To Read Message Board:

http://www.InsideTheWeb.com/messageboard/mbs.cgi?acct=mb77532

To Post a Message:

http://www.InsideTheWeb.com/messageboard/mbs.cgi?acct=mb77532#POSTNEW

The enclosed message refers to a APFN message posted to:

http://www.InsideTheWeb.com/messageboard/mbs.cgi?acct=mb77532&MyNum=913211964&P=Yesmessage

Please print, study and share this outstanding research with as many of your friends as possible. We are all thankful to John Prukop for this report. A true American Patriot! This report is the result of many current postings about Why Waco? Please go to the Message Board and review this information. Soon to be added is the information about Paul Wilshire and his report to Gen. Janet Reno "The Truth Behind Waco". Mr. Prukop helped APFN in the distribution of this report. In the first page of this report Mr. Wilshire makes the statement "The information in this report could get me killed". It did! In just over a month of giving this report to Gen. Reno, Mr. Wilshire was found dead in his Apt. by Washington Reporter Sarah McClendon. Mr. Wilshire was also representing covert agent Gunther Russbacher in what is called "The October Surprise Investigation". Rayelan Russbacher has just filed an E-mail with APFN on this matter. At the time APFN contacted APFN (FAX NETWORK) to help with a 10x10x10 matrix to copy and network "The Truth Behind Waco" report. I provided a copy of the report to the U.S. House Judiciary Committee during the Waco hearings. It was never discussed or reviewed in the final report. Mr. Wilshire's death has never been investigated, all his records and files were taken and no one has received any further information. On several interviews I have heard Sarah McClendon on she has never answered any hard questions about the report. If anyone has any further information on this matter please feel free to post to APFN message board or send to APFN@nebox.com and we will spread the word.

Subject: "Secretary of Treasury" A.K.A. "Governor" of The Fund and The Bank

From: "CCW" <ccw@wolfenet.com>

To: American Patriot Friends Network <APFN@netbox.com>

WARNING: 2nd AMENDMENT WILL BE GONE BY JUNE 99...

by Jon Christian Ryter (BAFFauthor@aol.com)

In a message DotHB forwarded a message in which Devvykidd writes:

"Americans have the right to defend their family, their life and we know how to do it. We will do it if that's what it comes down to - that's what the Second Amendment is all about. You know it, I know it and the bad guys know it." ....Devvy Kidd

As an individual who has run for Congress (and is acquainted with several of my own acquaintances) Devvy Kidd obviously knows the jeopardy in which the Constitution (and particularly the 2nd Amendment) is in. What you may not know at this moment is that the Justice Department is on a timeline that mandates the abrogation of the 2nd Amendment by next June.

In writing my latest book, I picked up several key information "sources" within the Clinton Administration. One of them is a terrorist specialist in the Justice Department. He and a high ranking department head in the National Institute of Health have provided me with a good deal of information concerning the National ID Card (which Lamar Smith lied to me about in February, 1997) and the abolishment of the 2nd Amendment no later than June, 1999. The Justice Department source, while actively supplying me with information a few months ago, has now become nothing more than my personal "Deepthroat." He will no longer supply new information, but will only confirm or deny information I manage to pick up elsewhere.

Two of the posts I sent out containing information he supplied were attached to a memo circulated through the Justice Dept asking for information about who could have leaked the data to an author.

It should be obvious to just about anyone today that the Y2K problem is a manufactured problem. First, no one knows what's going to happen. If you think about it, it is easy to figure out. You have included all of the elements. The introduction of the Euro is the first step to creating a universal global currency. As you likely know, when Jimmy Carter attempted to have GATT ratified (it had already failed in 1974), the government printing office had already printed thousands of new "dollars," believing that global governance would be achieved during his term.

The problem with creating a global currency has always been the United States. To create a global currency all that is required is a global panic which collapses not only the economies of the industrialized nations, but their currencies as well. The problem for the globalists has never been its desire or determination to do it, but in creating a catalyst that could not be blamed directly on them.

When J.P. Morgan instigated the Panic of 1908, it came back to his doorstep almost overnight. When the bankers manipulated the stock market throughout the 1920s and then collapsed the market and the economy in 1929, a good many intelligent writers correctly laid the blame on their doorsteps. This time the globalists have something else to blame - a computer chip.

They will be blameless this time. The collapse will be blamed on computers that see 2000 as 1900, and through no fault of their own, computers will shut down the economy. There are a few factors that will have great bearing on the severity of the problem: The crisis is being cleverly managed, and the media is doing its part to convince the American people that they will be faced with the loss of electricity, water, gas; and they can expect problems withdrawing funds from banks, etc.

And, of course, those things will happen. Because the crisis will be so severe, the government believes there will be a dramatic increase in crime, so they are also preparing for that contingency as well. (Isn't it nice that our government is so concerned about our welfare?)

To prepare for the crisis, Clinton wrote PDD-39 (which was immediately declared a top secret). As you know, PDD-39 creates a new "local" police force out of FEMA. For the better part of 1998, FEMA "agents" have been receiving small arms training, and now spend more time on the pistol ranges than either the FBI or the BATF.

Of course, since there are so many "radicals" around, Big Brother also realizes that FEMA, the FBI and the BATF may not be enough - even with the American military. Fortunately (according to my Justice Dept source who was responsible for their routing to U.S. military bases) there is not a shortage of UN troops. For the past year they have been coming into the United States in small numbers. They arrive at various military installations. The minute the pass through the front gates of those bases, they simply disappear. And, that is true also of vast amounts of weapons and munitions.

My source routed a trainload of small arms and munitions to one western base. Before the train arrived, it was diverted... and vanished. When he tried to track it, he was told by his supervisor in the Justice Dept that it was none of his business.

(1) the introduction of the Euro-dollar January 1, 1999,

(2) the government's progress,

(3) how prepared the American people are and the people of the United States, regardless how prepared they think they are, are not prepared for what is planned. Stocking up on food packets and bottled water will not prepare them for what is coming no later than next June.

(4) the behind the scenes machinations of the world bankers.

Here is the real culprit behind Y2K. From documents I picked up for my latest book, Whatever Happened To America?, that include confidential White House memos and Clinton documents that were buried in the National Archives, the timeline of world government has been chronicled.

[Devvy], I know when you were running for Congress, you followed this fairly close. I don't know how much access you have at this time.

What should you know about the problem? The obvious first is that it is going to happen and the world has waited too long to fix the problem. As you state in this posting, the problem, Y2K can be solved with a Band-Aid until such time as all of the nation's mainframes can be updated by simply manually keying the year 2000 into those systems that have not been updated. This would solve the Y2K problem temporarily with only a minor interruption.

The second is that you are probably going to have your life disturbed to some degree and that degree will depend on you and those in your community. In reality, Devvy, it will have nothing to do with any community. The power that is creating the problem requires the problem. Just as that invisible power behind government caused the illegal and fraudulent ratification of both the 16th and 17th Amendments - and the creation of its own central bank in the United States, it has selected not only every President who has sat in the White House since 1912 (at least) - and, it determines precisely what issues will be debated during those election campaigns. Their power extends beyond the elected officials now, and goes directly into the U.S. Supreme Court.

It was because of a fear of overpopulation and a demand from the Rockefeller Foundation that abortion be legalized that the Supreme Court ruled on January 22, 1973 that a woman had a right to an abortion. Unknown to you, but on file in Box 1748 in the National Archives are three Supreme Court decisions which have not yet been rendered because the cases have not yet been filed. The first decision will state, when the government attempts to gain access to the medical databases at State level that "...accessing medical databases does not require a medical license."

This decision, based on the passage of Hillary Clinton's Health Security Act of 1994, was to occur between 1996-98. The second decision which was to grant the government co-ownership of all medical databases was to occur between 1998-2000. And, finally, between 2002-04, the Supreme Court was to rule that all medical databases in the United States will be surrendered to the UN which will become the custodian of all information databases in the world.

