[fg_admin]

Sonik,

You are mistaken. The Constitution requires TWO oaths, not one. Article VI oath is mandated for all “executive officers”, of which washington was one. He never took the article VI oath to obey the constitution even though he was required to. He also knew better, because he led the writing of the constitution in the convention.

Without the Article VI oath mandated by the very constitution that he himself was most responsible for writing IN SECRET, he had no obligation to obey the constitution, and in fact he didn't. We ended up with no Article III courts, no real “judges”. Instead, we ended up with legislative franchise courts manned by “justices” in the legislative branch, not the judicial branch. See:

What Happened to Justice

http://sedm.org/ItemInfo/Ebooks/WhatHappJu…HappJustice.htm

[fg_admin]

Franklin,

Thanks for your entertaining observations. The approach of refusing to contract in court is described in the following:

Requirement For Consent, Form #05.003, Sections 14, through 14.3

http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm

One of our members, C. Hansen, challenged jurisdiction by demanding proof on the record that he was a public officer of the U.S. inc federal corporation. In response, the judge dismissed the government's contempt suit and they haven't bothered him since because they don't want to talk about the issue. For the documents he used to make the challenge, see:

http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Taxes/CaseStudies/CHansen/CHansen.htm[url url=”http://famguardian.o…sen/CHansen.htm”][/url]

This is truly ironic, because the reason they brought the injunction suit to begin with was because they accused hansen of claiming that all “taxpayers” are government “employees”. He never made this claim, and emphasized that they INSTEAD are “public officers” of the U.S. Inc federal corporation, and neither the DOJ prosecutor nor the judge ever disagreed with him on this point nor called the claim friviolous. See:

Why Your Government is Either a Thief or You Are a “Public Officer” for Federal Income Tax Purposes, Form #05.008

FORMS PAGE: http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm

DIRECT LINK: http://sedm.org/Forms/MemLaw/WhyThiefOrPubOfficer.pdf

Hansen defaulted them under F.R.Civ.P. 8(b)(6). When Hansen appealed the lower court FRAUDULENT ruling, even the Ninth Circuit Court of appeals refused to argue with him on this point and had to sanction him for something he never even said as an excuse not to deal with this very damning ELEPHANT sitting in the corner that they wanted to pretend wasn't there. SCUM!

Very interesting.

[fg_admin]

Dmiladin,

A “permanment resident” under Title 8 of the U.S. Code can be a “nonresident alien” for the purposes of the internal revenue code. This is explained in section 19.1.2 of the following:

Non-Resident Non-Person Position, Form #05.020

http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm

The term “State” includes states of the Union for the purposes of “aliens” under title 8, but it DOES NOT mean states of the Union under the I.R.C. 7701(a)(10).

[fg_admin]

Dmladin,

You are mistaken about the authorship of the Path to Freedom document. The most important thing you should have learned by reading these forums is not to make presumptions about anything, including the author of a specific document. The Path to Freedom is not OUR document. We are not SEDM and please don't confuse us.

Quote:

One – Are you implying that you have no knowledge of how succesful and legal your stands and forms are?

Everything we know about the effectiveness of our materials is contained in the following:

Frequently Asked Questions Page, Section 1

http://famguardian.org/FAQ/FAQ.htm

In the future, please refer to our FAQs page before you post a question. Chances are, it has already been answered on our FAQs page.

We don't maintain statistics about the effectiveness of our materials and are not equipped or resourced well enough to keep the statistics. We also don't get enough feedback to maintain statistics. Either the law stands on its own or doesn't. The only thing we expect people to do is learn and obey the law. If you need an insurance policy or a promise just to motivate you to do that, then you're on the wrong website and have the wrong motives. See:

http://famguardian.o…ityUniverse.htm

The Bible Commands us to learn the law and use it to DO JUSTICE. Micah 6:8. If you care more about avoiding persecution, being comfortable, or saving money on taxes than you do in obeying the word and law of the Lord or the law, you are on the wrong website.

Quote:

“Has the LORD as great delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices,

As in obeying the voice of the LORD [and the people in the Constitution]?

Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice,

And to heed than the fat of rams.

For rebellion [of either the Constitution or the Bible] is as the sin of witchcraft,

And stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry.

Because you have rejected the word [and laws] of the [sovereign] LORD [or “We the People” in the Constitution],

He also has rejected you from being king [and a sovereign over your government as a private citizen, or a public servant].”

[1 Sam. 15:22-23, Bible, NKJV]

?One who turns his ear from hearing the law [ God's law or man's law], even his prayer is an abomination.?

[Prov. 28:9, Bible, NKJV]

”This Book of the Law shall not depart from your mouth, but you shall meditate in it day and night, that you may observe to do according to all that is written in it. For then you will make your way prosperous, and then you will have good success.  Have I not commanded you? Be strong and of good courage; do not be afraid, nor be dismayed, for the Lord your God is with you wherever you go.?

[Joshua 1:8-9, Bible, NKJV,

IMPLICATION:? If you aren't reading and trying to obey God's law daily, then you're not doing God's will and you will not prosper]

“But this crowd that does not know [and quote and follow and use] the law is accursed.?

[John 7:49, Bible, NKJV]

“Salvation is far from the wicked, For they do not seek Your [God's] statutes.”

[Psalm 119:155, Bible, NKJV]

“Every man is supposed to know the law. A party who makes a contract [or enters into a franchise, which is also a contract] with an officer [of the government] without having it reduced to writing is knowingly accessory to a violation of duty on his part. Such a party aids in the violation of the law.”

[Clark v. United States, 95 U.S. 539 (1877)]

On the other hand, if you find anything on this website that is not consistent with what the law requires, we invite you to rebut it using only sources of Reasonable Belief, including the law itself. Otherwise, what the law requires remains in complete agreement with what we expect you to do, regardless of the personal cost to you.

[fg_admin]

dmiladin,

You’re on the wrong website if you are using the W-4 Exempt. You can’t use any of the tax materials on this website if you are filing W-4 Exempt. The W-8BEN is the only form you can use, which is part of the following article:

About IRS Form W-8BEN, Form #04.001

[url url=”http://sedm.org/compliant-member-only-forms/about-irs-form-w-8ben-form-04-002/“]http://sedm.org/compliant-member-only-forms/about-irs-form-w-8ben-form-04-002/[/url]

Those using this website also can’t use the 1040 form, which is only for resident aliens. Only nonresident aliens can use this site to interact with the government. See:

Non-Resident Non-Person Position, Form #05.020

http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm

As far as loans, create an entity such as a trust or corporation, build a credit history for the entity, and then use the entity and the assets you have seeded it with to get a loan. Never do anything in your name. Don’t ask for detailed advice on how to do this, because we can’t give legal advice and are not compensated to babysit people. As you figure it out for yourself, share what you learn with the rest of us so we can post it after we review it.

Everything one needs to correct their withholding is in the following. We can’t add anything to it and if we do, we are giving legal advice. Our Prohibited Activies in Section 12 of our About Us page prohibits us from giving legal advice. Read it and follow it. You are the sovereign and you must govern your own life using only the law or learn to be a good government slave.

Federal and State Withholding Options for Private Employers

http://famguardian.org/Publications/FedSta…teWHOptions.pdf

[fg_admin]

Franklin,

Thanks for your insights and your kudos. That is the only reward we get here at Family Guardian Fellowship for what we do.

You are correct that summaries help to invite more interest. The Hoax book does contain an introduction at the beginning of each chapter that does summarize the content of the chapter. Perhaps that technique is not employed consistently enough or is deficient, but we agree with your comments.

[fg_admin]

Riverway,

Someone complained to the domain registrar about the the domain. The result was that the domain names were temporarily locked by the domain registrar and would not resolve from 7/25 to 7/29. The web servers were up, but the domain names did not properly resolve to the correct IP addresses, making the website appear to be unreachable.

We have not been able to verify who the complaining party was. We suspect it was the IRS, because ALL the domain names had the same problem at the same time, including those that used other domain registrars. We will let you know who it was when we hear back from the registrar about the complaining party.

