14th Amendment

[test]

B Rookard wrote:

"This "house" called America belongs to everyone ... and everyone can demand that you help foot the bill for all the wonderful things you receive because of everyone's collective effort."

-------

Is there any factual evidence that everyone can demand anything from me at all? Is there a contractual obligation with me to do that? Can the contract be produced by "everyone" whoever that means?

Could you please expand a little bit more on specifying what are all the wonderfull things I receive because of everyone's collective effort?

" 8 USC 1481 gives the ways you can lose your nationality."

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/ht...1----000-.html


(5) making a formal renunciation of nationality before a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States in a foreign state, in such form as may be prescribed by the Secretary of State; or

(6) making in the United States a formal written renunciation of nationality in such form as may be prescribed by, and before such officer as may be designated by, the Attorney General, whenever the United States shall be in a state of war and the Attorney General shall approve such renunciation as not contrary to the interests of national defense;

"8 USC 1483(a) points to the necessary restriction ... you CANNOT lose your nationality while within the U.S."

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/ht...3----000-.html

§ 1483. Restrictions on loss of nationality; Release date: 2004-02-11

(a) Except as provided in paragraphs (6) and (7) of section 1481 (a) of this title, no national of the United States can lose United States nationality under this chapter while within the United States or any of its outlying possessions, but loss of nationality shall result from the performance within the United States or any of its outlying possessions of any of the acts or the fulfillment of any of the conditions specified in this Part if and when the national thereafter takes up a residence outside the United States and its outlying possessions.


It seems to me that it is still possible to do it in the US.

I looked up at some definitions in the Bouvier law dictionary, I know it is very old but there is one on-line, so I am not totally sure if what is mentioned there still stands:

NATIONALITY. The state of a person in relation to the nation in which he was born.

2. A man retains his nationality of origin during bis minority, but, as in the case of his domicil of origin, he may change his nationality upon attaining full age; he cannot, however, renounce his allegiance without permission of the government. See Citizen; Domicil; Expatriation; Naturalization; Foelix, Du Dr. Intern. prive, n. 26; 8 Cranch, 263; 8 Cranch, 253; Chit. Law of Nat. 31 2 Gall. 485; 1 Gall. 545.

ALLEGIANCE. The tie which binds the citizen to the government, in return for the protection which the government affords him.

Note by me: Like Mr. Badnarik would say, "Do you feel protected by the government?"

2. It is natural, acquired, or local. Natural allegiance is such as is due from all men born within the United States; acquired allegiance is that which is due by a naturalized citizen. It has never been decided whether a citizen can, by expatriation, divest himself absolutely of that character. 2 Cranch, 64; 1 Peters' C. C. Rep. 159; 7 Wheat. R. 283; 9 Mass. R. 461. Infants cannot assume allegiance, (4 Bin. 49) although they enlist in the army of the United States. 5 Bin. 429.

3. It seems, however, that he cannot renounce his allegiance to the United States without the permission of the government, to be declared by law. But for commercial purposes he may acquire the rights of a citizen of another country, and the place of his domicil determines the character of a party as to trade. 1 Kent, Com. 71; Com. Rep. 677; 2 Kent, Com. 42.

4. Local allegiance is that which is due from an alien, while resident in the United States, for the protection which the government affords him. 1 Bl. Com. 366, 372; Com. Dig. h.t; Dane's Ab. Index, h. t.; 1 East, P.C. 49 to 57.

ABJURATION – A renunciation of allegiance to a country by oath.

2. – 1. The act of Congress of the 14th of April, 1802, 2 Story's Laws, U.S. 850, requires that when an alien shall apply to be admitted a citizen of the United States, he shall declare on oath or affirmation before the court where the application shall be made, inter alia, that he doth absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity which he owes to any foreign prince, &c., and particularly, by name, the prince, &c., whereof he was before a citizen or subject. Rawle on the Const. 98.

3. – 2. In England t he oath of abjuration is an oath by which an Englishman binds himself not to acknowledge any right in the Pretender to the throne of England.

4. – 3 it signifies also, according to 25 Car. H., an oath abjuring to certain doctrines of the church of Rome.

