GOD'S
MINISTRY
THROUGH HIS SON JESUS CHRIST OF
BY THE POWER OF THE HOLY SPIRIT
Revs. Mr. and Mrs. H. Dean Daniels
E-mail: gods-ministry@hdd-gods-ministry.com
Web-site: http://www.hdd-gods-ministry.com/
MARK OF THE BEAST - PART IV
(Formerly Called Mark of the Beast III)
"This document is 42 pages"
With these documents, letters, and information for sermons and teaching aids, we are continuing to reveal what is presently taking place upon the Citizens of America and will prove how the Beast, Mark of the Beast and the Antichrist can and will enter every country throughout the entire world.
Again the Intent is not meant to be JUDGMENTAL of anyone other than Lucifer (Satan, the Devil, Beelzebub, etc.). However, we are revealing some of the means and tactics that the devil uses such as lying, cheating, stealing, intimidation, fraud, confusion and threats just to name a few, that the devil uses to force control over you.
We are not stating that the Internal Revenue Service Inc. or any other entity is Lucifer, Satan or the Devil. However, we are stating that these specified entities, so stated in these letters, "documents" that they are possibly being used in a manner in concert with Lucifer, Satan, that old Devil (hereinafter referred to as the devil), to bring about the Mark of the Beast that is referred to in the Book of
Revelation 13:1-18. Further, we only use the King James Version of the Holy Bible, for it only had 195 actual changes and all of the other versions of Bibles had in excess of 5,000 changes. The original Greek, and original Hebrew translations were used for the King James Bible and was ORDAINED of God which was and is the inspired and infallible Word of God.
II Timothy 3:16 "All scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:"
Also, Isaiah 55:11 "So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper [in the thing] whereto I sent it."
WE MUST GIVE THIS AS A LETTER WITH THE TWO PERSONAL NAMES RESPECTIVELY CHANGED (BOTH ARE NOW DECEASED) TO AID IN THE PROTECTION OF THEIR RESPECTIVE FAMILIES AND WE ARE USING THE STATE OF TEXAS IN PLACE OF THE ORIGINAL STATE THAT IS GIVEN IN THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT.
DEDICATION
I personally dedicate this letter or document, to my Heavenly Father, (Almighty God) His only Begotten Son Jesus who is Christ and The Holy Ghost "Amen." Further, had it not, been for an honorable and patriotic Internal Revenue Service Inc. EMPLOYEE, who confided to me about the internal working of the IRS some thirty-one years ago, this document could not have been written. While she would not tell me anything, she did put me on the right track such that I have been able to maintain my Freeman, Sui Juris status, and in a perfectly legal manner. Also, I have not been a person required to file any income tax forms for the past thirty-one years. Perhaps, I should have written this, document, years ago. However, I gave my word to my informant friend that I would never do so while she was still living.
(These person/s are now deceased and may they rest in the arms of God)
I AM WRITING THIS IN STORY FORM AS IT WAS GIVEN ME,
IT IS ALL TRUE WITH THE PREVIOUSLY SPECIFIED EXCEPTIONS
The Date (was sent certified mail)
The District Director
Internal Revenue Service, Inc.
Address
Dear Sir:
I am again stipulating with this letter, as several previous letters over the past 31 years that I have not filed a federal income tax return since 1969, because I have found I am not a person required to do so under the IRS Code. I am, therefore, returning, unopened, several letters from your office, which do not apply to either me or to my wife.
As you are aware, one’s "name" is one’s property. For one’s "name" to enjoy Sui Juris status, that "name" must be free of explicit legal disability resulting from some contract, indenture or commercial agreement, which is "held-in-due-course" by a fellow citizen, corporation or be an agency of the government.
Since, (personal name written here) claims Sui Juris status in connection with his property or "name," he requests that your agency, if it disputes the above "status" in connection with this "name," produce a photocopy of all documents being held–in-due-course, (see U.C.C. § 3-305.52) that create the explicit legal disability to the claimed Sui Juris status or standing relating to the "name" (personal name here).
Your failure to respond to the above request within 6o days of your signed receipt of this letter will constitute your agreement and consent of the matters stated herein and legally establish, that the Internal Revenue Service, Inc. can offer no documents that are being held-in-due-course to dispute the claimed status of (personal name here), Sui Juris.
Respectfully,
(Signature)
(personal name here)
AS WE BEGIN, PLEASE READ THE ENTIRE DOCUMENT. PLEASE DO NOT READ PART OF THE DOCUMENT AND THEN DISCONTINUE, LEAVING THE REST OF THE DOCUMENT UN-READ. READ THE ENTIRE DOCUMENT, OTHERWISE, STOP RIGHT NOW AND DON’T READ THE DOCUMENT AT ALL! You must read it all, in order to completely understand!
While with my State Police friends, I was quietly being introduced to others working for various state and federal agencies in the areas of criminal intelligence work. As a private citizen, criminal investigations became a fascination for me to do the leg work then publish my findings in my now popular newsletters. One of those involved in criminal investigations indirectly with the Texas State Police was a woman whom I shall call "Alice." She worked for the Internal Revenue Service Inc.
Although she was about 10 years older then I, she was interested in my investigative abilities as indicated by what I was able to discover and publish about the "Kennedy" Assassination. As a Catholic, she was interested as, to why the first Catholic President had been killed so quickly into his Administration. By the time I met her, I had been publishing my newsletters for five years and had set in place a string of intelligence contacts all across America. "Alice" had been in the Woman’s Army Corps during W.W. II and I think that she was an officer with Army Intelligence at that time. She had completed law school but, as far as I know, she had never become a member of the Texas Bar.
During one of our several trips across Texas on a veteran’s project in which she was vitally interested,
I casually asked her about the IRS from a legal aspect. When I provided information, quid pro quo, I expected information in return. Understand I have never had any problems with the IRS. I had been filing returns for 15 years while working with another Co. She looked at me in a very strange way, thought for a moment and then asked me to PROMISE NEVER TO REVEAL what she was about to tell me. I recently learned that she has passed away, so I am released from my promise made about thirty-one years ago.
What began with her as a innocent question exploded into her telling me some of the inner workings of the IRS statutes and incredible inside data, policy and information that was apparently common understanding for those that work for the Internal Revenue Service Inc.
I remembered once remarking to her that she had a fantastic position working for the Government with all sorts of wonderful promotion opportunities and great retirement benefits. She looked at me amazed at my naivete and stated that she did not work for the Government at all, but for a private corporation, which collects money to pay the federal debt along with its interest through the FEDERAL RESERVE BANK AND THE INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND. She was an astute woman and correct on so many other things we had talked about over several weeks. I told her there is no way that the IRS was not part of the Federal Government. Well we drove off the turnpike for lunch.
An inserted note of my own at this point: IRS presently and since the date of 1994, have been publishing in the telephone books across the country that they are included as part of the Federal Government, even though they are NOT (IRS and the Governments are in concert again being deceitful and committing fraud against the Citizens of America).
She took me to a telephone booth and pulled out the phone book. She skipped through to the page where U.S. Governments had it’s phone listings and there were quite a few of them. She asked me to point out any listings for the Internal Revenue Service. There was no such listing. We found it in the white pages under the regular alphabetical listing for Internal Revenue. We then looked up the Federal Reserve Bank under the U.S. Government and that was not there either. Again we did find it listed by itself in the white pages. She told me that the banking system and the IRS collection agency for the federal debt and interest were both privately owned and operated under private statutes for private, NOT PUBLIC, gain. She told me that IRS operates under PUBLIC POLICY "STATUTES" not constitutional law, in the interest of the nation’s creditors. Got that Sir?
I was visibly shaken, I guess, for she was silent as we ordered our lunch. With a little laugh she stated that I must have led a sheltered life. I told her that I believed that 95% of all Americans assumed that both Federal Reserve and the IRS are Federal Government Agencies carrying out their duties under the law passed by Congress. She confided that my 95% was too high, but that perhaps 80% would be more correct. Then she stated that the other 20% never talk about what they know, but neither do they file any returns or ever pay an income tax. What I had learned, she told me, was one of the most secret of any information that I would ever learn for all involved, right up to the federal judges, are never allowed to reveal it. I was shaking my head, as if to suggest that it could not possibly be so.
She reached into her briefcase and pulled out one of her IRS envelopes ready to be mailed and asked me to examine it with the same care that had gone into the Dallas Conspiracy investigation. "What do you see?" She asked me. Well, it looked to me like an ordinary Government letter, with its Kraft paper. She asked me to identify it for her, who would be paying the postage on the letter? I read it thoughtfully, "Postage and Fees paid, Internal Revenue Service." So what? Well, she asked if the IRS was really an official part of the Government, why would they have to pay for their own postage? See, Sir all official Government mail is sent out with the privilege that they do not pay their own postage. If you have to pay for your postage, you are NOT part of the United States Government. Okay, Alice, the point is well taken. My mind was whirling. But, Alice, what is all of this talk about the filing of returns and paying an income tax being voluntary? From what I have heard in the news media, it seems to be a compulsory tax and people go to prison for failing to pay it. How does that happen?
Alice told me that in the American Republic there can be NO LAW that compels specific performance, including the payment of any tax, except an excise tax as on gasoline, alcoholic beverages and cigarettes, that must be uniform throughout the United States. The 16th Amendment, which lays and collects an income tax from certain persons, is still bound in its application by Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution. She pulled a little copy of the Constitution out of her briefcase and asked me to read through Article I, Section 8. Notice, she said, that several matters are discussed in context in section 8. First there is the collection of taxes, duties, impost and exercises for a number of purposes, all of which apply EXCLUSIVELY to the LEGISLATIVE GOVERNMENT OVER WASHINGTON, DC and its territories. Don’t you see, it is ONLY WASHINGTON DC that can declare war, coin and regulate money, establish post offices and etc? Second, notice that Washington DC’s Congress can constitute TRIBUNALS TO JUDGE matters pursuant to those subjects set forth in Section 8. Later including the income tax of the 16th Amendment. Third, Congress was to have exclusive power over a tiny little set of the Federal Government limited to an area of only ten-mile square. To finance all of the lawful activities of Washington, DC and the Congress setting as the Legislature of THE DISTRICT was permitted to collect these taxes, duties, impost and excises. Anything difficult about that, Sir? Would you believe that less then five Americans out of a hundred know this truth?
REMEMBER that WE ARE STUDYING ABOUT THE MARK OF THE BEAST, IT’S ARRIVAL AND THE MANNER OF ARRIVAL. NOT, WHETHER WE ARE TO PAY TAXES!
We are studying about deception, lies, cheating, stealing, fraud, intimidation, threatening, and other means of control, even by force. For the DEVIL is a liar and the FATHER OF THEM, John 8:44 "ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own; FOR HE IS A LIAR, AND THE FATHER OF IT."
"UNITED STATES"
This term has several meanings. It may be merely the name of a sovereign occupying the position analogous to that of other sovereigns in the family of nation. It may designate territory over which sovereignty of United States extends. It may be collective name of the states which are united by and under the Constitution. (Hoover & Allison Co. v. Evatt, U. S. Ohio, 65 S. Ct. 870, 880, 324 U.S. 652, 89 L.Ed. 1252) FROM BLACK’S LAW DICTIONARY, FOURTH EDITION
ON WITH OUR LESSON
Later; for the benefit of those persons living in THE DISTRICT and those "states" such as Puerto Rico and Guam, an income tax was added to the long list of other ways that Washington, DC could lawfully raise money. The DISTRICT, not the citizens of the United States or even the States themselves, are permitted to coin money, regulate commerce with foreign nations, borrow money, build post roads and maintain a Navy, and so forth. THE DISTRICT was not permitted to maintain an Army for longer that two years. When Alice taught me to read this Article I, Section 8 with eyes to see it’s EXCLUSIVE instructions pursuant to THE DISTRICT ONLY, suddenly the deeper understanding of the entire Constitution fell into place for me. I got it! I got it!