We have since taken measures to protect ourselves from these types of attacks upon our domain names. We can't tell you the measures we have taken because we don't want them circumvented or compromised.

In the future, please bookmark the IP addresses of our websites IN ADDITION to the domain names for your records in case the domain names become unreachable.

SEDM: http://66.49.172.128/

Family Guardian: http://66.49.143.19/

Family Guardian 1: http://67.55.36.69

Family Guardian 2: http://74.52.238.226

All the above mirror addresses appear at the bottom of the opening page of the websites in question, so you can click on them and bookmark them.

In addition, the SEDM folks have added TWO new domain names in case the main SEDM.ORG domain name has problems:

http://sedm1.org

http://sedm1.info

Thanks for your concern. We ain't going anywhere and we will NEVER allow ANYONE to shut us up as the main source of authoritative, well-researched freedom information on the internet. Come hades or high water, the information we provide ALWAYS will be available to the public for free. There is no hope for improvement or reform of the corruption of our legal system and government unless this information is widely and publically available to everyone who is interested and everyone who wants a law abiding, accountable, constitutional, and limited government. The goals of this website have NOTHING to do with tax freedom, tax protest, or tax defying. Instead, our goal is political and legal reform, law enforcement, and crime prevention. The only thing we protest is CRIME and violations of law, not taxes.

This is the first type of attack like this that we have suffered in the seven years that Family Guardian has been in existence. We learned a lot dealing with it. In the end, however, they have made our defenses MUCH stronger. Now it's going to be a LOT harder to pull the same trick again. Thanks be to whoever did this in the government.

Quote:

“Rebuke a wise man, and he will love you.”

[Prov. 9:8, Bible, NKJV]

We also expect that DVD orders on SEDM of the content of Family Guardian will increase.

http://www.sedm.org/cgi-bin/ccp51prod/cp-a…tstr=HOME:Media

Whenever the existence of our website is threatened, interest in an archive of its content is considerably heightened. Thanks in advance to the government for improving donations to the affected ministries because of their schemes to shut down this website and censor the truth from public view and discourse.

😀

[fg_admin]

Franklin,

You are correct. A bivens action is pursuant to the constitution and NOT any statute. 42 U.S.C. 1983 is only for statutory U.S. citizens because it is civil law that attaches to those domiciled on federal territory. The constitution doesn't apply on federal territory. See:

http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Discrimina…eFederalLaw.htm

[fg_admin]

Franklin,

Thanks for your comments and your attention to detail on the subject matter. We are delighted that you have three attorneys in your family who can be influenced by our work. Your comments are merited and welcome. However, they are best directed at the source of the book, which is not Family Guardian, but SEDM. See:

http://sedm.org/ItemInfo/Ebooks/WhatHappJu…HappJustice.htm

Your suggestions for improvement should be posted to the SEDM forums, not these forums. Family Guardian and SEDM are entirely separate ministries and groups of people. It can't hurt to post your comments here, but if you want the book to be edited and improved based on your observations, it's best to post them on the SEDM forums or send them a Contact message with that information.

http://sedm.org/forums/

[fg_admin]

1. The DC Court is NOT an Article III court, by the admission of the U.S. Supreme Court:

Quote:

In the cases just cited, as also in others, it is recognized that the courts of the District of Columbia are not created under the judiciary article of the Constitution but are legislative courts, and therefore that Congress may invest them with jurisdiction of appeals and proceedings such as have been just described.

Federal Radio Commission v. General Electric Co., 281 U.S. 464, 50 S.Ct. 389 (U.S.,1930)

For the above, and others, see:

http://famguardian.org/TaxFreedom/CitesByTopic/courts.htm

2. The legislative notes under Title 28 are the authority for calling Hawaii an Article III court, but the underlying enactment in the Statutes At Large does not contain that language. Furthermore, Congress does not use the language “ordain and establish” required by the Constitution, nor are the judges called “judges” for this court, but rather “Justices”. See the original Judiciary Act of 1789. Therefore, district court “justices” are legislative and not constitutional officers within the Legislative and not Judicial Branch. That is the reason they can participate in the tax collection and enforcement process: Because taxation is a legislative and not judicial function. Only legislative officers in the legislative branch can officiate over franchises. In the context of income taxes, the franchise being administered in these “legislative franchise courts” is called a “trade or business”. See the following, which explains why taxation is a legislative function that cannot be delegated to another branch of government:

Treatise on the Law of Taxation, Form #11.013

http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm

The section that proves this in the above is on p. 4 entitled “Taxing Power an Incident to Sovereignty”.