Attached to these decisions was the itinerary the government was planning to use to control the free movement of the population of the United States. One thing I would like to stress and that is this: Just remember one thing - those people - patriots or sheep - who will be adversely impacted are also the people who can fix the problem.

Devvy, I am of the opinion that if we are to alter the timeline of the globalists, we need to do it now...or it will be too late. I am not certain exactly what the government has planned for June, 1999 but it is "last resort" act if the current plan to incite a revolt in North Carolina (or Tennessee, etc.) with the militia groups they are doing everything to incite fails. My "source" will not tell me what is planned (he may not even know), but the "plans" he is involved with apparently center on deployments after the incident occurs.

He did tell me that there is a Delta Force team that is "practicing" for a June, 1999 mission which suggest that if the militia groups like the 91st Brigade do not start shooting federal agents, it is likely that the government (in pure Hitler fashion) will use government troops to counterfeit one (like Hitler's burning of the Reichstag in 1933.)

I have been following your writings for some time, and have been greatly impressed with your assessment of the problems this country is facing. Devvy, too bad you failed in your bid to get elected. In fact, I was impressed enough with your determination to fix America that you are one of twelve patriotic Americans to whom I dedicated my new book.

At this time, I see your posts only because I have been fortunate enough to have them forwarded to me by Dot Bibee. Would appreciate it if you would include me on your primary mail list. BAFFauthor@aol.com Jon Christian Ryter

[MORE INFO. Jon is talking about the Delta Force - and that is the H.R.T. Squad that is in Andrews, NC right now. They are training hundreds of men - even though they only have a hundred or two there at a time because they rotate them every two weeks. They have been in the mountains since July. THINK!!! Stay Alert! ....Dot Bibee]

How much of the above is absolutely true and correct? I do not know, but I do know Devvy Kidd (her husband is a retired high ranking military officer), and it has been confirmed to me that there is enough truth in the message to cause anyone to initiate preparations for survival. Note the word; survival.

IF WE COULD FACE OUR FEARS

by Shonda P. Wigington (texnat57@gateway.net) Freedom-Lovers International

We have a crisis in our country today. The crisis I speak about is not the presidential impeachment hearings. It is not the recent rise in hate crimes. It is not the dangers our children face each day as moms and dads across America drop them off at public schools. It isn't the religious persecutions around the world that seem to be untouchable by the separation of church and state that has been planted in our way of life for the past 30 years. It isn't the crowding of prisons due to victimless crimes; nor is it the rising numbers of deadbeat parents. It isn't the breakup of the family, or the lack of role models in the land.

The crisis isn't campaign finance, or the outrageous amount of taxes we pay each year. It isn't nuclear warheads pointed at different countries around the world; nor is it the rapid destruction of rain forests. It isn't global warming, natural disasters, man-made pollution, or endangered species. It isn't terrorism, war, or slavery. It isn't the federal reserve, international moneychangers, or even welfare reform. It isn't illiteracy, disabled persons, or unemployment. It is not the economy, stupid.

The crisis we are facing in this country is FEAR. It is knowing that something is wrong and refusing to rock the boat for fear of being labeled a dissident.

I believe that it was Winston Churchill that stated, "The only thing men have to fear is fear itself." Today we have come to understand the meaning of those words all too clearly.

Too many times men and women change the subject rather than face controversial issues. Too many times we tend to give our children the benefit of the doubt rather than offer them advice whether they need it or not. Too many times we defend our public officials simply because we voted for them, rather than hold them accountable to do the job we voted for them to do.

For too long we have allowed the government access to our pocket-books without saying a word for fear of being labeled a tax-evader. We fear speaking up for our right for fear of the very people who swore to protect those rights. We fear police who harass and intimidate rather than serve and protect.

We fear arrest at our places of business for failure to I-D eighteen-year-olds who are allowed to die for their country without parental consent but are not allowed to decide whether or not they are responsible enough to drink a beer. We fear arrest for sexual harassment if we ask someone out on a date more than once. We fear being labeled racist if we promote someone of the wrong color, regardless of his or her ability. We fear being labeled stalkers, kooks, or fanatics if we attempt to hold our public officials accountable. We fear being politically incorrect when we speak at a public forum.

Yet we don't realize that the chains of slavery are fastened by FEAR. It is fear that keeps man from actively pursuing his natural tendencies regarding life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. When we fear we are more inclined to accept 2nd best, rather than strive to have the best at any cost.

There was a time when our heroes were admired for the lack of fear they seemed to show. Today, I am ashamed to say societal stature rather than their dissident opinions measure our heroes.

My heroes are still those of the past who uttered such words as "Give me liberty or give me death" or "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

If only we could think like those men and have the courage to draw that line in the sand and stand up for our beliefs and control over our own lives as they did. Maybe then we would be able to tip or hats in appreciation of the officer on the streets without fear. We could call our public officials and tell them "THANK YOU" rather than complain. We could say to our children, "Stand up straight. Show respect. THAT is the president of the United States of America coming."

If we could just have the courage to face our fears and look them in the eye and say, "I'm not backing down. No retreat, no surrender," we might then be able to see a glimmer of hope that our children and our grandchildren will not have to wear the chains of slavery our government has forced upon us in the name of Peace.

Shonda P. Wigington, President, Freedom-Lovers International 5308 Robinsdale Lane

Austin, Texas 78723 512-933-1950

While I certainly do not agree with the entire message, the basis is true. Just as we are told in scripture to have no fear, the same is true today. I stopped paying the beast long ago because I knew he was harming my nation and my people. I then prayed for knowledge and guidance. The knowledge was there, and all I had to do was ask. Since then, I have come to understand how powerful it is to seek knowledge, and to ask Him to supply what you need. I have access to more real knowledge now that I need to learn than was ever conceivable by me before asking.

Inhabitant of the Conquered lands wrote: Qualified Taxes The State Agreement

The Legislative authority of the United State Congress is "To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District" (Article 1, section 17), and to "the Territory or other Property to the United States:" (Article IV, section 3, clause 2).

The Congress of the United State under its legislative authority passed Public Law 587 on July 17, 1952; 66 Statute Chapter 940, page 765. An act (Senate bill 1999) Relating to the withholding for State income Tax purposes, on the compensation of Federal Employees.

This Act was codified in the Internal Revenue Code of 1954. The implementing regulations are found in Title 26 CFR part 301.6365, 301.6362, 301.6361, under what is known as the "qualified taxes." This program is applicable only to the Federal District.

The program requires returns based upon a W-4, or 1099. The amazing piece of the puzzle is the definition of the State and Governor. The second part of this puzzle is found in the intentional use of the Annotated code and revised Statutes of the States party to the Constitution to create the fiction of law wherein the State is defined as the District of Columbia.

When you read through the revised statutes, and/or the Annotated Code of this State, you will find the statutory recognition of this State being an insular possession, or Territory of the United States, or the "District of Columbia."

In the Annotated Code of the General Public Laws of Maryland, the State is defined in Tax Property, Title I, DEFINITIONS, GENERAL PROVISIONS., Sec. 1-101. Definitions (u) State:

"State" means:

(1) a state, possession, territory, or commonwealth of the United States; or

(2) the District of Columbia.

The tax imposed upon wages is recognized as a "qualified tax" program upon income by the State. This State, is the District of Columbia. The question then, is how can the wage tax, which is the "qualified tax" be administered outside the geographical State, which is the District of Columbia?

Simple, by the "election of the Governor."

The concept that the Governor may "elect" to establish this State to be a "withholding agent" on behalf of the United States applies to a limited and delineated jurisdiction. In fact the Governor in Question is defined as the Mayor of Washington, D.C.

Code of Federal Regulations Internal Revenue Title 26

301.6365.1 Definitions.

(a) State. For purposes of subchapter E and the regulations thereunder, the term "State" shall include the District of Columbia, but shall not include the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico or any possession of the United States.