5. – 4. In the ancient English law it was a renunciation of one's country and taking an oath of perpetual banishment. A man who had committed a felony, and for safety flee to a sanctuary might within forty days' confess the fact, and take the oath of abjuration and perpetual banishment; he was then transported. This was abolished by Stat. 1 Jac. 1, c. 25. Ayl. Parerg. 14.


Finally, an important last question:

When they say the US are they talking about the corporation named USA or which one of the other two?

[B Rookard]

Originally Posted by test

Is there any factual evidence that everyone can demand anything from me at all? Is there a contractual obligation with me to do that? Can the contract be produced by "everyone" whoever that means?

What makes you think that taxation has anything to do with a contract?

"Taxation is neither a penalty imposed on the taxpayer nor a liability which he assumes by contract." Welch v. Henry, 305 U.S. 134, 146

"A tax is not regarded as a debt in the ordinary sense of that term, for the reason that a tax does not depend upon the consent of the taxpayer and there is no express or implied contract to pay taxes. Taxes are not contracts between party and party, either express or implied; but they are the positive acts of the government, through its various agents, binding upon the inhabitants, and to the making and enforcing of which their personal consent individually is not required." Cooley, Law of Taxation, 4th Ed., pgs 88-89

"8 USC 1481 gives the ways you can lose your nationality."

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/ht...1----000-.html


[I cut out paragraph (5) because 8 USC 1483(a) lists paragraphs (6) and (7) as exceptions.]

(6) making in the United States a formal written renunciation of nationality in such form as may be prescribed by, and before such officer as may be designated by, the Attorney General, whenever the United States shall be in a state of war and the Attorney General shall approve such renunciation as not contrary to the interests of national defense;

[insert paragraph (7)]

(7) committing any act of treason against, or attempting by force to overthrow, or bearing arms against, the United States, violating or conspiring to violate any of the provisions of section 2383 of Title 18, or willfully performing any act in violation of section 2385 of Title 18, or violating section 2384 of Title 18 by engaging in a conspiracy to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States, or to levy war against them, if and when he is convicted thereof by a court martial or by a court of competent jurisdiction.

"8 USC 1483(a) points to the necessary restriction ... you CANNOT lose your nationality while within the U.S."

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/ht...3----000-.html

§ 1483. Restrictions on loss of nationality; Release date: 2004-02-11

(a) Except as provided in paragraphs (6) and (7) of section 1481 (a) of this title, no national of the United States can lose United States nationality under this chapter while within the United States or any of its outlying possessions, but loss of nationality shall result from the performance within the United States or any of its outlying possessions of any of the acts or the fulfillment of any of the conditions specified in this Part if and when the national thereafter takes up a residence outside the United States and its outlying possessions.


It seems to me that it is still possible to do it in the US.

Did you fall with the exceptions of paragraphs (6) and (7) ... did you commit the acts required for expatriation?

And, as the statute makes clear, if you don't fall within those exceptions then you must leave the country ... like I said.

Originally Posted by test

I looked up at some definitions in the Bouvier law dictionary, I know it is very old but there is one on-line, so I am not totally sure if what is mentioned there still stands:

Irrelevant.

Dictionary definitions don't trump the conditions for expatriation spelled out in the law.

The Supreme Court, a long time ago, said that a person can expatriate, but that expatriation is not a unilateral act and Congress can set the conditions under which it will accept expatriation as valid.

Even if there was no statute governing the subject ... the legal scholars and authorities back then said that leaving the country would be one of the conditions. As your own cite from Bouvier's says: "he cannot, however, renounce his allegiance without permission of the government." (definition of "nationality".)

And, going back to my example of the reluctant rent payer ... that seems fair.

You wouldn't expect the landlord to allow the renter to live there for free, enjoying the shelter and security of the dwelling. Would you?

[test]

Thanks B Rookard,

I did not catch at first, when you said "everyone can demand ..." that you were referring to the divine right of the state to tax you, I thought you ment everyone like in "all the people", I am sorry about that.

Did you fall with the exceptions of paragraphs (6) and (7) ... did you commit the acts required for expatriation?