3. The Court of International Trade and the U.S. Supreme Court are the only Article III courts, as far as we understand.

[fg_admin]

The world passport is already mentioned in our passport article at the top:

http://famguardian.org/Subjects/Taxes/Citi…orAPassport.htm

[fg_admin]

There is hardly anything that he DOESN'T ridicule. Ridiculing, in fact, is how he earned his living. Since he didn't ridicule Christianity in the above, it doesn't matter. If he had, it wouldn't ahve been posted.

Give the guy a break. He just DIED. This is a tribute to him. Every dead person deserves at least a LITTLE dignity.

Quote:

“Whenever an old man dies, a library is lost.”

[fg_admin]

Turftoe,

We dont recommend what is in the Redemption Manual. It is there only for inforamtion. For the reasons why, see:

Policy Document: UCC Redemption, Form #08.002
http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm

You’re not welcome to ask any further questions about Redemption in these forums, because it’s quite frankly a scam for the most part which we have no interest in and which we advise everyone to steer clear of.

_____________________________

Bing,

Sorry to bust your bubble, but I believe you are mistaken on the government employee bit. Read what Author #5’s post pointed to:

Non-Resident Non-Person Position, Form #05.020, Section 12
http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm

Section 12 PROVES that even for government workers, they don’t earn “wages” as legally defined in I.R.C. 3401(a) unless they are ALREADY public officers in the government.

1. If a government worker not engaged in a public office refuses to sign the W-4 and is not otherwise engaged in a ?public office?, then they can?t lawfully become the subject of W-2 information returns and if they are filed with nonzero ?wages?, they are FALSE in violation of 26 U.S.C. ?7207 and 26 U.S.C. ?7434.

2. It is ?wages? which appear on IRS Form W-2 in block 1. This form connects the term ?wages? to the ?trade or business? franchise pursuant to 26 U.S.C. ?6041(a).

3. 26 U.S.C. 871(a)(1) mentions “wages” and one can only earn “wages” if they consent under the W-4 contract/agreement.

TITLE 26–INTERNAL REVENUE

CHAPTER I–INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

PART 31_EMPLOYMENT TAXES AND COLLECTION OF INCOME TAX AT SOURCE–Table of Contents

Subpart E_Collection of Income Tax at Source

26 CFR ?31.3401(a)-3 Amounts deemed wages under voluntary withholding agreements

(a) In general.

Notwithstanding the exceptions to the definition of wages specified in section 3401(a) and the regulations thereunder, the term ?wages? includes the amounts described in paragraph ( :cool:(1) of this section with respect to which there is a voluntary withholding agreement in effect under section 3402(p). References in this chapter to the definition of wages contained in section 3401(a) shall be deemed to refer also to this section (?31.3401(a)?3).

(b ) Remuneration for services.

(1) Except as provided in subparagraph (2) of this paragraph, the amounts referred to in paragraph (a) of this section include any remuneration for services performed by an employee for an employer which, without regard to this section, does not constitute wages under section 3401(a). For example, remuneration for services performed by an agricultural worker or a domestic worker in a private home (amounts which are specifically excluded from the definition of wages by section 3401(a) (2) and (3), respectively) are amounts with respect to which a voluntary withholding agreement may be entered into under section 3402(p). See ??31.3401©?1 and 31.3401(d)?1 for the definitions of ?employee? and ?employer?.

4. It is “wages” and NOT “all earnings”, “income”, or even “gross income” that appear in the IRS individual master file as being taxable.

