It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


A March on Washington DC

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 11:44 PM
Some news updates on several lawsuits hitting the Government, courtesy of We the People Foundation. Does anyone have any other sources to confirm or deny these petitions & lawsuits? I don't see TV News talking about it...I don't see any newspapers or radio stations mentioning this. News like this should be widespread, so who can offer any justifications for "news blackouts" on these topics?

BTW, did you know that, on your tax form under Wages, Salaries & Compensation, you can always put zero as your "Taxable Income?"

News Updates about Taxation
According to the report, in 1913, just months after the purported ratification of the 16th Amendment, Congress attempted to stretch the meaning of the legal term “income” beyond the meaning and intent of the framers of the 16th Amendment, as recorded in EVERY official and professional document of the era: congressional record, congressional reports, law reviews, journals of political science, newspapers of record and so forth.

In the Income Tax Act of 1913, Congress surreptitiously, by stealth and without authority, included an un-apportioned, direct tax on the salaries, wages and compensation of ordinary Americans and instituted withholding at the source.

However, in 1916, as Mr. Hart’s report demonstrates, the Supreme Court brought the devilish action of Congress and the Executive branch to a screeching halt. The Supreme Court ruled in Brushaber (and the cases bundled with it), that wages are NOT income within the meaning of the 16th Amendment.

As the research documents, Congress was then forced to amend the Income Tax Act, to remove salaries, wages and compensation from the definition of taxable income, to outlaw the withholding of wages from the paychecks of citizens and to direct the Executive Department to refund all wages withheld. All this, of course was done to bring the law into compliance with Brushaber.

More of the story at the link provided.

In related news, The Hart Report (at the second link posted above, same page but just a little higher) completed two seperate research studies which confirms:

The Hart report demonstrates there is absolutely no foundation to the position of the Executive branch (the Treasury Department, the IRS and the Department of Justice) that wages and salaries EQUALS taxable “income” within the meaning of the 16th Amendment, or that an individual’s wages, received in direct exchange for his labor, equals income and is, therefore, taxable under the Sixteenth Amendment.

On the other hand, the report proves beyond a shadow of doubt what “income” means within the meaning of the 16th Amendment -- that a corporation may derive “income” from labor, as that corporation utilizes labor in pursuit of profits, and that such corporate income is taxable. Likewise, a person or a corporation may derive “income” from investments in stocks and bonds or real estate, and that such (passive) income is taxable.

And if the IRS still tries to pressure you, with summones, penalties, fees, direct confiscation of your finances/property, etc...Well, they can't legally do it without an official Court Order! Why?
By the Order of Congress!

“If money is wanted by Rulers who have in any manner oppressed the People, they may retain it until their grievances are redressed, and thus peaceably procure relief, without trusting to despised petitions or disturbing the public tranquility.”
1774, Journals of the Continental Congress, 1:105-113

Robert L. Schultz seems to be the single most feared man by the government nowadays...How come I never see news media covering what he's doing?
Below are portions of a speech (entitled, "No Answers, No Taxes"), Robert L. Schultz adressing Washington D.C., Nov. 14th, 2002:

Before going further, I’d like to clarify two points: first, the question we are dealing with here is not whether the government has the power to tax, but whether the government is abusing its constitutionally limited power to tax; and second, there is the question of whether the government is using the tax revenue to effect other abuses of its authority...............

The First Amendment to the United States Constitution states clearly and unambiguously, "Congress shall make NO law …abridging …the right of the people … to petition the government for a redress of grievances.".
While some Rights are reserved with qualifications in the Bill of Rights, there are none whatsoever pertaining to the Right of Redress. There are no limits on the Right of Redress. Any constitutional offense is legitimately petitionable.

By the 1st Amendment, the founding fathers secured for posterity the Right of Redress of Grievances Before payment of Taxes and they made the Right of Redress Before Taxes operate against "the government," that is, against all branches of "the government," -- the legislative, the executive and the judicial branches. Redress reaches all.
Notice that the founding fathers, sitting as the Continental Congress in 1774, held that this Right of Redress Before Taxes was the means by which "the public tranquility" was to be maintained. Then, sitting as the Constitutional Convention, the founding fathers declared that one of the major purposes of the (federal) government was to "insure domestic tranquility." Therefore, whenever this Right of Redress is violated, the People have a double grievance: a denial of justice by the government and, an incitement by the government to general unrest.
Today, our concern is the grievance that falls under the heading of a design to subvert the Constitution and laws of the country by those wielding governmental power.
Under this heading, all officers of the government are liable, if they strayed from their oath of office.

