From TC on 12/28/2012
**************************************************************
Re: Senate Betrays America Again - Reportedly
....
Interestingly enough congress does not
legislate for the people
Congress legislates for the federal territories and regulates commerce
between the statse. that legislation for the federal territories need not be
constitutional.
Copy and past the following address.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=HuMmQX2TWoQ
First is the issue of your being a citizen of
the United States. Most everyone would seemingly agree that they are a “proud
American” and therefore equally proud to be called a citizen of the United
States. But how do the law and the Supreme Court define a United States
citizen and most importantly the rights, privileges and immunities associated
with being one.
“there is in our Political System, a
government of each of the several states and a government of the United
States Each is distinct from the
other and has citizens of its own.”. United States v. Cruikshank, 92 US 542,
(1875) “There is a clear distinction between national citizenship and state
citizenship.” 256 P. 545, affirmed 278 US 123, Jordan v. Tashiro (1928)“The
only absolute and unqualified right of a United States citizen is to
residence within the territorial boundaries of the United States,” US vs.
Valentine 288 F. Supp. 957.
“The privileges and immunities clause of the
14th Amendment protects very few rights because it neither incorporates the
Bill of Rights, nor protects all rights of individual citizens. Instead this
provision protects only those rights peculiar to being a citizen of the
federal government; it does not protect those rights which relate to state
citizenship.”
Jones v. Temmer, 89 F. Supp 1226
Does the above comport with your
pre-established notion that being a United States citizen is the best of all
worlds regarding your rights, freedom and liberty. Did you even know there
was such a thing as a state Citizen and it was different from being a U.S.
citizen? Are you
possibly shocked to know that as a 14th Amendment U.S. citizen, one does not
have the protection of the Bill of Rights; in fact 14th Amendment U.S.
Citizenship protects very few rights! Did the government employees teaching
in the public schools ever teach you this!
In the Constitution of the United States, the
phrase "Citizen of the United States" appears. Because this phrase
appears within a Constitution, not a statute, the meaning of the phrase is
determined by the meaning intended by those who wrote and signed the
Constitution. If the intended meaning is manifest, there is no power on
earth, including that of a criminal in a black robe, which can alter the
meaning of the phrase. The meaning of the phrase "Citizen of the United
States" is well understood. That phrase is shorthand for the sentence,
"All the Citizens of the 13 independent nations [called
"states"] that are a party to this Constitution". The
important element that you should understand is that the "Citizen of the
United States" spoken of in the Constitution of the United States is
more properly and accurately a Citizen of the state in which he lives. The
phrase "Citizen of the United States" is actually a euphemism used
for convenience and brevity, and not a legal title
Is there a difference between the 'UNITED
STATES'
and the 'united States of America'?
It becomes obviously necessary to know the
definition of the United States so that jurisdiction can be determined.
Lets see what the UNITED STATES congress has
to say in, UNITED STATES Code title 28 section 1746 (1) and (2). USC Title 28
is JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE Code.
§ 1746. Unsworn declarations under penalty of
perjury
(1) If executed without the United States: ‘‘I
declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty
of perjury under the laws of the United
States of America that the foregoing is true and
correct. Executed on (date).
(Signature)’’.
(2) If executed within the United States, its
territories, possessions, or commonwealths: ‘‘I
declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty
of perjury that the foregoing is true and
correct. Executed on (date).
(Signature)’’.
(Added Pub. L. 94–550, § 1(a), Oct. 18, 1976, 90 Stat. 2534.)
>From this we can determine that perjury
laws for the United States of America are different than the perjury laws for
United States.
To gain a more comprehensive comprehension of
the definition of the 'UNITED STATES' we must look to some Supreme Court
rulings.
First lets look to the ruling in the case
entitled, Hooven & Allison Co. V. Evatt, Tax Commissioner of Ohio, 324
U.S., 1944, the Court made the following statement, “the term ‘United States’
may be used in anyone of several senses. It may be merely the name of a
sovereign occupying the position analogous to that of other sovereigns in the
family of nations. It may designate the territory over which the sovereignty
of the United States extends, or it may be the collective name of the states
which are united by and under the Constitution.”
First the term, 'United States' may be merely the
name of a sovereign.
We might ask just what is this thing that has the name United States and is
Sovereign?
For an answer we can look to: USC title 28 section 3002 subsection 15(A).
