Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 11

1

ARE YOU A U.S. CITIZEN BY CHOICE OR BY PRESUMPTION? Are you a U.S. citizen at all?

This is the lead in to all the books I have written since 1990 and an understanding of all the books I have written. These books are listed at the end and go into more detail. Bottom line, They need a tax base and you are it. This will shock most Americans and will explain why the private corporation called United States and of the States can control you as their SUBJECTS. There is only one explicit way to become a real US citizen and that is found in one original Statute at large and a revised statute that eliminated the two year wait of the Original Statute. Then there might be another way to allegedly become a US Citizen. That is by letting them TELL you that you are a US citizen. Yes they tell you. You dont tell them anything, like a free man and woman would tell anyone and anything your mind and heart has to say. So let us start with the first original statuteat-large. This has never been amended since 1824. There are no codes telling you that how to become a US citizen SUBJECT. You actually believe we won the 1776 war? Think again! The Act of Congress of April 14, 1802, (2 Stat. 153, c. 28, 1; Rev. St. 2165,) provides that "an alien may be admitted to become a citizen of the United States in the following manner, and not otherwise Then the revised Statute the act of May 26, 1824, (4: star. 69, c. 186, 1; Rev. St. 2167,) removed the two year limit that (2 Stat. 153, c. 28, 1; Rev. St. 2165 provided. Now, people have been so brain washed that anything Alien, is an impediment to rational thought. Many a time, when the health Bill said that Aliens are exempt, all jumped up and down in disgust that these Aliens get everything and you have to pay for these Aliens. Thats the mental incapacity forced on Americans for the last 235 years in making all Americans the most ignorant people on planet earth. What if I were to tell you that a free man and woman is an Alien? What if you were shown that when Madison wrote Federalist papers 42 and 43, that he was so afraid that the Aliens would come in and take over the private corporation they were setting up? What if you actually took the time to read AND comprehend, The key word is comprehend, Federalist Papers 42 and 43, to see that the free White man and women were called Aliens before the United States was formed? Yes this is so. So let us venture to a court where this is spelled out exactly and in clear detail just how to become a U.S. Citizen whereby you become a subject. Yes a SUBJECT like SLAVE, of 535 criminals named Congress, to do it to you without so much as a "I aint gonna do it", from you. So we see what the Court had to say and please note the phrase AND NOT OTHERWISE. CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS v. REUM. (Circuit Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit. May 29, 1893.). This is a true conclusion of law from that court. Isnt it nice they spell it out in detail, Remembering we live in America the country. The United States is NOT a country. "an alien may be admitted to become a citizen of the United 1

States in the following manner, and not otherwise. First. He shall, two Years at least prior to his admission, declare before a proper court his intention to become a citizen of the United States, and to renounce his allegiance to the potentate or sovereignty of which he may be at the time a citizen or subject. Second. He shall, at the time of his application to be admitted, declare, on oath, before some one of the courts above specified, that he will support the Constitution of the United States, and that he absolutely and entirely renounces and abjures all allegiance and fidelity to every foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty; and particularly, by name, to the prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of which he was before a citizen or subject, which proceedings shall be recorded by the clerk of the court. Third. It shall be made to appear to the satisfaction of the court admitting such alien that he has resided within the United States five years at least, and within the state or territory where such court is at the time held one year at least and that during that time he has behaved as a man of a good moral character, attached to the principles of the Constitution of the United States, and well disposed to the good order and happiness of the same; but the oath of the applicant shall in no case be allowed to prove his residence." Note: they said MAN. And there is a reason for that, as explained later. This is a plain down and Dirty contract. The word Federal means CONTRACT so lets see what Webster had to say about the word Federal that no one really understands what it means. 1828 Definition FED'ERAL, a. [from L. faedus, a league, allied perhaps to Eng. wed. L. vas, vadis, vador, vadimonium. See Heb. to pledge.] 1. Pertaining to a league or contract; derived from an agreement or covenant between parties, particularly between nations. 2. Consisting in a compact between parties, particularly and chiefly between states or nations; founded on alliance by contract or mutual agreement; as a federal government, such as that of the United States. FED'ERAL, 1913 Definition Federal (federal) Fed"er*al [L. foedus league, treaty, compact] akin to fides faith: cf. F. fdral. see Faith.] Pertaining to a league or treaty; derived from an agreement or covenant between parties, especially between nations; constituted by a compact between parties, usually governments or their representatives.

