<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
		>

<channel>
	<title>Family Guardian | oneofthepeople | Activity</title>
	<link>https://famguardian.org/members/oneofthepeople/activity/</link>
	<atom:link href="https://famguardian.org/members/oneofthepeople/activity/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<description>Activity feed for oneofthepeople.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 Aug 2026 14:48:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>https://buddypress.org/?v=3.4.2</generator>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<ttl>30</ttl>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>2</sy:updateFrequency>
		
								<item>
				<guid isPermaLink="false">358dd0ef67946ed8143990ec67a0f21d</guid>
				<title>oneofthepeople replied to the discussion Great IRS Hoax errata in the forum 9.3. Errata Reports</title>
				<link>http://famguardian.org/forums/forums/topic/great-irs-hoax-errata/#post-12637</link>
				<pubDate>Tue, 27 Jan 2015 18:42:03 +0000</pubDate>

									<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p class = "activity-discussion-title-wrap"><a href="https://famguardian.org/forums/topic/great-irs-hoax-errata/#post-12637"><span class="bb-reply-lable">Reply to</span> Great IRS Hoax errata</a></p> <div class="bb-content-inr-wrap"><p>Chapter 1 observations will be posted at another time being that most of them are written on paper and must be typed. So for now, Chapters 2 and 3 are posted here. More corrections from other chapters of the most recent version need to be reviewed and page numbers and lines verified because some of them were recorded from two different versions&hellip;<span class="activity-read-more" id="activity-read-more-3240"><a href="http://famguardian.org/forums/forums/topic/great-irs-hoax-errata/#post-12637" rel="nofollow"> Read more</a></span></p>
</div>]]></content:encoded>
				
				
							</item>
					<item>
				<guid isPermaLink="false">40b0bc8cdf47d9f4db5476509f02d753</guid>
				<title>oneofthepeople replied to the discussion Great IRS Hoax errata in the forum 9.3. Errata Reports</title>
				<link>http://famguardian.org/forums/forums/topic/great-irs-hoax-errata/#post-12635</link>
				<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jan 2015 20:31:32 +0000</pubDate>

									<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p class = "activity-discussion-title-wrap"><a href="https://famguardian.org/forums/topic/great-irs-hoax-errata/#post-12635"><span class="bb-reply-lable">Reply to</span> Great IRS Hoax errata</a></p> <div class="bb-content-inr-wrap"><p>Hello Admin,<br />
 <br />
First, thank you for the abundance of information provided and thorough responses.<br />
 <br />
I wish to know to what extent you wish to have typos reported. I have kept record of these in the past while reading The Great IRS Hoax (TGIH), but have not posted them yet. Today I was bouncing around in TGIH looking up a few specific things and&hellip;<span class="activity-read-more" id="activity-read-more-3238"><a href="http://famguardian.org/forums/forums/topic/great-irs-hoax-errata/#post-12635" rel="nofollow"> Read more</a></span></p>
</div>]]></content:encoded>
				
				
							</item>
					<item>
				<guid isPermaLink="false">7c173cca1f48a048bf2604885d071835</guid>
				<title>oneofthepeople replied to the discussion Trading With the Enemy Act (TWE) Falacies in the forum 5.5.4.  Flawed Patriot Arguments</title>
				<link>http://famguardian.org/forums/forums/topic/trading-with-the-enemy-act-twe-falacies/#post-15933</link>
				<pubDate>Sat, 24 Jan 2015 03:05:27 +0000</pubDate>

									<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p class = "activity-discussion-title-wrap"><a href="https://famguardian.org/forums/topic/trading-with-the-enemy-act-twe-falacies/#post-15933"><span class="bb-reply-lable">Reply to</span> Trading With the Enemy Act (TWE) Falacies</a></p> <div class="bb-content-inr-wrap"><p>Thank you for that.<br />
 <br />
I&#8217;m curious&#8230;<br />
 <br />
Do you have an organizational system or method wherein you have Supreme Court cases recorded for quick reference for all of these topics? I wish to start recording and organizing them for my own reference.</p>
</div>]]></content:encoded>
				
				
							</item>
					<item>
				<guid isPermaLink="false">fb8865a4888d0a7812c23ef714b048f5</guid>
				<title>oneofthepeople replied to the discussion Trading With the Enemy Act (TWE) Falacies in the forum 5.5.4.  Flawed Patriot Arguments</title>
				<link>http://famguardian.org/forums/forums/topic/trading-with-the-enemy-act-twe-falacies/#post-15931</link>
				<pubDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2015 21:59:45 +0000</pubDate>

