Originally posted by Bildo
Here is another comment containg much information concerning the point I'm trying to make. This takes us from commonlaw to statutes and then to
This is so much nonsense.
Now for a little more insight lets look to: 4 U.S.C.S. Sec. 110(d)
Notice here that the United states of america are foreign to the United States.
This section says no such thing. It says, "[As used in sections 105–109 of this title] the term 'State' includes any Territory or possession of the
United States." Sections 105-109 are about taxation, and how states (including territories and possessions) can levy income and sales taxes on
activities in Federal areas. (Source)
Evidence that the UNITED STATES is foreign in respect to united States of America is is found in the 5 points as follows:
(1) December 26th 1933 49 Statute 3097 Treaty Series 881 (Convention on Rights and Duties of States) stated CONGRESS replaced STATUTES with
international law, placing all States under international law.
All States have been under international law, i.e. "Treaties made ... under the Authority of the United States," since the Constitution was ratified.
Specifically, Article VI
. This does not "replace" statute law, because both statutes and
treaties derive their authority from the same document--the Constitution. Congress enacts a
(2) December 9th 1945 International Organization Immunities Act relinquished every public office of the United States to the United
I'm not even sure how to address this. Read
the Act. It did no such thing. It granted
international organizations the rights of foreign missions.
(3) 22 CFR 92.12-92.31 FR Heading “Foreign Relationship” states that an oath is required to take office.
CFR Title 22, Part 92
(4) Title 8 USC 1481 stated once an oath of office is taken citizenship is relinquished, thus you become a foreign entity, agency, or state.
is all about notaries, not public offices generally. Although the US Constitution does require an oath to take office
in Article VI. Anyway, your US Code citation reads, "A person who is a national of the United States whether by birth or naturalization, shall lose
his nationality by voluntarily performing any of the following acts with the intention of relinquishing United States nationality ... taking an oath
or making an affirmation or other formal declaration of allegiance to a foreign state or a political subdivision thereof
. That's a very specific circumstance, which your source seems to have
That means every public office is a foreign state, including all political subdivisions. (i.e. every single court is considered a separate foreign
That doesn't even make sense. Do you know what a foreign state is? It's an entity outside the United States with population, territory, and the
ability to engage in international relations. Traffic court is not a foreign state. Taking an oath to faithfully execute the duties of traffic court
judge does not renounce one's citizenship.
(5) Title 22 USC (Foreign Relations and Intercourse) Chapter 11 identifies all public officials as foreign agents.
4 U.S.C.S. Sec. 110(d). The term “State” includes any Territory or possession of the United States. ( Note: the use of the capital “S” in
“State” is reference to the designated territorial “States” and possessions held by the Corporate “United States”.)
Title 22 does no such thing, and your source is abusing 4 USC 110(d) which, by its own language, only applies to sections 105-109 of that title.
TITLE 2-- CHAPTER 14 Sec. 431. Definitions
(12) The term ``State'' means a State of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or a territory or possession of
the United States.
"When used in this Act" being the key words that your source chose to omit. (Source)
in question is the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971. Not sure what this section is supposed to prove, just pointing out another little
edit on 6-1-2013 by FurvusRexCaeli because: (no reason given)