Sunday, February 3, 2013

NO LAW THAT REQUIRES ANY AMERICAN TO FILE AND PAY INCOME TAX!



BILL BENSON

Joseph R. Banister, Special Agent of the IRS finds
NO LAW THAT REQUIRES ANY AMERICAN TO FILE AND PAY INCOME TAX!
Where: At the Freedom law School's Freedom Rally www.freedomlaw.org to be held at
Sheraton Hotel in Newport Beach, California on March 13-14th, Mr. Banister will share his findings and Report with the American People.
To: All Freedom Loving Americans
Date:
February 25, 1999
From: Peymon Mottahedeh, President Freedom Law School
Dear Fellow American,
Over the last 14 months, Freedom Law School along with Bill Conklin, Free Enterprise Society, Attorney Larry Becraft, Devvy Kidd and Bill Benson have been in communication with Joseph R. Banister, who is a Special Agent (Criminal Investigation Division) of the IRS in San Jose, California, and educated Mr. Banister as to how and why there is NO LAW THAT REQUIRES ANY AMERICAN TO FILE AND PAY INCOME TAX!
Mr. Banister with his own time and money has verified that:
    1) There is NO federal STATUTE (law written by Congress of the United States) which REQUIRES ANY AMERICAN TO FILE AND PAY INCOME TAX.
    2) The 16th (the INCOME TAX) AMENDMENT of the U.S. Constitution, which was NOT PROPERLY RATIFIED INTO THE U.S. CONSTITUTION.
    3) The U.S. Government operates NOT by revenues from the Income Tax, but by borrowing MONEY, which has been CREATED OUT OF THIN AIR, from the Federal Reserve Banks.
At the bottom of this message you will find a copy of the E-Mail which Mr. Banister sent me. Mr. Banister had written a 90 page report of his investigation of the Income Tax on February 11, 1999. This report is fully backed up by references to the U.S. Constitution, the IRS Code, Internal Revenue Manuals and court cases.
Mr. Banister presented this 90 page report to his superiors and asked them to present it to the highest ranks of the IRS, up to and including the Commissioner of IRS, Mr. Charles O. Rossotti. Mr. Banister informed the IRS leadership that unless they could point-by-point refute his findings, Mr. Banister would resign from his position INSTEAD OF ENFORCING A NON-EXISTENT LAW!
Apparently the Commissioner of IRS, Mr. Charles O. Rossotti and the high level officials of the IRS, who each have taken an oath to "uphold and defend the U.S. Constitution from all enemies, foreign or domestic", have VOLUNTARILY chosen to COMMIT TREASON on the American People by refusing to review and consider the findings of Mr. Banister, which squarely challenged the lawful basis of the IRS enforcing a NON-EXISTENT and VOLUNTARY INCOME TAX on the American people by use of VIOLENT FORCE!!!
On February 17, Mr. Banister was called into his Chief's office. Mr Banister was informed that his report had been reviewed "by the highest levels of the IRS". Mr. Banister was given a memorandum which in part read: "The Internal Revenue Service will not be responding to your request and will provide you with the necessary paperwork to tender your resignation. You will be placed on administrative leave effective upon receipt of this memorandum for a period of seven calendar days to consider what actions you wish to take."
Today, February 25, 1999, the anniversary of the alleged ratification of the 16th (income tax) Amendment, Mr. Banister resigned from the IRS so that he may freely and fully inform the American people of his findings regarding the income tax and the U.S. Government.
Mr. Banister will be appearing at Freedom Law School's 1999 Freedom Rally on March 13-14th, at Sheraton Hotel (949)833-0570, 4545 Mac Arthur Blvd, Newport Beach, California to share his findings and release his report: "INVESTIGATING THE INCOME TAX: A PRELIMINARY REPORT" to the American People.
To find out the latest developments and findings of Mr. Banister you may contact Freedom Law School at www.freedomlaw.org freedomlaw@home.com. You may also call us at (714)838-2896. However, since we have limited number of phone lines and staff, please use our web-site and E-Mail whenever possible.

"All that is needed for Evil to conquer, is for good men to do nothing!"
"The price of liberty is eternal vigilance."
"If not now, when?"
"If it's to be, it's up to me."
We at Freedom Law School encourage you to investigate this Report of Mr. Banister regarding the Income Tax and the U.S. Government, and let your local IRS agents/officials, Congressmen, Senators and President know what you want them to DO in response to Mr. Banister's Report. You can find the E-Mail and phone number of your congressmen at www.house.gov.