The reverse principle of "Taxes Before Redress" is based on the essence of monarchy and kingly power: the king owns everything under his domain. People possess property under a monarch by his grace alone. Since a king owns everything under his domain, he merely has to speak to lawfully dispose of his property. Thus, if a king imposed a tax on land he imposed it on his own land and whoever occupied the land was obligated to pay the tax to the king’s treasury. A tax, then, being a part of the king’s property, was legally presumed to be in the possession of the king before and after its assessment.

This proposition was soundly rejected by the Founders in designing our unique system of governance.
In America, such presumptions constitute grievances. The first duty of any officer is to uphold the Constitution – the entire Constitution, without reservation and without bribery or blackmail.
Petitioning the government for a Redress of Grievance naturally includes the ability to compel admissions – the production of information and answers to questions.

The idea that taxes are to be paid before redress is asserted by Congress in the Internal Revenue Code at Section 7241, which states, "no suit for the purpose of restraining the assessment or collection of any tax shall be maintained in any court by any person …."
How repugnant! American government is supposed to be organized to protect American citizens; but section 7241 authorizes the IRS to destroy them with impunity and the judiciary is cooperating with the executive and legislative branches in a collective decision to deny the People their constitutional Rights. Such acts of government are unconstitutional and must be stopped.
In America, the right to petition our government for redress of grievances is the basis of our liberty. Our founders explicitly recognized this right in the first amendment to our constitution -- for they understood that without it, we could not have a servant government whose power is defined and limited by the consent of the people.
In America, the right to petition our government for a Redress of Grievances is an unalienable right. It derives from our faith in a supreme being - an ultimate moral authority from whom we gain our understanding of equality, justice and the rule of law. Implicit in our first amendment constitutional right to petition our government for a redress of grievances, is the government's absolute moral and legal obligation to respond honestly and completely to the people's petition.

The way the system is now working is in sharp contrast to the way it was designed to work. The servant is taking over the House: the government has brought us to the brink; the Constitution is hanging by a thread.
Not only is the government neglecting its duties, it is operating outside the boundaries the People have drawn around its powers.

From there, he goes on to list specific Grievences, including abuse of the Constitutional writs of: The War Powers clause, the voting (without thorough reading & deliberation) on the Patriot Act, the Unconstitutional operations of the Federal Reserve and the DoJ & IRS failure to answer to the public for their Unconstitutional actions.
Nearer to the end of his speech:

With today’s failure to respond, we can see a clear pattern. Our elected representatives do not feel compelled to respond to the People.
We must take the appropriate next step. As of two o’clock today, the government has left us no choice but to engage in civil action – a pro-active, non-violent mass movement, with the explicit goal of restoring the Republic by bringing the government back under the control of the People and our Rule Book – the Constitution of the United States of America.
This meeting here on the National Mall is the culmination of Freedom Drive 2002. On November 8, citizens from across the nation began driving in caravans toward Washington DC, to peaceably assemble here to await the government’s response to their Petitions.

I have to continue this below...

[edit on 12-10-2006 by MidnightDStroyer]

posted on Oct, 12 2006 @ 11:45 PM
..........Conclusion to the above............

The nature of our resistance is clear. It is not an act of anarchy or rebellion; rather it is an act of resistance to a government that is violating the purposes for which the Creator -- through the People and the Constitution -- has ordained civil government.
We are not "anti-war." We are not "anti-tax." We are "pro-constitution" and "anti-fraud."

We did not initiate this conflict. We have been fully committed to peaceful reconciliation and have pursued that course for decades.
We have no desire for resistance or violence of any kind. However, in the People's peaceful reconciliation attempts, the People's petitions and appeals have been met with force, and in some instances with near- military force.

Any wage earner who gives money to the federal government and any employer who withholds money from the paychecks of working Americans is undermining the People’s Rights, Freedoms and Liberties. Under the present circumstances, their behavior must be considered to be un-American.
As our Founders said so clearly: "If money is wanted by Rulers who have in any manner oppressed the People, [the People] may retain [their money] until their grievances are redressed, and thus peaceably procure relief, without trusting to despised petitions or disturbing the public tranquility."