(b) Governor. For purposes of subchapter E and the regulations thereunder, the Term "Governor" shall include the Mayor of the District of Columbia. [T.D. 7577, 43 FR 59375, Dec. 20, 1978]

What needs to be uncovered is this "written statement of election" submitted by the Governor. The Constitutions of the State’s party to the Union, do not authorize officers of the Public Trust to surrender the Sovereignty of the People, or the State to a foreign principal.

The "State agreement" is based upon the statutory fact of a "qualified State individual income tax" program for the District of Columbia.

The "State agreement" would be prima facie proof that the Chief Executive Officer of this State does not know geography. Furthermore the application of the "State agreement" can only be applicable to "employees" of the State known as the District of Columbia.

Confused, you should be at this point. The wage tax collected by the withholding agent at the source of income is apparently a deliberate misapplication of the law. What can be done? Apparently the Courts of the United States, and of this State care nothing for the law. Or could it be the Judges cannot read?

One thing can be done. A Freedom of Information Act requesting that the "Governor" provide the "documents" made by the office in connection with the transaction of public business with regards to the election known as the "State Agreement."

The importance of exposing this "State Agreement" would be absolute proof of the existence of this "Federally controlled State." Furthermore, this would be evidence that the "income tax" is the "qualified tax" which is an imposition upon persons in the service of the District of Columbia as "State" employees.

Code of Federal Regulations Internal Revenue Title 26

301.6361.1 Collection and administration of qualified taxes (in part)

(a) In general. In the case of any State which has in effect a State agreement (as defined in paragraph (a) of 301.6361-4) the Commissioner of Internal Revenue shall collect and administer each qualified tax (as defined in paragraph (b) of 301.6361-4) of such State. No fee or other charges shall be imposed upon any State for the collection or administration of any qualified tax of such state or any other State. In any such case of collection and administration of qualified taxes, the provision of subtitle F (relating to procedure and administration), subtitle G (relating to the Joint committee on Taxation), and chapter 24 (relating to the collection of income taxes at source on wages), and the provisions of regulations thereunder, insofar as such provisions relate to the collection and administration of the taxes imposed on income of individuals by chapter 1 (and the civil and criminal sanctions provided by subtitle F, or by Title 18 of the United States code (relating to crimes and criminal procedure), with respect to such collection and administration) shall apply to the collection and administration of qualified taxes as if such taxes were imposed by chapter 1, except to the extent that the application of such provisions (and sanctions) are modified by regulations issued under subchapter E (as defined in paragraph (d) of 301.6361-4). Any extension of time which is granted for the making of payment, or for the filling of any return, which relates to any Federal tax imposed by subtitle A (or by subtitle C with respect to filing a return) shall constitute automatically an extension of the same amount of time for making of the corresponding payment or for the filing of corresponding return relating to any qualified tax.

(b) Returns of qualified taxes. Every individual, estate, or trust which has liability for one or more qualified taxes for a taxable year-

(1) Shall file a Federal income tax return at the time prescribed pursuant to section 6072(a) (whether or not such return is required by section (6012), and shall file therewith on the prescribed form a return under penalties of perjury for each tax which is-

(i) A qualified resident tax imposed by a State of which the taxpayer was a resident, as defined in 301.6362-6, for any part of the taxable year;

(ii) A qualified nonresident tax imposed by a State within which was located the source or sources from which the taxpayer derived, while not a resident of such State and while not exempt from liability for the tax by resident of such State and while not exempt from liability for the tax by reason of a reciprocal agreement between such State and the State of which he is a resident, 25 percent or more of his aggregate wage and other business in come as defined in paragraph (c) of 301.6362-5, for the taxable year; or

(iii) A qualified resident or on resident tax with respect to which any amount was currently collected from the taxpayer’s income (including collection by withholding on wages or by payment of estimated income tax), as provided in paragraph (f) of 301.6362-6, for any part of the taxable year; and

(2) Shall declare (in addition to the declaration required with respect to the return of the Federal income tax and in the place and manner prescribed by form or instruction thereto) under penalties of perjury that, to the best of the knowledge and belief of the taxpayer (or, in case of an estate or trust, of the fiduciary who executes the Federal income tax return), he has no liability for any qualified tax for the taxable year other than any such liabilities returned with the Federal income tax return ( pursuant to subparagraph (1) of this paragraph (b),. Such declaration shall constitute a return indicating no liability with respect to each qualified tax other than any such tax for which liability is so returned.

(T.D. 7577, 43 F.R. 59365, Dec 20, 1978)

301.6361-4 Definitions.

For purposes of the regulations in this part under subchapter E of chapter 64 f the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, relating to collection and administration of State individual income taxes-

(a) State agreement. The term "State agreement" means an agreement between a State and the Federal Government which was entered into pursuant to section 6363 and the regulations thereunder, and which provides for the Federal collection and administration of the qualified tax or taxes of that State.

(b) Qualified tax. The term qualified tax" means a tax which is a "qualified State individual income tax", as defined in section 6362 (including subsection (f)(1) thereof, which requires that a State agreement be in effect) and the regulations thereunder.

(c) Chapter and subtitle. References in regulations in this part under subchapter E to chapters and subtitle are to chapters and subtitle of the internal Revenue Code of 1954, unless otherwise indicated.

(d) Subchapter E. The term "subchapter E" means subchapter E of chapter 64 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, relating to collections and administration of State individual income taxes as amended from time to time.

(T.D. 7577, 43 F.R. 59365, Dec 20, 1978)

What appears is a constructive misapplication of the "qualified tax." This program of "income taxation" is based not upon Title 26, of the United States Code, but upon the Internal Revenue Code of 1954.

What is hard to understand, let alone tolerate is the blatant willfulness of the Officers of the Public Trust to willingly, knowingly, and intentionally deprive Americans of the fruits of their labor, their property under not the color of law, but a constructive fraud in the apparent misapplication of rules, regulations, and ordinances.

301.6362-1 Types of qualified tax.

(a) In general. A qualified tax may be either a "qualified resident tax" within the meaning of paragraph (b) of this section , or a "qualified nonresident tax" within the meaning of paragraph (c) of this section.

(b) Qualified resident tax. A tax imposed by a State on the income of individuals, estates, and trusts which are residents of such State within the meaning of section 6362(e) and 301.6362-6 shall be a "qualified resident tax" if it is either.

(1) A tax based on Federal taxable in come which meets the requirements of section 6362 (b), (e) and (f), and of 301.6362-2, 3016362-6, and 301.6362-7; or

(2) A tax which is a percentage of the Federal tax and which meets the requirements of section 6362 (c), (e), and (f), and of 301.6362-3, 301.6362-6, and 301.6362-7.

(c) Qualified nonresident tax. A tax imposed by a State on the wage and other business income of individuals who are not residents of such State within the meaning of section 6362(e)(1) a "qualified nonresident tax" if it meets the requirements of section 6362(d), (e), and (f), and of 301.6362-5, 301.6362-6, and 301.6362-7.

[T.D. 7577, 43 FR 59366, Dec. 20, 1979]

The "income tax" is a program as described, is limited to, and inclusive of the employee in service of the State, which is the District of Columbia. Simply amazing.

MEADOR ADDITION

In early 1997, we secured the agreement between the chairman of the Oklahoma Tax Commission and the Commissioner of Internal Revenue for Oklahoma, then people in several other States secured corresponding agreements. The fraud extends to each of the several States through these agreements; Geri Powers broke through on research leading to this discovery. However, the agreements are fraud for another reason: IRS is not the "delegate" of the Secretary so far as the several States are concerned, so is not authorized to enter these agreements.

The key to understanding this is in definitions of "delegate" at 26 U.S.C. 7701(a)(12), rules and regulations at 26 U.S.C. 7805. Note in 7805(a) that, "Except where such authority is expressly given by this title to any person other than an officer or employee of the Treasury Department, the Secretary shall prescribe all needful rules and regulations for the enforcement of this title..." IRS is not an agency of the "Treasury Department".