I have not commited the acts mentioned in (6) or (7), I think I would stay away from (7) it may not seat well for the HLS folks. But the point (6) is not especific about you getting out of the country, if the AG or the officer designated by the AG later say you have to leave then I guess you have to leave but it is not especifically mentioned in the statutes you listed.

With regards to your example of the landlord/renter I think it may not be exactly comparing apples to apples, you just provided me with your great wisdom that since the taxes are derived from the divine right of the state and do not have anything to do with contracts (disclosed at least) but in a landlord/renter relationship I think there would be a contract, wouldn't it? or what divine right would be involved there the landlord or the renter?

Could you please also enlighten me as to the question you left out about the term US, is it the US corp. they are talking about or any of the other two definitions, or are they going to inter-change them at their convenience based on their divine right?

Do you feel protected by the government yet?

I guess as long as you behave and every now and then you pay them their extra extortions you could say you "feel" protected then.

[weishaupt1776]

B Rookard, it seems like you jump into any thread and immediately try to change the tide into a "liability for income tax" direction. The reason I chose this thread to post 14th Amendment cites was because someone had already started it & I didn't want to be redundant in starting another one. Now the information stream concerning the 14th amendment has been breached.

This site has plenty of storage and bandwidth for you to start your own threads.

We are alot more tolerant on this site then most others, so start a thread in the taxation forum called You Are Liable for Income Taxes or something to that effect.

[weishaupt1776]

Please Ignore my posts on 17, 18 , & 20. This is the real stuff here on out:

The following is inspired, paraphrased, and/or copied from LB Bork at
http://www.pacinlaw.org:

We can use all of the UN-US voodoo they have conjured up against them

Universal Declaration of Human Rights General Assembly resolution 217 A (III) of 10 December 1948

• Article 15.
  
  (1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.
  
  (2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.

Do you see how the U.S. can be held guilty of violating their sacred treaty laws?
Look at part 2.
Did you consent to the United States to assign you the status of "citizen and national of the United States" and take away your state nationality?
If so, where are those facts & who gave them to you?
Can I bind you to a written instrument just based on your physical location, ALONE?
I'll do it to B Rookard right now by writing & publishing in the public:

• "B Rookard is obligated to wash Weis's Car every Friday."

Okay, now is B Rook still obligated?
Why or Why Not?

Amendment XIV

• Section 1.All persons born or naturalized in the United States . . .are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

So the presumption gets stuck on you from the git go because the writing of Section 1 allegedly naturalizes all people in the several United States
at birth according to their opinion. So this presumption needs to get rebutted.
A new political (and governmental) system is created by this written instrument called The Fourteenth Amendment Section 1 and 2 are inseparable keep section 1 in mind for the following:

• 
  
  Amendment XIV
  Section. 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State . . .

All people in the several states are included for representation.

• . . .'"But when the right to vote"

"But when" indicates a change from sentence 1 directly above. Towards the end of sentence 2 you will see that the the representation is going to be reduced.

• ". . . at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State."

This is LOADED.
At the end states "such male citizens".
Who are "such male citizens" ?
The male inhabitants that are citizens of the United States engaged in the participation in rebellion, or other crime.
So what is it really saying thus far ?
The right to vote is denied EXCEPT FOR participation in rebellion, or other crime.
Now, what do those inhabitants do?

• such male citizens will bear to the whole number of citizens"

Bear means:

• to effect in a harmful or adverse way and to exert force

The whole number of citizens includes all persons as mentioned in sentence 1; or inhabitants as noted in sentence 2.


Notice that right to vote is going to be abridged or denied.
When is the right abridged or denied?
Abridged or denied WITH WHAT EXCEPTION?
Participation in rebellion, and other crimes.
All people in any given state are
represented if they participate in rebellion or other crimes; and the
citizens that do not participate are not represented (however are still
deemed US citizens).


LB's QUESTIONS: How can one be represented if he can not vote?
Do the board of directors of GM represent me?
Can I vote in their corporation and be told what to do by it?
Can a person that gets convicted of a felony vote in
today's system?
The formula takes care of this, does it not?