I never heard of this actually happening in the major news media outlets...Has anyone seen coverage of this event? Has it already been covered in ATSNN somewhere?
Either/or, the processes they've started still continue...................

posted on Oct, 13 2006 @ 12:52 AM

You have voted MidnightDStroyer for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.

I think it's important to every American citizen to see this, if this indeed is the truth. Are there any other government documents that say this? Is there anything in any Constitutional text that supports this? If so, that would be added fuel to a fire that's been lit for well over 4 years.

I find this subject very interesting, as I never knew that before. No surprise really I don't suppose; not something they'd want the average citizen to know. Maybe I won't claim anything on my taxable income this year. We'll just have to see I guess.

Here's to ya though Midnight. That was one hell of a good post.


posted on Oct, 13 2006 @ 01:49 AM
I gave you a WATS, great work.
This is not a one-liner, hahaha feeble mods, bow to my powwwweeerrr!!

posted on Oct, 13 2006 @ 02:13 AM
Borg, keep in mind that this post didn't reprint all the relevant info about taxes...The real info is at the link I provided. Taxable Income does include corporate profits, appreciation of land values, stock dividends & other forms of "passive income". It's only wages, salaries & compensations that would be non-taxable. I hope you do your research thoroughly before you write down that $0.00. I won't allow myself to be held accountable for your mistakes.

Also, the info at the link specifies that you can withhold your payments (of any kind) to the Government only if you have legitimate Redress of Grievences pending...And you must put those payments aside, in some form of trust fund, in case you lose & have to pay anyway. Also keep in mind that any Interest earned on that trust fund is not for the government! You legally still keep that!

[edit on 13-10-2006 by MidnightDStroyer]

posted on Oct, 13 2006 @ 05:18 AM
Heh. That's what I meant by I'd have to wait and see. I need to research that a lot more before I do anything bold. Will be very interesting nonetheless.

I propose we start a research project on this. The ramifications of something this large would be.... well, HUGE!! Lemme know what ya think.


posted on Oct, 13 2006 @ 06:06 AM

Originally posted by TheBorg
I need to research that a lot more before I do anything bold...
I propose we start a research project on this.

Hmmm...If is "bold" you're looking for, look here.
For research, I suggest starting at the link I provided above. Even though it's an activist website, you don't have to join or support them to be able to see their research & trail off in your own directions from there.
I guess you could say that their research has jumped the line between "theoretical science" & "applied science."

[edit on 13-10-2006 by MidnightDStroyer]

posted on Oct, 13 2006 @ 05:35 PM
Yes I will confirm there are lawsuits pending and currently running against the IRS and other agecies related to it. What I really need to do is take a full day write a detailed overview of exactly how to fix this problem because it is a big problem and it has to do with your rights not to pay any tax's. And that is the key to this whole thing.

It has to do with the 14th amendment. The 14th amendment is everything if there is ever a ruling on the 14th amendment one of two things will happen and I really do need to take some time and explain this in detail.

First if the Supreme court rules the 14 amendment was never radified by congress or if they rule that it's unconstitutional which it is and it never was radified. Then what will happen is the 14th amendment no longer applys which means you and everyone else in the United States that has a Social Security Number or a birth certificte is no longer liable for tax's.

Secondly If the supreme court upholds the 14th amendment and says yes it applys to everyone in the United States then everyone of the elected people in the United States have to give up there offices this includes any judge or any official in the United States because the 14th amendment has to do with Citizenship.

When it was drafted it delt with giving right's to people that were slaves that wanted to be free from the south. But at that time the people runing the country did not feel that black people should have the same right's as white people so they created a different type of citizen.

The IRS has a big problem with this because there are some of us that know exactly how to bring down the system shall we say. It's real simple just get the supreme court to make a ruling on the 14th amendment if it was properly radified and is it consitutional and it's all over.

Keep in mind no matter if it's the supreme court or not they still have a oath of office and why they may be pleging there loyaty and doing so under oath thinking they cant be held accountable there are ways around that too.

See alot of this has ties with Teddy Rosevelt also because once gold and silver were taken from the people in exchange for paper currency Rosevelt gave the people unlimited right to contract. However when that happened contract laws took effect and were created.

It is illegal for anyone in the United States to enter into a contract before they turn 18 years old. This is why Social Security and Birth Certificates are illegal. Because they are contracts also known as a contraxual nexus or a contract between two parties in this case a contract between the person and the State.