5. The income tax is upon ?wages? but not even ?public officers? earn ?wages?.

 

TITLE 26 > Subtitle C > CHAPTER 24 > ? 3401

? 3401. Definitions

(a) Wages

For purposes of this chapter, the term ?wages? means all remuneration (other than fees paid to a public official) for services performed by an employee for his employer, including the cash value of all remuneration (including benefits) paid in any medium other than cash; except that such term shall not include remuneration paid?

6. It is ?wages? which are the subject of I.R.C. Subtitle C withholding and constitute I.R.C. Subtitle A ?gross income? because ?wages? is the code word for earnings of those who elect to become ?public officers? and thereby donate their private property earnings to a ?public office?, a ?public use?, and a ?public purpose? and thereby subject them to taxation by signing the federal W-4 ?public officer? job application and contract.

 

?Men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights,-‘life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness;’ and to ‘secure,’ not grant or create, these rights, governments are instituted. That property [or income] which a man has honestly acquired he retains full control of, subject to these limitations: First, that he shall not use it to his neighbor’s injury, and that does not mean that he must use it for his neighbor’s benefit; second, that if he devotes it to a public use, he gives to the public a right to control that use; and third, that whenever the public needs require, the public may take it upon payment of due compensation.

[Budd v. People of State of New York, 143 U.S. 517 (1892)]

7. It is ?wages? that 26 CFR ?31.3401(p)-1 says become ?gross income? and therefore ?trade or business? income ONLY AFTER one signs the W-4.

TITLE 26–INTERNAL REVENUE

CHAPTER I–INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

PART 31_EMPLOYMENT TAXES AND COLLECTION OF INCOME TAX AT SOURCE–Table of Contents

Subpart E_Collection of Income Tax at Source

?31.3402(p)-1 Voluntary withholding agreements.

(a) In general. An employee and his employer may enter into an agreement under section 3402( 😎 to provide for the withholding of income tax upon payments of amounts described in paragraph ( :cool:(1) of ?31.3401(a)?3, made after December 31, 1970. An agreement may be entered into under this section only with respect to amounts which are includible in the gross income of the employee under section 61, and must be applicable to all such amounts paid by the employer to the employee. The amount to be withheld pursuant to an agreement under section 3402(p) shall be determined under the rules contained in section 3402 and the regulations thereunder. See ?31.3405©?1, Q&A?3 concerning agreements to have more than 20-percent Federal income tax withheld from eligible rollover distributions within the meaning of section 402.

8. It is for claiming that “wages” are not taxable that many tax protesters are properly sanctioned. See:

Flawed Tax Arguments to Avoid, Section 6.2
http://famguardian.o…ArgsToAvoid.pdf

The W-4 form serves a dual purpose of being a federal “public officer” application form PLUS a tax withholding form for those acting as “Kelly Girls” called “public officers” engaged in the “trade or business” franchise. The W-4 form effectively is being used as follows:

1. As a federal “election” form where you can elect yourself into public office within the government. You are the only voter in this “election”. Now do you know why the IRS calls it an “election” whenever you consent to something in the I.R.C. They aren’t lying!

2. The W-2 can only be filed against those who make such an election. If it it filed against a person who did NOT make such an election, then election fraud is occurring and the employer is committing the crime of impersonating a public officer in violation of 18 USC 912. Any withholdings against a person who did not submit the W-4 is a bribe to procure a public office in criminal violation of 18 USC 211.
http://www.law.corne…11—-000-.html

3. To CREATE public offices in the U.S. government unlawfully rather than tax those already in existence.

4. As a way to create a franchise that turns private labor into public property by donating it to a public use and a public office.

?Men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights,-‘life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness;’ and to ‘secure,’ not grant or create, these rights, governments are instituted. That property [or income] which a man has honestly acquired he retains full control of, subject to these limitations: First, that he shall not use it to his neighbor’s injury, and that does not mean that he must use it for his neighbor’s benefit; second, that if he devotes it to a public use, he gives to the public a right to control that use; and third, that whenever the public needs require, the public may take it upon payment of due compensation.?

