[gSjQEEmq]

OK, let me rephrase for the mentally retarded croud: It made the application of the 5th Amendment Federally enforceable for ALL CITIZENS.

I see you do not have a clue as to why "due process" mentioned in the 5th needed to be repeated in the 14th. WHICH DUE PROCESS DO YOU BELIEVE YOU ARE RECEIVING, the 5th, the 14th or both?

Your U.S. citizenship is organic to you being a state citizen, absent revolution or revolt, the two are inseparable.

15 Stat 249 is intended to sever 14th amendment ties. But I don't expect you to understand this either. I doubt if you can understand how one of the several States can be considered a foreign government to the U.S.

[gSjQEEmq]

Perhaps it's best to just not file a return, and see what happens? Or, if you file a return, don't sign it and see what happens? That signature has gotta be more important to them than they let on. No contract, no jurisdiction for an Admiralty court.

Hatha

The Army can teach a grunt to charge a machine gun nest in 90 days. By comparison grown men weep at the thought of challenging the IRS.

Your signature on a 1040 is under the penalty of perjury. That is where you agree to be punished if you missed a decimal point.

[BuyNetHosting]

The grunt is only in the Army because he 'stepped forward' when he was asked to. That is, he unknowingly accepted everything the Army had to offer him.

Think of what the world would be like if they taught us in school how to avoid unwanted contracts. But instead, they teach us to conform and obey. The exact opposite of what one would expect from an education.

Here is a humorous example of a 'citizen' having intercourse with the IRS:

Dear Mr. Director: I do not understand! One of your employees, apparently working under your specific
direction, has just 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 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 or 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 Principal
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 as 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 the 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 fall to comply, a fault will exist as set forth in U.C.C.
1-120 (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,
Patrick Henry.

I'm sorry, I lack the link to where I got this.


Hatha

[attlawqa]

There is some controversy about whether there is a law that requires citizens to pay income taxes. This was the central theme of the late Aaron Russo's film America Freedom to Fascism. The IRS cannot show you the law. Nor can anyone else. There seems to be not only a jurisdictional problem but a problem of whether any law actually exists that can be enforced.

However, if you 'volunteer' to pay taxes, you are doing so legally, and the government has no problem with you. If you do not volunteer, they are on very shaky ground prosecuting you. That is why they are willing to negotiate how much taxes you 'should' pay. When they mailed you a form 1040 many years ago, they also mailed you the instructions for how to fill it out. In those instructions--right up front--on page 1 or 2, you always had the Commissar of the IRS bragging that the income tax is VOLUNTARY. Hahaha. If you didn't volunteer, and they came after you, wouldn't that claim by the IRS absolve you of an 'obligation' to pay an income tax?

Ahhh, but I forget, This is English we speak. If it goes to court, the lingua franca is legalese, where VOLUNTARY means MANDATORY. That is what is wrong with our sorry state of affairs, or is that affairs of state? You can't rely on the language as a legal guide. So, they can lie to you with impunity.

Hatha

I agree. This duplicity of language (legalese) is a major contributer in controlling us...........

[gSjQEEmq]

While witty and humorous the letter is probably not what you want to do. If you have not received notice then why bother responding? Just return the correspondence unopened. In my case I made sure all parties who might wish to correspond with me knew my correct address. When a letter arrives not correctly addressed back it goes.

Once you have received valid notice then your due process begins. This means you get to ask questions ... ASKING ... AS-KING ... if you see the connection. As soon as you make one statement (as "I don't live in the District of Columbia") then your due process is complete and it is off to hearing for you. In addition to the right to ask questions you also have a right to receive answers to those questions. Try to phrase the questions so that they may be answered by a (yes) or a (no). Any other answer than yes/no is then non-responsive.

[bmwservis]

I see you do not have a clue as to why "due process" mentioned in the 5th needed to be repeated in the 14th. WHICH DUE PROCESS DO YOU BELIEVE YOU ARE RECEIVING, the 5th, the 14th or both?

palani, please learn to read.

Before the 14th, the 5th Amendment was only applicable to the Federal Government and in Federal Courts.

State Courts and Governments could do pretty much what they pleased, to include indulging in slavery and discrimination by law.


***CONTEXT IS EVERYTHING.

[gSjQEEmq]

Before the 14th, the 5th Amendment was only applicable to the Federal Government and in Federal Courts.

The 5th amendment was unchanged by the addition of the 14th. Where did you get the idea that the function of the 5th amendment had changed?

State Courts and Governments could do pretty much what they pleased, to include indulging in slavery and discrimination by law.

The 14th amendment applies to a new federal class of citizen. The old class (pre-1868 ) still gets what the 5th amendment provides. I don't believe the 5th amendment even applies to 14th amendment citizens.

