United States vs.
United States vs.
United States Of America
Few Americans realize that There are three definitions for the "United States". Most have been misled to believe that the term "United States" has a single meaning and is a generic term referring to the country as a whole. Not always so. The legal standing of each individual American to any one of the three varies depending on his lack of status or his status in law. If you are a citizen of the District of Columbia (the Democracy) you have privileges granted by congress--Or, if you are a Citizen of the Union (the Republic) you are endowed with Rights --some of which are unalienable. All licenses are privileges whereas Rights are gifts from God. Black's Law Dictionary, 4th Edition at page 1703 defines the term as follows, "UNITED STATES". This term has several meanings. (1) It may merely be the name of a sovereign occupying the position analogous to that of other sovereigns in the family of nations. (2) It may designate territory over which sovereignty of the United States extends; or, (3) it may be the collective name of the states which are united by and under the Constitution. " Hooven & Allison Co. vs Evatt, 65 S.Ct. 870, 880, 324 U.S. 652, 89 L. Ed. 1252."
The first (1) "United States" is as a sovereign among the nations of the World under International Law (a nation amongst nations). It consists of (1) the Union States and (2) the federal zone (District of Columbia, U.S. territories and possessions, forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings), and is represented collectively in the international arena by the U.S. Consuls abroad as one and the same entity. The flag that properly represents it in the world arena is "Old Glory".
The second (2) "United States in Hooven, supra, was created by the Constitution in Art. 1 ,Clause 8, Cls. 17 and 18. This "second United States" received further authority when under Art. 4, Clause 3, C1. 2, "to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the territory or other Property belonging to this United States" but it gave no authority to Congress to extend its municipal authority into the Union States. The latter gave Congress power to extend its jurisdiction (law making powers) beyond the limits of the District of Columbia over which Congress was to exercise "exclusive Legislation" to include the former territories such as the Northwest territory, Alaska, Hawaii, and the Philippine Islands, and currently, American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, the Northern Mariana Islands, and other territories, possessions, areas and enclaves. It's flag is the Stars and Stripes with the yellow fringe representing a plenary Martial Law jurisdiction. The geographical area known as the "United States" (DC) has its own citizens. (see United States vs. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 588) who are generally referred to as United States citizens. The yellow-fringed flag signifying this jurisdiction is not for decorative purposes. It signifies the jurisdiction of the District, also known as the Corporate U.S. Federal that has been extended into the Union states by the 14th Amendment. This is the flag of the Democracy. It should be obvious to everyone who observes the flag next to his Senator or Representative from Washington D.C., that he represents the Districts interest in the area of his constituency and not the other way around. When the function of the Circuit Courts of the United States of America was changed to appellate status by another layer of courts, these courts were labeled United States District Courts-- the courts of the District. Where are the courts of the United States America sitting today ??
The third (3rd) "United States" ( of America ) described in Hooven, supra, is the 50 Union States united by and under the Constitution. This "3rd united States" (of America) is known as the Republic. It's flag is "Old Glory" In the Constitutional Courts, the civil authority of the Constitution is signified by the Stars and Stripes hung vertically behind the bench just as it hangs behind the Speaker's Chair in the house of Representatives. Why, one might logically ask, is that not found in our courtrooms today?
The Republic has Citizens of it's own called American Nationals. Those are the Sovereign Citizens who qualify as such by being Members of the Posterity refereed to in the Preamble and can only be the Natural Born or Naturalized White Inhabitants of each state whose forefathers delegated by solemn agreement certain powers to the Congress of the "United States" (D.C.), which powers are limited to those delegated in Art. 1, Clause 8, Cls. 1-16 and Art. 4, Clause 3, Cl. 2, though today unlawfully expanded far beyond Constitutional limits by the usurpation on the one hand and by the deception of offering benefits by contract which American Nationals unwittingly and unknowingly enter on the other hand.