The definition of "delegate" at 7701(a)(12)(A) provides that, "The term 'or his delegate'..," means the Treasury Department or any other official of the United States. Then 7701(a)(12)(B) stipulates that, "Performance of certain functions in Guam or American Samoa..," in relation to chapters 1, 2, and 21 of the Code, "also includes any officer or employee of any other department or agency of the United States, or of any possession thereof, duly authorized by the Secretary ... to perform such functions."

IRS is successor of the Bureau of Internal Revenue, Puerto Rico. IRS operates under T.D.O. #150-42 (1956), as amended by T.D.O. #150-01 (1986), only in insular possessions of the United States, and for some purposes, the District of Columbia.

The General Accounting Office is general agency of the Treasury, which is independent of the Secretary of the Treasury, and GAO is responsible for determining all obligations of and to the United States. See notes following 5 U.S.C. 5512, and the referenced cites in the Statutes at Large. Agreements for collection of State-qualified tax, where they exist, must be through the Office of Personnel Management, or withholding agents of the various Federal entities; see 5 U.S.C. 5512 through about 5520, to figure it out. I haven't had time to follow regulations, etc., for particulars.

To further this line, by consulting definitions in virtually all "uniform acts" adopted (not enacted) by legislatures of the several States, you will find that definitions of all of them apply to D.C. & insular possessions of the United States, not the several States. Among the more significant, Codes of civil & criminal procedure, and the Uniform Commercial Code. In a manner of speaking, they are uniformly bogus. These uniform acts provide wheels for Cooperative Federalism, and they are supplemented by administrative agreements such as the fraudulent agreement between State tax commissions and the Commissioner of Internal Revenue.

But the problem for the state boyos is that the only real power to tax that they have is through the federal government, and if they stop, they shut off the golden goose. Elsewhere in these papers I have shown some of the work by several men on finding out where the real money is being hidden by these people, and the vast amounts of money that they now control while continuing to tax the people. Of course, it is very necessary to continue to tax as heavily as possible, because that is the only way you confiscate enough wealth to prevent an uprising from occurring, whether it is done with ballots or guns.

From: JIM MEISINGER mejim@oneimage.com

From: "Roxanne Carol" litework@earthnet.net

WORLD ENVIRONMENTAL CONFERENCE and the MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS FOUNDATION F.D.A. ISSUING FOR COLLUSION WITH MONSANTO

Article written by Nancy Markle (1120197)

I have spent several days lecturing at the WORLD ENVIRONMENTAL CONFERENCE on "ASPARTAME marketed as 'NutraSweet', 'Equal', and 'Spoonful"'. In the keynote address by the EPA, they announced that there was an epidemic of multiple sclerosis and systemic lupus, and they did not understand what toxin was causing this to be rampant across the United States. I explained that I was there to lecture on exactly that subject.

When the temperature of Aspartame exceeds 86 degrees F, the wood alcohol in ASPARTAME coverts to formaldehyde and then to formic acid, which in turn causes metabolic acidosis. (Formic acid is the poison found in the sting of fire ants). The methanol toxicity mimics multiple sclerosis; thus people were being diagnosed with having multiple sclerosis in error. The multiple sclerosis is not a death sentence, where methanol toxicity is.

In the case of systemic lupus, we are finding it has become almost as rampant as multiple sclerosis, especially Diet Coke and Diet Pepsi drinkers. Also, with methanol toxicity, the victims usually drink three to four 12 oz. Cans of them per day, some even more. In the cases of systemic lupus, which is triggered by ASPARTAME, the victim usually does not know that the aspartame is the culprit. The victim continues its use aggravating the lupus to such a degree, that sometimes it becomes life threatening. When we get people off the aspartame, those with systemic lupus usually become asymptomatic. Unfortunately, we can not reverse this disease.

On the other hand, in the case of those diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis, (when in reality, the disease is methanol toxicity), most of the symptoms disappear. We have seen cases where their vision has returned and even their hearing has returned. This also applies to cases of tinnitus.

During a lecture I said "If you are using ASPARTAME (NutraSweet, Equal, Spoonful, etc.) and you suffer from fibromyalgia symptoms, spasms, shooting pains, numbness in your legs, cramps, vertigo, dizziness, headaches, tinnitus, joint pain, depression, anxiety attacks, slurred speech, blurred vision, or memory loss -- you probably have ASPARTAME DISEASE!" People were jumping up during the lecture saying, "I've got this, is it reversible?" It is rampant. Some of the speakers at my lecture even were suffering from these symptoms. In one lecture attended by the Ambassador of Uganda, he told us that their sugar industry is adding aspartame! He continued by saying that one of the industry leader's son could no longer walk - due in part by product usage! (Remember what I said about they do it to themselves? - David)

We have a very serious problem. Even a stranger came up to Dr. Espisto (one of my speakers) and myself and said, "Could you tell me why so many people seem to be coming down with MS?" During a visit to a hospice, a nurse said that six of her friends, who were heavy Diet Coke addicts, had all been diagnosed with MS. This is beyond coincidence.

Here is the problem. There were Congressional Hearings when aspartame was included in 100 different products. Since this initial hearing, there have been two subsequent hearings, but to no avail. Nothing as been done. The drug and chemical lobbies have very deep pockets. Now there are over 5,000 products containing this chemical, and the PATENT HAS EXPIRED!!!!!

At the time of this first hearing, people were going blind. The methanol in the aspartame converts to formaldehyde in the retina of the eye. Formaldehyde is grouped in the same class of drugs as cyanide and arsenic-- DEADLY POISONS! Unfortunately, it just takes longer to quietly kill, but it is killing people and causing all kinds of neurological problems.

Aspartame changes the brain's chemistry. It is the reason for severe seizures. This drug changes the dopamine level in the brain. Imagine what this drug does to patients suffering from Parkinson's Disease. This drug also causes Birth Defects.

There is absolutely no reason to take this product. It is NOT A DIET PRODUCT! The Congressional record said, "It makes you crave carbohydrates and will make you FAT". Dr. Roberts stated that when he got patients off aspartame, their average weight loss was 19 pounds per person. The formaldehyde stores in the fat cells, particularly in the hips and thighs.

Aspartame is especially deadly for diabetics. All physicians know what wood alcohol will do to a diabetic. We find that physicians believe that they have patients with retinopathy, when in fact, it is caused by the aspartame. The aspartame keeps the blood sugar level out of control, causing many patients to go into a coma. Unfortunately, many have died. People were telling us at the Conference of the American College of Physicians, that they had relatives that switched from saccharin to an aspartame product and how that relative had eventually gone into a coma. Their physicians could not get the blood sugar levels under control. Thus, the patients suffered acute memory loss and eventually coma and death.

Memory loss is due to the fact that aspartic acid and phenylalanine are neurotoxic without the other amino acids found in protein. Thus it goes past the blood brain barrier and deteriorates the neurons of the brain. Dr. Russell Blaylock, neurosurgeon, said, "The ingredients stimulates the neurons of the brain to death, causing brain damage of varying degrees. Dr. Blaylock has written a book entitled "EXCITOTOXINS: THE TASTE THAT KILLS" (Health Press 1-800-643-2665). Dr. H.J. Roberts, diabetic specialist and world expert on aspartame poisoning, has also written a book entitled "DEFENSE AGAINST ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE" (1-800-814-9800). Dr. Roberts tells how aspartame poisoning is escalating Alzheimer's Disease, and indeed it is. As the hospice nurse told me, women are being admitted at 30 years of age with Alzheimer's Disease. Dr. Blaylock and Dr. Roberts will be writing a position paper with some case histories and will post it on the Internet. According to the Conference of the American College of Physicians, 'We are talking about a plague of neurological diseases caused by this deadly poison".