									<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p class = "activity-discussion-title-wrap"><a href="https://famguardian.org/forums/topic/trading-with-the-enemy-act-twe-falacies/#post-15931"><span class="bb-reply-lable">Reply to</span> Trading With the Enemy Act (TWE) Falacies</a></p> <div class="bb-content-inr-wrap"><p><a class="bp-suggestions-mention" href="http://famguardian.org/forums/members/bing/" rel="nofollow">@Bing</a>,<br />
 <br />
According to the TWE the United States must be at war for &#8220;enemy&#8221; to apply. No declaration of war means they are our &#8220;FRIENDS.&#8221; How nice&#8230;<br />
 <br />
@ All<br />
 <br />
Here is a serious question in trying to truly learn. The TWE states, &#8220;The words &#8216;United States,&#8217; as used herein, shall be deemed to mean all land and water, continental or insular, in any&hellip;<span class="activity-read-more" id="activity-read-more-3169"><a href="http://famguardian.org/forums/forums/topic/trading-with-the-enemy-act-twe-falacies/#post-15931" rel="nofollow"> Read more</a></span></p>
</div>]]></content:encoded>
				
				
							</item>
					<item>
				<guid isPermaLink="false">ca5b5b481767b4649f20a1dca395bb45</guid>
				<title>oneofthepeople replied to the discussion U.S. Supreme Court Affirms FG and SEDM position on sovereignty in the forum 4.12 Sovereignty and Freedom</title>
				<link>https://famguardian.org/forums/forums/topic/u-s-supreme-court-affirms-fg-and-sedm-position-on-sovereignty/#post-15940</link>
				<pubDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2015 20:35:29 +0000</pubDate>

									<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p class = "activity-discussion-title-wrap"><a href="https://famguardian.org/forums/topic/u-s-supreme-court-affirms-fg-and-sedm-position-on-sovereignty/#post-15940"><span class="bb-reply-lable">Reply to</span> U.S. Supreme Court Affirms FG and SEDM position on sovereignty</a></p> <div class="bb-content-inr-wrap"><p>So, please address these concerns of confusion.<br />
 <br />
This case is about violation of 18 U.S.C. 229, which states at ( b ), &#8220;it shall be unlawful for any person&#8230;&#8221;<br />
 <br />
Much educational material written focuses on the definition and use of terms such as &#8220;individual&#8221; and &#8220;person.&#8221;<br />
 <br />
Later in this case on page 11 of the document and page 14 of the PDF&hellip;<span class="activity-read-more" id="activity-read-more-6366"><a href="https://famguardian.org/forums/forums/topic/u-s-supreme-court-affirms-fg-and-sedm-position-on-sovereignty/#post-15940" rel="nofollow"> Read more</a></span></p>
</div>]]></content:encoded>
				
				
							</item>
					<item>
				<guid isPermaLink="false">72430a44c9c4e4fa07a85e0cb3358422</guid>
				<title>oneofthepeople replied to the discussion Definition of &#034;firearm&#034; in the forum 6.5. Gun Rights and Gun Control</title>
				<link>http://famguardian.org/forums/forums/topic/definition-of-firearm/#post-15955</link>
				<pubDate>Thu, 22 Jan 2015 18:50:51 +0000</pubDate>

									<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p class = "activity-discussion-title-wrap"><a href="https://famguardian.org/forums/topic/definition-of-firearm/#post-15955"><span class="bb-reply-lable">Reply to</span> Definition of &#34;firearm&#34;</a></p> <div class="bb-content-inr-wrap"><p>So apparently when using parentheses with the letter &#8220;b&#8221; the emoticon seen is inserted. Further the copyright symbol is inserted when using letter &#8220;c&#8221; in the same. Spaces added to correct.<br />
 <br />
Should be&#8230;<br />
 <br />
“( b ) section 414 of the Mutual Security Act of 1954 (<a target='_blank' class="bbc_url" href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/22" title="External link" rel="nofollow">22</a> U.S.C. <a target='_blank' class="bbc_url" href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/22/1934" title="External link" rel="nofollow">1934</a>), as amended, relating to munitions control; or<br />
“( c ) section <a target='_blank' class="bbc_url" href="http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1715" title="External link" rel="nofollow">1715</a> of&hellip;<span class="activity-read-more" id="activity-read-more-1693"><a href="http://famguardian.org/forums/forums/topic/definition-of-firearm/#post-15955" rel="nofollow"> Read more</a></span></p>
</div>]]></content:encoded>
				
				
							</item>
					<item>
				<guid isPermaLink="false">24841ebe7c5355e31114f8aeba56a828</guid>
				<title>oneofthepeople replied to the discussion Definition of &#034;firearm&#034; in the forum 6.5. Gun Rights and Gun Control</title>
				<link>http://famguardian.org/forums/forums/topic/definition-of-firearm/#post-15954</link>
				<pubDate>Thu, 22 Jan 2015 18:49:10 +0000</pubDate>

									<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p class = "activity-discussion-title-wrap"><a href="https://famguardian.org/forums/topic/definition-of-firearm/#post-15954"><span class="bb-reply-lable">Reply to</span> Definition of &#34;firearm&#34;</a></p> <div class="bb-content-inr-wrap"><p>Another good resource that allows people to follow along with audio regarding the definition of the term &#8220;firearm&#8221; along with some history can be heard broken down by (both now deceased) Michael James Anthony on the The American Reconstruction Project radio show by Michael Golden aka &#8220;Jack Bauer&#8221; on TalkShoe at &hellip;<span class="activity-read-more" id="activity-read-more-1692"><a href="http://famguardian.org/forums/forums/topic/definition-of-firearm/#post-15954" rel="nofollow"> Read more</a></span></p>
</div>]]></content:encoded>
				
