CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
By asking for a SSN, you request to become a lifetime
permanent ward of a foreign program administered by your federal
government. You've given them
the power of attorney under the doctrine of Tacit Procuration. By confessing that you cannot provide for your own
retirement, you've stated that you expect others to take care of you.
And indeed, you are not taking care of yourself; or depositing
funds into a trust fund. Social Security is not a trust fund, nor insurance, nor an
Under the doctrine of Tacit Procuration, if you do
not stop them from managing some small affair, it is presumed that you are
asking for them to handle ALL your life's affairs for you. Whether they handle your affairs contrary to your wishes, or
even fail to give you any benefits at all (the Supreme Court in Fleming v.
allows government to deny Social Security benefits), is
irrelevant; you've given them absolute authority to act on your behalf.
You asked, in writing, on a permanent irrevocable record, to be
treated as their ward.
You become internal to the government.
You have accepted appointment to a government office.
The office of "Person" (see Appendix D).
Your Constitution was written to control government, not people.
And, you've enlisted into the government. You
can now expect to be regulated. And,
just like other forms of enlistment, you can expect to be treated harshly.
Those who hold this government office are now required to sign
forms under the penalty of perjury.
Although I haven't been able to find this document,
I've been told that those who have a social security number are federal
employees according to the 1935 Emergency Relief Act
Publication Resolution #11, 74th Congress, Session One,
Chapter 48, Section 2, of April 8, 1935.
Those who have Social Security Numbers are required
to pay taxes on their wages pursuant to section 801 of the Social Security
. This is in the Internal Revenue code in Section 3101(a)
. All you have to read is the
first five words of this law, which I’ve quoted in Appendix G.
You do not have legal rights to yourself.
Your owners have "beneficial" rights to your person,
which include all future labor. Also
see Christiansen v. Department of Social Security, 131 P2d 189, 191 for the difference between beneficial rights and legal rights.
You are registering to take public money that you did
not earn (As I have shown - it is not insurance or a trust fund, it is
theft unless you are a permanent welfare case).
You are not responsible enough to rely upon the Lord (who gives and
takes away). Or family (1st
Tim 5:8). Or Christian charity. Or
the fruits of your own labor ("...so that you will not be dependent
on anybody." 1st Thessalonians 4:11-12). 2nd Thessalonians 3:10.
A contract is not valid without consideration.
Unless you are offered a gift, you cannot take something without
agreeing to the strings attached. You
cannot agree with socialism without agreeing to provide to the communal
fund. If you ever have a
chance to study the Pilgrim's first winter, you will see that socialism
has never worked in America. Half of them died that year, because they tried socialism.
Thou shalt not steal.
Exodus 20:15 was written in stone by the finger of an unchanging
God (Deuteronomy 9:10, Ex 31:18). If you think Christians don't have to do as Christ commanded,
see 1st John 2:4. A
thief that was being executed in Luke 23:41 said that he deserved to be
executed for the crime of theft. You
too should regret your sin.
You have confessed that you need federal funds (such
as those that provide for your retirement).
You did this knowingly and with full knowledge that your
Constitution does not allows this. State
citizens can keep most of their rights, Appendix C, but you rejected state
The US Supreme Court's decision in Ex Parte Mulligan,
71 US 2, determined that STATES HAVE A DUTY TO PROTECT THEIR CITIZENS FROM
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
Once you become a resident in your federal
government; your state can no longer protect you from your federal
government. You accepted dual
citizenship. You cannot
complain. The Supreme Court
says, 92 US 551:
"It is the natural consequence of a citizenship
which owes allegiance to two sovereignties, and claims protection from
both. The citizen cannot
complain, because he has voluntarily submitted himself to such a form of
Once you become a resident in your federal
government; you subject yourself to federal laws. (The term `resident'
does not mean inhabitant. For
proof, read your Constitution: PRESIDENTS MUST BE RESIDENTS, WHEREAS
CONGRESSMEN MUST NOT BE INHABITANTS.
