fg_admin
Forum Replies Created
-
Human beings who are naturalized assume the same status as those who are born here. The process of naturalization is the conferring of nationality, not statutory citizen status, just as the process of being born in a place makes one a presumed “national” of that place.
Quote:8 U.S.C. §1101(a)(23) naturalization defined(a)(23) The term ”naturalization” means the conferring of nationality [NOT “citizenship” or “U.S. citizenship”, but “nationality”, which means “[url url=”http://famguardian.org/TaxFreedom/CitesByTopic/USNational.htm”]U.S. national[/url]”] of a state upon a person after birth, by any means whatsoever. [NOTE Compare with the definition of “expatriation“]
That is why the fourteenth amendment says “born or naturalized” rather than just “born”, and why the phrase “subject to THE jurisdiction” means the political and not legislative jurisdiction of the sovereign. You can be subject to the political jurisdiction without being subject to the legislative jurisdiction of a sovereign by having a domicile outside of the exclusive jurisdiction of the sovereign.
Only a person subject to BOTH the legislative AND political jurisdiction can be a citizen. The fourteenth amendment and the constitution both only cover the political jurisdiction side of the citizenship equation.
Quote:“This section [section 1 of the Fourteent Amendment] contemplates two sources of citizenship, and two sources only,-birth and naturalization. The persons declared to be [constitutional and not statutory] citizens are ‘all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.’ The evident meaning of these last words is, not merely subject in some respect or degree to the jurisdiction of the United States, but completely subject to their [plural, not singular, meaning states of the Union and excluding the federal government] POLITICAL JURISDICTION, and owing them [the state of the Union and not the federal government] direct and immediate allegiance. And the words relate to the time of birth in the one case, as they do [169 U.S. 649, 725]? to the time of naturalization in the other. Persons not thus subject to the jurisdiction of the United States at the time of birth cannot become so afterwards, except by being naturalized, either individually, as by proceedings under the naturalization acts, or collectively, as by the force of a treaty by which foreign territory is acquired.”[U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 18 S.Ct. 456; 42 L.Ed. 890 (1898)]
The way one become subject to the legislative jurisdiction, in turn, is by selecting a municipal domicile in that jurisdiction. Before one makes that choice, they are “non-citizen nationals” in respect to that jurisdiction and after they do it, they are statutory “citizens” of that jurisdiction. A person with no municipal domicile on federal territory is a non-citizen national because they were born somewhere in the American Union but have not chosen a domicile within the exclusive legislative jurisdiction of Congress pursuant to Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution.
Municipal domicile is acquired separate from that of naturalization and it is acquired based on how you fill out government forms as a “national”. Anyone who starts of as a non-citizen national becomes a statutory “U.S. citizen” pursuant to 8 USC 1401 by electing to have a domicle on federal territory and calling themself a “U.S. citizen” on a government form. If they call themselves a non-citizen national consistently on all government forms and indicate the correct “permanent address” on all government forms, then they do not forfeit their non-citizen national status.
Those who have inadvertently compromised their status by filling out government forms improperly, ambiguously, or falsely and thereby described themselves as statutory “U.S. citizens” must go back and fix all the government forms still active which contain that error and then send the following:
Legal Notice of Change in Domicile/Citizenship and Divorce From the United States, Form #10.001
http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm
Your wife retains her non-citizen national status in the eyes of the government just like you have until the first time she describes it ambiguously or improperly on a government form. Then she has created false presumptions that cause a waiver of sovereign immunity. This is covered in:
1. Why You Are a “national”, “state national”, and Constitutional but not Statutory Citizen
http://famguardian.org/Publications/WhyANational/WhyANational.pdf
2. Why Domicile and Becoming a “Taxpayer” Require Your Consent
http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Taxes/Reme…ForTaxation.htm
Please do your homework by reading the above. We won’t repeat what is in those documents again as we were compelled to do here.
The above is an opinion and a belief and is neither a fact nor legal advice. Any references to people or legal “persons” other than the author refer to us and not your specific circumstances. Your choices and all the consequences of your choices are entirely and exclusively your responsibility.
-
See
Sovereignty and Freedom Page, Section 6.1
“Bursting Bubbles of Government Deception”
http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Freedom/Fr…OF_SOVEREIGNTY:
See also:
Scams and Frauds page, Section 2, first item entitled “Magnificent deception”
-
Links to those videos have been posted on the Freedom and Sovereignty page for years, but thanks anyway.
-
See:
About IRS Form W-8BEN, Form #04.001
http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm
See also:
Path to Freedom, Form #09.015, Section 7.5.6
-
The full IRM is not online. Several sections are deliberately hidden and there is no way to obtain them, even through FOIA. We can't say what those sections are.