Now what did the Padleford Court say in my book The New History of America here is the direct Quote. A tender of bills is as good as one of

coin, unless the bills are objected to. To stand by, in silence, and see another sell your property, binds you. [Ok people how many times has your property (labor included) been stolen and turned over to the tax man in your silence? Did you file a refusal for good cause shown?] These are mere instances of the use of the maxim in the Municipal Law. In the Law of nations, it is equally potent. Silent acquiescence in the breach of a treaty binds a nation (Vattel, ch. 16, sec.199, book 1. See book 2, sec. 142 et seq. as to usucaption and prescription, and sec. 208 as to ratification). Express consent, then, not being necessary, is there anything from which consent may be applied? There is--length of time." BUT they lie by omission on the law of nations bind you. Not so. This is what James Wilson stated in my Myth and Reality Book that destroys all the great writers

"Puffendorf thought that the Law of Nature and the Law of Nations were precisely the same, he has not, in his book on these subjects, treated of the Law of Nations separately, but has everywhere joined it with the law of nature, properly, so called. His example has been followed by the greatest part of succeeding writers. But the imitation of it has produced a confusion of two objects, which ought to have been viewed and studied distinctly and apart. Through the Law of Nations, properly so called, be a part of the law of nature; through it spring from the same source; and through it is attended with the same obligatory power; yet it must be remembered that its application is made to very different objects. The law of nature is applied to individuals; the law of nations is applied to states. Mans only bound by the Law of Nature and that is Gods Law. Nations, may enter into treaties under the Law of Nations while man is not bound by treaties under the Law of Nations because man, the individual, cannot make treaties with other Nations. The physiocrats were scientists of the natural order who embraced the Law of Nature and Nations. They regarded private property to be the perfect product of the natural order and believed if artificial governments [like the United States and the British or French nations] were removed; the natural order would resume its usual course at once." End quote
Do you still believe all government is designed to protect the people from its encroachments, especially since you consented to be a citizen of the state having a representative in their corporate structure? And another tidbit from the Court stated; "Now the principle at the bottom of all these propositions is this: The States have no power, by the exercise of which, they can defeat all the ends of government--the General Government, or any of those ends. But the States, by the exercise of the taxing power, can take from their inhabitants every cent the inhabitants can spare, and live. According to the principle of this decision, therefore, the States have no power to lay any tax on their inhabitants; and if they have the power to tax, it follows they have no power to enable them to keep up their State Governments; and without State Governments, they have no power to keep themselves alive, as States. The principle comes to this: that the States, in making

the Constitution, intended to give up the power of selfpreservation." Lastly, the Court at page 491, said this of the People who made the Constitutions, "The people of the States who made the Constitution, considered themselves as the sovereign, and the Government as the subject. They were the principal- it the agent. That this is also true none will dispute." THIS IS A LIE OF FRAUD BY DECEPTION. We all know it is not us people who made the Constitutions but the select few as stated by the Court at page 520, to wit; "But, indeed, no private person has a right to complain, by suit in court, on the ground of a breach of the Constitution. The Constitution, it is true, is a compact, but he is not a party to it. The States are the parties to it. And they may complain. If they do they are entitled to redress. Or they may waive the right to complain."

