Tax Protesters Standoff Feds in N.H.

[psholtz]

Originally Posted by weishaupt1776

The Browns have not corrected their nationalities and/or have not even taken the first steps in formally challenging the presumed 14th Amndmt citizenship.
The result is that the Feds can colorably enforce military jurisdiction becasue the Browns are in rebellion to the DeJure New Hampshire Republic because they are presumed to be declaring allegiance to a defacto foreign D.C. Nationality

They are subjects of the Feds because of their "slave" status and will be treated like enemies because they have no rebuttal documentation which shows that they are lawful New Hampshire Nationals who have expatriated 14th Amdmt U.S. Citizenship

Yes, but bear in mind that "colorable" authority is by definition fraudulent anyway.

I'm getting to the point where I'm ready to say to hell w/ all these stupid legal tricks and games the Establishment has set up to "justify" their tyranny. The fact is, even if you renounce your 14th amendment citizenship, cross all your ts, dot all your is, the Feds *still* come after you(!) They don't obey their own laws! The only reason they have all these stupid laws is to confuse you and give their tyranny the color of authority. It has nothing actually playing by the book and if called the task, the Feds will *not* play by the book and will simply lie, cheat and steal to get want they want anyway: laws or no laws.

[rentiap]

Originally Posted by fulltitle

Without Prejudice.








Behold: Here you have a U.S. citizen and his wife maybe alleging that the U.S. doesnt have jurisdiction over them, yet they have U.S. passports and they have the U.S. flag flying from their house (not just one) NOT a New Hampshire flag mind you. According to law of the flag, from the perspective of the U.S. agents in the field surrounding the building, the house looks like a place under 26 USC. According to the law of the lag, from the perspective of the U.S. agents, their house is a at least a U.S. enclave. Such makes me wonder if he either 1) lacks such knowledge, or 2) is a wiling actor in a show.

I have only been told this so I do not have first hand knowledge.
The Browns have removed those military flags and have replaced them with the Civil flag.
http://www.uscivilflags.org/home.html
The same flag that I have flown over my home for the last year.

[psholtz]

Originally Posted by fulltitle

But back to the people in New Hampshire, the newspapers ran articles about how they have US passports, etc. The attorneys behind the scenes are merely illustrationg and supporting the case they have for "the Queen". (Rhyme intentional) The point is: they have U.S. passports and the newspapers RAN ARTICLES MENTIONING THIS--did the couple send the U.S. passports back for cancellation? Did the federal judge issuing any warrants happen to overlook the fact that they are holding U.S. passports and that they didnt cancel the passports? Do they have SSNs? Is the house is likely registered in STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE? There is likely SOMETHING standing out like sore thumb that the Feds are going--a nexxus of sorts.

Why should I turn in my passport just b/c I do not desire to participate in the criminal protection racket that is the Federal Reserve and the IRS? What does the IRS/Fed have to do w/ my right to travel? Yes, there is a "nexus" as you say, but it's an artificial fraudulent nexus dreamt up by a criminal mind. I have no desire to bow to the will of a common criminal like those staffing the Fed bank or its collection agency, the IRS.

The fact is these criminals aren't going to let you get away even if you severe every and any nexus. They lie, they cheat, they steal and they murder, all to get their thirty pieces of silver.

You can't bargain your way out of this kind of madness, and you can't reason w/ it.. And you certainly can't expect this kind of madness to adhere to any kind of Rule of Law, even if it's a (contorted, inverted, unjust) law that the criminal himself dreamt up. You get these criminals into checkmate, and they'll just grab your king, knock the board over and claim they won anyway.

You can't reason w/ these madmen.

[joseph sugarman]

That, psholtz, which you have just posited; gets a big AMEN!

[PANICPASS]

Eustace Mullins:

-One of the most forceful warnings against the 16th Amendment came from Richard E. Byrd, Speaker of the VA House of Delegate, on March 3, 1910. Father of the political leader, Senator Harry Byrd, Ricker E. Byrd warned,

"It (the 16th Amendment) means that the state must now give up a legitimate and long established source of revenue and yield it to the Federal Government. It means that the state actually invited the Federal Government to invade its territory, to oust its jurisdiction and to establish Federal dominion within the innermost citadel of reserved rights of the commonwealth. This amendment will do what even the 14th Amendment and 15th Amendments could not do--it will extend the Federal power so as to reach the citizens in the ordinary business of life. A hand from Washington will be stretched out and placed upon every man's business; the eye of a Federal inspector will be in every man's counting house. The law will of necessity have inquisitorial features, it will provide penalties. It will create a complicated machinery. Under it businessmen wil be hauled into courts distant from their homes. Heavy fines imposed by distant and unfamiliar tribunals will constantly menace the taxpayer. An army of Federal inspectors, spies and detectives will descend upon the State. They will compel men of business to show their books and disclose the secrets of their affairs. They will dictate forms of book keeping. They will require statements and affidavits. On the one hand the inspector can blackmail the taxpayer and on the other, he can profit by selling his secret to his competitor. When the Federal Government gets a stranglehold on the individual businessman, state lines will exist nowhere but on the maps. Its agents will everywhere supervise the commerce of the states."