Because people were not aware of the "Terms and Conditions of the Contract" also known as a contraxual nexus in this example social security or birth certificates that makes those contracts null and void.

And the IRS and other agencies know this why do you think the bush administration scrambled to try desperatly to fix social security? Because it's a possible 280 million lawsuits that could come against the United States for breaking contract law.

Now lets take online information. Did you know that all online information no matter what it is is not illegal to obtain or look at? The reason for this is regardless if that information is secret or classifed exc exc. Is usually most distributors like yahoo for instance make you do what?

Agree to the "Terms and Conditons". However because its not a written contract that you personally sign you are not liable. This is also why the majoirty of all the desperate attemps by the FBI to grab peoples computers for instance for having so called illegal music and movie information on them the people doing that are not breaking the law.

Why? You didnt enter into the contract it's that simple. You have to agree to the terms and conditons to become "liable". Let me tell you a magic trick. If you rent a movie and plan on copying it to a new tape or cd you see the FBI label come up informing you you cannot dupicate this cd dvd movie exc exc, if you close you eyes or turn away from that warning you are not liable if you did, could, might have, could have, might have had, copied that cd, movie, dvd because you didnt agree to the terms and condtions.

Even if there was no written contract those appear in movies to protect so called copyright law but there is no copyright law's or contraxual nexus laws that apply to anyone under the age of 18 years old 21 in some states and it's noy illegal for someone outside of the united states to provide to you me or anyone else a cd, movie, or dvd because they operate by a different set of laws.

So technically lets say someone in Austrialia sent Falcon a brand new copy of 007 Casino Royal in English dubbed format full movie. They would not be breaking the law by giving it to me and it would not be illegal for me to have it because I have not agreed to any terms and conditons in that area.


posted on Oct, 15 2006 @ 02:21 PM
Great work Midnight! I don't have the time to read through it all now...but will soon and then add my 2 cents. Thanks for the work!!

posted on Oct, 17 2006 @ 06:21 PM
Falcon....great work by you as well. I'd give you and Midnight WATS' if I had any left!

Midnight.....I need to spend some time on that website you posted. There is a lot to take in on that. Then I will join in this....this is fascinating stuff!!

I hope you got some applauses on deserve it!!

posted on Dec, 11 2006 @ 04:13 PM
An update to a March on Washington D.C., courtesy of We the People Foundation

Well, well...More pending.
Since the Government has been slow to answer (big surprise!
) & they're bumping the whole issue up in court-levels (They can't decide the "jurisdiction" over a Constitutional matter
), the IRS was busy locking down Shultz's bank accounts, going around the courts & "confiscating" his money...etc.

...Going against the laws that are in place to prevent the IRS from doing just that!...

The case of Schultz vs. the IRS was judged in court in favor of Schultz, putting a stop to the IRS! While the Tax Issue is still going through the petitioning process, the IRS has no authority to forcefully apply pressure on Shultz in any way.

Because of the Government's delays & hem-hawing in answering the original petition, a new march is scheduled to take place...
...A large group of people will be wearing the "V" costume as they rally for passing out information to anyone who happens by!

Full story at the weblink above.

We the People Congress on Long Island with the approval of Headquarters is planning to inform people about the Right to Petition and the D.C. "V" rally in 2007 to the thousands of people shopping this holiday season in NYC. We would like it if we could all do this together.

Dates: Saturday and Sunday Dec. 16th & 17th

So, who's going to be there?

In an extension of one of my original questions, is there going to be any News Media covering this? Are they actually going to broadcast it & inform (without the usual "spin") the people what's really going on?

I spoke with Police Officer Paul Spano of Midtown South Community Affairs Division of the NYPD and they assured me there will be no problem for us to hand out information on the side walk in costume, it is our first amendment right. I am working on obtaining a letter from the NYPD stating just that so we don't have any problems.

It's not like the police or any "government officials" will be caught by surprise...As long as everybody who joins the march keeps their cool & all of the police know what's going on, it shouldn't turn into any kind of riot.

For the message we are delivering to be uniform, everyone will receive a talking sheet as to what to say about the mask and why we are here, etc. This way everyone gets the same message.

They also claim to have a limited number of "V" costumes available, but also provide weblinks to find costumes.

On a bit more compassionate & practical note...