-
Dmiladin,
1. Ask her OR
2. Do a FOIA to the disclosure office and ask for all the agent information. See:
IRS Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Request, Form #03.014
-
jsgrahamus
We looked at that page again. Apparently, we were modifying the wrong page. We have added TWO links to each of the sections to which you refer:
1. One to the Sovereignty Forms and Instructions Book section.
2. One to the online version of the Sovereignty Forms and Instructions.
Reload and refresh the page and you will see the updated links. Sorry for the confusion. Author #5 is out to lunch.
-
jsgrahamus
The section numbers in the article about Liens and Levies to which you refer have been updated to correctly point to the proper resource. Please refer to it again.
-
Dmiladin,
You are correct, but nothing you are discussing is new. See:
Techniques for Developing a Good Administrative Record, Form #09.008
http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm
The direct link is:
http://sedm.org/Forms/Procs/AdminRecord/AdminRecord.htm
Kindof a waste of time to reshash work that has already been done and ready to use.
Before you start exploring a new topic, it's a good idea to see if it's already been researched by visiting the above forms page. Chances are, whatever you need is already there in my experience and is probably free.
-
Bing,
Excellent!
Thanks
-
Riverway,
If you look at the implementing regulations, they probably don't cover the general populace and pertain only to government organizations and not private persons. See 15 CFR Part 30-199.
http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx…frv1_06.html#30
All the regs relate to foreign and not domestic commerce. I can't find any enforcement provisions. Absent enforcement provisions, 5 USC 552(a)(1) says no penalty may be imposed upon the general public. The intended groups for this statute therefore are:
1. A military or foreign affairs function of the United States. 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(1) .
2. A matter relating to agency management or personnel or to public property, loans, grants, benefits, or contracts. 5 U.S.C. 553(a)(2) .
3. Federal agencies or persons in their capacity as officers, agents, or employees thereof. 44 U.S.C. 1505(a)(1).
This is further discussed in:
Federal Enforcement Authority Within States of the Union, Form #05.032
FORMS PAGE: http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm (OFFSITE LINK)
DIRECT LINK: http://sedm.org/Forms/MemLaw/FedEnfAuthStates.pdf (OFFSITE LINK)
Just more law for government. See:
Why Statutory Civil Law is Law for Governmetn and not Private Persons, Form #05.037
FORMS PAGE: http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm (OFFSITE LINK)
DIRECT LINK: http://sedm.org/Forms/MemLaw/StatLawGovt.pdf (OFFSITE LINK)
Penalties without a court trial constitute bills of attainder. The only way to waive the prohibition on bills of attainder is to CONSENSUALLY participate in a franchise or to maintain a domicile on federal territory, and that franchise is federal “employment” or office (5 U.S.C. 2105(a)), as usual.
The above is also civil law for those who have a domicile on federal territory and who have no constitutional rights. It can't pertain to those who are domiciled in a state of the Union and who are not statutory “U.S. citizens” or “permanent residents” (aliens).
http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Taxes/Reme…ForTaxation.htm
To approach this any other way is to imply that they can force you to incriminate yourself on a government form in violation of the Fifth Amendment and that they can impose involuntary servitude in violation of the 13th Amendment.
My 2 cents.
-
Sonik,
Don't assume I'm the protagonist. Your views about oaths were sent to the source, which was Ed Rivera and he had nothing to say in his defense. I'm not prepared to provide a direct answer to your query and I certainly don't share uninformed opinions on these forums when I don't have time to research a well thought out answer. You will have to find your answer from another poster.
-
Poldon,
Thank you for the encouragement. We are pleased that what we are doing is helping people like you to:
1. Learn and comply with the law.
2. Preserve as much of their freedom and rights as they can.
That is our main goal.
-
Poldon,
1. The personal income tax is NOT illegal. It is illegally administered and represented, but the I.R.C. Subtitles A and C are not unconstitutional. It is a franchise and participation in all franchises are voluntary and consensual. Anything that is truly consensual cannot be illegal, provided those who administer the program take appropriate steps to protect those who don’t consent from becoming the target of enforcement. The IRS refuses to respect the requirement for consent by refusing to issue licenses to participate, as it did when the first income tax began in 1862, and therein is the main problem with the system. See:
Requirement for Consent, Form #05.003
http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm
Right now, SSNs and TINs are used as de facto licenses to participate in places where participation is not allowed, such as in states of the Union. The Supreme Court has held that Congress cannot authorize or license a trade or business in a state in order to tax it. See the License Tax Cases. This case, in fact, is the main reason they stopped issuing licenses and why they use SSNs as DE FACTO licenses: to conceal the continuing requirement for consent and the consensual nature of the system as a franchise or excise tax.
2. The income tax is an excise or franchise tax on a “trade or business”, which is a public office in the united states government. All excise taxes are on activities and they are avoidable by avoiding the activity. In a constitutional sense, such taxes are called “indirect taxes”.