She asked me to repeat back to her in my own words what I had learned. According to my diary, here is what I told her: if there is a matter of federal taxes, then the same section of the Constitution that lays and collects taxes for the benefit of The DISTRICT would naturally have its own Article I, Section 8 Courts, Called TRIBUNALS to decide on the tax liabilities of those persons and individuals under its lawful jurisdiction. Since the average American does NOT live in WASHINGTON, DC, or Guam, Puerto Rico or the Virgin Islands and receives NONE OF THE BENEFITS extended to those living in those areas, they would NOT be persons or individuals who would be subject to the income tax or other impost and duties collected for the exclusive benefit of those in THE DISTRICT. You got it, Sir! Are there any serious drawbacks for living in or being attached to, THE DISTRICT in order to get the benefits? Of course. You will need a copy of BLACKS LAW DICTIONARY and she drove me across town and bought me a copy. My very first law book was this new copy of Blacks Fourth. We looked up the term United States which I have already reprinted for you to read again. She told me that those persons living in THE DISTRICT, because of their status, DID NOT HAVE AND COULD NOT CLAIM THOSE BILL OF RIGHTS reserved EXCLUSIVELY to the citizens of the States that are united by and under the Constitution. Blacks never suggest that those living in or attached to the DISTRICT have any rights at all and they do not. Within THE DISTRICT, she told me, the Congress could lay and collect taxes in any manner they wished, including going for the graduated form of the income tax first proposed by the SOCIALIST KARL MARX in his Communist Manifesto, Plank. #2. However, no DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA* income tax could be forced on the average American citizen, because under Constitutional Law, he could not be deprived of his property, in this case his money, without due process of Law. This is why, she told me that the Internal Revenue Service Inc. Code, Title 26 USC was never, and never could be, passed into Law by both the Senate and Congress acting on it or in behalf of, the Common Law Citizens of the Republic of the United States of America. Washington, DC got its working capital through the taxes on their people. The States received their money to operate through their own forms of State taxes on their own people. NOT ONE PENNY COULD COME FROM THE FEDERAL INCOME TAX PROCEEDS.
There is nothing to prevent the American Citizen from feeling so concerned about the affairs of THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA that they wish to volunteer to help them pay their bills. However, UNLESS THESE CITIZENS WOULD SWEAR, UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY, THAT THEY WERE OR WISH TO BE, subjects of THE DISTRICT, THE DISTRICT WOULD NOT BE PERMITTED TO TAKE THEIR MONEY. She told me that the Internal Revenue Service Incorporated 1040 Form is designed to permit, encourage and even threaten such Americans to VOLUNTEER to become DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA SUBJECTS by signing the Form, swearing that they were one of THE DISTRICTS subjects* Only then, she told me, can we take their money. Even if they send us an attached affidavit of the money they have earned and all of the deductions, which might be authorized. But fail to sign the Form swearing that they were one of THE DISTRICTS subjects and thus persons required or desiring to file that return and pay the computed tax, by statute we could not accept their money.
Sir, my boss is THE DISTRICT DIRECTOR here in Texas. As you think about his title, always put your mental emphasis on the word "DISTRICT." My boss Mr. ------, is the DIRECTOR of the Corporation known as the Internal Revenue Service Inc. which collects money on behalf of THE DISTRICTS business and pays its debts in the interest of THE DISTRICT’S creditors from its subjects. Who are called "persons," "individuals," "U.S. taxpayers," and "U.S. citizens," who are living here in Texas.
This is how it was before President Clinton re-wrote FEMA, EO’s AND PD DIRECTIVES, which adds to what we are revealing to you with a lot more to come!
Point Two: (remember, some of this "now" has been changed because of FEMA) The Constitution only permitted the Congress to lay and collect taxes. Now, because FEMA has been re-written, (if the President declares National Disaster through the National Security for any reason) Congress must perform AS THE PRESIDENT DICTATES. Therefore, Congress no longer would have the power that they had before FEMA was re-written by President Bill Clinton. In the past they could have voted them out if they did not toe the mark. The Constitution did not authorize the Congress to delegate that tax collection responsibility to a Private Corporation to collect money for a private banking corporation.
I MUST GIVE THIS TO YOU IN ITS ENTIRETY,
SO PLEASE STAY WITH ME HERE
*According to Alice, here is how the IRS tricks you into volunteering into the status of an U.S. individual and subject of THE DISTRICT. In the upper left hand section of the IRS 1040 Form. You will note that mixed in with the name and address, where you are to affix the IRS Label, (that was on the envelope) of the IRS forms that they sent you. There is another WORD "LABEL" present, that has nothing whatsoever to do with your name and address! That word has quite another meaning at Law. Here is the first definition in Blacks Law Dictionary. "A slip of ribbon, parchment or paper, attached to a codicil, a deed or other writing to hold the appended seal." Your signature is your "SEAL." The 1040 Form is the label that attaches as a codicil and is therefore, your intentional change or modification to the, will, deed contract or other writing/s. What you are doing when you sign this LABEL is to waive those Constitutional Rights extended to you, the Posterity of we. The people, by our Forefathers and petition for certain privileges extended to subjects, persons, and U.S. individuals of THE DISTRICT. When you sign this LABEL, identified as a private corporate Internal Revenue Service Inc. 1040 LABEL Form, you are attaching it as a CODICIL to your claim of the BILL OF RIGHTS, and under PENALTY OF PERJURY, are agreeing to waive your Common Law rights to life, liberty and property. You did, want it that way, didn’t you?
The Federal Reserve, who then deposits it into the Treasury of the International Monetary Fund, another corporation. When the IRS refers to "THE TREASURY," Alice said, "we are taught to never state that we collect taxes for the UNITED STATES Treasury. We do not and if you will look at the endorsement on the back of the check you used to pay the IRS last time, you will see that we endorsed it over to the "FRB," meaning the Federal Reserve Bank. It was not endorsed over to the Treasury of the United States, as it would be if it were collected on behalf of the AMERICAN GOVERNMENT." She was right! The last check I ever sent to the IRS was endorsed over to the "FRB."
Yes, Sir, we do want their money and quite frankly, all we can get. Once we accept their money with their signature under penalty of perjury and that they are Washington, DC individuals, then we have them. We even testify in the Federal Tribunals that they "knew that they were required to pay when they volunteered to pay!" Eighty percent or more of all Americans never catch on to what we have done to them. I remember she spoke with some contempt in her voice of these ignorant people, of which, until that summer, I was also included among their number. She went on with her lesson and I tried to mentally catch up.
Sir, the IRS has seen to it that there are no specific provisions made in our tax code so that these former Citizens of the Republic can easily revert back to their Common Law status. We do this by never specifically stating who really is required to file returns and pay the taxes. SECOND, we never define the word "INCOME" letting Americans assume that it is any money that "comes in." We use such language as, "Any person required shall…." And leave it to the casual reader of our Code or the non-reader of the Code to assume that he is a "person required," by such tactics as leaving our IRS forms in the U.S. Post Offices. Remember, the Post Office is a creation of THE DISTRICT under Article 1, Section, 8. See how that works? THE DISTRICT persons and individuals come to the Post Office to get their Forms. We cannot call TITLE 26, the IRS regulations, "LAW" because they are NOT "LAW." They have never been passed by both the Senate and the Congress as "LAW," as is, for instance, Title 18 USC, as applying to the Citizens of the Republic of the 50 states. The IRS Statutes were passed by the Congress as "RESOLUTIONS" to apply ONLY TO THOSE OF THE DISTRICT. When Congress passes Laws applying to those who are Citizens of the Republic, you will see that it is designated as H-1234. When what they pass is for THE DISTRICT, it will be HR-1234, meaning House Resolution 1234. Yes all changes to the IRS Code are designated with the HR PREFIX. Again, Sir, not one American in a hundred knows what I have told you!
Remember, Sir, Law cannot compel specific performance and Citizens of the Republic cannot be deprived of life, liberty or property (money) without due process of law. All lawful taxes can only be laid equally upon all Citizens and not based upon either their income or their property values. We call the IRS Regulations "Code," because a "Code" is the language always written in such a way that those who do not know the encryption and special meaning of the words, such as label, cannot figure it out in a hundred years.
She went on…
If THE DISTRICT’S individual/person later decides that he wants to back out of paying THE DISTRICT’S income taxes, a thought that rarely occurs to him, we can always point to an earlier return with his signature right on it and insist that he now honor his "signed contract," even if he never understood why we required his signature in the first place! Do you now understand why we must require you to volunteer your signature on all 1040 Forms, Sir? You are affixing your SEAL to a LABEL. We are going to state that you signed a contract even though no such contract exists.
Alice, how did we get into all this IRS deception? Well she confided in me her opinion: Americans, just like today, got so distracted by the marvels of the industrial age at the turn of the past century that they were unaware of the decade of the major financial changes when the Federal Reserve Private Banking people UNLAWFULLY TOOK CONTROL of their money, banking and credit and the communist graduated income tax funds funneled through them began to fund, as "foreign aid," LAW OF THE SEA, NEW WORLD ORDER SOCIALISM. Then there was the decade of our own socialism, from 1930-1940. It was then that the Americans whipped into submission by the great depression, (created deliberately through the Federal Reserve’s contraction of the M-1 money supply) demanded that their government provide them with some OLD AGE "INSURANCE." Thus when these COMMON LAW STATE Citizens filled out their applications for "SOCIALIST SECURITY, (the original name) they unwittingly checked the little box ( ) on the form which is designed ONLY for the UNITED STATES, (which is WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, IT’S ENVIRONS AND ENCLAVES ONLY) which as I have already pointed out, is a very different class of Citizen, than a United States of America Citizen. Read this paragraph again!
For an example: there are two States of Kentucky, one is a Corporate State and the other is a Commonwealth State and each State is totally independent of the other. Whereas, the Corporate State of Kentucky is obligated and bound by the Uniform Commercial Code’s of the DISTRICT, (Washington District of Columbia) and the Commonwealth State of Kentucky is totally Sovereign and independent of the other and independent of the DISTRICT. Further, for added information, there are two States of every State in the Union, one is a Corporate State (affiliated with THE DISTRICT) and the other is a Commonwealth State, being totally independent of the other. Again not very many people know this fact.
Sir, pay attention here! I admit my head was swimming and my responses were slowing down. She told me that there is another way that THE DISTRICT and thus the Internal Revenue Service Inc., tries to claim that they have jurisdiction over you. This is where "Socialist Security" comes in. If you look at a "Socialist Security" application form, you will see that there is no box (x) to be checked on the form for Citizens of the Republic of the United States of America. There is a place to check if you are an ALIEN and even a designation as ‘OTHER." What you do not understand, Sir is that all natural born white Americans are LAWFULLY INELIGIBLE for "Socialist Security," unless they volunteer to waive all of their Republican Common Law Rights for the privilege of being a person/individual of WASHINGTON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA! Then someday they might be able to collect the "Socialist Security" benefits. Sir, did you realize what you were doing when you signed up? I had to admit that no such thought ever crossed my mind. I only wanted a job and my employer made me provide him with a "Socialist Security" number as a condition of employment. Alice asked that if I knew that when I permitted a "Socialist Security" number to be attached to my children’s names that I might be waiving, on their behalf, all of their God-given Constitutional Rights. No, I did not. I was never informed of any such thing by the "Socialist Security" people. No understanding by either party of the contract, automatically voids that contract from its inception, even if the contract met every other lawful element, which "Socialist Security" DOES NOT. This is also true pertaining to the best of WRITTEN CONTRACT/S.