To understand why this is so, you must know that a resident is
someone who owes a duty to remain available to manage something belonging
to the government - anything - such as property, a trust, a corporation,
an individual, a motor vehicle, or an entire agency.
Since the President is the chief servant, the Constitution requires
someone with servile experience, and since legislators represent the will
of the sovereigns; we don't require - and probably don't want - servile
More proof: Physical presence within borders does not
prove residence. Never did.
Example: In John 17:14-15 Christ states that his disciples, although physically present,
were not of the world. Christ
also said that His Kingdom was not of this world, even though The Kingdom
was at hand). Your federal
government can now trespass across your state's border and use "the
long arm of the law" to enforce its laws on its residents, which
would otherwise be unconstitutional within your state.
Prove it to yourself: Direct taxes must be Constitutionally
apportioned to your State by the proportion of your State's representation
(Art.1, Sect.2, Clause3 & Art1, Sect.9, Clause4). -- And, NO. The
16th amendment did not change this, the 16th amendment did not alter, add or
remove any words from the original constitution, and the US Supreme Court
confirmed in Stanton v. Baltic Mining Co., 240 US 103 (1915) that
"… the 16th amendment conferred no new powers of taxation"
- That's right! There is no such thing as an unapportioned tax on the
earnings of state citizens. Indirect
excise tax on the privileges of limited citizenship (such as the federal
privilege of earning wages) does not have to be apportioned.
Alternatively, real people, according to the Fifth Amendment,
cannot have earnings or property "taken for public use, without just
compensation." Which are
Why did federal territories become states?
The "organic" inhabitants of federal territories (who
were, by the way, unregistered voters) became states in order to free
themselves from your federal government.
That's right! BY BECOMING A FEDERAL CITIZEN YOU'VE NULLIFIED THE REASON FOR
YOUR STATE TO EXIST. You've
spit on the graves of your state's founders just because some banker or
employer lied to you by telling you that you must get a Social Security
You change your citizenship by getting a number, you
are now a citizen of the District of Columbia, or any multi-national world
order that has a legitimate claim to the District.
The newer application forms for a SSN now have a box to check for
those who want to claim US Citizenship. The older forms did not need this
Proof: You can now vote for president and senators
even though state citizens cannot (Hint for those who are actually
checking up on this: Amendment 17 does not override the last clause of
Article 5, and Amendment 17
was only ratified by 36 states, even if you include Ohio).
Proof: you can be subjected to a trial by government
(see Appendix F) because you lost your right to a trial by jury (see the
Colgate case in Appendix C).
Proof: State citizens are not US citizens (see
You submit yourself to the acts of Congress.
You request congress to determine your moral values for you.
Congress determines what rights you have, if any.
You've consented to be governed. Protection draws subjection.
Allegiance is the "Obligation of fidelity and obedience to
government in consideration for protection that government gives.
U.S. v. Kuhn, D.C.N.Y., 49 F. Supp. 407, 414"
A Christian will not swear.
You've sworn an oath to obey man under penalty of perjury.
Perjury is an oath, and an oath is always a religious ceremony
(Appendix E) - but this time it is an oath to your new god.
You've openly, knowingly, and voluntarily, on a permanent record,
violated the first commandment, Matt 5:34, James 5:12, and Hebrews 6:16.
A Christian cannot be a freeloader, 2nd
Thessalonians 3:6-14, yet Social Security numbers can only be assigned to
those who need federal benefits per section 205(c)(2)(B)(i) of the Social
A servant is never greater than his master (Matt
10:24, and John 15:20). You've just confessed to public servants that they are not
your servant and you are not their master.