YOU SEE HOW THE COURT HAD TO LIE TO COVER TRUTH? They could not use either nonresident Alien or MAN, and had to use an oxymoron "Private PERSON". This is what Congress wrote in the federal Register on why nonresident Aliens are not subject to an income tax and spelled out in spades; quoted from which one are you Book *** The Federal Register, Tuesday, September 7, 1943 Page 12266 Section 404.102 of the Federal Register, Congress states: *** (g) Compensation paid to nonresident alien individual. ...remuneration for services performed by nonresident alien individuals does not constitute wages subject to withholding under section 1622..." What are the regulations designated by the Secretary? CFR Title 26 Chapter 1 pages 62 & 63 Section 301.6109-1 (g) Identifying numbers. I bold for clarity. "Nonresident alien exclusion. This section shall not apply to nonresident aliens, foreign corporations, foreign partnerships, or foreign private foundations that do not have income effectively connected with the conduct of a trade or business within the United States and do not have an office or place of business or a fiscal or paying agent in the United States." Obtain my book Which One Are You, to See what is a trade or business in the United States, spelled out in great Statute

detail This is what the revised statute May 26, 1824 did and why none of you patriots reading this ever were United States citizens. They Got you again didnt they? "Any alien, being under the age of twenty-one years, who has resided in the United States three years next preceding his arriving, at that age, and who has continued to reside therein to the time he may make application to be admitted a citizen thereof, may, after he arrives at the age of twenty-one years, and after he has resided five years within the United States, including the three years of his minority, be admitted a citizen of the United States, without having made the declaration required in the first condition of section twenty-one hundred and sixty-five; but such alien shall make the declaration required therein at the time of his admission, and shall further declare on oath, and prove to the satisfaction of the court, that, for two years next preceding, it has been his bona fide intention to become a citizen of the United States; and he shall in all other respects comply with the laws in regard to naturalization. REMEMBER the United States is a private corporation housed in the country of America and all States are also housed in the Country of America. Why do they call you an American and not a united statesman? Why the Song America the Beautiful? Why not United States the beautiful? Because America is a country. In the Encyclopedia of America I have from Harper and Row dated 1955 and used in all schools. Why didn't it say Encyclopedia of the United States? Now lets get you the use of MAN in the Statute. The Congress changes WORDS to mean something entirely different than you find in Websters 1828 or 1913 Dictionary. In Changing the definition they use a TERM of law in the Codes known only to them. Remember the health bill of Obama where Aliens are used? H.R. 3962, Page 299, Line 7 "NONRESIDENT ALIENS, Subsection (a) shall not apply to any individual who is a non resident individual. And one can find further proof of the nonresident Alien not paying taxes in the Federal Register. FORUM CONTRACTUS. The forum of the contract; the court of the place where the contract is made; the place where the contract is made, is considered as a place of jurisdiction. 2 Kent, Comm. 463. quote from Which One Are You, book Well the Term NONRESIDENT ALIEN has not one Blessed Thing to do with geography but with contract. Yes CONTRACT. If you contract with the U.S. Corporation like in the above Statutes, then you are Truly a U.S. Citizen and this cannot be a Christian