Please share this message with the Freedom Loving American People.

**Below is the full text of Mr. Banister's E-Mail to Freedom Law School**
Dear Friends:
Well, the day of reckoning has arrived. On February 11, 1999, in my capacity as a Special Agent and federal law enforcement officer sworn to support and defend the Constitution of the United States, I submitted a "preliminary report" to the Chief of the IRS Criminal Investigation Division for the Central California District. My report summarized my findings regarding allegations that the income tax and filing of federal income tax returns is voluntary, that the 16th Amendment was never ratified, and that income taxes are not used to pay for daily government operations.
In order to ensure that unnecessary and unwarranted delay would not occur, I requested that my report be forwarded to top officials in the IRS up to and including Commissioner Charles O. Rossotti, and I respectfully requested that the Commissioner or his designee respond to the evidence in my report within 30 days. Today, my Chief called me into his office and gave me a memorandum. The memorandum dated February 17th, 1999, read in part:
"The Internal Revenue Service will not be responding to your request and will provide you with the necessary paperwork to tender your resignation. You will be placed on administrative leave effective upon receipt of this memorandum for a period of seven calendar days to consider what actions you wish to take."
I was told that officials at the highest levels of the Internal Revenue Service were consulted regarding a response to my report. Apparently, I have now joined the ranks of every other taxpayer who ever was ignored or otherwise rebuffed by the Internal Revenue Service when they petitioned the IRS for a reasonable explanation. The only conclusion that I can reach is that those officials thought it was better to rebuff my request and pass up a golden opportunity to prove my research wrong than to have to admit that so-called "tax-protesters" and other supporters of the U.S. Constitution have been right all along. Ironically, had the IRS taken the time to address my concerns, or perhaps perform the simple task of proving the allegations wrong, I would have gladly been their spokesman advising taxpayers not to fall for these untrue allegations for the rest of my career.
As the memorandum states, I have until Friday, February 26th, 1999, the day after the 86th anniversary of the alleged ratification of the 16th Amendment, to tender my resignation. This is certainly a sad day in my life. Although I was hoping for a better result, I learned today after over two years of investigation that the Internal Revenue Service is everything that the so-called "tax protesters" said it was; non-responsive, unable to withstand scrutiny, tyrannical, and agency oblivious to the rule of law and the U.S. Constitution.
May God help us all.
Joseph R. Banister

 RELATED LINKS



 YOUTUBE 



 TWITTER

AFFIDAVIT I.R.S.




Office of the Consul General
c/o PMB #106
6080 S. Hulen #360
Fort Worth, Texas
To: Charles O. Rossotti, Commissioner
   Department of the Treasury
   Internal Revenue Service
   Washington, D.C. 20224                        Certified Mail # P 388 293 073
Date: September 30, 1998                                        AFFIDAVIT
Texas                 §
                           §   SS
Dallas County   §
I, Lewis Ray Daniel, the undersigned affiant and Consul General of the Provisional Government of the Republic of Texas, do hereby make this affidavit willingly and with full knowledge of the facts set forth herein, and attest to the veracity of said facts and state that I am competent to testify to same.
On or about July 31, 1998 IRS received Notice of Lack of Authority. IRS has failed to respond and rebut the facts presented in said notice.
On or about September 11, 1998 IRS received Notice of Default Nihil Dicit. IRS has affirmed without dispute and confessed by acquiescence to the following:
1. IRS is an Administrative Agency and operates outside of the Organic Law and the
   Constitution for the United States of America.
2. There is no current Delegation of Authority from the Secretary of the Treasury of the
   United States of America to the Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service published
   in the Federal
Register.
3. There is no tax a natural individual in Texas is liable for and there is no form said
   individual is required to file with a proper OMB number assigned.
4. There are no implementing regulations authorizing the IRS to request information or
   collect tax from natural individuals in Texas.
5. There is no act passed by Congress creating the Internal Revenue Service.
6. Title 26, USC has never been passed into positive law.
7. IRS has no lawful authority to impose compelled performance or intrude upon the
   Substantive Rights or Private Property of the Provisional Government, the declared
   Citizens of the Republic of Texas or the People of Texas through private copyrighted laws,    statutes, ordinances, rules, regulations, trusts, implied contracts or to prosecute same in
   the Courts of the UNITED STATES, Administrative or otherwise.
8. IRS is engaging in fraud, mail fraud, conversion, coercion and extortion through   the mail.
Further, Affiant Sayeth Naught
                        September 30, 1998
Lewis Ray Daniel, Consul General                       Date
Republic of Texas
Provisional Government
Texas                 §
                           §   SS
Dallas County   §
WITNESSED, ACKNOWLEDGED, AND EXECUTED on this 30th  day of September , 1998.
                                  September 30, 1998
Witness                                         Date
[/S/] Bobby Clebert McCrary                       September 30, 1998
Witness                                         Date