Alice gave me a clue, but at the time I missed it: If you were not told all of the details about This DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA adhesion contract or if you did not understand that "Socialist Security" is a tontine "insurance" contract that promises to pay you nothing and forces you to pay whatever the Party of the First Part decides, then there was fraud involved. Where fraud is involved, there is no statute of limitations to protect those who committed fraud against you. Fraud, she told me, is a contract void from it’s inception. There is a little box (x) labeled as "other." There, if you knew what you were doing at the time, you would have checked that box. You should have written "Citizen of the Commonwealth of Texas." If you had done that, they could not have issued you a "Socialist Security" number.
Alice never told me, but when I signed up for "Socialist Security" at age 16, I was still an "infant" and was not of lawful age to sign any contract. Therefore, the so-called "adhesion contract" of the "Socialist Security" system which bears my signature is voidable. I prepared a letter to both the Internal Revenue Service DIRECTOR and another to the "Socialist" Security Administration asking for them to give me a legal determination on my understanding of a number of questions from the above information. Alice approved of the language of the letters. I informed them, that if I did not have an answer to these questions from someone with the legal authority to answer them, that I would assume my own legal determination to be correct and that I would not be filing returns or be paying income tax to the Internal Revenue Service Inc. I had sent a letter by certified mail, but to this day, 31 years later, THE DISTRICT has failed to answer me.
Let the Record show, as demonstrated by this and previous letters over the past thirty one years, that I am NOT A "TAX Resister." Tax Resisters are those who are legally required to file Returns and pay the tax and they willfully fail to do so. I am not a person, employee or an individual in the coded language of the IRS Code. Furthermore, let the record show that I am not a "Tax Protestor" who goes about in the streets and highways "protesting" the legality of Title 26. I do not care if the 16th Amendment was properly ratified or not. All of it is very interesting, but it does not effect me. Every major federal ruling in this case, as set forth to me, is exactly what was taught me by Alice, more then thirty-one years ago.
I have no complaint or quarrel with those Americans, regardless of their status, who wish to contribute money to pay the debts with interest of THE DISTRICT. I have a strict personal rule not to get involved with other persons or individuals pursuant to their tax problems with the Internal Revenue Service Incorporated. When Americans complain to me about some IRS problem. I inform them that I do not practice Law and I suggest that they find a good Lawyer or spend a year of study. As Alice taught me, if they refuse to study and know their status and make every effort to strictly maintain it, then they should probably go ahead and pay whatever tax that their accountant says that they owe.
Again for the record, a precise language of a Law that was passed by Congress 18 USCA 4001(a), which states: "no citizen shall be imprisoned or otherwise detained by the United States except pursuant to an act of congress."
Further, I have made the legal determination that the United States military flag with the gold fringe around it properly distinguishes its jurisdiction representing, British Admiralty, (the Law of the Sea and not the Law of the Land) from the Common Law jurisdiction, which is the American Flag with no such gold fringe. Do you agree or disagree with that assessment MR. DIRECTOR?
It is my theory of the case that it is only the third group in Black’s who are under the collective name of the United States, which are united by and under the Constitution. Would you agree or disagree with that assessment MR. DIRECTOR?
MR. DIRECTOR, what was the date, if ever that 26 USC was passed into Law by the Congress?
Does the Internal Revenue Service Inc. collect tax money for the benefit of the United States Treasury or the Treasury of the International Monetary Fund? Is the final undisclosed Principle for which your Service collects the U. S. DISTRICT taxes, the Agency For International Development? Is the Secretary of the Treasury an employee of the United States or does he work for and actually get paid by, the International Monetary Fund of the United Nations?
President Clinton announced in 1994 that the United States, both corporate Washington, DC and the incorporated fifty states, are legally bankrupt. Therefore, his reason for pledging (including signing over) to the United Nations, such as, Grand Canyon National park, Historic Military Battlefields, all water and waterways including the Great Lakes (as an example), including your personal body and all of your personal possessions against the (so called) national debt. By the way, it is recorded in the record books.
Alice told me that since 1938, the United States DISTRICT COURT (Article I Tribunal) Judges are instructed to take "silent judicial notice" that America is a bankrupt nation. As such, it is not operating under Constitutional Law but under certain "public bankruptcy policies," the very existence of which is not to be made general public knowledge. [5 USCA 903, etc.] I have learned since that these U.S. DISTRICT, Court Judges, who act on the behalf of THE DISTRICT, are immune from civil torts; that is wrongs or breaches of duty imposed by law, because under bankruptcy they are members of an "Independent Judiciary," as distinguished from a true Article I, Section 8 Judge. They are also paid by the IMF-controlled Treasury Department. They no longer take the Civil Service Commission Loyalty Oath. Isn’t that so MR. DIRECTOR?
I want the record to show MR. DIRECTOR, that the U. S. Marshals no longer take the "oath" prescribed under 5 USCA 3331 and are NOT "officers of the United States." [Hedrick v U. S.] The fact that these U. S. Marshals, according to the U. S. Government Manual, under Department of Justice, are MEMBERS of the INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL POLICE ORGANIZATION more commonly called or referred to as INTERPOL, headquartered in France. They are international organization of the United Nations (22 USCA 263 a), When they make military "hits" within the United States, as a number of unusual recent cases including WACO, they are operating under a foreign constitution and do not take directives from any nation or state. [See the Constitution and General Regulations (INTERPOL), Article 30, Clause 1.] They, have been improperly using certain bankruptcy and emergency powers, such as the International Economic Emergencies Act. (IEEA has been included with, part of and interwoven with FEMA), (1976 and further has been updated by President Clinton November 14th 1997), Title 50,USCA 1701-1706, against a number of political dissenters, especially those of us who understand or emphasize the tactical objectives of the New World Order, who may hold an unapproved theology, or who object to confiscatory unlawful taxes and who support private enterprise economics. Have I done my homework, MR. DIRECTOR?
Another personal note here pertaining to this whole document: another reason for it being written is, many people are paying and giving what is called Biblical TITHES (of their First Fruits), with the understanding they are giving their "Tithes" to the church and/or the Lord (God of Heaven) with which they are correct in doing so. However, most Churches have filed with the IRS Inc. by signing (attaching their SEAL) to the LABEL (which is a CODICIL) stating that the Church was in and a SUBJECT of Washington, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA (DC). That act alone, is FRAUD BY DECEPTION. Further, it gave the Internal Revenue Service Incorporated, New World Order, United Nations, International Monetary Fund, Federal Marshals and Interpol and etc., final authority over your Church. IRS and those that are in concert with them, are permitted to do with that Church as they please, anytime they please, without any further consent from you or your Church, your Church Organization or affiliation. The Church/s (upon that deception etc. of IRS Inc.) are being deceived by IRS Inc. by inducing the Churches to go along with the FRAUD AND DECEPTION. Further, by placing their SEAL, claimed all of those in concert with the IRS Inc., including the Corporate State, as their god, final authority to meet their needs (further deception of IRS Inc. and Socialist Security), instead of Almighty God. Further at the time of filing taxes, the Church and most of the people of that Church file tax returns on the amount of money or "tithes" they give the Church or IRS Inc. or others requiring a receipt, so they could file and claim their deduction/s. May I further ask you, under that condition, was that money or amount actually a "tithe" to God or a loan or a TRIBUTE to the IRS Inc., when a tax return was filed using the amount of your "tithes" for the year to get a deduction relating to that amount on your taxes? Almighty God is not mocked by anyone. Galatians 6:7-8 Be not deceived; God is NOT MOCKED: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap (verse 8) For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting. Matthew 22:17-21 Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give TRIBUTE unto Cae’sar, or not? (Verse 18) But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, "Why tempt ye me, ye hypocrites? (Verse 19) Shew me the TRIBUTE MONEY." And they brought unto Him a penny. (Verse 20) And He said unto them, "Whose is this image and superscription?" (Verse 21) They said unto Him, Cae’sar’s. Then saith He unto them, "Render therefore unto Cae’sar the things which are Cae’sar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s." ALSO, Revelation 21:8 But the fearful, and the unbelieving, and the abominable, and murders, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, AND ALL LIARS, shall have their part in the LAKE WHICH BURNETH WITH FIRE AND BRIMSTONE: which is the second death. Next I must give you the definition of the word "lie," as in telling a "lie" or "LIAR," which is a person or a group of people that tells "lies." Meaning, an utterance or proclamation by any means, of a falsehood and/or an untruth which is therefore a deception either with or without intent. So I ask the question: is there no fear of God? Doesn’t anyone fear God? Is there MERCY FOR YOU? Remember, what you or I personally believe, does not change God, but what we personally believe, can and will allow God to change us. I further ask you PASTORS OF THE CHURCH, ANOTHER QUESTION. ARE YOU REQUESTING, SUGGESTING OR ENCOURAGING YOUR PARISHIONERS TO COMMIT FRAUD, TELL LIES AND FURTHER TO GO ALONG WITH A FRAUD APPROVING OF IT, when "tithes, offerings and gifts to the Church were already TAX EXEMPT," BEFORE YOU SIGNED OR PLACED YOUR SEAL ON IRS INC. OR FEDERAL RESERVE BANK DOCUMENTS and before you even became a church. Another question for you PASTORS; IN WHOM DO YOU PLACE YOUR TRUST, ALMIGHTY GOD OR MAN? I request that when the State, Federal and etc. comes to take your church that you NOT BLAME GOD FOR IT, because you signed it away. You gave them the Authority to take it away from you. God wanted the church to be a LENDER AND NOT A BORROWER. Proverbs 22:7 "The rich ruleth over the poor, and the borrower is servant to the lender," Psalm 112:5 "A good man sheweth favor, and lendeth: he will guide his affairs with discretion." Again I suggest, that you not play with the things of the DEVIL. DO NOT DO IT, REPENT, FOR ALMIGHTY GOD WILL NOT APPROVE OF PLAYING WITH THE DEVIL, nor the things of the devil, FOR THEY ARE AN ABOMINATION UNTO GOD.
Church did you sell your birthright for a bowl of pottage like Esau? Genesis 25:30-34 "And Esau said to Jacob, Feed me, I pray thee, with that same red pottage; for I am faint: therefore was his name called Edom. (Verse 31) And Jacob said, Sell me this day thy birthright. (Verse 32) And Esau said, Behold I am at the point to die: and what profit shall this birthright do to me? (Verse 33) And Jacob said, Swear unto me this day; and he swear unto him: and sold his birthright to Jacob. (Verse 34) Then Jacob gave Esau bread and pottage of lentiles; and he did eat and drink, and rose up and went his way; thus Esau despised his birthright." Also, I am adding to this statement, 1st John 2:15 "Love NOT THE WORLD, NEITHER the things that are in the WORLD. If any man love the WORLD, the LOVE OF THE FATHER IS NOT IN HIM." Church, do you LOVE THE WORLD MORE then you love God?