[Budd v. People of State of New York, 143 U.S. 517 (1892)]

5. As a way to make private workers into a Kelly Girl for the government.

6. As a way to make you party to the franchise agreement codified in I.R.C. Subtitles A and C.

7. The SSN on the form is being used as a de facto “license” to act as a “public officer” in the U.S. government called a “taxpayer”. The IRS Form 1042-s instructions say the SSN is only required for those engaged in a “trade or business”, which means a public office. The tax is on the office, not on the private person. The office is the “res” that is the subject of the tax and the use of the number is prima facie evidence of the existence of the “res”. All tax proceedings are “in rem” against the office, which is the only real “citizen”, “resident”, and “taxpayer”. The human being filling the office is not the “taxpayer”, but he is surety for the “taxpayer”. They don’t call the SSN or TIN a “license number” even though it is for all intents and purposes, because they don’t want to admit that they have no authority to license ANYTHING within a state of the Union:

 

“But very different considerations apply to the internal commerce or domestic trade of the States. Over this commerce and trade Congress has no power of regulation nor any direct control. This power belongs exclusively to the States. No interference by Congress with the business of citizens transacted within a State is warranted by the Constitution, except such as is strictly incidental to the exercise of powers clearly granted to the legislature. The power to authorize a business within a State is plainly repugnant to the exclusive power of the State over the same subject. It is true that the power of Congress to tax is a very extensive power. It is given in the Constitution, with only one exception and only two qualifications. Congress cannot tax exports, and it must impose direct taxes by the rule of apportionment, and indirect taxes by the rule of uniformity. Thus limited, and thus only, it reaches every subject, and may be exercised at discretion. But, it reaches only existing subjects. Congress cannot authorize [e.g. LICENSE] a trade or business within a State in order to tax it.?

[License Tax Cases, 72 U.S. 462, 18 L.Ed. 497, 5 Wall. 462, 2 A.F.T.R. 2224 (1866)]

Show me a case where the License Tax cases was overruled? It’s still in force. The feds can’t license ANYTHING within a state, including “public offices” and the “trade or business” franchise that is being ILLEGALLY enforced within states of the Union at this time. To admit otherwise is to sanction a destruction of the separation of powers between the states and the federal government. There is NO PLACE within the I.R.C. that authorizes the CREATION of public offices using any tax form, and yet that is what the IRS is unlawfully using W-2, W-4, and 1040 forms for. 4 U.S.C. 72 says there MUST be a statute that authorizes the creation and exercise of such offices within a state in order for such public offices to be valid. Essentially what is happening is that the forms constitute an election to make you into a “resident agent” for an office that exists in the District of Columbia.

The existence of 26 USC 871(a) is a deception, because 26 U.S.C. 7701(a)(31) says the property of those not engaged in the “trade or business’ franchise is a foreign estate not subject to the I.R.C. One’s earnings are part of that estate.

I.R.C. 3401(a)(6) excludes earnings of “nonresident aliens” from “wages”, if regulations exist. Government workers who aren’t public officers therefore have the same protections as ordinary private industry workers who are nonresident aliens not engaged in the “trade or business” franchise. The only way a nonresident alien not otherwise engaged in the “trade or business” franchise can become subject is to sign the W-4 contract to:

1. Become engaged in the franchise and be eligible for “benefits” under the franchise agreement.

2. Waive sovereign immunity pursuant to 28 USC 1605.

3. Make an election to become a “resident alien”.

Where in I.R.C. 3401 is the term “wages” treated any differently for government workers who AREN’T “public officers”? It AIN’T.

Remember: Information returns are the only way the IRS could find out about the earnings of a government employee, and these returns can ONLY be filed against those engaged in the “trade or business” franchise or who elect to be using the W-4 agreement/contract. 26 CFR 31.3401(a)-3(a), 26 CFR 31.3402(p)-1. How would the IRS find out about 871(a) income that is NOT connected with the “trade or business”? There is no information return that is NOT connected to a “trade or business” and it is a CRIME for a person not ALREADY engaged in a public office in the government BEFORE they signed the W-4 to impersonate a public officer or engage in the activities of a public office. 18 USC 912.