TITLE 28—JUDICIARY AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURE
§ 3002. Definitions
(15) ‘‘United States’’ means—
(A) a Federal corporation; .
>From this examination we can see that this
Sovereign with the name “United States” is a “Federal corporation”. And we
can see that it is this corporation with the name 'United States' which has
sovereignty which extends over the territory called 'United States' . And
lastly in “Hooven & Allison Co. v, Evatt” it is stated that “it[United
States] may be the collective name of the states which are
united by and under the Constitution.”
The States united by and under the
constitution are separate and distinct in respect to the states united by the
articles of confederation.
So far we can see that:
1) United States is a “Federal corporation”;
2) United States is the name of the territory over which the corporation
rules;
3) United States is the name of a group of territories united by and under
the Constitution.
Lets look for some verification of the
definition of State.
In the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) as of May 15, 1990, at section 3121(e),
certain definitions are given. First, the term ‘State’ is defined as, “The
term ‘State’ includes the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and American
Samoa.”
Hey wait a minute I thought these were
territories, not States, and what about Oregon, California and Idaho?
Next, the definition of ‘United States’ is given as, “The term ‘United
States’ when used in a geographical sense includes the Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa.”
Here we notice that Oregon, California, Idaho and the other states are not
'included' in the definition of “United States” and therefore must be
excluded.
Could it be that Oregon ,California, Idaho and the other states are included
in the united states of America, united by and under the articles of
Confederation?
Lets look to Blacks law first edition for the
definition of
“CONFEDERACY.”
In international law. A league or
agreement between two or more independent
states whereby they unite for their mutual
welfare and the furtherance of their common
aims. The term may apply to a union so
formed for a temporary or limited purpose,
as in the case of an offensive and defensive
alliance; but it is more commonly used to
denote that species of political connection
between two or more independent states by
which a central government is created, invested
with certain powers of sovereignty,
(mostly external,) and acting upon the several
component states as its units, which,
however, retain their sovereign powers for
domestic purposes and some others. See
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
CONFEDERATION. A league or compact
for mutual support, particularly of
princes, nations, or states. Such was the
colonial government during the Revolution.
F E D E R A L GOVERNMENT. The
system of government administered in a
state formed by the union or confederation
of several independent or quasi independent
states; also the composite state so
formed.
In strict usage, there is a distinction between
a confederation and a, federal government.
The former term denotes a league
or permanent alliance between several states,
each of which is fully sovereign and independent,
and each of which retains its
full dignity, organization, and sovereignty,
though yielding to the central authority a
controlling power for a few limited purposes,
such as external and diplomatic relations.
In this case, the component states are the
units, with respect to the confederation, and
the central government acts upon them, not
upon the individual citizens. In a federal
government, on the other hand, the allied
states form a union,—not, indeed, to such
an extent as to destroy their separate organization
or deprive them of quasi sovereignty
with respect to the administration of their
purely local concerns, but so that the central
power is erected into a true state or nation,
possessing sovereignty both external and internal,—
while the administration of national
affairs is directed, and its effects felt, not by
the separate states deliberating as units, but
by the people of all, in their collective capacity,
as citizens of the nation. The distinction
is expressed, by the German writers,
by the use of the two words "Staatenbund"
and "Bundesstaat;" the former denoting a
league or confederation of states, and the
latter a federal government, or state formed
by means of a league or confederation.
It can be found in the 'Declaration of
Independence' (Adopted by Congress on July 4, 1776)
“The Unanimous Declaration of the Thirteen United States of America”
and
“We, therefore, the representatives of the United States of America, in
General Congress, assembled,appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for
the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name, and by the authority of the
good people of these colonies, solemnly publish and declare, that these
united colonies are, and of right ought to be free and independent states;
that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all
political connection between them and the state of Great Britain, is and
ought to be totally dissolved; and that as free and independent states, they
have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish
commerce, and to do all other acts and things which independent states may of
right do. And for the support of this declaration, with a firm reliance on
the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our
lives, our fortunes and our sacred honor.”
>From this we can conclude that each state(United States of America) is
free and independent and are known as the United States of America
(independent republic nation states).
Whereas the United states (territories) are not.
Now refer to the articles of confederation:
Article I. The Stile of this Confederacy shall be "The United States of
America."
Article II. Each state [The United States of
America] retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every Power,
Jurisdiction, and right, which is not by this confederation expressly
delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled. [emphisis mine]
Again we see the difference between The United States of America and the
United States.