3. Federal corporations are “taxpayers” but state corporations are not. They are “taxpayers” because corporations are franchises and all franchise make those who participate into “public offices” of the government.
“A corporation is a citizen, resident, or inhabitant of the state or country [or jurisdiction] by or under the laws of which it was created, and of that state or country only.”
[19 Corpus Juris Secundum, Corporations, ?886]
4. All “public offices” are required to be exercised ONLY in the District of Columbia, which means a business entity not domiciled or resident in the District of Columbia is excluded. 4 U.S.C. 72 . In that sense, the I.R.C. Subtitles A and C are a municipal income tax for the District of Columbia that has deceptively disguised to deceptively “appear” like a “federal” income tax using “words of art”.
5. 26 USC 7701(a)(9) and (a)(10) includes only the District of Columbia within the definition of “United States”, and the reason is that all public offices can only be exercised there.
6. What connects most businesses to a tax liability, like that of individuals, is the filing of information returns against them, nearly all of which are false.
6.1 They are false because people continue using Taxpayer Identification Numbers to do their business and banks continue to force people to use these numbers to open accounts. These numbers connect the entity to a domicile in the District of Columbia. 26 CFR 301.6109-1(B ) says that only “U.S. perons”, meaning “persons” domiciled in the District of Columbia, are required to use such numbers.
6.2 They are false because those who file them refuse to look at the definition of “trade or business” in the I.R.C. at 26 USC 7701(a)(26) and refuse to believe what they read. They are deceived using the legal abuse of the word “includes”. See:
Meaning of the Words “Includes” and “Includings”
http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Taxes/Fals…c/Includess.pdf
6.3 They are false because those who file them aren’t reading WHEN information returns are required to be filed as indicated in 26 USC 6041(a), which is only against “persons” holding public office in the government, which is what a “trade or business” is defined as in 26 USC 7701(a)(26).
6.4 They are false because the federal courts refuse their constitutional duty to consistenty and properly recognize the I.R.C. Subtitle A income tax as an excise or franchise tax upon the “trade or business” activity and therefore refuse to recognize participation in the system as voluntary and avoidable by avoiding the activity. This is being done to perpetuate the deception that the income tax is a direct, unapportioned tax.
6.5 They are false because people keep relying on sources of belief that the courts and the IRS’ own website say are UNTRUSTWORTHY. See:
Reasonable Belief About Income Tax Liability, Form #05.007
http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm
7. The only way to lawfully avoid being connected with a tax liability is to:
7.1 Stop filling out government forms. Every such form represents a contract in which you give away some portion of your rights in exchange for some “benefit” or franchise or privilege. See:
Non-Resident Non-Person Position, Form #05.020, Section 14.2
http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm (OFFSITE LINK)
Government Instituted Slavery Using Franchises, Form #05.030
http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm (OFFSITE LINK)
7.2 Stop using identifying numbers, because they can only be issued to public officers in the government domiciled on federal territory. These numbers act as DE FACTO licenses to engage in a public office in the government. See:
About SSNs and TINs on Government Forms and Correspondence, Form #05.012
http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm
7.3 Learn the law and educate your business associates about what it requires. Rely ONLY on reasonable sources of belief indicated above in that education.
7.4 Stop the false information returns from being filed
7.5 Correct all those that have been filed. See
Correcting Erroneous Information Returns, Form #04.012
http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm (OFFSITE LINK)
7.6 Insist that all your business associates obey not public policy or IRS policy, but what the law actually requires.
7.7 Observe the following in doing the above:
Path to Freedom, Form #09.012
http://sedm.org/Forms/Procs/PathToFreedom.pdf
8. The approach towards taxation taken by this fellowghip is summarized below, and this approach applies universally to every type of entity:
Non-Resident Non-Person position, Form #05.020
http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm
This website deliberately does not concern itself with businesses, and neither should these forums. All the arguments that apply to individuals are the same that apply to businesses. Please redirect all future questions about people and not businesses to keep this website out of harm’s way. Our Prohibited Activites in Section 12 of the About Us page, Item 11 prohibits discussion about businesses.
http://famguardian.org/aboutus.htm
The following article applies equally to businesses and individuals. It encapsulates most of what you need to know about tax liability of EVERYONE, including businesses:
http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Taxes/Reme…usinessScam.htm
-
From: CryerLaw@aol.com [mailto:CryerLaw@aol.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2008 3:25 PM
To: xxx
Subject: George Washington Oath
I don't know what started this string, but maybe I can help stop it.
I am a bit of an authority on George. He was a devout Christian. He was also a very active Freemason and served as Master of his lodge in Alexandria. His oath of office was sworn to on the Bible from the altar at the Alexandria Lodge and is now in the museum at the George Washington Monument in Alexandria.