When legislating for the third "(3rd) united States" (of America) all powers not enumerated in Art. 1, Clause 8, Cls. 1-16, are reserved for those sovereign Citizens and states of the Republic by the 9th and 10th Amendments to the Constitution of these united States of America (In Union) respectively. The Founding Citizens of the Republic gave very limited powers to the Congress of the United States to legislate for the geographical area known above as the "3 Union States", described in the Hooven case, supra. These legislative powers are limited to being exclusive within the area of it's jurisdiction as is that power possessed by any one of the legislatures of the 50 states of the Union when legislating for its responsive geographical area. However, when legislating for the 50 Union states collectively as a nation, Congress is bound by the chains of the Constitution and must remain inside the jurisdictional boundaries of Art. 1, Clause 8, Cls. 1-16, "and out of the jurisdiction of any particular State" [18 U.S.C. Clause 7 (1), (5), & (7), see particularly Clause 7 (3)].
Territories, power of the United States over, as plenary[ full, entire, complete, absolute ] In exercising its constitutional power to make all needful regulations respecting the territory belonging to the (2nd) United States, Congress is not subject to the same Constitutional limitations as when it is legislating for the 3rd states of the Union.
Hooven & Allison Co. vs Evatt, supra; Downes vs. Bidwell 182 U.S. 244
Constitutional Guaranties as extended to territories.
"In general the guarantees of the Constitution, save as they are limitations upon the exercise of excessive legislative power, when exerted for or over the insular possessions of the United States, extend to them only as Congress, in the exercise of it's legislative power over territories belonging to the United States, has made those guarantees applicable." Hooven & Allison Co. vs. Evatt, supra. ie., The Court states that the rights of those within Congress's sphere at exclusive jurisdiction are mere "privileges" extended them at the whim of Congress. Those who live in the District of Columbia, it's enclaves, territories, or possessions, and those who live in the ceded areas of the several states (called "federal areas or enclaves") are known as #2 United States citizens. They are true federal citizens. From the standpoint of Constitutional law Congress has 100% control over the lives of All #2 United States citizens whenever they reside in the several states, or elsewhere, and their rights are subject to Congress's exclusive legislative authority. Such rights are called "civil rights". This type of government is a "Legislative Democracy", the object of which, since passage of the 14th Amendment, has been to rob Natural Born Citizens of their birthright and bring all Americans into the Democracy under the legislative authority of Congress as a single group under authoritarian rule --contrary to the intent of the Organic Constitution. In contrast, white people living in the Union States (the Republic) are not under the Congress's legislative authority and are known as American Nationals. They are citizens of the (3rd) united States of America. The reason that the federal government prefers that everyone submit to its authority "voluntary" under the 14th Amendment through participation in Social Security is that the IRS can lawfully tax only federal #2 United States citizens, it's employees and those others who willingly contract with it. and not #3 American Nationals who chose not to. It's authority does not lawfully extend to the latter unless they "voluntarily" place themselves under the "private commercial law" of CORPORATE U.S. FEDERAL by contracting with it by such a simple and subtle means as merely using Federal Reserve Notes and associated commercial paper instruments. Included in this latter group are those Whites who elected to be 14th Amendment citizens by "voluntarily" entering into unilateral contracts with the federal government by contracting for Social Security Old Age Insurance, obtaining licenses, privileges, etc, and by "voluntarily" making W-4 and 1040 contracts annually. This is what is meant by their claim that the federal income tax is "voluntary". In this way, those who "volunteer" themselves into federal contracts place themselves under the authority of Congress's powers to regulate commerce under Art. 1, Clause 8, Cl.3, subjecting themselves to the federal income tax. Thus the federal government ultimately obtains legal title to all of our property and total control over our lives leaving us with only the equitable interest so long as we perform the terms of our contracts. A serious breach of the contract means the loss of our equity; i.e., the government will take our property. The 1st clause of the 14th Amendment created a subject matter enclave jurisdiction to "artificially" create citizens not circumscribed by the Organic Law (Negroes, corporations, licensees, etc.) and placed them directly under municipal authority of Congress so that wherever they might "reside" in any one of the several states, territories, or possessions, they are within the scope of Congress's legislative authority as their existence is a federal state created privilege.