Nation but for lip service. Yes, this is not a Christian nation any longer because look what you MAY have done in the statute? YOU would have to renounce The Creator God, shun his allegiance and take to a new master, in contravention to The Creators command that all he wanted is your allegiance and have no other Gods before you, as is now the United States is your God. And of course the States in America that also houses the United States, all private corporations. Isnt that correct? Is it not so that all preachers gave up the Lord for a 501 C 3 character? And will not marry anyone unless they have a license from their new master called The Corporation of the United States? Yes they gave up all Rights Jesus (Immanuel) gave to MAN. You See the Lord created MAN. The Lord never created the artificial PERSON. Did HE? So preachers are all bound by Lucifer, Not The Lord.. You go to Lucifer's church every Sunday. Yes, I have proof in the Myth and Reality book So let us see how else you can become an alleged U.S. Citizen. By fraud of course! Using the PRESUMPTION Rule. YES the United States and States all work on presumption that you are a US citizen; A SUBJECT or a SLAVE? Your choice; as they both mean the same thing. But by your actions of accepting who you are, by them telling you who you are, even if you deny it. Have you evidenced anything what-so-ever that you are not a U.S. Citizen, other than just saying you are not a US citizen? No you have not evidenced anything. Why? You constantly state its YOUR constitution; YOU formed government for your protection: YOU admit to being a U.S. Citizen on many papers you sign. Thats cause for PRESUMPTION, which is nothing but a lie to keep you under their control. Now shall we take a look at that definition of PRESUMPTION specifically at the first word in Number 1? SUPPOSITION another killer WORD defining PRESUMPTION So lets see what Websters 1828 and 1913 Dictionary say on presumption First to see the word supposition that no American has a clue to what either WORD actually means. 1828 Definition PRESUMP'TION, n. [L. proesumption.] 1. Supposition of the truth or real existence of something without direct or positive proof of the fact, but grounded on circumstantial or probable evidence which entitles it to belief. Presumption in law is of three sorts, violent or strong, probable, and light. Next to positive proof, circumstantial evidence or the doctrine of presumptions must take place; for when the fact cannot be demonstratively evinced, that which comes nearest to the proof of the fact is the proof of such circumstances as either necessarily or usually attend such facts. These are called presumptions. Violent presumption is many times equal to full proof. 2. Strong probability; as in the common phrase, the presumption is that an event has taken place, or will take place. Poor Webster made a critical error. Yes he did. In the paragraph above #2 He left out the word either. That makes the word Or, an And, in law. This is what is said; OR, conj. A disjunctive particle used to express an alternative or to give a choice of one among two or more things. It is 6

also used to clarify what has already been said, and in such cases, means `in other words,' `to wit,' or `that is to say.' Or is frequently misused; and courts will construe it to mean `and' where it is so used. State v, Circuit Court of Dodge County, 176 Wis. 198, 186 N.W. 732, 734; Northern Commercial Co. v, U.S., C.C.A. Alaska, 217 F. 33,36; Spillman v, Succession of Spillman, 147 La. 47, So. 489, 490; Smiley v Lenane, 336 Ill. 66, 1 N.E. 2d 213, 216. However, where the word `or' is preceded by the word `either,' it is never given a conjunctive meaning. Smith v Farley, 155 App. Div. 813, 140 N.Y.S. 990, 992. Do you see how the education System Set-up by so called government dumbed you all down so you do not know the English Language or sentence structure at all? To top that off they created TERMS from WORDS and gave it their definitions. The TERM NONRESIDENT ALIEN simply means an Alien to their Federal . Federal meaning CONTRACT! Try this on for size . Did you file your contract 1040 last year? Isn't it called a FEDERAL (CONTRACT) form ? You bet it is. Barry video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1GuANgz2RY&feature=relmfu 1913 DefinitionPresumption (presumption) n. (?; 215) Pre*sump"tion [L. praesumptio: cf. F. prsomption, OF. also presumpcion. See Presume.] The act of presuming, or believing upon probable evidence; the act of assuming or taking for granted; belief upon incomplete proof. Ground for presuming; evidence probable, but not conclusive; strong probability; reasonable supposition; as, the presumption is that an event has taken place. That which is presumed or assumed; that which is supposed or believed to be real or true, on evidence that is probable but not conclusive. Conclusive presumption. See under Conclusive. -- Presumption of fact (Law), an argument of a fact from a fact; an inference as to the existence of one fact not certainly known, from the existence of some other fact known or proved, founded on a previous experience of their connection; supposition of the truth or real existence of something, without direct or positive proof of the fact, but grounded on circumstantial or probable evidence which entitles it to belief. Burrill. Best. Wharton. -- Presumption of law (Law), a postulate applied in advance to all cases of a particular class; e. g., the presumption of innocence and of regularity of records. Such a presumption is rebuttable or irrebuttable. Now SUPPOSITION, n. The act of laying down, imagining or admitting as true or existing, what is known not to be true, or what is not proved. 1. The position of something known not to be true or not proved; hypothesis. This is only an infallibility upon supposition that if a thing be true, it is impossible to be false. 2. Imagination; belief without full evidence. 1913 DefinitionSupposition (supposition) 7