Now for further insight lets look to US
supreme court ruling in Howard v. Sinking Fund of Louisville,
There has been created a fictional Federal “State within a state”. See Howard
v. Sinking Fund of Louisville, 344 U.S. 624, 73 S.Ct. 465, 476, 97 L.Ed. 617
(1953); Schwartz v. O’Hara TP. School Dist., 100 A. 2d. 621, 625, 375 Pa.
440. (Compare also 31 C.F.R. Parts 51.2 and 52.2, which also identify a
fictional State within a state.) This fictional “State” is identified by the
use of two-letter abbreviations like “CA”, “AZ” and “TX”, as distinguished
from the authorized abbreviations like “Calif.”, “Ariz.” and “Tex.”, etc.
This fictional State also uses ZIP codes which are within the municipal,
exclusive legislative jurisdiction of Congress.
Now for a little more insight lets look to:
" Eisenberg v. Commercial Union Assurance Co., 189 F.Supp. 500 (1960)
"It is to be noted that the statute differentiates between States of the
United States and foreign states by the use of a capital S for the word when
applied to a State of the United States." Eisenberg v. Commercial Union
Assurance Co., 189 F.Supp. 500 (1960)
Now for a little more insight lets look to: 4 U.S.C.S. Sec. 110(d)
Notice here that the United states of america are foreign to the United
States.
Evidence that the UNITED STATES is foreign in respect to united States of
America is is found in the 5 points as follows:
(1) December 26th 1933 49 Statute 3097 Treaty Series 881 (Convention on
Rights and Duties of States) stated CONGRESS replaced STATUTES with
international law, placing all States under international law.
(2) December 9th 1945 International
Organization Immunities Act relinquished every public office of the United
States to the United Nations.
(3) 22 CFR 92.12-92.31 FR Heading “Foreign Relationship” states that an oath
is required to take office.
(4) Title 8 USC 1481 stated once an oath of office is taken citizenship is
relinquished, thus you become a foreign entity, agency, or state. That means
every public office is a foreign state, including all political subdivisions.
(i.e. every single court is considered a separate foreign entity)
(5) Title 22 USC (Foreign Relations and Intercourse) Chapter 11 identifies
all public officials as foreign agents.
4 U.S.C.S. Sec. 110(d). The term “State”
includes any Territory or possession of the United States. ( Note: the use of
the capital “S” in “State” is reference to the designated territorial
“States” and possessions held by the Corporate “United States”.)
TITLE 2-- CHAPTER 14 Sec. 431. Definitions
(12) The term ``State'' means a State of the United States, the District of Columbia,
the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or a territory or possession of the United
States.
Further proof of the foreign status of the
United States is found at:
The issues as to whether there are different
meanings for the term "United States", and whether there are three
different "United States" operating within the same geographical
area, and one "United States" operating outside the Constitution
over its own territory (in which it has citizens belonging to said
"United States"), were settled in 1901 by the Supreme Court in the
cases of De Lima v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 1 and Downes v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244.
In Downes supra, Justice Harlan dissented as follows:
The idea prevails with some -- indeed, it found expression in arguments at
the bar -- that we have in this country substantially or practically two
national governments; one, to be maintained under the Constitution, with all
its restrictions; the other to be maintained by Congress outside and
independently of that instrument, by exercising such powers as other nations
of the earth are accustomed to exercise.
[Downes supra, page 380, emphasis added]
He went on to say, on page 382:
It will be an evil day for American liberty if the theory of a government
outside of the supreme law of the land finds lodgment in our constitutional
jurisprudence. No higher duty rests upon this court than to exert its full
authority to prevent all violation of the principles of the Constitution.
[Downes supra, page 382, emphasis added]
Quoting Fourteen Diamond Rings v. United States, 183 U.S. 176; cf. De Lima v.
Bidwell, 182 U.S. 1; Dooley v. United States, 182 U.S. 222; Faber v. United
States, 221 U.S. 649; cf. Huus v. New York & P.R.S.S. Co., 182 U.S. 392;
Gonzales v. Williams, 192 U.S. 1; West India Oil Co. v. Domenech, 311 U.S.
20.
Two national governments (1) united States of
America and (2) United States.