Since the nations bankruptcy in 1933-- and the subsequent overthrow of the Constitution in 1933--though our government will not "openly and officially" admit it-- its position is that all Natural Born Citizens are also "subjects" with jurisdiction acquired by our "voluntary" contractual participation in Worldwide Social Insurance. Accordingly, all races are considered joined together as 14th Amendment (D.C.) citizens, "subjects" since being "enrolled" into Commerce by their "birth certificate", and by subsequently confirming their consent, when "applying for" such Unilateral Contracts as the Drivers and Marriage Licenses, Social Security Application, Selective Service and Voters' Registration, Bank Accounts, Credit Applications, W-4, and 1040 Income Tax Contracts, etc.For those who would chose to follow Satan, God provided flaws in the Constitution -- Art. 1 Clause 8, Cls 3, 17,& 18, and Art. 1, Clause 10, Cl. 1- - for the International Bankers to discover , to humble Christian Americans who would turn their backs on their God to worship the strange gods of greed, power, prestige, sex, the sports world, etc.- - their idols of materialism - - all violations of the First Commandment. When a Natural Born Citizen with a SS# refuses to sign a 1040 contract the federal courts will rule that he has " a know legal duty" which compels him to contract with government without ever requiring the government to produce the laws that make him liable for the tax and require the affirmative act of filing. Such quasi- coerced and compelled "commercial agreements"- - though entered out of fear - - need only be entered voluntarily and intentionally to have validity. The fact that he did not enter the agreement knowingly is immaterial. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.
It has taken concerned American Nationals 62 years to figure out why our Constitutional protections have been legislated away since 1913 by a Congress initially ordained with no such powers. Under the Common Law, violations require an injured party (a Corpus Delicti), and contracts must be entered Knowingly, Willingly, and with full knowledge of informed consent (intentionally). Having done so unknowingly or unwillingly could not have resulted in any forfeiture of unalienable Rights that would bring about a loss of property (labor) or liberty (held in captivity) as has been the case resulting from alleged Internal Revenue Code violations by American Nationals. Such an insidious plot perpetrated against American Nationals could only have been conceived and hatched in the mind of Satan. How did this system of Commercial Law develop? It developed as a result of the use of the introduction and use of Federal Reserve Notes (Commercial Paper). In pursuance of our use of this "Commercial Paper" the courts in our country are proceeding under the old Negotiable Instruments Low which has been codified into the Uniform Commercial Code and subsequently adopted by all the states. A Federal Reserve Note dollar is a fictional instrument a "colorable" dollar, and not the lawful dollar described in Clause 9 of the Coinage Act of 1792, (371-1/4 grains of .999 silver.) Common Law and Equity use gold and silver; Admiralty use gold only. All systems of law described in the Constitution are based on substance. No system of law that uses paper can be genuine - - -therefore it is a "colorable" system of law. So the Banksters and the Bar Association invented this new "colorable" jurisdiction to support this colorable law called "statutory law" which operates not according to "Public Law" but according to "Public Policy". For many years Patriots thought that because this statutory jurisdiction followed Admiralty rules it was an Admiralty jurisdiction. Not so! The only reason the Banksters did not enforce the Bankruptcy of 1933 by 1938 and foreclose on this and other bankrupt nations is that they did not have control of the guns. So you see why it is today that gun control is our governments paramount objective through deception of anti-terrorism legislation?
Our servants of the Public Trust have long ignored the meaning of the 9th and 10th Amendments and the Concept of "unalienable Rights" so eruditely stated by Jefferson in the Declaration Of Independence for the benefit of the People of this nation and their Posterity. Our Natural and Unalienable Rights run much deeper than those so called "civil rights" regulated by Congress through the 14th Amendment, [Proof of this among others is the duplicate due process clause provided therein for its citizen "subjects" ]If we expect to claim our Rights it is our individual responsibility to see that the Bill of Rights is enforced and that those violating our Rights are tried for Treason. ] Truly, we are engaged in a spiritual battle. The situation that presently exists in the 50 Union States is the very reason the 2nd Amendment was written - - so that the contract called the Constitution could be enforced by the People (i.e. the state 3 Citizens).
Why all the confusion over the simple term "United States" ?