n. Sup`po*si"tion [F. supposition, L. suppositio a placing under, a substitution, fr. supponere, suppositium, to put under, to substitute. The word has the meaning corresponding to suppose. See Sub-, and Position.] The act of supposing, laying down, imagining, or considering as true or existing, what is known not to be true, or what is not proved. That which is supposed; hypothesis; conjecture; surmise; opinion or belief without sufficient evidence. So conclusion says they make a lie in presuming you are their SUBJECT Then lay another lie on you in supposition Making believe the presumed lie with no evidence on their part is supposed to be the truth. And the beauty part is that you cannot counter it because what the maximum states in their law. BALLENTINE LAW 3rd Edition FICTION. Derived from Fictio in Roman Law, a fiction is defined as a false averment on the part of the Plaintiff which the defendant is not allowed to traverse, the object being to give the court jurisdiction. 3rd Ed. (1969) Pg. 468; In the case of "Willful failure to File," the Plaintiff and court invents the "fiction" that defendant is a "taxpayer." Motions and briefs which rely on precepts of law will thereafter be denied or found frivolous. This point was made clear in Roberts v. Commissioner, 176 F 2d 221, 225 (9 C.A., 1949) So there you have why all patriots lose because the courts are corporation courts designed upon Fiction to keep the Fictional PERSON , meaning You, who want a constitution; who claim on your death bed to be a U.S. citizen; to signing any and everything locking you into their private corporation and Swear to it under penalties of Perjury a TERM of Statute law, from ever prevailing. That is if You do not attack the plaintiff and his court on jurisdiction ONLY at the outset . That would be what The Informer has said long, long ago to which all patriots ignored. All of this can be found in Gilbert's Law Summary. Gilberts Law Summaries page 33 sections 207- 211 2 What constitutes "timely" objection? (a) Under state practice, D is usually required to file his motion to quash service of process before any other pleading; If he instead files a demurrer or answer (or asks for any other relief--even a continuance), he is deemed to have made a general appearance and submitted himself to the court's jurisdiction--even if he alleges lack of jurisdiction as a "defense" in his answer [84 Cal. App. 2d 229 (b) In federal practice, D must raise lack of personal jurisdiction by his initial pleading--in a motion to dismiss, or, if no such motion is filed, in his answer to the complaint. [FRCP 12(h) Of course you all

know FRCP12h is ADMIRALTY did you not? I have APPENDIX III TABLE SHOWING DISPOSITION OF ADMIRALTY RULES To FRCP such as Admiralty and all 59 Rules of Admiralty rule I ........ As to commencement of action see FRCP 3; as to service of process see FRCP 4(c). So let me ask this of you. Have you ever followed to the letter of the two statutes to become a United States citizen? Either Yes or No? Have you ever claimed US citizenship? Have you ever claimed the constitution is yours? Have you ever signed anything under penalty, where in you say you are a U.S. Citizen and it;s all under presumption? It has to be yes and for two reasons. The next two Questions prove by Presumption that you are. #1 Did you ever register to Vote? #2 Have you ever signed any IRS tax form? Be not so hasty to think you lost and there is no way out. This is what the dumbing down education system was designed to do. There is a quote in my The Myth and The Reality book, I use here to prove a point what it does to you.
"Reason and Ignorance, the opposites of each other, influence the great bulk of mankind. If either of these can be rendered sufficiently extensive in a country, the machinery of Government goes easily on. Reason obeys itself, and Ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it." "The Rights of Man," Thomas Paine