 RELATED LINKS



 YOUTUBE 



 TWITTER

NOTICE OF DEFAULT NIHIL DICIT I.R.S.






Office of the Consul General
c/o PMB #106
6080 S. Hulen #360
Fort Worth, Texas NOTICE OF DEFAULT NIHIL DICIT
To:    Charles O. Rossotti, Commissioner
       Department of the Treasury
       Internal Revenue Service
       Washington, D.C. 20224                            Certified Mail # P 388 293 070
Notice Date: September 8, 1998
Lewis Ray Daniel, Consul General of the Provisional Government of the Republic of Texas, does hereby notice Charles O. Rossotti, Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service (hereinafter "IRS") of Default Nihil Dicit.
On or about July 31, 1998 IRS received Notice of Lack of Authority. IRS has failed to respond and rebut the facts presented in said notice. IRS has affirmed without dispute and confessed by acquiesence to the following:
1. IRS is an Administrative Agency and operates outside of the Organic Law and the
   Constitution for the United States of America.
2. There is no current Delegation of Authority from the Secretary of the Treasury of the
   United States of America to the Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service published
   in the Federal Register.
3. There is no tax a natural individual in Texas is liable for and there is no form said
   individual is required to file with a proper OMB number assigned.
4. There are no implementing regulations authorizing the IRS to request information or
   collect tax from natural individuals in Texas.
5. There is no act passed by Congress creating the Internal Revenue Service.
6. Title 26, USC has never been passed into positive law.
7. IRS has no lawful authority to impose compelled performance or intrude upon the
   Substantive Rights or Private Property of the Provisional Government, the declared
   Citizens of the Republic of Texas or the People of Texas through private copyrighted laws,    statutes, ordinances, rules, regulations, trusts, implied contracts or to prosecute same in
   the Courts of the UNITED STATES, Administrative or otherwise.
8. IRS is engaging in fraud, mail fraud, conversion, coercion and extortion through the mail.
9. Notice to the principal is notice to the agent, notice to the agent is notice to the principal.
Any response to this NOTICE is required within 10 calendar days of receipt of this NOTICE.

Lewis Ray Daniel, Consul General
Republic of Texas
Provisional Government 


 RELATED LINKS



 YOUTUBE 



 TWITTER

NOTICE OF LACK OF AUTHORITY I.R.S.




Office of the Consul General
c/o PMB #106
6080 S. Hulen #360
Fort Worth, Texas NOTICE OF LACK OF AUTHORITY
To:    Charles O. Rossotti, Commissioner
       Department of the Treasury
      
Internal Revenue Service
       Washington, D.C. 20224                            Certified Mail # P 388 293 056
Notice Date: July 22, 1998
Lewis Ray Daniel, Consul General of the Provisional Government of the Republic of Texas, does hereby notice Charles O. Rossotti, Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service (hereinafter "IRS") of Lack of Authority.
1. IRS is an Administrative Agency and operates outside of the Organic Law and the
   Constitution for the United States of America.
2. There is no current Delegation of Authority from the Secretary of the Treasury of the
   United States of America to the Commissioner of the Internal Revenue Service published
   in the Federal Register.
3. There is no tax a natural individual in Texas is liable for and there is no form said
   individual is required to file with a proper OMB number assigned.
4. There are no implementing regulations authorizing the IRS to request information or
   collect tax from natural individuals in Texas.
5. There is no act passed by Congress creating the Internal Revenue Service.
6. Title 26, USC has never been passed into positive law.
7. IRS has no lawful authority to impose compelled performance or intrude upon the
   Substantive Rights or Private Property of the Provisional Government, the declared
   Citizens of the Republic of Texas or the People of Texas through private copyrighted laws,    statutes, ordinances, rules, regulations, trusts, implied contracts or to prosecute same in
   the Courts of the UNITED STATES, Administrative or otherwise.
8. IRS is engaging in fraud, mail fraud, conversion, coercion and extortion through the mail.
9. Notice to the principal is notice to the agent, notice to the agent is notice to the principal.
Any response to this NOTICE is required within 10 calendar days of receipt of this NOTICE.

