The American Ruling Class

[Xenophanes]

Interesting thread guys.Here is a little primer for non-Americans who may also wish to assert their rights and kill their 'straw man'.


http://www.yourstrawman.com/



Again,as has been said,DO NOT try and explain this to a stupid nazi-pig/cop!At the very least you can look forward to a good roughing up for resisting,obstructing,ect.They don`t care so save your breath.The most important thing to remember is to SAY NOTHING,and live to fight anther day (in court).Also,if placed under arrest it is important to NOT admit that you understand 'your rights' as they have been read to you.That is a very subtle trap,which basically means you have discarded your 'other' rights and have entered into contract with the legal system.Say nothing.Research!

[zapzap]

Short on time will give it a handful of shots:

...and appears to have won, using these same argument you are dismissing, I believe.

A victory? Absolutely, if you call them ignoring a small business temporarily a “victory”. I agree that to the owner of the business , if all continues to remain silent, they have every right to feel victorious. It would be interesting to hear if any party filed the relevant motion to non-suit the case with prejudice and got a properly signed and served order from the judge granting it. That would be a much more significant victory. Another would be if Utopia won on an appeal, then you have a "victory" in the non-personal, big picture way. So yes your comment , “and appears to have won” is properly vague as to the nature of the victory.

Regarding the rest of the sentence, “using these same argument you are dismissing, I believe.”, your belief is inaccurate. First, I didn’t dismiss anything. I pointed out how things go when one gets targeted. The courts dismiss pretty much all arguments out there. Sometimes you don’t even get to open your mouth. Other times what you say is ignored. Example? From the Utopia case: “As expected, when the judge made her ruling she apparently ignored all evidence against the 'court's jurisdiction' entered by Taylor and co-defendant Adask…”. I’ll take a guess why Utopia is being ignored: Legs. More than likely the so-called State has just decided to move on to an easier target. Utopia has some resources and can better attempt to stand up. If inclined, they’ll (the so-called state) set up precedent and then come back to clean house.

Provisional government? Hmmm. Ever hear of the Republic of Texas? Back around the mid-nineties? Heeee Hawwww! They had both a provisional government and an interim government too! Yup, well the non-provisional, non-interim government had a different viewpoint - and one way or another, enforced it. The “national capital” burned down I heard. Kind of a War of 1812 moment?

Bank story? Anyone got any clue where that one’s at or a rough timeframe? Oh, Snowden? Throw in Assange too! I’ll defer at this time, ha ha!

Strawman? You mean the Roger Elvick strawman? This guy? Nice picture (bit dated) and perhaps biased story here: His 'Straw Man' Free, a Scammer Finds the Rest of Him Isn't | Southern Poverty Law Center
Or is there another strawman? How about that guy that seems to believe he is, among other things, “He describes himself as a "Plenipotentiary-Judge", an ambassador, banker, postmaster,[7] King of Hawaii, and a genius with an IQ of 200.[8][9][10] He has told audiences at his seminars that in 1975 he died from surgical complications and was not resuscitated for 35 minutes. He says he was awake for eight consecutive years following the incident and has not aged since that time.” (from Wiki) Are you impressed? He communicates in, “QUANTUM-LANGUAGE-PARSE-SYNTAX-GRAMMAR” :HOME He’s supposedly a redemptionist who seemingly and amazingly has not gone to prison (Club Fed) that I could find but his “students” sure have (see Wiki) Why even Clinton and the entire United States Supreme Court were his students: “…Miller claimed that Bill Clinton and the entire Supreme Court of the United States were his students.” You know what? Maybe this is the perfect guy to take with you to Washington D.C. on that, Provisional Government field trip? Think of the doors he’ll open!

[Xenophanes]

"Strawman" is a generic term which in this case refers to your 'legal' identity and the various encomberments attached to it.You seem somewhat intelligent so I`ll just assume you`re being a dick and not an idiot.