				
							</item>
					<item>
				<guid isPermaLink="false">218c28d2a32af10c163633f5c05b8c1f</guid>
				<title>oneofthepeople replied to the discussion The US Constitution Was Not Made For You in the forum 7.2. Federal jurisdiction</title>
				<link>http://famguardian.org/forums/forums/topic/the-us-constitution-was-not-made-for-you/#post-15950</link>
				<pubDate>Thu, 22 Jan 2015 14:23:35 +0000</pubDate>

									<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p class = "activity-discussion-title-wrap"><a href="https://famguardian.org/forums/topic/the-us-constitution-was-not-made-for-you/#post-15950"><span class="bb-reply-lable">Reply to</span> The US Constitution Was Not Made For You</a></p> <div class="bb-content-inr-wrap"><p>@Admin<br />
 <br />
The statements below are not made to confirm nor deny the veracity of the speaker in the video above. (David Williams?) They are mere observations. From watching the video posted three of the points I gleaned were as follows:<br />
 <br />
1. If one is not a direct descendant of the founding fathers, one is not of the Posterity for whom the&hellip;<span class="activity-read-more" id="activity-read-more-354"><a href="http://famguardian.org/forums/forums/topic/the-us-constitution-was-not-made-for-you/#post-15950" rel="nofollow"> Read more</a></span></p>
</div>]]></content:encoded>
				
				
							</item>
					<item>
				<guid isPermaLink="false">7abbd1885290bce4c14b62d2070f95e3</guid>
				<title>oneofthepeople replied to the discussion Marc Stevens: Show Me the Evidence Your Laws Apply in the forum 7.2. Federal jurisdiction</title>
				<link>http://famguardian.org/forums/forums/topic/marc-stevens-show-me-the-evidence-your-laws-apply/#post-15938</link>
				<pubDate>Thu, 22 Jan 2015 05:38:07 +0000</pubDate>

									<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p class = "activity-discussion-title-wrap"><a href="https://famguardian.org/forums/topic/marc-stevens-show-me-the-evidence-your-laws-apply/#post-15938"><span class="bb-reply-lable">Reply to</span> Marc Stevens: Show Me the Evidence Your Laws Apply</a></p> <div class="bb-content-inr-wrap"><p><a class="bp-suggestions-mention" href="http://famguardian.org/forums/members/bing/" rel="nofollow">@Bing</a><br />
 <br />
Are you referring to 53 Stat. p. 510 Chapter 2 listed as H.R. 2762, Public, No. 1 dated February 10, 1939, and titled, &#8220;Internal Revenue Code. AN ACT To consolidate and codify the internal revenue laws of the United States&#8221; as proof the IRC was repealed or something else? Please help me understand. I do not see mention of a repeal.</p>
</div>]]></content:encoded>
				
				
							</item>
					<item>
				<guid isPermaLink="false">09e5bf8d3f339a070d7bb9ffa1ed1240</guid>
				<title>oneofthepeople replied to the discussion Private Company accepting credit cards? in the forum 7.4. Money, Debt, and Credit</title>
				<link>http://famguardian.org/forums/forums/topic/private-company-accepting-credit-cards/#post-15948</link>
				<pubDate>Wed, 21 Jan 2015 21:20:01 +0000</pubDate>

									<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p class = "activity-discussion-title-wrap"><a href="https://famguardian.org/forums/topic/private-company-accepting-credit-cards/#post-15948"><span class="bb-reply-lable">Reply to</span> Private Company accepting credit cards?</a></p> <div class="bb-content-inr-wrap"><p>Your explanation makes sense. Thank you for it.</p>
</div>]]></content:encoded>
				
				
							</item>
					<item>
				<guid isPermaLink="false">4388d1ab8d6cda97071cd8203bf14df3</guid>
				<title>oneofthepeople replied to the discussion Private Company accepting credit cards? in the forum 7.4. Money, Debt, and Credit</title>
				<link>http://famguardian.org/forums/forums/topic/private-company-accepting-credit-cards/#post-15946</link>
				<pubDate>Wed, 21 Jan 2015 02:21:53 +0000</pubDate>

									<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p class = "activity-discussion-title-wrap"><a href="https://famguardian.org/forums/topic/private-company-accepting-credit-cards/#post-15946"><span class="bb-reply-lable">Reply to</span> Private Company accepting credit cards?</a></p> <div class="bb-content-inr-wrap"><p>1. First of all, thank you for answering. This does provide some clarification.<br />
 <br />
2. I merely posted here because I had remembered creating the user account in the past, but don&#8217;t think I had posted before.<br />
 <br />
3. Do you have suggestions for sources regarding education of the private trust topic? I know of The Art of Passing the Buck.<br />
 <br />
4. The&hellip;<span class="activity-read-more" id="activity-read-more-1067"><a href="http://famguardian.org/forums/forums/topic/private-company-accepting-credit-cards/#post-15946" rel="nofollow"> Read more</a></span></p>
</div>]]></content:encoded>
				
				
							</item>
		
	</channel>
</rss>
		