Lewis Ray Daniel, Consul General
Republic of Texas
Provisional Government 



 RELATED LINKS



 YOUTUBE 



 TWITTER

HISTORICAL FACTS



HISTORICAL FACTS SECTION
Back to "A Page of History"


Historical Fact #1:
THE FIRST TEXIAN CASUALTY "At eleven o'clock that night they reached the presidio, forced open the doors of the chapel where the Mexican soldiers were quartered, and after a brief skirmish, accepted the surrender of the defenders. In the melee, three Mexican soldiers were wounded and one was killed. The Texians had one man wounded, the first of the Texas Revolution, a free Negro named Samuel McCullogh."

Historical Fact # 2:
LOSS OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS
"Before the [Mexican] Federales (constitutionalists) had time to regroup, decree after decree undermined the federal structure and devastated the rights of individuals under the Constitution (of Mexico - 1824 - , which Stephen F. Austin was instrumental in helping draft) ... Finally, in October 1835, the constitution itself was abrogated and replaced by a new document known as the "Siete Leyes" [Seven Laws], which provided for a completely centralized government and converted the states of the erstwhile republic into "departments" (political subdivisions) ruled by governors..."

Historical Fact # 3:
WHO WANTED WAR?
The Texian movement started with the goal of getting General Antonio López de Santa Anna to return to the Mexican Constitution which Stephen F. Austin had been employed by the Mexican
government to help in its drafting. The Mexican Constitution (1824) was formed long after the Constitution of the several states of America. Austin traveled to Mexico City in hopes of getting the General to come to terms with the constitutional question and stop the growing resentment towards Mexico in Texas. The peace-loving, ever-patient Stephen F. Austin was thrown into prison for 18 months and held without charge. Upon his release, he proclaimed "They have declared war!"

Historical Fact #4
LOST IN COMMITTEE AGAIN! or HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF
The status of the nation of the Republic of Texas was sent into oblivion 130 years ago by referring it to committee by the congress of the United States. That petition has never left the instant death status of the House Judiciary Committee. April 30, 1996 - Congressional Record - House Petitions, Etc. Under Clause I of Rule XXII 71. The SPEAKER presented a petition of Chief Ambassador and Consul General, Republic of Texas, relative to a copy of "Diplomatic Notice of Perfection of International Relations Between the United States of America and The Republic of Texas", which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.


Historical Fact #5
WHERE DID THE STATE OF TEXAS COME FROM?
AND
WHAT ABOUT ANNEXATION?
The United States began annexation overtures towards Texas early in the young republic's existence. However, many of the American leaders of that day [including President John Quincy Adams] recognized the lack of constitutional provisions to lawfully annex Texas.
Eventually, an agreement was reached to annex Texas by compact. Through a joint resolution of the U.S. Congress, Texas was supposedly annexed to the United States. Other states are admitted to the union, not annexed!
In the records of congress, however, the annexation of the Republic of Texas is referred to as the "re-annexation" of Texas and also referred to as part of the Louisiana Purchase. How could this be? Was the U.S. already attempting to cover up the fraud of the "annexation?"
Ratification by a 2/3 majority vote is required to admit a state to the union. In the case of Texas this did not happen, but by a simple majority and a joint resolution of Congress.
Spain and France confirmed the boundaries of Texas. Further, the United States did not "purchase" the lands in the Louisiana Purchase, but only purchased the forts, arsenals and streets of New Orleans. The lands of the Louisiana Purchase were ceded back to the ancient ones (Washita Indians) by Napoleon himself, in the Louisiana Purchase documents!
Why was this fraud perpetrated? 

Historical Fact #6
WHO SECEDED TEXAS AND WHEN?
"At the opening session on January 28, (1861) Judge Oran M. Roberts of the Supreme Court was elected president by acclamation. The following day a vote of 152 to 6 passed a resolution (by Texas Congress) that Texas should separately (not with the other Southern States) secede from the union. The ordinance of annexation was repealed, a declaration of causes for secession adopted, a secession ordinance drafted, an interim Committee of Public Safety appointed and the date set for February 23 (1861). When the convention (delegates from the counties) passed the secession ordinance, by a vote of 166 to 8. Secession was approved (by popular vote of the people) by 46,129 to 14,697, an overwhelming sixty-six per cent."
Voted out of the United States by the Texas Congress
Voted out of the United States by the convention of county delegates
Voted out of the United States by the People (Texians)
None of the above votes were ever repealed!
Three Strikes - Your Out!