The income tax is upon the COINCIDENCE of DOMICILE within the jurisdiction AND being engaged in the “trade or business” franchise. The VOLUNTARY use of an identifying number connects you to BOTH of these prerequisites:

1. SSNs and TINs can only be issued to “U.S. persons”. 26 USC 6109(g), 26 CFR 301.6109-1(g), and 20 CFR 422.103(d).

2. The number is only MANDATORY for persons engaged in franchises. See IRS form 1042-s instructions AND section 10 of the following:

About SSNs/TINs on Government Forms and Correspondence, Form #05.012
http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm

You can STILL be a government worker as a nonresident alien not engaged in a “trade or business”, not have a domicile on federal territory, and therefore STILL be free. The DOMICILE and the protection it pays for is where the government’s authority comes from to collect the tax in the first place. It is a CIVIL liability and you aren’t subject to their CIVIL law without a domicile on federal territory, unless you contract with them to procure an identity or “res”, and thereby become a “res-ident”. When you contract with them, you create a “public office” in the government and become surety for the office you created using your signature. F.R.Civ.P. 17(b ), 26 USC 7408(d), and 26 USC 7701(a)(39) then changes the choice of law to the District of Columbia for all functions of the “public office” because now you are acting in a representative capacity on behalf of the federal corporation as such public officer.

On the subject of contracting with the government, the Bible forbids Christians from nominating a King or Protector above them, or from contracting with the pagan government:

 

“Do not walk in the [civil] statutes of your fathers [the heathens, by selecting a domicile or “residence” in their jurisdiction], nor observe their judgments, nor defile yourselves with their idols. I am the LORD your God: Walk in My statutes, keep My judgments, and do them; hallow My Sabbaths, and they will be a sign between Me and you, that you may know that I am the LORD your God.”

[Ezekial 20:10-20, Bible, NKJV]

_________________________________________

“You shall make no covenant [contract or franchise] with them [foreigners, pagans], nor with their [pagan government] gods [laws or judges]. They shall not dwell in your land [and you shall not dwell in theirs by becoming a ?resident? in the process of contracting with them], lest they make you sin against Me [God].?? For if you serve their gods [under contract or agreement or franchise], it will surely be a snare to you.”

[Exodus 23:32-33, Bible, NKJV]

_________________________________________

“Therefore, my brethren, you also have become dead to the law [man’s law] through the body of Christ [by shifting your legal domicile to the God’s Kingdom], that you may be married to another?to Him who was raised from the dead, that we should bear fruit [as agents, fiduciaries, and trustees] to God. For when we were in the flesh, the sinful passions which were aroused by the law were at work in our members to bear fruit to death. But now we have been delivered from the law, having died to what we were held by, so that we should serve in the newness of the Spirit [and newness of the law, God?s law] and not in the oldness of the letter.”

[Rom. 7:4-6, Bible, NKJV]

_________________________________________

“The wicked shall be turned into (censored), And all the nations [and peoples] that forget [or disobey] God [or His commandments].”

[Psalm 9:17, Bible, NKJV]

_________________________________________

“Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God?? Whoever therefore wants to be a friend [?citizen?, ?resident?, ?taxpayer?, ?inhabitant?, or “subject” under a king or political ruler] of the world [or any man-made kingdom other than God’s Kingdom] makes himself an enemy of God. “

[James 4:4, Bible, NKJV]

_________________________________________

“Above all, you must live as citizens of heaven [INSTEAD of citizens of earth.? You can only be a citizen of ONE place at a time because you can only have a domicile in one place at a time], conducting yourselves in a manner worthy of the Good News about Christ. Then, whether I come and see you again or only hear about you, I will know that you are standing together with one spirit and one purpose, fighting together for the faith, which is the Good News.”