Please dress appropriately under your "V" costume, the weather in NY has been in the mid to low 40s.

Yet, the fundamental Right to Petition for Redress of Grievances is the whole premise behind this march. This may be the event that forces the government to come out & answer the primary question about the USA: Is this a Government By & For the People or is it a Government that blows smoke in the face of the Founding Principles of Unalienable Rights that so many have fought & died for over the past 230+ years? (Personal Note: Go Get 'Em, ADVISOR!)
As usual, the Government is quite reluctant to answer...Right now, the Government is still struggling over the "jurisdiction" of which Court must actually provide the answer, even though such a fundamental question about the First Amendment should have started at the Supreme Court. After all, every public concern about Constitutional violations should automatically be deliberated by the highest Court of the Land.
The aftermath? IMO, what will be to follow, no matter how the Government responds, is going to be like a floodgate opening...A floodgate of petitions that will make the Government realize that it is Constitutionally required to be held accountable to The People for its actions...If not by peaceful alteration of th government, then by forceful abolishment of it.

A quote from the Declaration of Independence:
"That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness."
(Bold emphasis is mine)

[edit on 11-12-2006 by MidnightDStroyer]

posted on Dec, 12 2006 @ 03:24 AM

You have voted MidnightDStroyer for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have one more vote left for this month.

Again, great post. I wonder if they would organize nationwide walks instead of just in D.C.? It might get the message out a bit faster if they saw people all across the country doing the same thing in every state capitol. Would be interesting indeed.


posted on Dec, 14 2006 @ 05:49 AM

Originally posted by TheBorg
I wonder if they would organize nationwide walks instead of just in D.C.?

In my opinion, it's only logical. Any such activist organization only has so many people involved in it & what better place to start generating public interest than in the very heart of the corrupted government? I might expect, once corruption has been rooted out of the very root of the Federal Government, that various State Governments would follow.

But then again, I'm hoping to see the march get broadcast on nationwide news media...Why march all over the country if you can get the whole country to see a march in D.C.? After all, to get attention from today's media, you need some kind of flashy "gimmick."

[edit on 14-12-2006 by MidnightDStroyer]

posted on Dec, 15 2006 @ 01:54 AM

Originally posted by MidnightDStroyer
After all, to get attention from today's media, you need some kind of flashy "gimmick."

[edit on 14-12-2006 by MidnightDStroyer]

And what better gimmick than a couple hundred V's standing outside the Nation's capitol buildings protesting? I can think of nothing I'd love to see more than that.


posted on Apr, 26 2007 @ 01:39 AM
More updates...

The petitions & subsequent lawsiut actions that originally prompted the March on D.C. are continually updated here.

In a nutshell, the Government tried to hide behind the fallacy of retaining "soverign immunity" because Congress had not voted to allow the government to be sued over the matter. WTP replied that, when concerning Constitutional Torts, the government cannot claim such a position because nothing the government can do makes them immune to the Constitution to which they've sworn an Oath.

Quite a few people who are included in the petitioning have been getting harrassed by the IRS, even after the Second Circuit Appeals Court have twice ruled that the petitioners must remain free from any retaliation during court proceedings! WTP filed for injunction against the IRS for that! So, not only does the IRS break the laws that they operate under, they also have been illgally enforcing "laws" that that don't exist!

posted on Apr, 26 2007 @ 01:48 AM
Speaking of which, whatever happened with the guy that was refusing to pay his income taxes? Is there a follow up to that story, or did he just "disappear" as was suggested before it happened?


posted on Apr, 26 2007 @ 02:17 AM
Are you referring to Dick Simkanin, the employer who refused to perform withholding from his employee payroll? The latest news in that update is nearly 3 years old, but with WTP's more recent research into the tax laws & how the court "railroaded" him in the first place (as the link shows), I wouldn't be surprised that something is already being done to help him counter-sue the IRS & the court itself in return.

posted on Apr, 26 2007 @ 02:40 AM
No. I was referring to that professor that holed himself up in his home, and had some militia members joining him in his efforts. It was posted here on ATS, but I can't remember what thread it was in. I posted in it, but I believe I removed it from my thread faves.


posted on Apr, 26 2007 @ 03:09 AM
If you have trouble remembering & you have the time to spare, there is a roundabout alternate way to find your references...

Look yourself up in the Member Lists, display all of your previous posts, then using approximate dates & scrolling backwards in time, you should eventually find the links to your posts.