I can see how you might be confused.

[bmwservis]

The 5th amendment was unchanged by the addition of the 14th. Where did you get the idea that the function of the 5th amendment had changed?

What are you, 12? Not "changed", EXTENDED.

The 14th amendment applies to a new federal class of citizen.

And again, an ASSUMPTION on your part with absolutely no evidence to support it.

The old class (pre-1868 ) still gets what the 5th amendment provides.

What pre-1868 Federal Employees received by way of the 5th Amendment is irrelevant, immaterial and beside the point.

I don't believe the 5th amendment even applies to 14th amendment citizens.

Well, considering that there is no such thing as a "14th amendment citizen" and that the 14th Amendment made the 5th, as well as other protective amendments, applicable to All Citizens, your attempt to make distinctions that do not exist in fact or in any law, makes you look a little ridiculous.

I can see how you might be confused.

You poor boy, I'm not the one confused.

[BuyNetHosting]

Does everyone belong to this new class of 'citizen'? Or are you presumed to be a citizen because you have not declared otherwise? How does anyone enter into a contract in which one is a 'citizen'? Is it by accepting privileges and benefits and waiving rights? Is it the practice of voluntary slavery? Does paying taxes make you a citizen? What if you don't want any privileges or benefits? What do you have to do to 'opt out'? Or do slaves not get to 'opt out'? Because that is the nature of slavery, aka citizenship?

What if you just want the government to not deny you your rights, and leave you alone? Maybe Gaillo's signature is a maxim of law.


Hatha

[gSjQEEmq]

Not "changed", EXTENDED.

Where do you get the idea that the 5th was EXTENDED? Nowhere does it state such.

And again, an ASSUMPTION on your part with absolutely no evidence to support it.

States it right there in the 14th.

What pre-1868 Federal Employees received by way of the 5th Amendment is irrelevant, immaterial and beside the point.

The ORGANIC CONSTITUTION is the entire point. If the 5th (for example) is irrelevant that means it was replaced. What was it replaced with? My answer ... the 14th replaced everything. Glad to see you agree.

Well, considering that there is no such thing as a "14th amendment citizen" and that the 14th Amendment made the 5th, as well as other protective amendments, applicable to All Citizens, your attempt to make distinctions that do not exist in fact or in any law, makes you look a little ridiculous.

Didn't you just state the action of the 5th amendment was irrelevant?

You poor boy, I'm not the one confused.

Not from where I am sitting.

[bmwservis]

Where do you get the idea that the 5th was EXTENDED? Nowhere does it state such.
States it right there in the 14th.
The ORGANIC CONSTITUTION is the entire point. If the 5th (for example) is irrelevant that means it was replaced. What was it replaced with? My answer ... the 14th replaced everything. Glad to see you agree.
Didn't you just state the action of the 5th amendment was irrelevant?
Not from where I am sitting.

OK, you've gone into full blown idiot mode making shit up for me, this conversation is over.

Have fun with your delusions.

[gSjQEEmq]

Does everyone belong to this new class of 'citizen'?

I doubt if it includes Mexicans or Panamanians. In addition there are 50 other nationalities that are outside the 14th amendment classification.

Or are you presumed to be a citizen because you have not declared otherwise?

If you were born in one of the several States but have made ANY declaration of U.S. citizenship then you fall under the 14th amendment.

How does anyone enter into a contract in which one is a 'citizen'?

You believe you were born in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction.

Is it by accepting privileges and benefits and waiving rights?

Usually they will have you sign a statement ... after you provide a birth record.

Is it the practice of voluntary slavery?

Americans are a very unselfish and giving people. This works against them in the long run.

Does paying taxes make you a citizen?

In the early 1800's Pennsylvania had a statute that said that a citizen was one who paid Pennsylvania taxes.

What if you don't want any privileges or benefits?

Don't accept them. None are free. They all come with a price.

What do you have to do to 'opt out'?

15 Stat 249

Or do slaves not get to 'opt out'? Because that is the nature of slavery, aka citizenship?

Just because you once made a mistake no need to compound it. Anything you did can be undone nunc pro tunc.

What if you just want the government to not deny you your rights, and leave you alone?

If you know how to handle situations you can turn down contracts with honor.

[gSjQEEmq]

OK, you've gone into full blown idiot mode making shit up for me, this conversation is over.

It was over before you pretended to start. Nothing here applies to you.

[bmwservis]

It was over before you pretended to start. Nothing here applies to you.

I knew that, you're a tool and a spammer who can't read but loves reading your goofy beliefs into things.

There is no such thing as 14th Amendment citizen separate from a state citizen who is also an organic U.S. citizen.