Historical Fact #7
WHY TEXAS IS NOT A STATE ACCORDING TO THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION
"Article IV Section 3 : New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of any other State, nor any State formed by the Junction of two or more States...."
We have seen no reference to Texas ever being admitted as a State of the Union.  It is always referred to as an annexation or re-annexation, as part of the Louisiana Purchase.
The argument of Texas being able to split into five states would be null and void lawfully, since the Constitution of the United States would have greater authority than the compact/contract between the U.S. and the Republic of Texas, unless it was a treaty between two powers.  However, upon instituting the presumed statehood, would the treaty become null and void, since the state of Texas would be bound by the U.S. Constitution?
The United States violated their own Constitution when it militarily took lands from Texas and made those lands parts of other States. The Compromise of 1850 between Texas and the United States breached the compact between the Republic of Texas and the U.S. and removed lands from Texas.


Historical Fact #8
DOES THE UNITED STATES CONSIDER TEXAS AS PROPERTY OF THE UNITED STATES?
"Article IV Section 3 : New States may be admitted by the Congress into this Union; but no new State shall be formed or erected within the jurisdiction of any other State, nor any State formed by the Junction of two or more States.... The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States...."
Texas was not admitted as one of the several States of the Union and the records prove that the attitude of the U.S. Congress towards Texas was re-annexation.   Did the United States consider Texas as its Territory or Property which it presumed to take authority over, and dispose of lands belonging to Texas?   How could the United States re-annex another nation, with which it had treaties as a foreign power?
Who perpetrated this fraud upon the Texian nationals, and why?



Historical Fact #9
FREEMEN or FREEDMEN?  The Civil War and the emancipation of the slaves is marked with fraud and deceit.
  1. In Texas historical documentation, the emancipated slaves are not called freemen by the United States writings and carpetbaggers.  They are referred to as freedmen.  This continued to make the ex-slaves a marked class of people.  They were not given free-man status but freed-man status.

  2.  
  3. The word emancipation, when taken back through word study into the ancient Roman civil law does not mean to make or set free.  It means the slave was sold to the State!

  4.  
  5. Frederick Douglass, abolitionist, hero for the freed slaves, former slave, and U.S. Ambassador complained of his token status.  He also remarked that until the "chattel slavery" upon all persons was lifted that no man would truly be free.

 RELATED LINKS



 YOUTUBE 



 TWITTER


Friday, February 1, 2013

Was the Annexation of Texas Really Legal?