[aljhoa]

14.2 Manipulation and Oppression of the Judicial Branch

Congress are the ones responsible for creating courts other than the U.S. Supreme Court. A Congress that wishes to consolidate all power into its own hands or that of the Executive Branch will:
1. Create only legislative courts.
2. Not invoke Article III of the Constitution in creating the courts so that the court ends up being a franchise court and a property court that cannot rule on issues of rights.
3. Gag the judges from ruling on constitutional violations relating to tax issues using Declaratory Judgment Act.
4. Force judges to have a conflict of interest relating to tax issues by forcing them to be "taxpayers".
5. Using the IRS to terrorize judges who will not do what they want by using tax enforcement to destroy honest judges who rule righteously.
6. Force the judges in the court to be individually at their pay, so that they can be individually controlled. For instance, instead of budgeting for the ENTI judicial department and letting the department pat the judges individually, the Executive pays each judge personally. This put them at the mercy of the Executive Branch.

http://sedm.org/Forms/05-MemLaw/DeFactoGov.pdf

Al

[zapzap]

Excellent quote. Now let's look at something practical? Let's look at how this paperwork stands up to my amateur analysis on the fed income tax matter:

Aha! at page 85 or so we get to the proposal of this thesis regarding the Federal Income Tax! It's... It's... Domicile!!! (I think, starting at page 82, line 16)

The solution? A practical example? When filing for a USA passport on Block 13, put, "Kingdom of Heaven". (Table under page 87, line 18)

Did you know that in some states like Oregon by having a driver's license declares you to being a resident? (Table under page 87, line 18). So I guess you can't have a D.L. in those states and present this argument? Also, you can't have a D.L. in any other state that requires a social security number or presumably, a real physical address?

If you don't list your domicile as "The Kingdom of Heaven" seemingly almost everywhere you are waiving many of your rights including the right to sovereign immunity, 28 USC 1605(b)(2) (page 83, line 24, et seq.)

If you do the above (and don't use a social security number or tax ID number, and I'm not yet sure of what else.) the government will get CREAMED by a tactic affectionately called "courtroom evangelism". Do you know why? Because the court HAS TO USE God's laws in the Holy Bible as the only rules of decision. Also, they can use rulings of ecclesiastical courts on the subject. (No, I'm not making this stuff up, see page 86, lines 25-29)

Did you know the goob-berment is so sneaky as to hide these facts that they only use the word "domicile" in two sections within the entire 9,500 page IRC Code! Why? Because in 1954 the USSC admitted that domicile was the source of government's jurisdiction to impose an income tax in Miller Brothers Co. v State of Maryland, 347 US 340.

Oddly, this thesis is silent on the following quote that deals specifically with the question BEFORE the court .

The question here is whether this vendor, by its acts or course of dealing, has subjected itself to the taxing power of Maryland or whether it has afforded that State a jurisdiction or power to create this collector's liability. Despite the increasing frequency with which the question arises, little constructive discussion can be found in responsible commentary as to the grounds on which to rest a state's power to reach extraterritorial transactions or nonresidents with tax liabilities. Our decisions are not always clear as to the grounds on which a tax is supported, especially where more than one exists; nor are all of our pronouncements during the experimental period of this type of taxation consistent or reconcilable. A few have been specifically overruled, while others no longer fully represent the present state of the law. But the course of decisions does reflect at least consistent adherence to one time-honored concept: that due process requires some definite link, some minimum connection, between a state and the person, property or transaction it seeks to tax.

Thus, the Court has frequently held that domicile or residence, more substantial than mere presence in transit or sojourn, is an adequate basis for taxation, including income, property, and death, taxes. Since the Fourteenth Amendment makes one a citizen of the state wherein he resides, the fact of residence creates universally reciprocal duties of protection by the state and of allegiance and support by the citizen.

Since I'm not a liar/lawyer I'm going to requote what the question before the court straight out of the horse's mouth:

"The question here is whether this vendor, by its acts or course of dealing, has subjected itself to the taxing power of Maryland or whether it has afforded that State a jurisdiction or power to create this collector's liability."

Get it? A company in Delaware versus State of Maryland... Not federal. Nothing to do with the federal income tax matter. On page 73 starting at line 21, a portion was quoted but not the portion of what was the question BEFORE the court. Would someone be kind enough to please let the authors know about this? When dealing with a case in front of the USSC, it is a really good idea to carefully determine exactly what is before them. Don't you think?

[dutchdivco]

Zap Zap

I THINK I understand, in a general way, the issue your covering. Its like the recent 'issue' regarding taxing I-net businesses, vs. 'brick and mortar' businesses. It goes back to the laws originally used to set up the taxing syst.

In the case of sales tax, it was originally set upthat the tax on sales was based on the LOCATION of the seller, who was also 'responsible' for collecting the tax, and paying it; sales tax, that is. Didn't matter what the 'residence' or 'domicile' or the BUYER was, if he was in Maryland, he paid Marylands sales tax, when purchasing from a commercial seller who's location was Maryland.