Dr. Roberts realized what was happening when aspartame was first marketed. He said "his diabetic patients presented memory loss, confusion, and severe vision loss". At the Conference of the American College of Physicians, doctors admitted that they did not know. They had wondered why seizures were rampant (the phenylalanine in aspartame breaks down the seizure threshold and depletes serotonin, which causes manic depression, panic attacks, rage and violence).

Just before the Conference, I received a FAX from Norway, asking for a possible antidote for this poison because they are experiencing so many problems in their country. This "poison" is now available in 90 PLUS countries worldwide. Fortunately, we had speakers and ambassadors at the Conference from different nations who have pledged their help. We ask that you help too. Print this article out and warn everyone you know. Take anything that contains aspartame black to the store. Take the "NO ASPARTAME TEST" and send us your case history.

I assure you that MONSANTO, the creator of aspartame, knows how deadly it is. They fund the American Diabetes Association, American Dietetic Association, Congress, and the Conference of the American College of Physicians. The New York Times, on November 15, 1996, ran an article on how the American Dietetic Association takes money from the food industry to endorse their products. Therefore, they can not criticize any additives or tell about their link to MONSANTO.

How bad is this? We told a mother who had a child on NutraSweet to get off the product. The child was having grand mal seizures every day. The mother called her physician, who called the ADA, who told the doctor not to take the child off the NutraSweet. We are still trying to convince the mother that the aspartame is causing the seizures. Every time we get someone off of aspartame, the seizures stop. If the baby dies, you know whose fault it is, and what we are up against. There are 92 documented symptoms of aspartame, from coma to death. The majority of them are all neurological, because the aspartame destroys the nervous system.

Aspartame Disease is partially the cause to what is behind some of the mystery of the Dessert Storm health problems. The burning tongue and other problems discussed in over 60 cases can be directly related to the consumption of an aspartame product. Several thousand pallets of diet drinks were shipped to the Dessert Storm troops. (Remember heat can liberate the methanol from the aspartame at 86 degrees F). Diet drinks sat in the 120 degree F. Arabian sun for weeks at a time on pallets. The service men and women drank them all day long. All of their symptoms are identical to aspartame poisoning. Dr. Roberts says "consuming aspartame at the time of conception can cause birth defects". The phenylalanine concentrates in the placenta, causing mental retardation, according to Dr. Louis Elsas, Pediatrician Professor - Genetics, at Emory University inhis testimony before Congress.

In the original lab tests, animals developed brain tumors (phenylalanine breaks down into DXP, a brain tumor agent). When Dr. Espisto was lecturing on aspartame, one physician in the audience, a neurosurgeon, said, "when they remove brain tumors, they have found high levels of aspartame in them".

Stevia, a sweet food, NOT AN ADDITIVE, which helps in the metabolism of sugar, which would be ideal for diabetics, has now been approved as a dietary supplement by the F.D.A. For years, the F.D.A. has outlawed this sweet food because of their loyalty to MONSANTO.

If it says "SUGAR FREE" on the label-- DO NOT EVEN THINK ABOUT IT!

Senator Howard Hetzenbaum wrote a bill that would have warned all infants, pregnant mothers and children of the dangers of aspartame. The bill would have also instituted independent studies on the problems existing in the population (seizures, changes in brain chemistry, changes in neurological and behavioral symptoms). It was killed by the powerful drug and chemical lobbies, letting loose the hounds of disease and death on an unsuspecting public. Since the Conference of the American College of Physicians, we hope to have the help of some world leaders. Again, please help us too. There are a lot of people out there who must be warned, please let them know this information.

Just think; In that "supermarket" where you buy your "food" there are over 5000 products with Aspartame in them. And this is just one product made from plastic. There are hundreds more, only the effects from them are not as immediate. I assure you, they are just as severe over time.

I also need to point out that most of the "drugs" (they are DRUGS people!) prescribed by doctors are based on plastics as well. And if you will look at the information above, you will see where people actively worked to stop notification going to people of the harm caused by Aspartame. I assure you that many of the people who actively worked to stop this warning drink lots of diet pop. I do not understand why this is, but it is a function of His Law, and I have seen it in action before. They literally do it to themselves, and it is because of His Law.

Foreign Correspondent: Inside Track On World News

By International Syndicated Columnist & Broadcaster

Eric Margolis: margolis@foreigncorrespondent.com

Remembering Ukraine's Unknown Holocaust by Eric Margolis

LOS ANGELES - As Britain's socialist government cleared the way for a gaudy show trial of that Great Satan of the left, Chile's Gen. Augusto Pinochet, the 65th anniversary of this century's bloodiest crime was utterly ignored. Leftists now baying for Pinochet's head don't want to be reminded of the Unknown Holocaust.

In 1932, Soviet leader Josef Stalin unleashed genocide in Ukraine. Stalin determined to force Ukraine's millions of independent farmers - called `kulaks'- into collectivized Soviet agriculture, and to crush Ukraine's growing spirit of nationalism.

Ukraine's nightmare had begun in 1932. Faced by resistance to collectivization, Stalin unleashed terror upon Ukraine. Moscow dispatched 25,000 fanatical young party militants - earlier versions of Mao's `Red Guards' - to force 10 million Ukrainian peasants into collective farms. Secret police units of OGPU began selective executions of recalcitrant farmers.

When Stalin's red guards failed to make a dent in this immense number, OGPU was ordered to begin mass executions. But there were simply not enough Chekists (secret police) to kill so many people, so Stalin decided to replace bullets by a much cheaper medium of death, mass starvation.

All seed stocks, grain, silage, and farm animals were confiscated from Ukraine's farms. Ethiopia's communist dictator, Mengistu Haile Mariam, used the very same method in the 1970's to force collectivization: the resulting famine cased one million deaths.

OGPU agents and Red Army troops sealed all roads and rail lines. Nothing came in or out of Ukraine. Farms were searched and looted of food and fuel. Ukrainians quickly began to die of hunger, cold, and sickness.

When OGPU failed to meet weekly execution quotas, Stalin sent henchman, Lazar Kaganovitch, to destroy Ukrainian resistance. Kaganovitch, the Soviet Eichmann, made quota, shooting 10,000 Ukrainians weekly. Eighty percent of all Ukrainian intellectuals were executed. Ukrainian Nikita Khruschchev helped supervise the slaughter.

During the bitter winter of 1932-33, mass starvation created by Kaganovitch and OGPU hit full force. Ukrainians ate their pets, boots, belts, bark, and roots. Cannibalism became common; parents even ate infant children.

The precise number of Ukrainians murdered by Stalin's custom-made famine and Cheka firing squads remains unknown to this day. KGB's archives, and recent work by Russian historians, shows at least 7 million Ukrainians died. Ukrainian historians put the figure at 9 million, or higher. Twenty-five percent of Ukraine's population was exterminated.

Six million other farmers across the USSR were starved or shot during collectivization. Stalin told Churchill he liquidated ten million peasants during the 1930's. Add mass executions by the Cheka in Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania; the genocide of 3 million Muslims of the USSR; massacres of Cossacks and Volga Germans. In total, Soviet industrial genocide accounted for at least 40 million victims, not including 20 million war dead.

Kaganovitch, and many senior OGPU officers( later, NKVD) were Jewish. The predominance of Jews among Bolshevik leaders, and the frightful crimes and cruelty inflicted by Stalin's Cheka on Ukraine, the Baltic, and Poland, led the victims of Red Terror to blame the Jewish people for both communism and their suffering. As a direct result, during the subsequent Nazi occupation of Eastern Europe, the region's innocent Jews became the target of ferocious revenge by Ukrainians, Balts, and Poles.

While the world is by now fully aware of the destruction of Europe's Jews by the Nazis, the story of the numerically larger holocaust in Ukraine has been suppressed, or ignored. Ukraine's genocide occurred 8-9 years before Hitler began the Jewish Holocaust, and was committed, unlike Nazi crimes, before the world's gaze. But Stalin's murder of millions was simply denied, or concealed by a leftwing conspiracy of silence that continues to this day. In the strange moral geometry of mass murder, only Nazis are guilty.