Was the Annexation of Texas Really Legal?
by Jesse Enloe - May 4, 1998
   According to an article in the Dallas Morning News on Friday, May 1, 1998, on Thursday, April 30, 1998 Washington Federal Judge Paul L. Friedman ruled on a suit filed by Richard McLaren and his wife, Evelyn. I do not know the content of the suit, but I am responding to the reported ruling. It is reported that the ruling was that "Texas became one of the United States of America in 1845 ... and that any question about the statehood issue was laid to rest by a U.S. Supreme Court opinion issued in 1868."  Judge Friedman was also quoted as saying "It is the precedent by which this court and all courts of the United States are bound. The Republic of Texas no longer exists."
The 1868 Supreme
Court Case to which Judge Friedman was referring is "Texas v. White." There are some interesting things about this case that everyone should know.
In Texas v. White there were two questions put before the Supreme Court to answer. The question of whether Texas annexation was legal/lawful was NOT one of the questions. The case dealt with the legality of the sale of bonds, acquired in the Compromise of 1850, to White and Chiles and the legality of secession. The process by which Texas was annexed was not addressed by the Supreme Court and, to our knowledge, has never been addressed by any court in the world.
The reason that the legality of the Annexation of Texas was not a question in Texas v. White, and has never been ruled on in any other case the Federal Court or Supreme Court has ever heard is that the Federal Courts do not have jurisdiction to answer that question. It is a POLITICAL QUESTION that can only be answered by Texas and/or the Congress of the United States. In 1868 the question was put to the Congress of the U.S. and it was sent to the Judiciary Committee where it was tabled or "put in a drawer somewhere" and NEVER answered.
The headlines that "Texas Annexation was Legal," that are appearing in many newspapers, do not appear to be an accurate rendition of Judge Friedman's decision. Because of the fact that he quoted Texas v. White shows only that he is bound by this Supreme Court decision that "Secession is not legal." This, though not relevant to the question of the annexation being lawful, is also a flawed ruling if the principle is true that "All Political Power is Inherent in the People," which is stated in the Declaration of Independence for the United States of America and in every Texas Constitution ever written.
So, let's address the real question: Was the Annexation of Texas legal? On October 16, 1843 Secretary of State A.P. Upshur, at the direction of President John Tyler, wrote to Minister Van Zandt of Texas proposing annexation. In his letter, Secretary Upshur stated "A treaty of annexation is considered the most proper form.... It is highly desirable that the treaty should be presented to the Senate at as early a period as possible." [emphasis added]
This shows that the men of the government of the United States understood that the only proper and lawful way for one nation to deal with another is by treaty. That principle is still part of International Law today. And the only way for the legislature of the United States to approve a treaty is by a two thirds vote of the Senate, per the Constitution for the United States of America.
The treaty was presented to the Senate in 1844 and was DEFEATED by a vote of 35 to 16. The following year, in 1845, the House of Representatives entered into the record a "Resolution of Annexation." The House of Representatives has no authority to initiate a matter of foreign affairs. After passing the resolution, the United States declared that Texas was a "State of the Union." This was an unlawful, fraudulent process which has been questioned since it was done, but the United States has failed at every turn to answer the questions regarding the unlawful process it used to acquire Texas. Secretary Upshur's own letter is evidence that a "Resolution" is NOT the proper and lawful way to annex a Nation as a State!
The question of the "perpetual nature of the union of American States," addressed in Texas v. White, is one that is irrelevant to the question of the lawful status of Texas since Texas was never lawfully joined to the Union. It is a maxim of law that anything done by fraud is void from the beginning.
Each person needs to think for themselves and answer the question for themselves. The United States is not going to answer the question of the Legality of Annexation. They have had 153 years, since 1845, and have not answered it yet.
Consider these questions:
Is it an established principle in United States Law and International Law that Nations deal with each other only by treaty?
Per the Constitution of the United States, how are treaties approved?
Was a Treaty of Annexation of Texas approved by the Unites States Senate? Look at the United States Congressional Records and the Constitution for the United States of America for the answers to these questions. Do not rely on anyone from the Government or anyone else. Answer the questions yourselves. There is only one possible conclusion. Texas was NOT annexed to the United States as a State by proper lawful action.
In summary, the ruling of Judge Friedman is as void as the 1868 Supreme Court decision and the annexation process itself, because it is all based on elected officials acting outside their delegated authority, which means those actions are fraudulent and unlawful. And more to the point, Judge Friedman did not say that Texas was legally annexed!
Many of the People of Texas know that Texas was never lawfully made a part of the United States of America, and the Republic of Texas not only continues to exist, it is Alive and Well! The People of the Republic of Texas remain committed to the Peaceful and Lawful Restoration of Texas as an Independent and Sovereign Nation.
We challenge the media to investigate this issue and report the truth! 


 RELATED LINKS



 YOUTUBE 



 TWITTER




What is a Straw Man?
We all need to know the
answer to this question!