The words "But when" mean next to nothing as they are just changing
what was established in sentence 1.
The relevant key words are "SUCH CITIZENS"
and what they do and the outcome of their actions.
Moreover, why would this be put into a constitution to take care of people that participated in the so-called Civil War... They have all been dead for over one hundred years.

SIMPLE PUT: THIS IS A COMPLEX FORMULA TO ENFRANCHISE US CITIZENS AND DISENFRANCHISE STATE CITIZENS AND CREATE THE PRESUMPTION THAT YOU ARE A US CITIZEN.

Now read Section 1-2 again:
U.S. Constitution: Fourteenth Amendment

Fourteenth Amendment - Rights Guaranteed Privileges and Immunities of Citizenship, Due Process and Equal Protection

Section. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section. 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

[weishaupt1776]

This is a MUST READ--NO DOUBT.
I would love to see B Rookard's spin on this stuff:

The Purpose of the Fourteenth Amendment

AFTER YOU READ THAT:
SUPPORTING DOCUMENT:
The Unconstitutionality of the Fourteenth Amendment
Congressional Record - House (13 June 1967)


Then
SUPPLEMENTARY ESSAY:
There is No "Fourteenth Amendment"
by David Lawrence

[weishaupt1776]

This book is a MUST
The Red Amendment by LB Bork.
This guy blows the 14th Amendment to pieces. Tell Him Prescott sent you.

Remember, you are presumed to be a U.S. Citizen or the STRAWMAN which could be presumed to be the U.S. Citizen. Either way, the presumption MUST be broken whether you go the UCC route or another way.
Why is that not speculation?

• 
  Fourteenth Amendment
  
  Section. 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

The United States is a municipal corporation, so the presumption is forced on you that you are a subject/trustee/fiduciary/employee of this corporation the minute you bust water & YO MAMA files that Birth Certificate to seal the deal.

Check out how linear the post-Bill Of Rights Amendments are in forcing the presumption on us that we're slaves:

• 
  Thirteenth Amendment - Slavery And Involuntary Servitude
  
  Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

Okay, back to the 14th Amendment sec 2 with all of the garbage taken out:

• " . . . the right to vote at any election . . . is denied . . . to all male inhabitants . . . except for participation in rebellion, or other crime"

So, to have the right to vote is a crime, therefore if you have the right to vote as a U.S. Citizen, then you are "legally" considered to be a slave involuntarily indentured because you are participating in rebellion against you true dejure governmental system.

HELL-O!

[chuckhs12]

Weis posted a cartoon from this website http://www.pacinlaw.org . I went and looked and found an article on "Citizen of the United States A Modern Day Serf/Vassal"

Using the codes and law, they have made a very convincing point on what you are classified as. A Citizen of the United States or not.

The one thing I know for sure, is that any documentation written and distributed by any agency of the US Corporation is confusing and takes a lot of energy to get to the truth. and that no two people come to the same understanding after reading the same statements.

Perception is what got all of us where we are today, and unless we correct our thoughts, perception and ego will not let us go.

By the way Weis, I really enjoyed the cartoon. http://forum.suijuris.net/showthread...hlight=cartoon.

[Jerseee]

Citizenship is voluntary. that is it. You cannot be compelled into forced allegiance--that is slavery.

14th Amendment crap is for those who believe that. The Declaration of Independence is a great source document to begin with.

YOU state how you are--not some amendment. Those rules (the Constitution) are put in place for the government to heed--not you. People established those rules of government for the government--not themselves.

What is sovereign about aligning oneself with an amendment that pertains to the corporation--not the sovereign?

[weishaupt1776]

That's true, but THEY think that if it acts like a duck & walks like a duck, it must be a duck.

The presumption is forced on you until corrected

Please re-read the posts on how the 13th Amdmt ties into the 14th.


The Trading w/the enemy Act is almost a re-statement of those Amendments.

You are declared an enemy of the dejure system until you rebut the presumption formally

quack, quack, quack

In fact, Jersee, I respectfully request that you address the breakdown of each of the sentences broken down in the posts regarding the 13th & 14th above and explain WHY those are incorrect by addressing the actual sentences.

If you read closely you will see WHY you are cosidered by THEM to be "legally" enslaved involuntarily no matter how much we quack, "I'm Sovereign".