Socialist luminaries like Bernard Shaw, Beatrice and Sidney Webb, and PM Edouard Herriot of France, toured Ukraine during 1932-33, and proclaimed reports of famine were false. Shaw announced, `I did not see one under-nourished person in Russia.' New York Times correspondent Walter Duranty, who won a Pulitzer Prize for his Russian reporting, wrote claims of famine were `malignant propaganda.' Seven million people were dying around them, yet these fools saw nothing. The New York Times has never repudiated Duranty's lies.

Modern leftists do not care to be reminded their ideological and historical roots are entwined with this century's greatest crime - Stalin's mass murder machine - the inevitable result of enforced social engineering and marxist theology. Had Germany won the war, today's `reformed' Euro-Nazis would take the same amnesiac approach to Hitler as modern European socialists do to Stalin.

Western historians delicately skirt the sordid fact that the governments of Britain, the US, and Canada were fully aware of the Ukrainian genocide and Stalin's other monstrous crimes. Yet they eagerly welcomed him as an ally during World War II. Stalin (they did more than that; they actively supported him with food and arms during the 30s. - David), whom an adoring Roosevelt called `Uncle Joe,' murdered four times more people than Adolf Hitler - and a decade earlier. Roosevelt and Churchill colluded with and helped save history's most murderous regime. Time to face this ugly fact.

None of the Soviet mass murderers who committed genocide were ever brought to justice. `Soviet Eichmann' Lazar Kaganovitch died peacefully in Moscow a few years ago, still wearing his Order of the Soviet Union, and enjoying a generous state pension.

Copyright: E. Margolis, December 1998

And the Russians were disarmed. Now you understand what is planned for America if they ever manage to disarm us.

Shot In The Dark Activists Claim Childhood Vaccinations Do More Harm Than Good

By Sam Boykin

There's a bizarre yet common custom practiced among certain cultures that has come under criticism as being unnecessary and potentially life-threatening. The procedure starts when scientists prepare a concoction of bacteria and viruses that are manufactured using a host of materials including aborted fetal tissue, dead animal flesh and formaldehyde. Samples of this toxic material are collected and shipped to specially designated stations. Parents bring their young children to these facilities where this strange virulent mixture -- by order of state and federal mandates and under threat of penalty -- is injected directly into the child's bloodstream. Contrary to the way it sounds, this isn't some 1984-ish plot or a witch doctor remedy. It's the common practice of childhood vaccinations. In our culture now, it's seen as a cornerstone of preventive care and a necessary part of a child's medical treatment, needed to protect young bodies from a host of illnesses and disease. Vaccination shots are administered every year in schools, hospitals and health centers across the globe in nearly every part of the civilized world. In the United States, more than 80 percent of children are immunized by the time they reach school age.

Despite the widespread acceptance and implementation of vaccines, there are many people who question the need and, moreover, the safety and ethical implications of such practices and suggest that not only are vaccinations unnecessary, but are causing chronic health and mental problems.

One such organization is the Charlotte-based group, People Advocating Vaccine Education (PAVE). Its founders, Lisa and A.A. Jillani, said they started the group two years ago after they realized their oldest daughter had been "vaccine damaged" following a series of vaccination shots in 1994. About six months after receiving these inoculations, the Jillanis say, their daughter started exhibiting odd behavior and her grade school teachers noticed little "red flags" in her conduct.

"It was things like her gross motor skills, neurological tics, and a diminished attention span," Lisa Jillani said. Eventually their daughter was diagnosed at the Watkins Center as having sensory integration dysfunction.

"They couldn't adequately explain to me what that was so I began reading, and all of her symptoms kept popping up as a mild form of autism," Jillani said. "Autism is actually a spectrum disease; you can have full-blown classical autism or something as simple as a learning disorder, and I believe our daughter is on the lower end of this autism spectrum as a direct result of her vaccination shots."

Long before they started PAVE, Lisa Jillani said the seed of doubt concerning vaccinations had already been planted. Previous to giving birth to her first child, Lisa read about a young couple -- one a professional athlete, the other a model -- and how they chose not to have their children vaccinated because they considered it unethical, unhealthy and unnecessary.

"My first thought after reading that was I wonder what they know that I didn't. I started to think maybe vaccinations really weren't 100 percent safe."

However, not realizing there was other information available on the subject, Lisa went against her intuition and took her daughter to the doctor for her scheduled rounds of inoculations simply because that's what was expected. But after getting four of the five required sets of shots, Lisa said she couldn't bring herself to submit her daughter any longer to a process in which she had such strong doubts.

"It was such a traumatic experience I just decided I'm not going to do this anymore," she said. It was then that she began to research the topic in earnest, and eventually came across several sources of information that confirmed her worst fears concerning the adverse effects of inoculations.

She first came across a 1994 book, Vaccines: Are They Really Safe and Effective, by Neil Miller who, among other things, said vaccinations are a form of genetic assault and claimed that the introduction of toxins directly into the bloodstream can potentially cause long term and unforeseen damages. "It was enough for me to know that I definitely needed more information before I ever used vaccinations again," Lisa said.

Miller's book led Lisa to a host of other sources including a series of studies conducted in the mid-90s that linked vaccinations to numerous chronic diseases (everything from autism, MS, diabetes, SIDS, asthma and inflammatory bowel disease). Dr. Andrew Wakefield, in a 1998 study that appeared in The Lancet, stated that the MMR (Measles, Mumps and Rubella) vaccine causes autism and inflammatory bowel disease. Dr. Vijendra Singa, in a 1996 study, associated vaccines with autism and multiple sclerosis. Numerous studies have also cited a connection between Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) and vaccinations, including a 1994 study by Dr. Viera Scheibner. In addition, both medical researcher Barthelow Classen, in a 1996 study that appeared in the New Zealand Medical Journal, as well as Harris Coulter in his book A Shot in the Dark, linked vaccinations to diabetes; and Dr. M.R. Odent indicated there was a connection between asthma and vaccinations.

A growing number of parents, concerned citizens and doctors are questioning a medical practice that for a long time has been taken for granted and gone largely unchallenged.

After becoming convinced that the anti-vaccination movement wasn't just some fringe society comprised of crazies, Lisa expressed her trepidation to husband A.J. Initially he didn't take it very seriously and laughed it off, but that attitude started to change when he began to look into the issue himself, and even more so after seeing the surprisingly strong reaction by the medical community after he and Lisa expressed their reservations.

"What finally did it for me was when the pediatrician we had been seeing for three years threw us out of his practice," A.J. says. "Suddenly he sends us this certified letter out of the blue saying I don't treat unvaccinated children, you'll have to find another doctor."

By the time Lisa became pregnant with her second child, the Jillanis had become convinced that vaccination was an unnecessary and dangerous tradition.

Now, with their youngest daughter almost three, the Jillanis said she hasn't received any vaccination shots, nor has she been sick. "We're completely comfortable and confident in her health," Lisa said.

The Jillanis are part of a growing number of parents, concerned citizens and doctors who have begun to question a medical practice that for a long time has been taken for granted and gone largely unchallenged. Although the medical community admits there are some minor risks associated with the use of vaccines, such as fever and soreness, only recently have far more dangerous side effects and consequences been discussed on such a wide scale within both grassroots organizations as well medical studies and books.

The basic goal behind organizations like PAVE isn't to discourage others from vaccinating, but to encourage people to look into the matter for themselves in order to make a more informed decision regarding their health and the health of their family. An integral part of this philosophy is the assertion that the fundamental theory supporting vaccinations is flawed.