Go back and read the case and remember that phrase; AND NOT OTHERWISE. That is very specific is it not? The Not otherwise would eliminate PRESUMPTION RULE would it not? Here is what was said by the highest legal person in the United States. The Solicitor General of the United States and is self explanatory and the source is given. I am in yellow, as a declared nonresident alien in 1998 by the Pope, The attorney general of Great Britain, The make believe US Treasury, The National Accounts Director and the Private IRS.,
An alien owes no allegiance or obedience to our government, or to our constitution, laws, or proclamations. A citizen subject is bound to obey them all. In refusing such obedience, he is guilty of crime against his country, and finds in the law of nations no justification for disobedience. An alien, being under no such obligation, is justified in refusing such obedience. Over an alien enemy, our government can make no constitution, law, or proclamation of obligatory force, because our laws bind only our own subjects, and have no extra-territorial jurisdiction. Over citizens who are subjects of this government, even if they have so far repudiated their duties as to become enemies, our constitution, statutes, and proclamations are the supreme law of the land. . The fact that their enforcement is resisted does not make them void. It is not in the power of armed subjects of the Union to repeal or legally nullify our constitution, laws, or other governmental acts. SOURCE: The Legal Classics Library War Powers under The Constitution of the United States 1864 tenth Ed Entered by Act of Congress In the Clerks Office of the District Court of the District of Massachusetts Special Edition 1997.

And the case that thousands of Patriots kept quoting from the 70's to the 1990's had truth, but the Patriots were blinded by their Sheer ignorance, was the Erie Railroad case 1882. Not one of

all the patriots from 1882 to present caught it especially a man much malign, Larry Becraft that had this to say what the Dissenting opinion of Justice Field said and that can be found on the internet of Larrys website. Larry's Quote. United States v. Erie Ry. Co., 106 U.S. 327, 333, 1 S.Ct. 223 (1882): Federal tax case, no important principle within majority opinion. However, Justice Field wrote in his dissent: "The power of the United States to tax is limited to persons, property, and business within their jurisdiction, as much as that of a state is limited to the same subjects within its jurisdiction." End quote.. You see he left out the part about the nonresident alien. Here it is what the attorney for untruth left out, but Justice Field laid it out so clear that anyone with a brain could see. Field said this, to shorten the article. I paraphrase; "The government thus lays a tax, through the instrumentality of the company, upon the income of a non-resident alien over whom it cannot justly exercise any control, nor upon whom it can justly lay any burden.". The power of the United States to tax is limited to persons, property, and business within their jurisdiction, as much as that of the State is limited to the same subjects within its jurisdiction." Now go back to the federal Register to see it squares with Fields rendition of Whiting The Solicitor General of the United States in 1864, some 18 years later in 1882. The Informer September 1, 2011 BOOKS BY THE INFORMER BOOKS 12-11 PRICES [1]-"Which One Are You" 58.00 [2] - Vol. I and I-A, Response to "Which One Are You" 15.00 [3] - Vol. II, Response to "Which One Are You" 15.00 [4] - Would You Like the Constitution as a Source of Rights 10.00 [5] - The Big Lie 9-

10

10.00 [6] - The Big Lie III

58.00 [7] - Works of the Informer 7.00 [8] - Reality

5.00 [9] - "The New History of America" (ten or more - 24.00 each) 32.00 [10] - Addendum to New History of America included in above price [11] - The MYTH and The REALITY [New Book available] 35.00 Book #6 is Not discounted. Book #9 is ONLY discounted for ten or more For mail Outside the United States postage is 6.00 more per item All payment is either cash or US POSTAL Money ORDER left COMPLETELY BLANK. YOU KEEP THE RECEIPT All other money orders will be returned. Mail to A bar C, 7055 Mountain Rd, Oxford, North Carolina 27565. Include name and address to be shipped.. Buying all books at once, the special price is only $187.00 for the month of September. Shipping and Handling is 10.95 for all books.

11