Title 18 U.S.C. § 7 specifies that the
territorial jurisdiction of the United States extends only outside the
boundaries of lands belonging to any of the 50 states, and Title 40 U.S.C. §
255 specifies the legal conditions that must be fulfilled for the United
States government to have exclusive or shared jurisdiction within the area of
lands belonging to the States of the Union.
TITLE 1--GENERAL PROVISIONS
CHAPTER 1--RULES OF CONSTRUCTION
Sec. 2. ``County'' as including ``parish'', and so forth
The word ``county'' includes a parish, or any other equivalent
subdivision of a State or Territory of the United States.
(July 30, 1947, ch. 388, 61 Stat. 633.)
"The US Government Incorporated as a
for-profit commercial enterprise in the legislative act of February 21st of
1871; 41st Congress Session 3, Chapter 62 page 419 and charted a federal
company entitled 'United States, i.e. United States AKA US Incorporated, a
commercial agency originally designated as Washington D.C.; in accordance
with the so-called 14th Amendment, which the records indicate was never
ratified. The iron-fist government is a foreign corporation with respect to
the state."
“Foley Brothers, Inc. v. Filardo, 336 U.S. 281
(1949).” (U.S. regulations apply only within the U.S. territories and the
District of Columbia. “It is a well established principle of law that all
federal regulation applies only within the territorial jurisdiction of the
United States unless a contrary intent appears.”)
“Caha v. US, 152 U.S. 211 (1894)” (U.S.
regulations apply only within the U.S. territories and the District of
Columbia. “The laws of Congress in respect to those matters [outside of
Constitutionally delegated powers] do not extend into the territorial limits
of the states, but have force only in the District of Columbia, and other
places that are within the exclusive jurisdiction of the national
government.”)
The Government by becoming a corporator (See: 28 USC § 3002(15)(A)(B)(C), 22
USCA 286(e) lays down its sovereignty and takes on that of a private citizen,
it can exercise no power which is not derived from the corporate charter.
(See: The Bank of the United States vs. Planters Bank of Georgia. 6 L Ed.(Wheat)
U.S. vs. Burr. 309 U.S. 242). The REAL PARTY
IN INTEREST is not the de jure "United States of America" or
"State", but "The Bank" and "The Fund". (22
USCA 286, et seq.). The acts committed under fraud, force and seizure are
many times done under "Letters of Marque and . Reprisal" i.e.
"recapture." (See: 31 USCA 5323). such principles as "Fraud
and Justice never dwell together.” Wingate's Maxims, 680. and, "A right
of action cannot arise out of fraud."
Call the Secretary of State and order a
certified true copy of the US constitution. Notice that this US constitution
was adopted in 1871.
This is actually a constitution for the Government of the District of
Columbia. The municipality act of 1871,forming a corporation for the
Government of the District of Columbia.
Also order a copy of IRS license to conduct business in Oregon.
In the event the Secretary is unable to locate the license then a certificate
of search and unable to locate.
The FCC,CIA,FBI,NASA and all of the other
alphabet gangs were never part of the United States government. Even though
the “US Government” held shares of stock in the various Agencies.
U.S. v Strang,254 US 491,Lewis v.US,680 F.2d,1239
**************************************************************
Posted in response to below article
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
: Senate Betrays America Again - Reportedly
Passes NDAA for 2013
: & STELLAR WIND
: In his article, 'December 28-31, 2012 --
Senate delivers fatal
: end-of-term blow to Constitution', in the members' section
: at
: http://www.waynemadsenreport.com/articles/20121228
: Wayne Madsen describes the recent treachery
of current U.S.
: Senate as they reinvigorate the unlawful, unconstitutional
: warrantless electronic spying and pass President Obama's
: National Defense Authorization Act for 2013 which contains
: the same illegal detention of U.S. citizens as in 2012.
They're keeping the old warrantless
surveillance authority
: imposed by the Bush-Cheney administration under the FISA
: Amendments Act of 2008, and not only that but quite a few
: foreign countries will now have access to our emails,
: personal data, phone calls, electronic texts and messages,
: etc., as if Americans need another security hole for
: foreign pedophiles to get at the kids through!
: If a foreign pedophile or pedophile ring
cannot access the
: personal data of your kids through their own country they
: can possibly now go through databases of England, Sweden,
: Norway, Canada, Germany, Australia, and on and on to get
: information on Americans and our families.
: UGH. Devvy is right - they're a bunch of
gutless cowards.
http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?read=265292
|