Today's medical science uses the same basic methodology in implementing vaccinations that was originally discovered in the 1700s. Vaccinations were first attempted in England in 1718 when healthy people were inoculated with a tiny amount of material from smallpox sores. Those who survived the inoculation became immune to smallpox. Toward the end of the 1700s, British physician Edward Jenner discovered that he could immunize patients against smallpox by inoculating them with material from cowpox sores -- a far milder disease. The same basic principles are used today. Modified or weakened forms of bacteria or viruses are injected into the bloodstream which trigger or stimulate the body's immune system to build a defense mechanism that continuously guards against the disease.

But what the Jillanis and others who subscribe to their views maintain is that unless you're an immune-compromised child or adult, your body can naturally fight off most diseases without the aid of vaccinations. Furthermore, they say that by introducing these artificially manufactured viruses into the body you are corrupting the body's natural defense system and putting millions of people at risk.

"When a virus is injected into your bloodstream, it's already bypassed several of your body's natural defense systems," A.A. Jillani said. "If you were to come into contact with a bacteria in a natural setting, it is first introduced into the body through the throat and nasal passages, but with a vaccine it's injected directly into the system."

"Basically you're chronically sick all your life," Lisa Jillani said. "You may not feel bad, but your body will always see that virus in your bloodstream. If you got the measles naturally, it would only be in the bloodstream for the length of the illness, but once you're injected with it, the body will detect that germ for the rest of your life."

This theory also touches upon the growing acceptance and popularity of Eastern or alternative medical practices. More people have started putting emphasis on their spiritual well-being and the value of a balanced, harmonious lifestyle including exercise and a sensible diet as a way to promote health and fortify the body as opposed to some chemical or pharmaceutical created in a lab.

Judith Coates, a homeopathic physician in Charlotte, said she was inspired to pursue the field of homeopathic medicine after its practices cured her from a deadly illness she suffered from as a result of a swine flu vaccine in 1976.

Coates said she received the swine flu vaccination because of governmental "propaganda" that there was going to be an epidemic. Within days of the shot she became violently ill. She said she was just one of 589 documented cases that occurred as a result of the vaccine. Coates added that many people who got the vaccine died within 10 days, but their cases were never documented.

Coates says a substantial number of her patients are vaccine-damaged children and adults. Usually by the time they come to her for help they've exhausted all the traditional medical avenues and have progressed to advanced stages of whatever disease or illness they suffer from.

"I never get anyone because they have blisters on their fingers, they're dying," Coates said. "The biggest problem with vaccine-damaged people -- adults or children -- is the disease that is identified doesn't follow the traditional pattern, it has a lot of deviations, so it is very difficult to diagnose."

Not all critics of vaccinations are within the alternative medical field. Some scientists and doctors who practice within traditional channels have begun to question vaccine's safety as well.

Clarence Norris, MD, who has been a practicing physician in Charlotte since 1994, is one of the very few local doctors who will speak out against vaccinations.

"I may lose my license but I think people should be aware of the risks and be allowed to make their own individual choices," Norris said.

Norris said he first began to question the validity of vaccination while living in Texas during the mid-80s and the two-year-old son of a neighbor died of SIDS following a series of vaccinations.

"I'm not downing the medical field but the American Medical Association (AMA) is going to do whatever they can to protect their interests," Norris said. "It's a money thing. And even if it costs you your life, you will be part of the package that goes down. Most physicians are afraid for their licenses."

Organizations such as the NC Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) as well as the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) dispute this position and maintain that vaccinations are an absolute necessity.

According to the CDC, the vaccines and bacteria that cause vaccine-preventable death still exist, and it has only been through the use of vaccines that we have been able to dramatically reduce the number of people who get infectious disease. Furthermore, if we were to discontinue their use the result would be widespread epidemics, illness and death.

Diseases that are almost completely eradicated or well under control such as polio, measles and pertussis would experience a substantial resurgence, resulting in dramatic costs in terms of both human lives as well as doctor's visits, hospitalizations and missed work.

Dangerous Tradition

It was during the 1950s, following the introduction of an injectable polio vaccine introduced by American physician Jonas Salk, that vaccines became widespread and drug companies started to export vaccine policies globally. Technology within this area of science continued to evolve and by the 70s other vaccinations were available including one to help combat measles. By 1980 a worldwide vaccination program was said to have resulted in the global eradication of smallpox, and in most developed countries immunization was said to have essentially eliminated such diseases as diphtheria and neonatal tetanus. The number of cases of Hemophilius influenza type b meningitis in the US is said to have dropped 95 percent among infants and children since 1988, when a vaccine for the disease was first introduced. In an attempt to continue these global successes, the World Health Organization has set the year 2000 as a target date for the immunization of all children.

Despite this evidence of medical science at its most effective, opponents of vaccines say that this particular version of history is more about a successful public relations campaign than an accurate account of the facts. Most anti-vaccine groups take issue with just about every medical milestone attributed to vaccinations, including the assertion that vaccines were responsible for the near global elimination of polio.

According to the Jillanis, over the past 15 years the vaccine has caused all cases of polio in the US itself. Furthermore, no cases of non-vaccine-induced polio among US residents have been detected in the last decade.

Alan Phillips, an independent investigator and author on vaccine risks and alternatives indicates in his report, Dispelling Vaccination Myths, that after years of steady decline caused by the body's natural defense system, vaccinations caused substantial increases in polio. According to Phillips, ever since the polio vaccine was introduced by Salk in 1954, the rate of polio steadily increased. Phillips also indicates that in 1985, the Center for Disease Control (CDC) reported that the vaccine caused 87 percent of the cases of polio in the US between 1973 and 1983.

The CDC asserts that in 1996, as a result of global immunization efforts to eradicate polio, there were only 3,500 documented cases of polio in the world, as compared to between 13,000 and 20,000 which were reported each year in the US alone prior to the polio vaccine.

Furthermore, the CDC insists that cases of polio that groups like PAVE attribute to the vaccine itself are actually caused by importation of the virus from countries such as India. It has only been the use of vaccines, they say, that has prevented it from spreading into the US population.

The pertussis (whooping cough) vaccine in particular has been singled out as being the main culprit in many SIDS deaths. It's asserted by the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) that "hot lots" of this vaccine -- those that appear to be associated with more injuries and death than others -- have been responsible for thousands of cases.

A study by Viera Scheibner, Ph.D., called, Vaccination: 100 Years of Orthodox Research Shows that Vaccines Represent a Medical Assault on the Immune System, found peak incidences of SIDS occurred at the ages of 2 and 4 months, precisely when the first two routine immunizations are given. In the mid-70s Japan raised their vaccination age from 2 months to 2 years after a rash of SIDS deaths and lawsuits from grieving parents; their incidence of SIDS dropped dramatically.

The CDC denies the existence of "hot lots" and insists that the newer pertussis vaccine that has been available since 1991 is associated with fewer mild and moderate adverse reactions when compared with the older vaccine that received negative publicity during the 70s. As a result of this publicity and the public concern over the pertussis vaccine, the CDC indicated that several countries drastically reduced their use of the vaccination, which resulted in a resurgence of the disease in several countries including 13,000 cases and 41 deaths in Japan between 1974 and 1979.

Although many of the benefits of vaccinations continue to be challenged, the Jillanis say the real issue isn't even that of the vaccine's effectiveness, but rather the lack of scientific proof supporting their safety and longterm consequences.

"The medical community has no science behind what laboratory engineered viruses do to the body," A.A. Jillani said. "You are taking this incredible risk of introducing viruses into 100 percent of the population. You drastically multiply the problems associated with that particular virus."

Some say it's America's quick fix propensity (also evidenced in the skyrocketing popularity of over the counter drugs to treat everything from depression to stomach aches) and the promise of immediate and permanent protection that explain our willingness to subject our children and ourselves so willingly to vaccinations. That quick-fix mentality has continued despite the fact that inoculations' initial promise -- a single shot would provide lifelong protection -- has proven to be false. Now, booster shots for such diseases as diphtheria and tetanus are routine in order to maintain adequate protection. For example, it was discovered that a single injection of measles vaccine, first licensed in 1963 and administered to children at the age of 15 months, did not confer protection through adolescence and young adulthood. As a result, in the 1980s a series of measles epidemics occurred on college campuses throughout the US. This prompted health officials to recommend that a booster dose of measles vaccine be administered at 4-to-6 or 11-to-12 years.