Yeah, it can get tedious but it's the only reliable way I know of to be sure you get the right link-history.

A somewhat easier way that you might try first would be to use the ATS Search & try to pick out keywords to get you in the general ballpark...Could be a lot of diverse threads based roughly on the same topic.

[edit on 26-4-2007 by MidnightDStroyer]

posted on Apr, 28 2007 @ 02:57 AM

Originally posted by TheBorg
No. I was referring to that professor that holed himself up in his home, and had some militia members joining him in his efforts. It was posted here on ATS, but I can't remember what thread it was in. I posted in it, but I believe I removed it from my thread faves.


Your talking about Ed & Elaine Brown. I expect the Feds to do a raid in 5 or 6 days. They were each convicted for 5 yrs but you can get the scoop here:

What people don't realize is that all Americans, Canadians, Australians, New Zealanders, and any country that is a member of the IMF, international Monetary Fund are all free men who unknowingly but willingly volunteered to give up their unalienable rights from God to hold the gov't office of PERSON, RESIDENT, & TAXPAYER (not tax_payer) in exchange for rights, duties, & priviledges that come with benefits like a pension, funeral costs, welfare, health care subsidy, child tax benefits, student loans, etc, etc. Pretty much everyone is now an officer on an immaginary chartered ship with the same name as your country undertaking a maritime voyage in which the under writers of the voyage(insurers/bankers) can claim insurance premium payments which we experience as income tax. This all takes place in an alternate realm on paper that uses Maritime Admiraly Law which dictates to everyone via martial law cause everyone is an officer at war! (war on drugs / terror / poverty / vietnam / korea / communism / etc.) Remember many famous British War Admirals, Generals, etc, were put into military service when they were as young as 9(nine) yrs of age. Watch the movie with Russel Crowe (Master & Commander), Watch the movie the New World with Colin Ferrel(splg?) when they bring the law of the sea on to the land and turn the FORT into a ship. The captain of the ship becomes president by authority of the king. We are under maritime Admiralty law, think about why corporations are so powerful. Corporations are chartered ships / fictions with the ability to hold personhood/own property and be sued. Person comes from personhood which goes back to greek persona which means mask. Why do you think the world is a stage? Everyone is acting (Acts of Legislation) this is what shakespear is all about. Why do you have citizenSHIP, why is there owner SHIP? When you are bankrupt you go into recieverSHIP. The constitution will protect you if you remain a man!, BUT not a person, officer, taxpayer recieving benefits and must be without a BIRTH certificate or Social security number / Social insurance number.
Only gov't employees & officers recieve pensions. Everything the IRS/CCRA is legal even though they mislead you through fraudulent conveyance of langauge.
Remember the Inner City of London England; a seperate principality like the Vatican, used to be Londonmidium a Roman colony that the AngloSaxons (Isaac's Sons) never did re-conquer. The Bank of England pretty much controls the finances of the world along with the Crown and all its franchises via the BAR (British Admiralty Registry) throughout the world.
Uniform Commercial code is the law of contracts under maritme admiralty law, the law of commerce, equity, which is really ROMAN LAW which is why you are reading this in the font known as NEW TIMES ROMAN (because we are in the new roman times) which can be traced back to the Code of Hammurabi or BABYLON as most realize.
The legal system still works on legal maxims, the most abused being IGNORANCE of the law is NO EXCUSE. BUT my favourite is NO ACT OF LAW MAY HARM A MAN! That is why you think you are a person instead of the fact that you have a person and act as it's agent. This will make a Judge get up and leave a court room and abandon ship!
Jump over board and swim to shore, get back on the land where the GOV'T has no power.
Learn your legal maxims, get a Blacks & Bouviers Law Dictionary. One for AngloSaxon common law and one for Napoleonic Code and understand what words really mean. NEVER TAKE ANYTHING FROM THE GOV'T because it comes with strings attached and hidden adhesion contracts. The powers that be use your own jealousy & greed against you to get you to give them permission to act in a socialist manner to rob from Peter to pay Paul.
You contracted in and you can contract out it just takes time. Your birth certificate pledges you future labour against your countries national debt.
NEVER REGISTER YOUR CHILDREN & remember a NOTARY of THE PUBLIC is more powerful than your Supreme Court. I could go on but just do a search for my previous posts or send a U2.

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in