Obviously, to extend the taxing powers beyond their constitutionally authorized limits. Everybody knows that:" The District of Columbia is not a state within meaning of the Constitution" [ U.S. vs. Virginia (1805) ] like the 50 states of the Union, and yet it is referred to in all the (2) United States Codes as a "State", meaning the corporate and statutory venue of the Union. The District of Columbia is a corporation which is also known as the "1 & 2 United States." It must have it's own definition for "state" since it 1 & 2 and the territorial States were not formed as Union States (3) by and under the Constitution. It is the primary entity owning Guam, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, American Samoa, the Northern Mariana Islands, the Virgin Islands, etc., which are federal States. Nevertheless, the federal courts are unconstitutionally enforcing the jurisdiction of CORPORATE U.S. FEDERAL (2) entity upon the entire geographical area of the Union states (3) as if they were under Congress' exclusive legislative authority (see 18 U.S.C. Clause 3231, with it's Cross References referring the reader to 18 U.S.C. Clause 7, @ (3). The law is clear on this point, but the courts won't enforce it. Here are the facts concerning the term "United States" when used in the federal tax code (Title 26) which has it's own peculiar definitions (called terms of art) written by the craftiest of legal minds, and paid by our tax dollars to defraud us, the American People, of our labor property.
1."United States" does not mean the fifty states of the Union except in
two extremely limited areas which deal with excise taxes on articles and goods.
2. "United States" means "federal areas" within the fifty states of the Union which are ceded to the "United States" and under the municipal authority of the Congress seated in Washington, D.C., but it does not include the entire geographical areas of the several states of the Union.
3. "United States" means the possessions of the District of Columbia which are its States - - -Guam, Puerto Rico, American Samoa, and the Virgin Islands. It does not mean the 50 Union States.
4. The numbers 2 and 3 above are called "States" but are not to be confused with the states of the Union, such as Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky. The "Internal Revenue Code" is purposely written to mislead and is purposefully misconstrued by the courts in the interest of promoting "Public Policy".
5. "United States" are: Congress assembled at home (the seat of government), the District of Columbia and its territories (termed States in the IRS Code) and its possessions (ceded areas, military posts, navy yards, etc.) called federal enclaves.
6. "United States Citizen" does not mean a Natural Born Citizen who is an American National. State Inhabitants who live in the Common Law venue and jurisdiction of one of the 50 Union States are not "subject to" the income tax laws unless they either work for the federal government [see 26 U.S.C. Clause 6331(?)] and thus are compelled to pay a Kickback for the contractual privilege received. Or they are those who produce alcohol, or tobacco under Title 27, the Stamp Tax Act. The District of Columbia is referred to as a "State" in the Income tax laws and Social Security laws, as well as in all other codes of the "United States" to purposely leave the law open to interpretation so the courts can "mold" it in the interest of "Public Policy" under the Colorable Law of the Uniform Commercial Code. Federal Law Distinguishes How our government complies with the law while promulgating the fraud...
Do they know the difference? You bet they do! and the following law proves it. From the Code of Civil Procedure.28 United States Code: Section 1746 Unsworn declarations under penalty of perjury. "Wherever, under law of the United States, or any rule, regulation, order, or requirement made pursuant to law, any matter is required or permitted to be supported by him, as true under penalty of perjury, and dated in substantially the following form.
(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).
(2) If executed within the United States , its territories, possessions, or commonwealths: "I declare (or certify, verily, or state) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on (date) (Signature) [emphasis mine] The writers of the Code of Civil Procedure in (1) above are referring to the Common Law venue and jurisdiction (that of the Republic), and in (2) above, the statutory venue and jurisdiction of the District Of Columbia (that of the Democracy) -- not just whether one is inside or outside of the country -- but whether one is legally situated inside or outside the Republic, through your ignorance in this instance will never be challenged. Please also note that when government employees and agents sign documents they are only required to swear that the information is true, correct and NOT "Complete " as is required of those United States citizens/"subjects" who submit 1040 contracts because of their so-called "voluntary" relationships with the District. That should incline one to inquire just who considers whom the master and whom the servant in this relationship. A word to the wise ....
Copyrighted at Common Law (rev. February 27, 1998)
Reprinted with permission.