God does not lie, nor does He encourage, teach, instruct lying or approve of lying. God DOES NOT cheat, steal, or commit FRAUD, nor does He instruct you to do so. The devil is the deceiver, not God! Hebrews 6:18 That by two immutable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie, …Numbers 23:19 God is not man, that He should lie; … God is TRUTH and His word TRUTH. John 14:6 "Jesus saith unto them I am the WAY, the TRUTH, and the LIFE no man cometh to the Father but by Me." Also, John 6:63 "It is the Spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: THE WORDS THAT I SPEAK UNTO YOU. THEY ARE SPIRIT, AND THEY ARE LIFE." So we find that Jesus of Nazareth, the SON OF THE LIVING GOD, DOES NOT LIE, CHEAT, STEAL OR TEACH DECEIT OR FRAUD EITHER. Further we find in the Gospel of John 16:13 "Howbeit when he, the SPIRIT OF TRUTH is come, HE WILL GUIDE YOU INTO ALL TRUTH: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he shall shew you things to come. So it is determined that the SPIRIT of TRUTH will guide you and not the SPIRIT OF LIES.
Further, Let it be known, IRS and those that are in concert with them, are not concerned what church you attend or are a member of or who you shake hands with, or with whom you play golf. So for the record, when Almighty God is involved in a thing, it will be blessed and grow and be alive, "UNLESS," God is pouring out His wrath upon it. Then, if that be the case, I personally would rather not be involved or included in the destruction. "FOR I DO, FEAR GOD." For He gave me the breath of Life, and He certainly, has the power to take it, at His will.
ON WITH MORE OF THE LESSON
MR. DIRECTOR, in this letter, I do not base my legal determinations on the old argument of direct taxes based upon apportionment as being the only lawful way that Congress can tax the citizens of the states. As far as I can determine, our Congress has only laid and collected a direct tax four times in our history. Each time, it was done by way of equal apportionment upon all male citizens. Congress could pass a direct tax law stating that every citizen pay, say, $500.00, as an equal apportionment throughout the land. Rich and poor, working and retired, every citizen would pay the same tax and it would probably be the fairest federal tax to all.
However, for Congress to lay such a tax, they could not collect it directly, but would have to send the bill to the Governor of the State amounting to $500.00 for each citizen based upon the recent census and he would have to collect the tax on behalf of the government as a lump sum from the people. Why do you suppose that this was never done? Because for the State Governor to collect such a tax, he could only make it payable in either silver or gold coin as stated in the Constitution. Since no silver or gold coin now exist in circulation, he would fail in collecting such a lawful direct tax on behalf of the government. Even if the Governor wanted to do so, he could not make Federal Reserve Notes, or instruments expressed in said notes, payable for this tax, for to do so would specially violate his OATH OF OFFICE.
THE DISTRICT has the same financial and currency restrictions. TRIBUTE FOR FRIENDSHIP AND PROTECTION still must be paid in silver and gold coin according to LAW. How do they get around this Constitutional LAW and accept and use checks and paper money? THE ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION LIES IN WHAT IS KNOWN AS, THE CLEARFIELD DOCTRINE wherein the Supreme Court ruled: "Governments descend to the level of a mere private corporation and take on the characteristics of a mere private citizen… where private corporate commercial paper
[Federal Reserve Notes ] and securities [checks ]are concerned. … For purpose of a suit, such corporations and individuals are regarded as entities entirely separate from government."
Clearfield Trust Co. v. United States 318 U.S. 363-371
Stated another way, the Internal Revenue Service Inc. had to be created as a private corporation and transfer the collected funds into another private corporation, the Federal Reserve, in order to deal in commercial paper. Now you know perhaps for the first time, why the Internal Revenue Service Inc. is a PRIVATE corporation not listed as UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT or an agency for the United States Government. The IRS Inc. has to be under the Supreme Court ruling known as the CLEARFIELD DOCTRINE.
In another Supreme Court case, United States v. Burr, 309 U.S.242, the Court stated, in part: "When governments enter the world of commerce, they are subject to the same burdens as any private firm or corporation."
MR. DIRECTOR, I know that you and your legal staff understand THE CLEARFIELD DOCTRINE very well, but a lay jury or some other reader of this letter, may not, so I ask that you let me take the time to explain it here for the Record. The CLEARFIELD DOCTRINE CASE was decided in 1942 as a "public policy" decision, following after the apparently secret change in our LEGAL system in 1928 by the Erie Railroad v. Tompkins case wherein it appears that earlier decisions of the U. S. Supreme Court based upon public LAW are not honored in Courts of Legislative nature, which were created to administer the BANKRUPTCY OF THE NATION in behalf of the corporate government’s creditors.
Alice told me that neither the IRS Inc., federal prosecutors, or THE DISTRICT COURTS ARE EVER TO ADMIT THIS FACT, or mention the SECRET bankruptcy of THE DISTRICT in 1933 and apparently the Republic in 1938. Alice told me to never mention where I obtained this SECRET INFORMATION.
THE CLEARFIELD DOCTRINE WAS RECORDED IN THE AMERICAN LAW REPORT OF 1938.
THE DOCTRINE EXPLAINS: ERIE RAILROAD COMPANY V. HARRY J. TOMPKINS.
United States Supreme Court- April 25, 1938
(-U. S.- ,82 L. ed. (Adv. 787), 58 S. Ct.-.)
Courts. § 377 – duty of Federal Courts to follow State decisions on matters of general law.
1. The Phrase "laws of the several states" in the provision of § 34 of the Federal Judiciary Act of September 24, 1789, chap. 20, 28 U.S.C.A. § 725, that the laws of the several states, except where the Constitution, treaties, or statutes of the United States otherwise require or provide, shall be regarded as rules of decision in trials at COMMON LAW, IN THE COURTS OF THE United States, in cases where they apply, cannot constitutionally be construed as excluding in matters of general jurisprudence the unwritten law of the state as declared by its highest court. Swift v. Tyson, 16 Pet. 1 10 L. ed. 865, OVERRULED.
Common Law, § 2- of nation.
2. There is no Federal common law, and Congress has no power to declare substantive rules of common law applicable in a state, whether they be local or general in their nature, be they commercial law or a part of the law of torts. [See A. Jur. Title "common Law," § 5: R.C.L. title "Common Law." § 4.] Appeal, § 976- remand for further consideration- propriety………Etc. (this can be found in any university library) page 1487 & 1500.
LET IT BE KNOWN, I have a deep sincere
belief, concern and conviction of Almighty God Your Honor, that my use of
"Without prejudice" UCC I-207 above my signature indicates, that I
have exercised the remedy provided for me in the Uniform Commercial Code at
Article I, section 207, whereby I might reserve my Common Law Right not to be
bound by, nor compelled to perform under any contract, commercial agreement, or
bankruptcy that I have not entered into knowingly, voluntarily, and
intentionally. That reservation serves Notice upon all of the administrative
agencies of government, Federal, State & Local, that I do not, and will
not, accept the liability associated with the "compelled benefit" of
any unrevealed contract, commercial agreement, or bankruptcy."
From Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, the dictionary used exclusively by the United States Supreme Court:
Sui Juris (Lat.) of his own right: possessing all of the rights to which a freeman is entitled; not being under the power of another, as a slave, a minor, and the like. To make a valid contract, a person must, in general, be Sui juris. Every one of full age is presumed to be Sui juris. Story, Ag. 10. See Harrison v. Leveen, 196 p.2d 458
Citizens of the Commonwealth States that were still Common Law Citizens, and all other Citizens that qualify accordingly, did and at this time, (the writing of this document) still do, have COMMON LAW rights, UNTIL, a national disaster is proclaimed by the President or National Security Council. That was another reason "FEMA" was re-written by President Clinton. President Clinton signed Presidential Executive Orders and they were held in the Federal Registry in the hands of Congress for thirty days, therefore becoming, (under the heading and included with FEMA) the Law of the Land along with others May 14, 1998. All of those Presidential Executive Orders that were signed (upon a national disaster being declared) totally eliminate Congress and the need for Congress. Mr. Clinton has already announced, Congress will no longer exist at that time. Therefore removing ALL INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS from EVERYONE, including all COMMON LAW RIGHTS from every Citizen, regardless of who they are or their Citizenship. At that time, Marshall Law will be declared and everyone will be under the Sole authority of the President (The National Security Council), FEMA.
WE MUST GO ON
The use of private commercial paper [debt currency of Federal Reserve Notes] removes the sovereignty status of governments of we, the people, and reduces them to an "entity," rather then a government in the area of finance and commerce. As with any corporation or person, this "entity" cannot compel performance upon its corporate statutes or corporation rules unless it, like any other corporation or person, is the holder-in-due-course of some contract or commercial agreement between it and the one upon whom demands for performance are made and is willing to produce said document and place the same into evidence before trying to enforce its demands, called STATUTES. This is the purpose of the last paragraph of my letter on page one.
In striking contrast to the Constitution direct tax, the taxes the IRS collects are not a direct tax and therefore cannot be a tax designed for the State Citizens. The very fact that it is graduated means that it has to be an indirect excise tax based on the purchase or use of something, such as alcohol, tobacco, firearms, gasoline, tires, telephone bills and a host of other things usually involved in one way or another in interstate commerce. This excise tax money goes right to the Treasury of the United States. It does not go through the corporate hands of the Internal Revenue Service. These excise taxes are what the government really uses to pay all of its bills and expenses. There is more then enough of these excise taxes, along with import duties, etc., for the government to pay all of its lawful expenses.
Furthermore, if you decide not to pay these excise taxes, all you have to do is stop buying gasoline, alcohol, tobacco, etc. and disconnect your telephone. To this extent, all excise taxes are voluntary. No one will write you a letter after a few years demanding that you pay one of these excise taxes or threaten you with the willful failure to pay them. Why not? Because you do not owe an excise tax on cigarettes if you do not smoke. Again, in this strict sense, all federal excise taxes, including the tax on incomes, are strictly voluntary. However, when you pay these excise taxes or pay a direct tax called for by the Governor, what does THE DISTRICT know about you on a personal basis? They know nothing at all, not even your name. However, under the Internal Revenue Service, Inc. 1040 LABEL FORM, THE DISTRICT and anyone whom they wish to share that information with, knows everything they might want to know about you and your personal life. Joseph Stalin and Adolph Hitler never had it so good! They know how much money you make, how much in savings that you have and where you bank it; how many children you have and their ages, how many real estate properties that you own; they know what Church that you go to, what political and charitable organizations you support financially and thus knowing your social-political background. The IRS 1040 LABEL FORM is a government totalitarian Socialist Scheme to find out all it can about every person, individual and Citizen of the United States while reducing their standard of living by 30% or more.
Beardsley Ruml, was the Federal Reserve Chairman in 1946, wrote an article entitled "Taxes For Revenue Purposes are Obsolete," (American Affairs, January, 1946, Before the American Bar Association). According to Mr. Ruml the reason why the income tax exists is not for revenue, but for control. They want to know all they can about you and your life style. MR. DIRECTOR, personally I do not care whether or not the majority of Americans want to pay their annual tribute for friendship and protection. I am not concerned if they desire anyone who has access to the 1040 LABEL Form to know all about their personal and private affairs. That’s fine with me. However, I will not personally participate and, quite frankly, never have had an abiding need for either THE DISTRICT’S protection or their fickle friendship.