[Philippians 1:27, Bible, NLT]

They can’t force you to choose a domicile in their jurisdiction or to nominate a protector or become a “resident” if you are a “national” who was born in this country. They can do it with “privileged” aliens born in other countries, but the can’t do it to those who are born here, becaust they can’t force a “citizen” under the constitution to suffer any of the disabilities of alienage without engaging in involuntary servitude. This is also confirmed by the definition of “residence” at 26 CFR 1.871-2, which only includes aliens and not nonresident aliens. If they did force you to choose a domicile or residence and thereby become a “taxpayer”, it would be a violation of the First Amendment prohibition against compelled association and the Thirteenth Amendment prohibition against involuntary servitude. It has always been lawful to refuse protection and refuse to be a domiciliary called a “U.S. citizen”, “U.S. person”, or “U.S. resident”, and to refuse to contract with them or accept any benefits that might give rise to a “quasi-contractual” obligation to pay for “social insurance”. See:

1. Why Domicile and Becoming a “Taxpayer” Require Your Consent, Form #05.002
http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm

2. The Government “Benefits” Scam, Form #05.040
http://sedm.org/Forms/FormIndex.htm

As Frank Kowalik points out in his wonderful book, IRS Humbug, the income tax is a public officer kickback program disguised to “look” like a legitimate income tax. It’s smoke and mirrors. To make it look like an income tax, they had to throw the “domicile” stuff into it, but the public officer status is still the foundation. That is why 26 U.S.C. 7701(a)(31) says everything in the code is “foreign” that is not connected to the public office (“trade or business”) franchise. To be “foreign” means it is outside the jurisdiction of the franchise agreement because not consensually connected to it.

Incidentally, nearly the entire content of this post is available as Section 11 of the following:

The “Trade or Business” Scam, Form #05.001
http://famguardian.o…usinessScam.htm

[fg_admin]

Reb,

What you are looking for is the 1939 Internal Revenue Code, which is here:

http://famguardian.org/PublishedAuthors/Go…dIncTaxActs.htm

The 1939 I.R.C. is at 53 Stat. 1, not 53 Stat. 4. Section 4 of that act is what repealed itself. See:

Exhibit #05.027

http://sedm.org/Exhibits/ExhibitIndex.htm (OFFSITE LINK)

[fg_admin]

Bing,

Thank you for sharing your frustration and your insight. Incidentally, one of our fellowship members called Bob Schulz recently to propose the very approach you suggest:

1. Stop fighting the system. Don't gripe: You're married to it if you consent to be called a “citizen”, which is nothing more than a person born on the territory and who elects to have a domicile within the political group and to be protected by its civil laws.

2. Make your own civil government. If you can't fight them, join and compete with them!

3. Use his following to populate the new government.

He gave the member a deer in the headlights response:

” That's just too big of a problem to even comprehend. I wouldn't even know where to start.”

We thought he was a more creative engineer than that. He still doesn't know how to think outside the box and so he spends his life as fish in a barrel dodging the bullets shot at him by the very people he could easily get at by far less political and sophisticated means. All he has to do is form his own government, change his domicile to it, populate his own courts, and then issue adverse foreign judgments and liens against his oppressors. All he has to do is follow the wonderful roadmap laid out in spades in the following document:

Sovereignty Federation Government: Articles of Confederation, Form #10.001

http://sedm.org/Forms/Emancipation/SFGArtOfConfed.pdf

Nearly everything he needs to form his own civil government is in the above book, and he could do it very inexpensively with only a handfull of people in each county. He could use his WTP coordinators as the catalyst to form these governments, if he would quit complaining and start offering ALTERNATIVES, CHOICE, and COMPETITION in government. Isn't the heart of the problem: That the present system appears to have a monopoly on government? Let's give them a little competition using their own laws, constitution, and codes. There are a LOT of very frustrated and disillusioned voters out there who want to start over with a new government, new parties, and a much more libertarian approach. With this approach, they could lawfully divorce the system and divert their resources and taxes lawfully to the new and better government.

The above book doesn't suggest a “common law court” philosophy, but a REAL court philosophy. All you need to form a government is people, territory, and laws. You can find those ingredients everywhere. We object to the way some common law courts operate because they don't follow the same rules as the regular government and aren't sufficiently accountable. Many of them turn into nothing more than simple marketing forums for snake oil and commercial scams. However, the SFG approach mimics exactly how a lawful, de jure constitutional government must operate and prohibits all the scams that plague the much maligned “common law court” approach.