[PANICPASS]

Mullins continued:

Because the 14th Amendment was enacted under martial law, it has had no validity since 1878, when martial law ended in the southern states, and Federal troops were withdrawn. Martial law is supreme, and overrides all state and local governments, but only during the period of military occupation. The 14th Amendment was ratified in 1868, ten years before martial law was ended in the southern states. The 14th Amendment can only be valid if it is maintained that the entire United States is still under martial law. This is not legal pettifogging; it is a serious legal question, which must be resolved in the courts. The federal, or equity, district courts might have little difficulty with this problem; they could simply declare that the states are only legal fictions, which exist at the pleasure of the federal entity, just as the citizens of the several states, through Social Security law and income tax regulations, have been transformed into Artificial Persons.

The citizen’s defense begins with his denial that he is under martial law, or that the punitive injunctive power of the 14th Amendment, which is founded on martial law, can be applied to him.

[fulltitle]

Originally Posted by psholtz

Why should I turn in my passport just b/c I do not desire to participate in the criminal protection racket that is the Federal Reserve and the IRS? What does the IRS/Fed have to do w/ my right to travel? Yes, there is a "nexus" as you say, but it's an artificial fraudulent nexus dreamt up by a criminal mind. I have no desire to bow to the will of a common criminal like those staffing the Fed bank or its collection agency, the IRS.

The fact is these criminals aren't going to let you get away even if you severe every and any nexus. They lie, they cheat, they steal and they murder, all to get their thirty pieces of silver.

You can't bargain your way out of this kind of madness, and you can't reason w/ it.. And you certainly can't expect this kind of madness to adhere to any kind of Rule of Law, even if it's a (contorted, inverted, unjust) law that the criminal himself dreamt up. You get these criminals into checkmate, and they'll just grab your king, knock the board over and claim they won anyway.

You can't reason w/ these madmen.

Without Prejudice.
IMHO, its not necc. about 'bargaining' or 'reasoning' ones way out of anything. Perhaps this gets at the core of it: if you didn't mean to sign up for the NFL membership and are tired of NFL fees, fines or penalties and tired of having to show up at games where u moan about right to travel and the like everytime you get mad about getting a ticket for being offsides, then perhaps you ought to make it clear and take off the NFL uniform and quit being half-assed about it. Otherwise the NFL tribunals might just take very seriously any contracts or covenants they presume you made wisely, knowing and willingly.

And interestingly enough: 'checkmate' refers to a game that is about MONEY/COMMERCIAL LAW and the term 'checkmate' most indeed refers to courts of commerce.

Why should I turn in my passport...

If it is your passport then it might follow that you are UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

...just b/c I do not desire to participate in the criminal protection racket that is the Federal Reserve and the IRS?

Might your passport be taken as a token of an oath of allegiance to the very same United States with all of its treaties concerning enforcement of international obligations, debts and even obligation to that constitutional fragment that has something to do with "the public debt of the United States shall not be questioned".

What does the IRS/Fed have to do w/ my right to travel? Yes, there is a "nexus" as you say, but it's an artificial fraudulent nexus dreamt up by a criminal mind. I have no desire to bow to the will of a common criminal like those staffing the Fed bank or its collection agency, the IRS.

And why then did you then swear an oath of allegience to what you call an 'artificial fraudulent nexus dreamt up by a criminal mind'? See, I aim to do a favor with the following: there are those who would love to split you (and Ed Brown) bloodily and painfully in half for waivering between two extreme opinions. On one hand you seem to say its a kind of criminal syndication racket on the other hand you are carrying around a counterfoil or token to an oath of allegience to that same system--one that may very well have severe penalties for "resisting and opposing the laws of the United States" or for belligerence or for mutiny or for perfidy. Didnt you agree that "...the public debt of the United States shall not be questioned"?

That said, if one was not in ones right mind at the time one entered into one or more contracts in the past, or if one did not intend to enter into an agreement or a contract, perhaps THEY will otherwise presume full competency, full knowledge, expert level comprehension of commercial law and therefore they may feel no mercy whatsoever in putting a round between your eyes should you take on a perfidious composure.

[palani]

Bouvier 1856 Law Dictionary -

Ignorance .... Ignorance is either essential or non-essential. 1. By essential ignorance is understood that which has for its object some essential circumstance so intimately connected with the: matter in question, and which so influences the parties that it induces them to act in the business. For example, if A should sell his horse to B, and at the time of the sale the horse was dead, unknown to the parties, the fact of the death would render the sale void.

So ignorance, if essential, means that neither party knew the horse was dead at the time of the sale and this fact voids the contract; however, if the selling party knew the horse was dead the sale would be void ab initio because of fraud.

The question is: Once you know the horse is dead how many more payments are you going to make?