MR. DIRECTOR, as you know from the IRS Publication #519 U.S. Tax Guide For Aliens, they state that, for tax purposes, everyone living in America has status in one of three categories. For tax purposes only, anyone who is not a U.S. Citizen is some type of "alien." Don’t you see, while I was born in Iowa, served in the military during the time of war, have lived most of my life in America, and make my home in North Carolina, I am still not a U.S. Citizen! The IRS knows exactly what I am teaching here. For instance, 26 USC 7701 (a)(1) and 26 USC 3121 (e)(1) defines the United States as THE DISTRICT. However, when they want to include the 50 states, they are quite able to do so, and it is done in 26 USC 4612 (a) when it comes to excise taxes on petroleum. Yet to keep you confused, they toss out the term United States and let you lean to your own understandings. I call this sedition by syntax where the language structure and meanings of words are changed for deceptive and treasonous purposes. It makes sense if you think about it.
IRS Publication #519 makes it very clear that anyone who is not born or living in THE DISTRICT is an "alien" to THE DISTRICT. U.S. Citizens, are only those persons whose citizenship originated in or was transferred to, THE DISTRICT. Until people born in one of the fifty states signed a 1040 LABEL FORM and VOLUNTARILY joined the growing ranks of U.S. Citizens, they were "aliens "to THE DISTRICT.
Most Americans who love the Red, White and Blue, cannot bear to think of themselves as "aliens" to anything that is American, including the Capitol with its cherry trees, Washington Monument and Vietnam Memorial. But for tax purposes only, they had better learn to think of their "alien" status in that way. When I began to look at THE DISTRICT as a different country altogether from the American Republic of the fifty states, almost as different as Canada or Cuba, I was pleased that those folks in THE DISTRICT classified me as an "alien." Then, there is the resident alien. He is just an ordinary foreigner, a person with a "green card" allowed to live and work here, but who is not an American. Isn’t that simple? For the privilege of working and living in America, of course they are required to file IRS forms and pay income taxes.
MR. DIRECTOR, why doesn’t the IRS just come right out and tell us, as a news release, that
Non-Resident Aliens are not taxable on their Constitutional Rights of labor and wages, local non-corporate business profits, salaries, commissions and tips? I know, I know! The Internal Revenue Service, Inc. has told us that plainly in their publication #515 titled Withholding of Tax on Non-Resident Aliens and Foreign Corporations. The problem is that most Americans have never heard of that publication! As you know, MR. DIRECTOR, it states that Non-Resident Aliens are subject to tax on all income except wages. Wages, salaries, commissions and tips, earned or received from outside of THE DISTRICT, are excluded specifically from being taxable for Non-Resident Aliens. No one, except U.S. individuals of THE DISTRICT or foreigners with their "green card" or others who may have lived in, or been attached to "by contract to" THE DISTRICT (*see below about the 1040 label form), for at least 31 days during a taxable year, are ever required to file 1040 LABEL FORMS or pay a calculated tribute. Why? Simply because a Common Law citizen cannot be taxed for exercising a Right. Only those without Rights can be taxed on wages, salaries, and commissions and tips. Isn’t that so MR. DIRECTOR?
WE MUST TELL IT ALL, OTHERWISE, YOU WILL NOT UNDERSTAND ABOUT HOW THE MARK OF THE BEAST IS SETTING UP THE STAGE AND BEGINNING TO ENTER THE ENTIRE WORLD BY DECEPTION.
The Beast MUST and WILL be involved with a ROMAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT!
I am explaining how, with absolute proof, it is and will take place in these last days.
*THE 1040 LABEL FORM is what is known at Law as an adhesion contract. It is a contract between a Superior Party and an Inferior Party and you can just imagine who’s who in this contract! This is not a normal contract for it does not have any of the essential elements, except you, the Party of the Second Part. Have you ever seen any signature of a representative of THE DISTRICT along side of yours on an IRS Form? Is there any offer or acceptance indicated by this contract? Is there any suggestion of informed consent of both Parties anywhere on this contract? Do both Parties have the right to contract; that is, they are not minors [Law calls them infants], under the age of 21? All lawful contracts have to include the element of time and each Party should be exchanging something of about equal value and there should be a "consideration" acceptable to both Parties. What you have agreed to do when you signed the 1040 LABEL FORM was to abandon your constitutional rights and offer your body as property, yes, quite literally, to THE DISTRICT. They will then take care of your body, their property, from the cradle to the grave and in return for doing this for you, they expect you to pay TRIBUTE out of your income. If you fail in any way, they have the right to put your body in prison until you understand who really owns your body! YOU KNOW, WHAT I AM STATING HERE, MR. DIRECTOR; but most of your lay juries, who are into these adhesion contracts themselves, do not. As a matter of my intent, this letter must be a part of any set of exhibits given to them.
Forty-three years ago when I joined the U.S. Navy, a proper function of THE DISTRICT under Article I, Section 8, I signed an adhesion contract. This was an informed consent and the time was four years. I was told that for the next four years, the Navy owned my body. I thought that statement was a figure of speech designed to bring me around mentally to military discipline. One day, I was sent to the Navy dentist and he determined that I should have four perfectly normal wisdom teeth extracted, all of them at one time. The dentist admitted that they were perfectly normal. I objected and refused. I was put on report for failing to obey orders and threatened with the Captain’s Mast with possible brig time. They reminded me that they literally owned my body, including its normal wisdom teeth and they were going to remove them whether or not I wished to have that operation. So it is with adhesion contracts. They are contracts between a superior Party and an inferior Party. These CONTRACTS ARE NOT under the COMMON LAW of the Constitution, but are under ROMAN CIVIL LAW OF THE DISTRICT. UNDER ROMAN CIVIL LAW, which our Forefathers did their best to repeal with the CONSTITUTION, a person could go to prison for violation of a contract, such as the adhesion contract between the private Internal Revenue Service, Inc. and the "U.S. individual" and "persons" now called a "United States Taxpayer," persons and ultimately "taxpayers." It applies only to the United States Citizens, not to the bonafide citizens of the fifty states. Now, as a further indication of what I am teaching here, I enter as evidence the Title Page and page 2 of the United States Codes. At the present time there 50 such Codes, cited as 42 USC 1983 or 18 USC 241, for example. Of these fifty Codes, 20 of then have an * before the name. This means that they are positive laws, which apply to the two United States, the Republic of Fifty States and to the Legislative Democracy of THE DISTRICT and its dozen or so states out in the oceans which THE DISTRICT captured in war or purchased. The other 30 USC Codes, which you see listed here, do NOT HAVE the little * identifying them as POSITIVE LAW! They are, therefore, private statutes* which apply only to THE DISTRICT’S United States Citizens and not to those of us who are citizens of the Republic. Among these 30 you will find FDA and OSHA, for example. Also among these 30, you will find Title 26 of the Internal Revenue Service, Inc. Code. These are statutory, administrative and revenue generating Codes, which do NOT APPLY TO FREEMEN in Sui Juris. The IRS Code became PRIVATE LAW for THE DISTRICT under both House and Senate RESOLUTION,* NOT as a House and Senate Bill. Every Congressman and Senator knows exactly what I am revealing here to some reader of this letter for the very first time and about this subject, the Congress will say NOT ONE WORD! Have I got that right, so far, MR. DIRECTOR?
*The definition of the word, "resolution;" a formal expression of the opinion or will of an official body or a public assembly, adopted by vote; as a legislative resolution. Scuddar v. Smith, 331 Pa. 165, 200 A. 601, 604.
Legislative Practice: The term is usually employed to denote the adoption of a motion, the subject matter of which would not properly constitute a statute; such as a mere expression of an opinion; an alteration of the rules; a vote of thanks or of censure and etc. McDowell v. People, 63 N.E. 379, 204 Ill. 499; Conly v. Texas Division of United Daughters of the Confederacy, Tex. Clv.App., 164 S.W.24,25.
The chief distinction between a "Resolution" and a "Law" is that the former is used whenever the legislative body passing it wishes merely to express an opinion as to some given matter or thing and is only to have a temporary effect on such particular thing, while by a "LAW" it is intended to permanently direct and control matters applying to persons or things in general. Exparte Lingue, 104 N.J. Eq.31, 144 A. 546, 559.
Joint resolution: A resolution adopted by both houses of congress or a legislature. When such a resolution has been approved by the president or passed with his approval, it has the effect of a LAW. 6 Op.Atty. Gen. 680.
The distinction between a joint resolution and a concurrent resolution of congress, is that the former requires the approval of president while the latter does not. Rep. Sen. Jud. Com. Jan. 1897.
Resolutions are not law but may have the effect of Law, (From Black’s 4th Law Dictionary). This is how you know that the IRS Code is not POSITIVE LAW. Also, when checking this out for yourself, if you use West Publishing, USCA Codes, they do not put the * before those laws that are positive. However the government published United States Codes DO HAVE an * on the FIRST PAGE OF EACH VOLUME.
MR. DIRECTOR, I know that you are aware of the following, but I have decided to include it for the benefit of any future jury or other readers of this letter. Some time ago, a nice-looking man approached me and stated that he was an FBI agent. I saw nothing, which gave him any authority to talk to me. He had no visible gun, no vehicle with flashing lights and no visible badge. I told him that before I would talk to him, I had to see his badge and FBI identification or so far as I was concerned, he was an imposter. He produced no badge and walked away. I turned his description into the Texas FBI office as an imposter. Well as it turns out, it is not a violation of Law to pose as and tell someone that you are an FBI agent, until you try to take any action pursuant to that false claim, such as search a home or car or impede anyone in his normal course of duty, or attempting to confiscate his car or attempting to make an arrest, etc.
The same is true of the Internal Revenue Service, Inc. with their operations. In their case, their "badge" is the specific section of Title 26. They have no other authority to act upon anyone or deprive anyone of Life; liberty or property except under the authority of the specific language of THE DISTRICT Title 26 Code. (Remember, in the case of a National Emergency (DISASTER), the Presidential Executive Orders that President Clinton signed when he updated and re-wrote FEMA, takes PRIORITY OVER ALL OF THIS, otherwise this is still in force. Furthermore at that time, the Presidents authority, SUPERSEDES EVERYTHING AND EVERYONE EXCEPT ALMIGHTY GOD according to FEMA), if they attempt to act outside of their specific authority and make an arrest or to take property; they are committing a felony! The citizen not only has the right, but the duty to prevent the commission of any felony if he can, by whatever means which may be required.*
*CAVEAT: "An arrest made with a defective warrant; or one issued without an affidavit; or one that fails to allege a crime is without jurisdiction and one who is being arrested, may resist arrest and break away, if the arresting officer is killed by one who is so arresting, the killing is no more than involuntary manslaughter." House v. People, 75Ill. 491; reaffirmed and quot3ed in State v. Leach, 7 Conn.452; State v. Gleason, 32 Kan. 245; Ballard v. State 43 Ohio340; State v. Spaulding, 345 Minn. 361; State v. Rousseau, 241 P.2d See also laws under the term "misprision of a felony." If you could have acted, and did not, you could be sent to prison. The laws may vary by state, so know what you are doing.