It's a distinction of the delusional angling for a way out while remaining well in.

[Tinasblue]

I knew that, you're a tool and a spammer who can't read but loves reading your goofy beliefs into things.

There is no such thing as 14th Amendment citizen separate from a state citizen who is also an organic U.S. citizen.

It's a distinction of the delusional angling for a way out while remaining well in.

Carl you are like two right shoes.
One is just not right and that is YOU!
To stop being a 14th you need to have a Affidavit of Status.
If not you ARE a 14th.

[gSjQEEmq]

There is no such thing as 14th Amendment citizen separate from a state citizen who is also an organic U.S. citizen.

Too often we get so wrapped up in history that information being reviewed appears to be what is happening today. Your statement is true in that the several States of the union were eliminated by the action of Harry S. Truman on June 25th, 1948. All that remains are 14th amendment citizens and us French inhabitants (in my particular region). In the region covered by the treaty of Guadeloupe Hidalgo all that are left are 14th amendment citizens and Mexicans.

The several States have been relegated to mere administrative subdivisions of the federal government. An analogy would be attending a bullfight with a nutted bull.

[bmwservis]

Carl you are like two right shoes.
One is just not right and that is YOU!
To stop being a 14th you need to have a Affidavit of Status.
If not you ARE a 14th.

Thanks for that observation, I strive to endeavor to preserver in the face of inanity.

How does one go about "stop being" what does not exist?

OK, let me try again.

You are both, a citizen of the state and a citizen of the U.S. at the same time.

There is no lawful way to seperate the two.

For as long as you remain a citizen of a state, you will be a U.S. citizen because your U.S. citizenship is organic to your state's membership in the Union.

The 14th applies to all U.S. citizens, which necessarily means it applies to all citizens of every state in the union.

This means that, by natural consequence of your organic status as a U.S. citizen arising out of your state's membership in the union of states and your citizenship within a state, the 14th applies to you.

And this means that there is no legalistic escape from the 14th short of renouncing your U.S. citizenship, which consequently negates your state citizenship.

As an aside; the 14th has absolutely nothing to do with your status as a corporate person, that's a product of the 1933 U.S. bankruptcy.

[gSjQEEmq]

You are both, a citizen of the state and a citizen of the U.S. at the same time.

That is what the 14th amendment says (except it makes no mention of me). The opt out is 15 Stat 249.

There is no lawful way to seperate the two.

Yes there is. 15 Stat 249.

For as long as you remain a citizen of a state, you will be a U.S. citizen because your U.S. citizenship is organic to your state's membership in the Union.

Where is it written that you MUST be a citizen of a state? Provisions are made for inhabitants.

The 14th applies to all U.S. citizens, which necessarily means it applies to all citizens of every state in the union.

The U.S. was brought into existence by the U.S. constitution in order to deal with TERRITORIES. Once territories become states they stop being controlled by congress. Naturalization is handled by the U.S. so states may only choose their citizens from a pool of U.S. citizens. Once a man becomes a state citizen U.S. citizenship, having fulfilled its function, may disappear.

This means that, by natural consequence of your organic status as a U.S. citizen arising out of your state's membership in the union of states and your citizenship within a state, the 14th applies to you.

15 stat 249 provides a REMEDY. Government must present you with a choice. That is fundamental.

And this means that there is no legalistic escape from the 14th short of renouncing your U.S. citizenship, which consequently negates your state citizenship.

If you happen to have been born OUTSIDE the jurisdiction of the U.S. [aka the District of Columbia] the 14th amendment hardly applies unless you happen to have papers that state you are naturalized.

Carl, you WANT the security of 14th amendment citizenship. I would rather be free. I have no problem with you choosing slavery over freedom. Enjoy yourself.

As an aside; the 14th has absolutely nothing to do with your status as a corporate person, that's a product of the 1933 U.S. bankruptcy.

A person is a word, an action or representation. Corporations are only capable of representation (not having vocal chords, arms or legs).

[bmwservis]

palani, you're a trip,

I've destroyed your argument, face up to it, admit it and try to get on with your life without that delusional crutch.


15 stat 249 - A BILL TO PROVIDE FOR REPRESENTATION OF THE UNITED STATES AT THE INTERNATIONAL MARITIME EXHIBITION TO BE HELD AT HARVE FRANCE

[gSjQEEmq]

15 stat 249 - A BILL TO PROVIDE FOR REPRESENTATION OF THE UNITED STATES AT THE INTERNATIONAL MARITIME EXHIBITION TO BE HELD AT HARVE FRANCE

Always ready to expand your education, Carl.

http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage...15.db&recNum=4

Put 223 in the "turn to page" window and see what comes up. Look for something labeled CCXLIX.