George Washington was, even before the war, probably the most respected and trusted man in the colonies. His fish barrels were waved on board without inspection because the words “G Washington” stenciled on them was all that was needed to verify that the barrels were filled with salted fish, not fishy salt.
There was a gate house at the entrance to Mount Vernon that he visited every day. People knew that they could go there and seek his assistance and many did. George took time to hear each of them, one at a time, and sometimes he sent them away with advice, sometimes money and sometimes with a letter of introduction to help obtain a position, but he helped every single one of them in some way or another and he never asked anything in return. Charity, to relieve the distress of a member of the human family, is a Masonic duty, not an option. Does that sound like a sinister man?
The reason he added “So help me God” when he was sworn into office is that he understood the enormity of the responsibility he was undertaking and he knew that as a mere mortal, as principled and disciplined as he was, he would need the benevolent hand of God to guide him. By doing that he not only sought providential aid for himself, but was asking for the sake of his country.
Does that sound like an evil man? Is that an evil motive?
One of the problems people have with Freemasonry is not what they know, but in what they do not know. The organization, which is older than history records, has been regarded as a secret organization, which is not true. If it were secret there would be no signs at the edge of town welcoming people on behalf of the lodge. People like Bob would not be stating in emails that they are Masons. And I would not be displaying a past master's jewel on my finger.
The organization has “secrets” (any of which can be obtained from readily available references) out of tradition and the tradition of maintaining secrets of recognition and of moral commitment plays a role in cementing the fraternity together, giving each member a common sphere of experience and knowledge shared by every other brother.
But people who do not know any better still consider it a “secret order”. The mind, no matter how small, abhors a vacuum (also no matter how small) and when confronted with one it will fill it with something. Not having Truth, they fill their own mental gaps and voids with fiction. It is no fun to imagine that men assembled out of sight are engaging in good fellowship and civic service. It is fun to imagine they are raising Cain and “riding the goat.”
Another objection people have to the Masons is that they are not religious bigots. A belief and trust in God is a prerequisite for consideration for membership but any inquiry or challenge beyond that point is strictly prohibited. There are Masons who are Protestant, Catholic, Baptist, Jewish and Muslim not to mention a few other religions around the world. The Protestant Mason does not hate his brother for being Catholic or vice versa. Some, however, believe that they are duty bound to hate anyone who believes differently, worships differently or prays differently and those who don't share their hatred and intolerance are branded along with the infidels. The most popular brand is as a satanist.
The consequence of such intolerance and bigotry, however, is not to discredit the worthy, like George Washington, but to discredit the accuser who is exposing himself as small minded and sinister in thought and deed.
The American Revolution is the one and only 'political' project the Masons have ever undertaken. Equal to the prohibition of religious quarrels is the prohibition of the discussion of politics in the lodge, so why would this one event warrant its status of sole exception?
Virtually all of the leadership, whether social, intellectual, political or spiritual, among the Founding Fathers (and I don't need any lecture on definition of “Founding Fathers”–to me they include every man, woman and child who risked and/or sacrificed all to secure our independence, my ancestors among them) were Masons.
The minutes of the Boston Lodge reveal that the Master of the Lodge, John Jay, had to return to the lodge on the evening of the Boston Tea Party because he forgot to exchange his hat for a band of feathers.
George Washington and all 33 of his generals were Masons.
Thomas Jefferson, whose role in the revolution was equaled only by George Washington, was a Mason as were Benjamin Franklin (twice Grand Master of Pa.), James Madison, George Mason, John Hancock, Sam Adams, John Adams, Thomas Paine and many, many more.
One of the very few exceptions was Alexander Hamilton, who complained that George Washington kept him out of the inner circle and who later proved himself to be a monarchist and a pawn of the Bank of England.
Someone mentioned that a river affording safe passage for American troops and suddenly swelling to frustrate their pursuers was an example of Providence intervening on behalf of this Masonic adventure, but many more “miracles” can be cited occurring right up to Yorktown.
So why this sole exception to such a strict and long standing policy to avoid political engagements? This new country represented not only the future of the world as God intended, free to rely on each other instead of an anointed king, free to love God and to love one another, the only two expectations of man under the new covenant.
This country also represented a cross-section of Mankind, consisting of all nationalities, all races and all religions. It was a nation without any national history and all the baggage that comes with it, starting from the principle that God created man, making each man equal to all others and endowed them with certain fundamental rights. A nation where the birthright of man was not as before, to rule others, but to be ruled as he will, to create his own government. Is that a mission that God would assign to a satanic cult? I think not.
America was to serve as God's beacon on the hill, the example and inspiration to all mankind of the benefits and blessings of freedom and mutual support. Would He select a satanic worshiper to light that beacon? I think not.
A little common sense, along with a little knowledge of the Truth, can go a long way.
Tom