As an example; MR. DIRECTOR, I call your attention to 26 USC 6331 (a) under the subject of levy. The (a) designation in any Section of the IRS Code is what gives that section its authority. Without that (a) authority, the IRS agent cannot act. It is his "badge," if I can continue on with that illustration. Mr. DIRECTOR, you and I know full well that the (a) section of 26 USC 6331 specifically EXCLUDES all but the accrued salary, wages, etc. of any officer, employee, elected official etc. of the United States, meaning the DISTRICT, and its states scattered around in the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. No other citizen, persons, individuals, or the corporations foreign to THE DISTRICT, can be included under the jurisdiction of 26 USC 6331 (a).
26 USC 6331 (a): Authority of Secretary,-- If any person liable to pay any tax neglects or refuses to pay the same within 10 days after notice and demand, it shall be lawful for the Secretary to collect such tax (and such further sum as shall be sufficient to cover the expenses of the levy) by levy upon all property and rights to property (except such property as is exempt under section 6334) belonging to such persons or on which there is a lien provided in this chapter for the payment of such tax. Levy may be made upon the accrued salary or wages of any officer, employee or elected official, of the United States, THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, or any agency or instrumentality of the United States or the DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, by serving a notice of levy on the employer (as defined in section 3401 (d)) of such officer, employee, or elected official. If the Secretary makes a finding that the collection of such tax is jeopardy, notice and demand for immediate payment of such tax may be made by the Secretary and upon failure or refusal to pay such tax, collection thereof by levy shall be lawful without regard to the 10 day period provided in this section.
Yet, MR. DIRECTOR, you direct your agents to levy the salaries, wages, pensions, bank accounts and "Socialist Security" payments and of all sorts of Americans over many of whom you and the Internal Revenue Service, Inc. have absolutely NO SUCH AUTHORITY. I remember Alice showing me a "notice of levy" on a woman’s bank account. On the back, that IRS Form listed the statutory provisions of 26 USC 6331. The one section, which the Internal Revenue Service, Inc. deliberately left off the "Levy Form," was that authority provision stated in section (a). I do not have to go back 31 years to prove that point, for the current levy Form that you are using today, predictably, begins with 26 USC 6331 (b). When your agents walk into a bank and issue a levy on someone’s account, they do so without any "badge of authority." MR. DIRECTOR, is this by accident or design? MR. DIRECTOR, I am not holding you personally accountable for the pattern of deception by syntax found throughout the INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, INC. Code. Furthermore, I am not personally concerned if others volunteer to become involved with the IRS and pay TRIBUTE for protection and friendship.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN OF THE JURY
… THE VERY SIMPLE REMEDY FROM A BELLIGERENT CLAIMANT AT LAW.
It is not my general nature to be belligerent. However, the Supreme Court has ruled again and again that for a Citizen to claim Common Law Rights, he must [1] do it himself and [2] be a belligerent claimant at law.
Many of our early American settlers came to this country in the status of "INDENTURED SERVANTS." THESE PEOPLE MAY HAVE BEEN IN DEBT IN England and were to be put in debtor’s prison. An Englishman of means would pay the debt in return for a contract, i.e., "indenture," that stated that his debtor, in exchange for a payment of the debt, would work for the person who paid the debt for a specified period of time. The higher the debt and the lower the actual value of his work, the longer the period of his work. The person who paid the debt would usually provide the debtor room and board and take care of his medical expenses. In return, the debtor not only worked where he was told, but obeyed any other rules and regulations imposed by his master.
By indenture, i.e., contract, the debtor forfeited his FREEMAN or SUI JURIS status. He was, in LEGAL FACT, A SLAVE. The Bible says that the debtor is servant to the lender. He could not make further contracts and he could not appear in court IN PROPRIA PERSONA. He had no status or standing to do so. Rather, if he got into trouble with the law, he had to have his master speak for him. Some early Americans became indentured servants only to the extent of their ship passage to America and may have only worked for a year or so according to the signing of the contract (indenture).
INDENTURED SERVANTS, ACCORDING TO BLACK’S FOURTH LAW DICTIONARY
Indenture,
A writing containing a contract. Indentures are generally duplicates, laid together and indented, so that the two papers or parchments correspond to each other. But indenting is often neglected, while the writings or counterparts retain the names of the indentures.
INDENTURE, ACCORDING TO NOAH WEBSTER’S 1828 DICTIONARY IS!
A deed to which two or more persons: are parties and in which these enter into reciprocal and corresponding grants or obligations toward each other; whereas a deed-poll is properly one in which only the party making it executes it, or binds himself by it as a deed, through the granters or grantees therein may be several in number, 3 Washb, Real Prop. 311. See Indent, U…
As I talk about our forefathers at lectures, folks have boasted to me that their forefathers came here as serious debtors and worked for years and years for the man who bought their bodies out of debtor’s prison. I note that often these same people, as did their forefathers, live quite contentedly in debt today, looking to THE DISTRICT to eventually take care of them from the perils of everything from floods to terminal illness. Apparently, they see nothing wrong or degrading about their indentured servant status with the INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, INC. Likewise, any citizen who joins the military signs an indenture (contract) for a specified period of time and in this way intentionally waives his COMMON LAW, SUI JURIS, status or standing.
It is the legal determination or more accurately the legal presumption, of the INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, INC. and the legislative TRIBUNALS [Article I Courts] into which Americans find themselves from time to time, that most American are not FREEMAN, Sui Juris, but instead are federal debtors, indentured servants of government by way of some kind of contract or indenture. That being their premise, most Americans are not permitted to exercise those Constitutional Rights because THE DISTRICT courts are alleging they have been waived by way of such contract which, they insist, compels specific performance to Public Policy Code of the INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE INC. To that extent, of course they are correct, for there is no COMMON LAW RIGHTS WITHIN A CONTRACT. The problem, ladies and Gentleman of the Jury, is that the Court forced you to agree, before you were impaneled as a jury, that you were to allow the Judge to determine the Law and you were only to determine the facts. The U.S. DISTRICT, is going to instruct you that the IRS defendant is a "person required to file returns under the law" and all you are permitted to determine is whether or not he did so.
THE LAW OF CONTRACTS* REQUIRES THESE ELEMENTS OR THE CONTRACT IS VOID
1. Offer by person qualified to make the contract.
2. Acceptance by party qualified to make and accept the contract.
3. Bargain or agreement and full disclosure and understanding by both parties.
4. Consideration given.
5. Must have the element of time to make the contract lawful.
6. Both parties must be Sui Juris: that is, of lawful age, usually 21 years old.
* Contracts, by John Calamart and Joseph Pertillo, West Publishing Co., St. Paul Minnesota 55102
Sui Juris (lat.) Of his own right; possessing all the rights to which a freeman is entitled; not being under the power of another, as a slave, a minor and the like. Further, to make a valid contract, a person must, in general, be Sui Juris. Every one of full age is presumed to be Sui Juris, Story, Ag. 10. See Harrison v. Laveen 196 P.2d 456. This was taken from Bouvier’s Law Dictionary, the dictionary used exclusively by the United States Supreme Court:
It is rare that the citizen sues the IRS in THE DISTRICT Court, becoming the plaintiff who is obliged to disprove the existence, language and signatures to any said contract compelling specific performance. Generally, it is the IRS, which asserts itself and is the plaintiff in an action against them. Therefore, it is not your requirement or your duty, as the defendant, to prove that no lawful jurisdiction exists or to show that no contract (indenture) exists with your signature on it compelling specific performance; that is, to file returns or pay an alleged tribute due. No defendant is ever compelled to testify at all in any court. Yet, this very testifying is the legal mistake that novice IRS dependants continue to make, and this foolish tactic is always bound to lose. Instead, IRS defendants are encouraged to force the IRS as plaintiff to prove that they have lawful jurisdiction by producing in court the said contract (indenture) by which they claim jurisdiction. You are only to assert and claim Freeman and Sui Juris status or standing and thus force the IRS plaintiff to try to prove by sworn statements, and with some lawful indenture or contract which was signed by you, that your Sui Juris Freeman claim is invalid.
Many patriots get involved with certain paralegals pursuant to the matter of the Internal Revenue Service, Inc., and attempt to claim one or more of their Constitutional Rights, only to have the Federal Tribunals, sitting in Article I jurisdiction, dismiss them as having no Rights at all in their Court. These patriots never seem to get beyond the point of understanding that the Court is presuming that the Internal Revenue Service, Inc. has a contractual right to compel specific performance; that is, force any offending U.S. taxpayer to file a "return" and pay the tribute. Both the IRS and THE DISTRICT Courts are correct. If you are in the status of U.S. Individual, U.S. Taxpayer, U.S. Citizen or federal officer or employee, my advice to you is file and pay whatever tribute is demanded. Remember, you are their indentured servant and you wanted it that way.
Back on page 13, I referred to the 1942 Supreme Court case known as The Clearfield Doctrine. It is stare decisis; that is, still valid today and can forever be relied upon as the Law. The Supreme Court has stated that governments descend to the level of A Mere Private Corporation whenever they use private commercial paper in their business transactions; that is, paper money, credit instruments and checks. Do you get it? They must be regarded as mere entities entirely separate from the government. This is precisely why the Internal Revenue Service, Inc. and the Federal Reserve Bank must always be private corporations. As stated in U.S. vs. Burr 309 U.S. 242, when they get involved in commerce, they are subject to the same burdens as any private firm or corporation. Thus, they must, as every other private corporation and private person, adhere to the strict guidelines known as the Uniform Commercial Code.
Those patriots, who finally understand where the IRS, Inc. is coming from; that is, the Uniform Commercial Code contract law, go too far when they insist that the possession of a "Socialist Security Number" or having an interstate commercial, drivers license card, a state driver’s license, or even a postal zip code, binds the Common Law citizen, by way of contract, so that payment of tribute, to the IRS, Inc., is suddenly a contractual obligation. Have you heard that idea, taught by other patriots? Think about it for a minute! The government cannot remove all the gold and silver from circulation, and then insist that the use of paper money and checks are suddenly contractual obligations wherein a tribute must be paid for their use.
In the 580 pages of the modern law book authority on Contracts, including explanations of the Uniform Commercial Code, written by John Calamari and Joseph M. Perillo and published by West Publishing, you cannot find one reference or suggestion that any contract that does not have at least all of the six elements set forth on page 24 has any validity at law. This includes the so-called adhesion contract of the IRS 1040 Label Form, if you were not told about it in detail before you signed it, The Clearfield Trust Co, (318 U.S. 363-371) case should be studied in its entirety, but it can be properly summarized as, "an entity cannot compel performance upon its corporate statutes or corporation rules unless it, like any other corporation, is the "holder-in-due-course" of some contract or commercial agreement between it, and the one on whom its demands for performance are made, and is willing to reproduce said document, and to place the same into evidence, before trying to enforce its demands, called statutes in this case. When you bring up The Clearfield Doctrine in Court, and watch the Judge and the U.S. District attorney, you will know that you have hit pay dirt.
Thus, the Internal Revenue Service, Inc., being a private corporation under The Clearfield Doctrine, must adhere to corporation laws and to THE UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE. In the UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE there is a remedy for those of you who may have unwittingly signed an IRS 1040 Label Form or other corporate quasi-contracts wherein there may have been an inadvertent waiver of rights. Since it is so difficult to find a set of the UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE by Anderson Publishing Company, I think that it will be helpful to set those sections that are applicable to this topic here on the pages for you to study. So, let’s begin with the remedy for those of you who signed what is alleged to be any contract wherein you did not have full disclosure and informed consent. This will be found under U.C.C. § 1-207:7 Effect of reservation of rights. The making of a "valid" reservation of rights preserves whatever rights the person "then" possesses and prevents the loss of such right by application of concepts of waiver or estoppel.