A Christian would know that if you offer yourself to someone to
obey them as a slave then you are a slave to the one you obey (Romans
6:16). A Christian would
never obey a stranger (John 10:5). And no Christian can serve two masters (Matt 6:24, Luke
16:13). A Christian will serve God only (Matt 4:10, Acts 5:29). No Christian would want to be a thief, or register (with an
ungodly oath) to partake of dishonest benefits. No able bodied Christian will falsely confess that he is
unable to take care of himself in order to fraudulently qualify for future
You must now obey your new masters (Ephesians 6:5,
Colossians 3:22, Titus 2:9, 1st Peter 2:18).
The government cannot interfere with a right.
Bear with me as I repeat this essential precept in several
different ways so that you might understand: Rights do not come from civil
government. We are endowed by
our Creator with unalienable rights. According to the Declaration of Independence, the ONLY reason
government exists, it uses the phrase “instituted among men,” is to
protect rights. You cannot be
granted rights you already have. The
word "Unalienable" means it cannot be taken from you.
If something can be lawfully taken from you, then you didn't have a
right to it. Government must
protect rights not regulate them. Governments
are instituted among men to secure those rights.
Rights are above government. The
exercise of a right cannot be infringed.
A right cannot be taxed. The
exercise of a right cannot be taxed.
The power to tax is the power to destroy.
You cannot delegate to your civil servants the power to regulate
the inalienable rights of others. The
enumeration in your Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be
construed to deny others retained by the people.
Nor shall private property be taken for public use without just
compensation. And again, A RIGHT CANNOT BE TAXED. (See appendix G).
The Supreme Court in Murdock v. Penn., 319 US 105 determined that no state can convert a right into a privilege
and then charge a fee. The
Supreme Court ruled in Hale v. Henkel, 201 US 43, at page 74, that you can
carry on your own business without regulation, and you owe no duty to the
state if you receive nothing except protection, and you have no duty to
divulge your business on government forms, and you owe nothing to the
public so long as you do not trespass upon their rights.
The US Supreme Court in Hale v. Henkel, 201 US 43,
individual may stand upon his constitutional rights as a citizen.
He is entitled to carry on his private business in his own way.
His power to contract is unlimited.
He owes no duty to the state, or to his neighbors to divulge his
business, or to open his doors to an investigation, so far as it may tend
to incriminate him. He owes
no such duty to the state, since he receives nothing therefrom, beyond the
protection of his life and property.
His rights are such as existed by the law of the land long
antecedent to the organization of the state, and can only be taken from
him by due process of law, and in accordance with the Constitution.
Among his rights are a refusal to incriminate himself, and the
immunity of himself and his property from arrest or seizure except under a
warrant of the law. He owes
nothing to the public so long as he does not trespass upon their rights...
An individual may lawfully refuse to answer incriminating questions unless
protected by an immunity statute."
You waive ALL of your rights by getting a number.
You have no right to own property.
You have no beneficial right to yourself.
You have NO right to keep any wages.
Congress is nice enough to let you keep some of their money, but
whenever they want they can raise the tax to more than 100% by a simple
majority vote. IRS
Commissioner T. Coleman Andrews, in a press interview when he resigned,
back in 1956, stated “Congress can take 100% of our income anytime it
This is the socialism that you agreed to.
Any employee with a SS number is subject to the FICA Employment
tax. Section 3101(a) of the
Internal Revenue Code imposes FICA tax in addition to OTHER undisclosed
taxes. Later, I will show you
later that ALL of your future labor has already been traded to
multinational financial networks as collateral for the National debt.
If you want to do some research, try to find out
exactly what kind of protection draws subjection, as the Hale case seems
to allow protection without subjection.
Government officers can be forced to account for
money they are entrusted with, whereas ordinary people cannot be forced to
sign confessions. Not even a
tax return. The Supreme Court
has twice ruled that tax returns must be voluntary in order to be
admissible in court: Garner
v. US, 424 US 648 and U.S. v. Sullivan, 274 US 259.
