Squirrel, I like what you said in your post. I have some questions for you ifyou would.
#1. I assume you are familar with this page
http://www.hiscovenantministries.org...risdiction.htm because I assum the "Strategic withdrawl" book is the one on this site. My question is. What do you agree with the analysis of "penalities of perjury"?
#2. I looked at expatriation. The problem is that without the number, a person that wants to work at a real job to earn a lving cannot do so. That's the bottom line. I may look at "Strategic withdrawl" again because I see there are different levels of withdrawl.
#3. OK, I looked up codicil in Blacks Law.
"Codicil : A supplement or an addition to a will; it may explain, modify, add to, subtract from, qualify, alter, restrain or revoke provisions in will." OK, so you're saying that in theory,
a) We signed this within the "United States", which we did not, so that is perjury.
b) Potentially, we declared ourselves a federal employees since they are subject to mulitple counts of perjury for one act.
My question is what were the modifications or alterations we made to the "will"? I believe A and B, please explain more.
#4. What is the proper way to rescind the past 1040 forms?
#5. Are you familar with the book "The Errant Sovereigns' Handbook by Augustus Blackstone "? Now in that book, he explains how to terminate the Trust relationship aspect of the SSN. Two questions. a) Can anyone prove it exists? b) If it does exist and his strategy is executed, will that enough to end the attachment so that a person can work and live in peace?
As far as Larken Rose goes. He argued and created a controversy. I would never argue. I would only agree via Administrative Notice, and (a) conditionally accept to do whatever you say after I accurately ascertain that he who purports to act for the Government stays within the bounds of his authority by providing me...
1. A properly executed assessment signed under penalties of perjury...
2. Constitutional oath of office, as required by Article VI, Paragraph 3 of the Constitution of the United States and 5 U.S.C. § 3331;
3. Civil commission as agent or officer of Government of the United States, as required by Article II § 3 of the Constitution of the United States
4. Affidavit declaring that he did not pay for or otherwise make or promise consideration to secure the office (5 U.S.C. § 3332);
4. Personal surety bond; and
5. Documentation that establishes his complete line of delegated authority, including all intermediaries such as the Assistant Commissioner (International), beginning with the President of the United States.
Now I'm not arguing about the law. I'm arguing about your authority. Now if he is violates my due process then, it's his business.
Larson v. Domestic & Foreign Commerce Corp., 337 U.S. 682, 69 S.Ct. 1457 (1949): suits agent govt agents: personal if without authority.
Federal Crop Ins. Corp. v. Merrill, 332 U.S. 380, 68 S.Ct. 1 (1947):
"Whatever the form in which the Government functions, anyone entering into an arrangement with the Government takes the risk of having accurately ascertained that he who purports to act for the Government stays within the bounds of his authority. The scope of this authority may be explicitly defined by Congress or be limited by delegated legislation, properly exercised through the rule-making power. And this is so even though, as here, the agent himself may have been unaware of the limitations upon his authority," 332 U.S., at 384.
Keep it comin'