The key words here are "valid" and "then." I have put emphasis on them. How do you make a valid reservation of rights? If there is a valid reservation, there must be also an invalid reservation of rights, and we need to know what that would be so that we will not make fools out of ourselves at the worst possible moment. It is not possible, nor is it intended, that your use of U.C.C. § 1-207 reserves all of your rights, including your right to grow a mustache. The preservation of rights by the use of U.C.C. § 1-207 only applies to the specific matter at hand, about which the reserving Party may be under contract. Anderson writes in his U.C.C. § 1-207:4:
"When a payment is made on a debt or obligation, is the payee bound by the terms on which the payment is tendered? Specifically, if a debtor tenders his creditor with a check marked "in full payment," is it possible for the creditor to accept the check but thereafter assert the claim for any balance? There is some authority that the creditor may in such case cross out the notation, add "With reservation of Rights" to his endorsement, and thereby reserve the right to proceed for any additional sum that the creditor believes to be due."
The U.C.C. § 1-207:4 reads: Sufficiency of reservation. Any expression indicating an intention to preserve rights is sufficient, such as "Without Prejudice," or "with reservation of all our rights." The CODE states an "explicit" reservation must be made. "Explicit" undoubtedly is used in place of "express" to indicate that the reservation must not only be "express" but must be intended.
The term "explicit" as used in U.C.C. § 1-207 means "that which is so clearly stated or distinctively set forth that there is no doubt as to its meaning."
I remember taking a course in Common Law some fifteen years ago, "he claimed all his rights at all times, waived none of his rights at any time, including the right to time." Well, that is a fine statement of his claim to his rights, but it is not what is intended here in U.C.C. § 1-207. If a Judge asks some day what you had in mind when you put a term such as "Without Prejudice" U.C.C. § 1-207 on some document, do not tell him that you are "reserving all your rights at all time; waiving none of your rights at any time, including the right to time and the right to grow a mustache!" He will chuckle to himself and rule that your reservation of rights was not sufficiently "explicit" to be a valid reservation of rights under U.C.C. § 1-207:7. The U.C.C. applies only to your rights under a specific contract with THE DISTRICT, it does not apply to your right to freedom of religion or your right to keep and bear arms.
I will not quote U.C.C. § 1-207:8, but you are to understand that by definition, a reservation of rights can only reserve a right that is existing. The making of a U.C.C. § 1-207 reservation of rights does not create a right where none existed before. Also, 1-207:9 states that when a waivable right or claim is involved, the failure to make a reservation thereof causes a loss of the right and bars its assertion at a later date. However, as in the case of the IRS 1040 LABEL FORM, where it can be shown that fraud is involved, that fraud voids the most solemn contract whether or not either Party actually understood the nature of the contract. Doesn’t that make sense?
If you write on the endorsement of a check, "Without Prejudice"- U.C.C. § 1-207, your reservation of rights applies ONLY to that check and its possible implications under a credit and commerce contract of which you may be unaware and any undisclosed contract pursuant to the bank account into which it is being deposited. Furthermore, if you waive a right under one contract, it certainly does not waive your rights under any and all other contracts. Unless some contract, which you have intentionally signed, thereby waives your COMMON LAW STATUS, that contract does NOT effect those areas of your life that are NOT under contract, such as the right to trial by jury. If you sign a contract to get a drivers license, for instance, it does not thereby waive your Common law rights to remain silent when being questioned about a criminal matter. The drivers license is a simple and easy contract to understand. There are no hidden meaning within the language of that contract, so the use of "Without Prejudice"-U.C.C. § 1-207 would not be proper unless you really do not understand what the term "55 MPH" and "Yield" mean. Do you now understand what is meant in this section by the "explicit" reservation requirement?
The "WITHOUT PREJUDICE"-U.C.C. § 1-207 reservation could not have a better application than pursuant to the INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, INC. Code. Where is there any "contract" that is more deliberately scrambled syntax than what is written in Title 26 and on the 1040 LABEL FORM?
Until you read this letter, (document) you had no idea what "LABEL" meant and had no idea that by said contract you were waiving your precious God-given rights as a CODICIL to our Founding Father’s legacy, did you? If not, then FRAUD was involved and that adhesion contract is null and void. It is not binding upon you, if you properly make the reservation. So, with the use of "Without Prejudice" U.C.C. § 1-207, here is what you are saying to the Judge, who, by the way, is the only person who has the authority to even ask you about it. I suggest that you memorize these words exactly:
"Your Honor, my use of "Without Prejudice"-U.C.C. § 1-207 above my signature on this document indicates that I have exercised the Remedy provided for me in the UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE at Article I, Section 207, whereby I might reserve my Common Law Right not to be bound by, nor compelled to perform under any contract, commercial agreement, or bankruptcy that I have not entered into knowingly. That reservation serves notice upon all of the administrative agencies of government, Federal, State and Local, that I do not, and will not, accept the liability associated with the "compelled benefit" of any unrevealed contract, commercial agreement or bankruptcy."
IN ALL ROMAN TRIBUNAL COURTS
Some years ago, I attended a law seminar in which the instructor taught that, "there no longer were any Common Law Courts left in America." At the time, I believed the thesis, but he was absolutely incorrect. His presumption was based on the fact that the overwhelming majority of all Americans are now citizens of THE DISTRICT by way of certain adhesion contracts, such as the IRS 1040 LABEL FORM and "SOCIALIST SECURITY." Those who have WAIVED THEIR RIGHTS under contract certainly do not have them in most courts where the issue of a violation of a contract’s terms are concerned. Most Americans who find themselves in any Court these days are there concerning contract violations of one kind or another. This is particularly true of traffic violations. They never knew that it was a contract violation as their case was being tried. How can there be criminal penalties to a civil contract violation? SUCH IS THE NATURE OF A ROMAN CIVIL TRIBUNAL and not a Common Law Court. Rights are NOT allowed to be any part of the testimony and procedure of such a TRIBUNAL. THE ROMAN TRIBUNAL, wherein the Judge determines the law and the jury only "THE FACTS," is depicted as the "BLINDFOLDED LADY JUSTICE" with the scales in her hand. You have seen her again and again and never knew what she stood for. Under her Statutes; the side which tips the scales even the slightest amount wins. This is not in the COMMON LAW COURT where the defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt and unto a moral certainty.
In the United States (Washington, DISTRICT of Columbia) and its environs and enclaves, ROMAN CIVIL TRIBUNALS are NOT Common Law courts!
There are some students of law who have suggested that the claim, "Without Prejudice" was somehow inadvertently included in the UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE. They have never understood the original purpose of the U.C.C., which was designed to protect the unlearned common man from being defrauded by unscrupulous merchants and bankers. The U.C.C. was written to facilitate the Common Law and protect the people against what the law characterizes as a unconscionable bargain or contract. An unconscionable contract, according to BLACK’S FOURTH LAW DICTIONARY, is one which no man in his senses, not under delusion, would make on the one hand, and which no fair and honest man would accept, on the other. The "Without Prejudice" claim is carefully designed to protect the innocent person’s Common Law rights and provide a lawful platform in Court for proper claims against those who would be, in their nature, inclined to take advantage of him.
The forgoing being true, long before you get to U.C.C. § 1-207, you will read 1-103:6, which states:
1-103:6 COMMON LAW. The Code "complimentary" to the common law, which remains in force except where, displaced by the Code. In attempting to codify a large body of law, it is almost impossible to anticipate all the factual situations that may arise. It is for this reason that courts have adopted the principle of statutory construction so a statute will not be construed so as to overrule a principle of common law, unless it is plain by the act that such a change in the established law is intended. A Statute should be construed to be in harmony with the common law (and not as an obligation of an unrevealed commercial Agreement once the Remedy of U.C.C. § 1-207.7 is exercised. NWD), Unless there is a clear legislative intent to prorogate the common law… the Code cannot be read to preclude a common law action.
What might constitute an unconscionable contract within the context of this letter? What unconscionable contract have you ever signed that "no man in his senses, not under delusion," would ever sign and "no fair and honest man would ever ask you to sign?" If there is any such contract that better fits this description than the IRS 1040 LABEL FORM, I cannot think of it. Any contract, which has a hidden agenda that either party is unaware of at the time of the signing, is a FRAUD ON ITS FACE. All contracts based upon fraud are not enforceable. The U.C.C. § 1-207 "Without Prejudice" reservation is designed to release the citizen from any hidden contracts and force the party laying any claim on that citizen to produce that contract, with its terms and his signature or to immediately cease from demanding performance under that alleged contract.
The additional element of any unconscionable contract is that it proves beyond the shadow of a doubt and unto a moral certainty that FRAUD WAS INTENDED AND DID NOT COME ABOUT BY ACCIDENT. THUS, THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, INC. HAS WHAT WE CHARACTERIZE IN LAW AS "DIRTY HANDS."
American Courts have ruled consistently that "FRAUD or illegality or unconscionable character of a transaction is unclean hands." [Ford v. Caspers, 42F. Supp. 994, 998.] Ladies and Gentleman of the jury, until you know otherwise, you are to consider every contact by and correspondence from the INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, INC. to be an attempt to commit a FRAUD* upon you and using a TACTIC OF FEAR, coerce you to pay a TRIBUTE that you do not lawfully owe! Likewise it is my opinion that the "SOCIALIST SECURITY" is an UNCONSCIONABLE contract as it was forced upon most Americans in order for them to graduate from high school, obtain employment, or open a bank account. Thus, if you were forced to sign the "SOCIALIST SECURITY" contract, checking the [ ] for U. S. Citizen, without being told the nature of the contract and change of status at the time of your signing, or you were a minor at the time, or you have been forced to pay into it to hold a job or position to be able to eat and pay your bills, then that contract is unconscionable. It cannot be used as an instrument to compel specific performance to the INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, INC. I think those who have failed in Court in the past on this contractual point, may not have timely and properly made their U.C.C. reservations.
* If you have been filing 1040 Label Forms, and are now turning from your deluded ways but are not yet into the coveted status of Sui Juris, after properly addressing The District Director in your area, you might answer any letter from the IRS in the following manner with a copy to his agent Mr./Ms. So and So. Please understand, I have intentionally set this into this type so that you will have to study it carefully as you re-type it on your own equipment. We repeat, we are not going to practice law. However, you may write, E-mail us, asking us to come and lecture, teach and or preach unto those of you whom have made arrangements with us as God meets the need accordingly for us to do so. Philippians 4:19.