"It's short term thinking," A.A. Jillani said. "America is an instant results society. If vaccines interrupted the diseases permanently it would be another matter. But they interrupt it in the short term and you only move certain diseases from childhood into adolescence or adulthood."

Furthermore, critics say that the protection provided by vaccines aren't worth the harmful side effects that emerge later. But because these consequences oftentimes do not manifest themselves until years after the vaccination, the cause and effect relationship is often diminished.

"To me it's not even a concern if these products are working," A.A. Jillani said. "My concern is do I want to take my chances with whooping cough, chicken pox and measles now, or brain damage, cancer, autism, asthma or diabetes later. There will never be an official cause and effect relationship attributed to this unless the kid drops dead in the doctor's office immediately after receiving a shot."

Skewed System While short of an X-Files type of conspiratorial plot to inject the children of the world with an insidious solution, vaccination critics say the government has established a system that is relatively impervious to recourse. There are two main federal organizations in the US that deal with the consequences and compensation of immunization-related illness or death:

The Vaccine Adverse Effects Reporting System (VAERS), and the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (NVICP), which is part of the US Dept. of Health and Human Services (HHS).

These two organizations -- both started in 1986 -- work in tandem and were designed to provide both compensation to individuals or families of individuals who've been injured by childhood vaccines, as well as a centralized surveillance system to which adverse vaccine events can be reported.

By law, people injured by vaccines must apply for compensation with the NVICP before suing drug companies or physicians. The NVICP has paid out over $900 million to the families of vaccine injured or killed children since the program officially went into effect in 1988. They have received over 6,000 petitions, including over 700 for vaccine-related deaths, and there are still thousands of total death and injury cases pending.

Despite the assertion that the NVICP was established to help the public, the Jillanis say it actually acts as a shield to protect drug companies and doctors. They maintain that it's structured to make it so taxing on individuals in terms of financial restraints, time limitations or fortitude, it becomes extremely difficult to win a case and collect for damages. Although the NVICP has awarded millions over the past decade, more than 60 percent of the cases are rejected.

VAERS receives about 11,000 reports annually, some one percent of which are deaths from vaccine reactions. But many say this is merely the tip of the iceberg and such statistics don't reflect an accurate portrayal of vaccine reactions because VAERS is a voluntary, self-policed system.

Another criticism facing VAERS is the disease or injury table which they consult in order to determine if injuries meet the criteria which enable people to receive compensation. According to program figures, the average time for successful applications is three and a half years.

One woman who knows first-hand the nightmares of facing NVICP and the VAERS restrictions is Robin Miller of Statesville, whose son died in 1994 after a yearlong period of convulsions and sickness following his first round of vaccination shots when he was two months old. Since her son's death she's been engaged in a legal battle with NVICP. Her case is now going into its fourth year.

"He was sick immediately after the shots and had a high fever," Miller said. "About a week later he started having convulsions and he was never the same after that."

In trying to diagnose her son's symptoms, Miller said doctors went from one extreme to another, prescribing countless medications and performing endless tests, but never acknowledged the possibility of vaccine damage, despite the fact that her own pediatrician had indicated that was a possible cause of the child's death. Miller continues to haggle with NVICP over the medical issues, which she says is an overwhelming experience.

"It's almost impossible," Miller said. "They make it so difficult. Even since I filed my case they've changed the rules again."

Big Brother Is Vaccinating You Since January 1995, it's a Class 1 misdemeanor if a person violates the rules adopted by the local board of health concerning vaccinations. Starting in 1939 with the diphtheria vaccine, North Carolina law has required vaccinations. Throughout successive years other vaccines have been made a requirement by NC law, the latest being the hepatitis B recombinant vaccine in 1994. Although vaccines are legally mandated and are required for many necessities such as enrolling your children in schools, camps, etc., there are actually three exemption possibilities in most US cases. You may be exempt from vaccinations under medical, religious or philosophical reasons, yet these exemptions are usually downplayed. This writer was actually pulled out of class as an undergraduate student at UNCC because I had not yet received my measles booster shots, but was never told about an exemption option.

A call placed to the Health Center at UNCC also revealed that students may be exempt if their classes are all after 5pm; if you have less that four credit hours; if all classes are off-campus; or if you attend weekend classes only. Also, students who were enrolled in the NC University system prior to 1994 may be exempt from second measles shot.

There is also an immunization registry being coordinated which will establish an immunization tracking record and link all 50 states. Currently the North Carolina Immunization Registry uses a statewide monitoring system to help ensure the timely immunization of infants and children. The purpose is to give parents, health care providers and child care facilities timely access to complete immunization data. It will also allow officials to evaluate the immunization status of parents and identify children who are past due for immunization, as well as help communities assess their immunization coverage and identify area of under-immunization.

While the debate over the safety and effectiveness of vaccinations is sure to become even more heated as the popularity of alternative medicine grows, advances within the system continue to be made. There are currently over 250 new vaccines being developed, many of which focus on sexually transmitted diseases and even one which would temporarily prevent pregnancy.

While these advances may seem like a godsend to most, the Jillanis and an increasingly growing number of others say they're even more cause for concern. The Jillanis indicate that the increase of additional "mandatory" vaccinations and developments such as an immunization registry based on "implied consent" with no provisions to opt out are alarming signs of governmental control run amok and blind adherence to a system at the expense of children.

"The bottom line is true science is being suppressed so as not to compromise the immunization programs," A.A. Jillani said. "But anytime that [the idea that vaccines are harmful] is presented or suggested to government agencies or vaccine companies it's shot down. There's a billion-dollar treatment behind every chronic illness that is caused by vaccines, so it is not the medical community's concern what is causing them. My point is, let's err in favor of the kids rather than the vaccine companies."

http://www.creativeloafing.com/charlotte/newsstand/current/anews.htm

Pennsylvania Parents for Vaccine Awareness. The information here is not to be construed as medical or legal advice. The decision whether to vaccinate is yours and yours alone. Investigate BEFORE you vaccinate.

During the last years of his life, my father suffered severely from Gilliam Barae (Sorry, I know that is not the correct spelling. - David). It was years before I found out that it was probably caused by the "free" swine flu shots that he and my mother had been given. All in all, it was a terrible price to pay for a "free" shot. Of course, we should all realize that there is nothing free about the shots; the drug companies don't give away drugs. They have simply arranged for the payments for the drugs to be made through collections from the so-called tax payers. All in all, under the guise of law, it is an amazingly efficient system for the accumulation of immense wealth on the part of the behind-the-scenes owners of the drug companies.

http://www.uhuh.com/reports/headsup/state98.htm I think you will find this site of interest. I certainly did. It is titled The State of the Union, 1998, and while the author has no knowledge of the background of the Constitution, he does have some good insight into other background.

http://www.cyndislist.com/internet.htm You might want to check out this site, not for information on laws, but general information on the net. It has more about viruses than any other site, for instance, that I have ever seen.

It is a FELONY to promote a New World Order, or to provide funding to international organizations promoting principles or doctrines of the one world order.

-Public Law 471, chap 456, Title 1, Sec. 109, 1954

Nominated for quote of the year is the statement made by Representative Dick Armey, who when asked if he were in the President's place, would he resign, responded: "If I were in the President's place I would not get a chance to resign. I would be lying in a pool of my own blood hearing Mrs. Armey standing over me saying, 'How do I reload this damn thing?'

When you are ready to proceed, please E-mail coffee@infotech.net.mx and request Part XV. All my best, and may God Bless you, David.