What/Who is the Straw Man?
by Jesse Enloe - July 28, 1999
Straw man, as defined in Black's Law Dictionary, 6th Edition: A "front"; a third party who is put up in name only to take part in a transaction. Nominal party to a transaction; one who acts as an agent for another for the purpose of taking title to real property and executing whatever documents and instruments the principal may direct respecting the property. Person who purchases property for another to conceal identity of real purchaser, or to accomplish some purpose otherwise not allowed. [Emphasis added]
There's no telling when the deception really started, but one of the first major events was the incorporation of the United States in 1871, with the final act occurring in 1878. It appears from the Statutes at Large that this was only the incorporation of the District of Columbia, but in the final act the phrase "District of Columbia or United States" is used making the phrases interchangeable and allowing the United States to operate as a corporation.
The so-called government is not the government created by the Constitution, it is a Corporation operating in COMMERCE for a PROFIT. Every transaction is now considered by the US, INC. to be a commercial transaction by fictional entities (fictions at law).
What is a Fiction at Law?
A fiction at law, or legal fiction, is an artificially created entity that is only contemplated in law. In other words, it is not real except in the eyes of the law written by men.
Legal fictions are the opposite of natural entities, such as people. A created legal fiction is endowed by the law to have some privileges that resemble the rights that people have, such as the right to hold property and to sue and be sued.
The most common legal fictions are corporations and trusts. These have been around for quite some time with their main purpose being to limit the liability of the people holding the corporation or trust, allowing them to NOT be personally responsible for their actions.
Legal Fictions are not compatible with the Common Law, which is the law our land was founded upon. In common law, everyone is responsible for his own actions and is held accountable and responsible for any wrongdoing (harming another in any way)
What does this have to do with me?
In 1933, the governors of all the states met to discuss the "emergency" declared by FDR and to support the new process that was being established. The "government" was in
bankruptcy and had to be funded in its state of bankruptcy.
The governors made a "pledge" to the U.S., INC. to fund it. The pledge was that the assets and the energy of the people would back the "government" and secure the debt. But there was one little problem.
Natural living people cannot mix with legal fictions (corporations) so it was necessary to create a "bridge" between the fictions and the people to bring the people under and make them subservient to the "government" corporation.
When the governors made the pledge, they agreed to the birth certificates of the people with the U.S. Department of Commerce. The birth certificate is the security instrument (collateral) used to back up the pledge. The legal fiction was created by using the name on the birth certificate and writing it in all capital letters, the designation for a legal fiction. Then, because of the "pledge" YOU were determined to be the surety for the legal fiction.
Surety means: The one who is responsible to pay. So, when the government or any corporation uses any process whatsoever they are using it against the legal fiction, which they want YOU to think IS YOU. But when your name is written in all capital letters, IT IS NOT YOUR NAME!!. It is the designation of a legal fiction that is an entirely separate entity. A living human cannot be a legal fiction, and a legal fiction cannot be a living human. One is real or natural, the other is created by "law."
Whenever a government agency (such as a court) determines liability it is a liability of the legal fiction or Straw Man since everything is done in commerce. You are presumed, as evidenced by the pledge of your governor, to be the surety for the Straw Man and you must pay the liability.
REMEMBER: Every transaction is presumed by the "government" to be a transaction in commerce by a legal fiction.
What's the Answer?
The only way out of this is to defeat the presumption that you are the surety for the Straw Man (legal fiction).
The "Redemption Process", otherwise called the "Acceptance for Value" process, is the most promising way to defeat this presumption, using the Uniform Commercial Code, which is the "law" that the fictional commercial world operates under.
The first step is to "Capture the Straw Man." Filing a UCC-1 financing statement to secure a claim against the all capitalized legal fiction, or Straw Man, does this.
The next step is to accept your birth certificate for value and become the Holder in Due Course of that document. You will also want to accept for value your Drivers License and the Social Security Number that was assigned to the Straw Man.
The UCC-1 claim and the acceptance of these documents will REDEEM you from the commercial system and establish documented evidence to defeat the presumption that you are the surety for the Straw Man.
When the birth certificate is accepted for value, YOU become the Holder in Due Course and the Governor's position in the equation is also changed. Since the Governor is the GUARANTOR of the pledge when you are no longer the surety he/she becomes the surety for the Straw Man. It is my understanding that when this happens the Governor must then post a bond equal to the value you placed on your acceptance.
It's very much like if the Governor co-signed on a loan for a car for you and you stopped making the payments, the bank then looks to HIM for the payments.
I don't know about you, but personally I LOVE THIS IDEA!!! Now if I get a traffic ticket, I can just let the Governor pay the fine, since he is the surety for the Straw Man and is liable for all debts/fines/judgments incurred by the Straw Man. This is not intended to be an instruction on how to use the Redemption Process, but merely to give a basic understanding of the "fictional commercial world" we have been operating in, and how they have "bridged the gap" between this and the real live people and drawn us into their Babylonian system as a surety for a legal fiction. It is also the intention of this writing to establish in your mind that IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT YOU DEFEAT THE PRESUMPTION THAT YOU ARE THE SURETY FOR THE STRAW MAN (Legal Fiction).
How to contact the Republic of Texas:
24 Hour Information Line:
(972) 988-6660
Internet:
http://texasrepublic.com

[To download this brochure, CLICK HERE]


 RELATED LINKS



 YOUTUBE 



 TWITTER