[weishaupt1776]

Originally Posted by PANICPASS

The citizen’s defense begins with his denial that he is under martial law, or that the punitive injunctive power of the 14th Amendment, which is founded on martial law, can be applied to him.

In my No Dl case;
That was a big part of my reconstruction brief - along with a huge record of 40 plus agencies defaulting

[psholtz]

Originally Posted by fulltitle

Without Prejudice.
IMHO, its not necc. about 'bargaining' or 'reasoning' ones way out of anything. Perhaps this gets at the core of it: if you didn't mean to sign up for the NFL membership and are tired of NFL fees, fines or penalties and tired of having to show up at games where u moan about right to travel and the like everytime you get mad about getting a ticket for being offsides, then perhaps you ought to make it clear and take off the NFL uniform and quit being half-assed about it. Otherwise the NFL tribunals might just take very seriously any contracts or covenants they presume you made wisely, knowing and willingly.

My life and liberty is *not* an NFL game..

Seriously..

Nor do I need and require an artificial legal fiction like the NFL or the State or any other legal fiction to tell me what my liberty and freedoms are: my freedoms and liberties derive from the Creator Himself and are antecedent to the institution of legal fictions like the State or the NFL.

You want to talk about "conspiracies", I'd say the NFL is a great example: bread and circus for the masses, to keep them dumbed down and keep their attention from focusing on the crimes going on behind the curtain.

And interestingly enough: 'checkmate' refers to a game that is about MONEY/COMMERCIAL LAW and the term 'checkmate' most indeed refers to courts of commerce.

Interesting.. where can I learn more about that?

Why should I turn in my passport...

If it is your passport then it might follow that you are UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

...just b/c I do not desire to participate in the criminal protection racket that is the Federal Reserve and the IRS?

Might your passport be taken as a token of an oath of allegiance to the very same United States with all of its treaties concerning enforcement of international obligations, debts and even obligation to that constitutional fragment that has something to do with "the public debt of the United States shall not be questioned".

What does the IRS/Fed have to do w/ my right to travel? Yes, there is a "nexus" as you say, but it's an artificial fraudulent nexus dreamt up by a criminal mind. I have no desire to bow to the will of a common criminal like those staffing the Fed bank or its collection agency, the IRS.

And why then did you then swear an oath of allegience to what you call an 'artificial fraudulent nexus dreamt up by a criminal mind'? See, I aim to do a favor with the following: there are those who would love to split you (and Ed Brown) bloodily and painfully in half for waivering between two extreme opinions. On one hand you seem to say its a kind of criminal syndication racket on the other hand you are carrying around a counterfoil or token to an oath of allegience to a very system that has has some severe penalties for "resisting and opposing the laws of the United States" or for belligerence or for mutiny or for perfidy. Didnt you agree that "...the public debt of the United States shall not be questioned"?

That said, if one was not in ones right mind at the time one entered into one or more contracts in the past, or if one did not intend to enter into an agreement or a contract, perhaps THEY will otherwise presume full competency, full knowledge, expert level comprehension of commercial law and therefore feel no mercy whatsoever in putting a round between your eyes should you take on the a perfidious composure.

With respect to the above, all you've proven is that you know (some of) the language necessary to navigate your way around the Enemy's House; nevertheless, it is a House built upon sand and soon enough it will come crashing down and great will be the fall of it (Matt 7:26-27). Why you insist on running around the Enemy's House and playing his game I do not understand: this is *not* a game that you are capable of winning, nor should you desire to "win" it for if you do, all it will "win" for you is a one-way trip straight to Hell.

You're asking me bizarre questions like "If I have a passport, doesn't that mean I support the criminals running the government and doesn't that mean I refuse to ever question the government's debt and doesn't that mean I pledge blind allegiance to the laws of the U.S. etc, etc, etc."

The answer to your question is a big, fat, resounding NO!!

I got a passport b/c I wanted to travel internationally.

PERIOD.

Then I went to travelocity.com, I paid $$ to buy a plane ticket, and went to where it was I wanted to go.

PERIOD.

Such are the "contracts" that I voluntarily agreed to.

No hidden strings, terms, agreements or conditions.

PERIOD.

Now if, in the middle of that, you throw some "fine print" into my passport application that says: "oh, btw, you're by default agreeing to be a total slave and always pay your fraudulent income taxes and you agree never to question the debts of the U.S.", does that "fine print" make these "clauses" of the contract valid and enforceable?

ABSOLUTELY NOT!!

PERIOD.

All it means is that the contract was made under fraudulent terms and conditions and whoever it was who made those fraudulent terms or whoever tries to enforce those fraudulent terms should be arrested and thrown in prison, possibly put to death, for committing criminal fraud on such a grand and widespread scale.

PERIOD.

It's good to know how the criminal thinks, and it's good to understand some of the "legal" manuveurs the Enemy is using against us to bring us down and destroy our freedom and liberty, but that said, don't let yourself became that which you are fighting, and don't let yourself fall into this manner of thinking. Only criminals think the way you outlined above, and it will (literally) destroy you in the end.