FOR YOUR STUDY AND USE, SHOULD YOU CHOOSE TO DO SO
Dear Mr. Director: I do not understand! One of your employees, apparently working under your specific direction, has sent me a bill for some alleged tax, along with penalties and interest. I have attached a copy for you to read for yourself. I am returning this presentment, without dishonor, because I have learned that I have no tax liability. This presentment by you through your agent, Mr. So and So, indicates an attempt by you both acting in concert to commit constructive fraud (U.C.C. § 3-305 (2) (b) & (c) by trying to induce me to accept it for the benefit of the Internal Revenue Service, Inc. and /or its principal(s). Your agent apparently acting under your specific guidelines, has provided me with no performance or consideration which would cause me to become indebted on any instrument not bearing my signature per U.C.C. § 3-401. Will you direct your agent Mr. So and So, to send me a copy of the instrument(s) containing my signature that forces me to perform to your demand under agreement, as set forth in U.C.C. § 1-201 (3), for my examination? Will you direct your agent Mr. So and So, to send me a copy of the source of income and the description which will designate what "geographical" part of the statutorily defined "United States" it came from, so that your claim can be substantiated? Will you direct your agent Mr. So and So, under the requirements of U.C.C. § 3-805, to send me a copy of any negotiable instrument(s) which you claim I have signed, making the Internal Revenue Service, Inc. a holder-in-due-course, with the right of presentment and demand? Mr. Director, is your Principle pursuant to my case under U.C.C. § 3-403:42, the Federal Reserve System, The International Monetary Fund, The Agency for International Development, or The Treasury of the United States? In the event that you do not have the above requested contractual documents, will you direct your agent Mr. So and So, to advise me in writing that further investigation has established that I am not a U.S. Taxpayer under the IRS Code and that no further correspondence to me will be issued?
Mr. Director, you and your agent, Mr. So and So, are hereby informed that I am not a resident of Washington, D.C. or any of its possessions, territories and enclaves scattered across the American Republic. I do not have a trade or business within any of those areas. Therefore, it is my legal determination that your presentment is under a fraudulent unconscionable contract outlined in U.C.C. § 2-302. In addition, your presentment is discharged per U.C.C. § 3-601 (2)&(3). You have ten days from the date of this receipt of this certified letter, to comply with my request for information. My request should be easy, as it should be right in my personal file on Mr. So and So.’s desk. If you fail to comply, a fault will exist as set forth in U.C.C. § 1-201 (16). The cause will be yours and would make null and void all of your actions from the beginning as set forth in U.C.C. § 1-103. In addition, according to U.C.C. § 3-505 (2), your failure to comply promptly with this information will invalidate the presentment you have made to me in your letter dated today. Very truly yours, (name).
ALSO, WITH THESE DOCUMENTS, I AM REVEALING, EXPLAINING AND TEACHING, HOW THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, AND ALL OF THOSE THAT ARE IN CONCERT WITH THEM, SUCH AS, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, INTERPOL, NEW WORLD ORDER, INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND, INCLUDING ALL OF THOSE THAT I HAVE PREVIOUSLY LISTED WITHIN THIS DOCUMENT, HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO TAKE OVER AND REMOVE CHURCHES OR PROPERTY FROM THE PEOPLE. Again, that is the way you wanted it, when you signed and became indentured servants to them, isn’t it?
As we will explain further, even the various bank loan forms, all have OMB numbers printed on them, which are for FEDERAL EMPLOYEES ONLY and by placing your "SEAL" on that FORM STATED THAT YOU WERE A FEDERAL EMPLOYEE. ARE YOU A FEDERAL EMPLOYEE? Without your signature "seal" attached, to that CODICIL, you MAY not have received that loan. Also, by placing your "Seal" on that OMB (Office of Bank Management) Form, made you an INDENTURED SERVANT TO THEM. Again, You thereby, have NO RIGHTS OF YOUR OWN.
I think that I need to explain some of the language in the suggested letter in the footnote on the previous page. We will not hold your hand. However, we will be itinerating, to lecture, teach and Minister the Gospel of Jesus Christ throughout the country. Further, we will be explaining the Mark of the Beast, pertaining to these documents as God supplies the finances to do so in your area. However, you still need to do your own study so that it will be from your own mouth so that you can give a LAWFUL REASON AND INTENT FOR WHAT YOU DO. If not perhaps you should go ahead and lick their boots and pay whatever TRIBUTE is demanded.
You will notice that I have asked THE DISTRICT DIRECTOR to tell me who the PRINCIPAL is for WHOM the Internal Revenue Service, Inc. is collecting the TRIBUTE. Now, we know that it is NOT the United States Government, don’t we? We know it is NOT the Federal Reserve Bank, for they never spend the money, DO THEY? Look, the IRS calls itself a "service," DOESN’T IT? For what PRINCIPAL is it a commercial paper financial collection service? I think the IRS might even want to write you off as a "U.S. Taxpayer" rather than admit that they do not collect their TRIBUTE for the Government of the United States. Under U.C.C. § 3-403:42, you have a right, to be told WHO THE PRINCIPAL IS OR THEY MUST FORGET THE WHOLE MATTER.
Understand, if someone that you did not know sent you a letter stating that they were a debt-collecting agency and that you were to send them a few thousand dollars, don’t you think that you have a right to know for whom they are collecting the alleged debt? Of course! Would you send off a check to the debt collector if you did NOT KNOW to whom the money was going and for WHAT INDEBTEDNESS it was discharging? Of Course NOT! What if you never owed any such debt in the first place? We know that the IRS INC. never spends any money on anything, but simply transfers funds to some other Entity. Is it not then that Entity, rather than the IRS, who is demanding payment through their collection service agency? Why of course! To think otherwise would be forever naive in the world of commerce.
Pay attention here, for this simple matter may very well be the most important thought or concept of this whole letter or document! Since many of you members of the jury cannot find Anderson’s Uniform Commercial Code book, I am again going to reprint another most important section for you to carefully study.
§ 3-403:42 Disclosure of Principal. The Code continues the pre-Code concept that all liabilities must be determinable from the commercial paper itself. Consequently, it is essential that the authorized agent in signing commercial paper disclose not only his representative capacity but also name the principal for whom he is acting.
Here the authorized agent is the Internal Revenue, A financial Service Corporation, specializing in the collection of TRIBUTE. They may have sent you a "notice of deficiency." This is commercial paper. Therefore, the Internal Revenue Service Collection is bound by U.C.C. to inform you not only what the contract states and produce your signature on it, but also inform you for whom it is attempting to collect the commercial paper money from you. They may say it is "The Treasury" but you have the right to know for what treasury it is collecting and the collecting agency is required by the UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE to tell you if you are informed enough to ask. It is not The Treasury of the United States.
Why is this so? Remember back on page 17, I mentioned what is well known as the Clearfield Doctrine? According to the Supreme Court, under Clearfield Trust Co. vs. United States [318 U.S. 363-371], "governments descend to the level of a mere private corporation and take on the characteristics of a mere private citizen… where private corporate commercial paper and securities is concerned."
The folks in THE DISTRICT shot themselves in the foot when they removed lawful money; gold and silver coin from circulation and substituted in its place "legal tender" made up of paper. When THE DISTRICT coined gold and silver money, as mandated by Article I, Section 8, they did not have to abide by the rules of a mere corporation or a mere citizen under the UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE. They were not compelled to operate under all those U.C.C. requirements as the rest of us do. They were sovereign! Because of Commercial paper, they must tell us who the PRINCIPAL IS and they do not want to reveal that TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC. EVERY CONGRESSMAN AND EVERY SENATOR KNOWS. THE PRESIDENT KNOWS. THE SUPREME COURT JUSTICES AND ALL OF THE DISTRICT COURT JUDGES KNOW. ALL OF THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, INC. highest ranking officials know. However, 90% of the American people DO NOT KNOW what I am disclosing here.
The Taxes on the income of the U.S. Taxpayer goes into the Internal Revenue Service Inc. which goes into the Federal Reserve Bank Inc. which is turned over to Governor-Secretary of the Treasury (The International Monetary Fund, Inc.), of the United Nations which is then connected and given to THE UNITED NATIONS AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT.
The private corporation you know as the Internal Revenue Service, Inc. entered into a "service agreement" with the U.S. Treasury Department {see: Public Law 94-564; Legislative History, page 5967; The 1985 Edition of the Army Field Manual, FM 41-10 paged 3-6 and 3-8}: and the Agency For International Development pursuant to Treasury Delegation Order No.91. The Agency For International Development is a Socialist-Marxist, anti-American, international paramilitary task force operation which includes such activities as "assumption of full or partial executive, legislative and judicial authority over a country or area." It is part of the United Nations which does military operations all over the world, including the more then 200,000 United Nations troops which are, right now as I write, setting up subversive tactical operations within the United States.
NOTICE NOTICE NOTICE
The United Nations Agency for International Development is the PRINCIPAL, whose name will NEVER BE DISCLOSED by the Internal Revenue Service, Inc. This PRINCIPAL is financed and funded by the IRS, which collects the TRIBUTE, the commercial paper money for this PARAMILITARY AGENCY within the United Nations from the U.S. Taxpayers. This is where all the money goes! It is funding the Subversive objectives of the New World Order.
Can you handle this, MR. DIRECTOR? Not one so-called taxable dollar goes to pay for American military expenses or even pay for abortions or long-term welfare programs. Every dollar goes for United Nations international development programs and the military operations to insure that their directives are enforced.
The highest risk for resistance to these United Nations directives will come from the American People who do not want to see their liberties taken from them. We have newspaper reports of sightings (I have seen this personally) of "UN" operations at the El Toro, Marine and Navel Station in California and others have also been confirmed all over the United States. Half of the troops at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, for instance, are Russian soldiers. These are A.I.D. "U.N." operations. Soviet T-72 tanks have been seen on railroad cars and heavy trucks, in dozens of places across America within the last few years. What is their purpose according to Senate Report No. 93-549, page 185? Are you sitting down, Members of the jury?
One of the reasons for this is, when or should your son that is in the Armed Services of the United States (what is now under the authority of the United Nations) receive a direct order to shoot their parent, or one of their relation, or place them into custody, they would not be as likely to perform that duty as well as a foreign military United Nations personnel would. Therefore the United States military personnel being sent overseas, for a police action and the Foreign Military personnel to maintain the police action on the home military front.
The purpose of this IRS Principal, "for whom the IRS collects the American TRIBUTE, is to promote, implement and enforce absolute United Nations control over finance in the United States."*
Finally, to wrap up my comments on the UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE and its application to the INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE INC., there was an Official Code Comment at § 3-401:1. It is so important that there was a wording change in the U.C.C. to make it clear that:
§ 3-401:1 OFFICIAL CODE COMMENT. No one is liable on an instrument unless and until he has signed it.
The long-winded comment following that straightforward statement makes it very clear, in the context of our study of the Internal Revenue Service, Inc. and its presentments and demands on behalf of its Principal, the Agency For International Development of the United Nations, that no one can be compelled to SPECIFIC performance by any IMPLIED contract. In the Uniform Commercial Code there are no IMPLIED contracts permitted, and if properly and timely challenged by a defendant, every court or TRIBUNAL IS OBLIGATED TO RULE IN THE DEFENDANTS FAVOR OR IT IS REVERSIBLE ERROR.
Section 3-401:1 goes on to state that "a signature" can be anything that is used for that purpose, such as a mark or an "x" when the person cannot read or write. It can be typed, printed or even a thumbprint will do. It need not be subscribed; that is, written below the body of the contract. It can be in the body, as "I, Patrick Henry, promise to pay…"
The point here is that you cannot IMPLY a contract is in force by some act or action on your part. The U.C.C. requires a signed document, otherwise no one can enforce any alleged contract. Why is this important? Didn’t I once sign a 1040 LABEL FORM? We have shown why that FORM, WHEN PROPERLY CHALLENGED is null and void as a binding contract.
* It appears from the documentary evidence and inside information made available to me, that the Internal Revenue Service, Inc. agents are in fact "Agents of a Foreign Principal" within the meaning and intent of the "Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938." They are directed and controlled by the corporate "Governor of The Fund." This means the International Monetary Fund. The Governor is also known as the "Secretary of the Treasury." This information i