In the 1975 Garner case, Mr. Garner was tried for the
crime of gambling. The
prosecutor admitted into evidence his tax return where he had claimed
gambling profits. He objected
and claimed that this evidence is not admissible because it was compelled
testimony. He appealed all the way to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court confirmed that compelled testimony is indeed
inadmissible, and that he should have refused to answer the questions on
his tax return. His tax
return was admissible in court because it was NOT in any way compelled or
In a more recent tax decision, August 7, 1996, the
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a California man, Loren
Troescher, could refuse to answer questions or turn over documents. The court ruled:
"We need not consider how or in what manner the
Fifth Amendment may be invoked as a defense to a prosecution for failure
to file tax returns."
See US v. Troescher, No. 95-55609. D.C. No.
By getting a Social Security Number, you volunteer to
collect excise tax from yourself and turn it over to your master.
Failing to turn over, with signed paperwork, the tax you've
assessed yourself, is a crime. It's
as much a crime as a Customs officer failing to turn over, or account for,
the excise tax he has collected. This
is because you have accepted an appointment as a federal officer: the
office of "Person". See
are subject to, and protected by, your lord of the manor
By getting a number: You agree that you are a subject
of the government. And you agree that you are not a sovereign citizen (one
of We the people who created government) and do not have any rights (see
the case cites in appendix C: K Tashiro v. Jordan, 256 P 545, and Hague v.
CIO, 307 US 496, 520), and that your Constitution does not directly
protect you against the government. You
are a member of the "citizenship" (uncapatilized in the 14th
amendment, but capitalized everywhere else in your Constitution) created
by congress rather than a true Citizen.
You are therefore only protected against the government to the
extent which your masters allow you access to your Constitution.
Government derives its just powers from the consent of the Governed
- and you've consented to be governed.
Here is an analogy: those who voluntarily enlist in
the military, with an oath, know that they are waiving their unalienable
rights and will be subject to regulations that can be very harsh.
You too, with an oath, knowingly volunteered to be a subject for
the remainder of your enlistment. And you are presumed to know the laws that you volunteered
into. Ignorance of the law is
By being a subject of the government, you are
protected by your masters in congress to whatever extent that they want to
protect you. Example: you are
protected against the consequences of your own acts by bankruptcy laws. You can pray to a courthouse priest that he cancel your vows
to God with divorce laws. Your
masters protect you from unemployment, injury comp, consumer protection,
OSHA, pollution, bank failures, retirement, barking dogs, unlicensed
barbers, paint fumes, etc. You
are "protected" by a building inspector's fines if you don't get
a permit to repair your back porch. I
recently read about someone who was fined $30,000 for building a backyard
deck that cast a shadow onto a wetland.
This is in the same nation where our great great grandfathers,
without permission from their servants, bridged wetlands and blasted
through mountain ranges to build a railroad from sea to shining sea.
Your grandfathers had birthrights as sovereigns (Appendix D).
You, like Esau, sold that birthright for a future bowl of stew. You are even protected against suffering the consequences of
God's acts: the cost of recovering from floods, earthquakes, drought
(remember what President Cleveland said), and hurricanes are paid by your
master's theft of your neighbor's wages; you are vaccinated against God's
illnesses, and Hillary’s village will educate your children so that you
won't be burdened with the responsibility - you've given up that
responsibility by accepting their offer.
You deprived your children of their birthright by your probate
contract. Are you comforted
to know that an angel of light has smoothed the rough path of life?
(2nd Corinthians 11:14).
Conversely, real people are instructed by Their Lawgiver to
patiently endure hardships as discipline from God, and "do not make
light of the Lord's discipline" (Hebrews 12, also read 2nd
Timothy 2:3-15 and 2
Corinthians 1:3-11 and 1st
Peter 2:19-20, and 1st Peter 4:12-16).
Do you have a God given right to be protected against
the consequences of your acts? Do
you have a right to be protected against God's discipline? Which god protects you?
23:24-33: "Thou shalt not bow down to their gods, nor serve them.
Thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor with their gods
for if thou serve their gods, it will surely be a snare unto