Back then, there were always SOME 'mail order' businesses, which, (if I recl correctly, DIDN'T collect tax on sales made to out-of-state customers. But, no one made an issue of it. It was only with the vast growth of I-net commerce, that A) Brick and Mortar companies began to complain, percieving they were at an 'unfair' disadvantage, and STATES/MUNICPALITIES got concerned, percieving they were 'losing' revenue, as purchases were occuring in which either the buyer or the seller was in their area.

So now, they are trying to change the rule, and rquire the BUYER to be responsible for paying the tax, based on where they live. In my state, Arizona, they are going so far as to say that (threat) EVERYONE buys 'stuff' on the I-net, so anyone who files a tax return, and doesn't list some amount of $ on line 18b, (amount of $ spent on purchases over the I-net) will be audited. I THINK its just a bluff, but we'll see.

Anyway, I'm bringing this up as a kind of comparison to what you are talking about, in that you have to go back to the original laws and regulations establishing the taxing authority, and subsequent rulings; IF its based on Domicile, as in where you live, than any official document they can (later) refer to, in which you assert, under 'Pains and penalties of perjury' that your 'domicile' or 'residence' is such and such, COULD be used as a basis for taxing you, IF domicile IS one of the defining or detirmining criteria.

In reading up on some of this, it does seem,like for MOST people, in MOST situations, they 'got' you; if you have a birth certificate, and a Social Insecurity # 'assigned' to you, (Its NOT 'your' #, nor is it 'your' card, as both remain the 'property' of the U.S. Corp. Gov't.) if you use Federal reserve notes as money, apply for and recieve a drivers license, register for selective service, etc. you are, by these actions, (apperently) surrendering your individual sovereighnity (sp?) to 'THE MACHINE', as in "Welcome, to,...THE MACHINE.

THEY, have 'got you', and they 'own you', and they aen't too worried about the small # of people who are going to structure theirlives so as to be 'free' of these entanglements; Only bartering for necesaries, home birth/home school of children, etc.

Taxation is merely extortion by another name, and 'in the name' of the state; its collecting $ under threat or 'menaces'.

ONCE you 'BUY IN' to the idea of CIVILISATION, i.e. staying in one location (residence/domicile instead of being a 'Hunter/Gatherer'), EVERYTHING else flows from that decision; Gov'ts, and currency and taxes, wages, etc.
Its a 'flow chart', and once you (or, collectively we humans) made that decision, (around 10-14,000 years ago) all else flows from that. And, very few are willing to 'give up' the PERCIEVED 'advantages' of civilisation, and return to the H/G lifestyle. In fact, should it all go down the toilet, I fear most, not percieving that this decision to NOT be H/G's, and to take up permanent residence leadsinevitably to a dead end road, would be repeated. That is, the 'survivors' of any collapse of civilisation will probably immediately start once again, establishing small defensive 'enclaves', which in time will grow into cities, and the whole stupid excercise will start all over again!
Jim

[zapzap]

tangled webs, and a tale of two Millers, ha ha!

Hi. You are correct in regards to “civilization” being a tangled web (my paraphrase). Notice how in all those so-called civilizations it supposedly became a necessity to enter grains into the food supply in a major way. Humans began the long road to being dumbed down and weakened which continues to date. Of course there are exceptions. Was there a evolution to this change? Or was there other forces?

Regarding the 225 page book that Aljhoa briefly quoted and linked, I read almost half of it and decided to look a bit more in detail on federal income tax subject it covered.
The cornerstone case (Miller Bother Co. v. Maryland) for the domicile argument is non applicable.
It is almost unbelievable an error for the author(s) of that treatise to not understand that this case had nothing to do with the federal income tax. I mean, in the second paragraph of the case it says:

The question is whether these factors, separately or in the aggregate, in each or all of the above types of sales, establish a state's power to impose a duty upon such an out-of-state merchant to collect and remit a purchaser's use tax.

That’s it. That is the whole question before the court. How in God’s name to you misunderstand that? How do you ignore the USSC repeatedly telling what the question before them is and then twist it to fit into a major nexus (domicile) regarding the federal income tax? While not a big fan of Wiki (who is?), here is the brief summation:

The Supreme Court held that imposing tax collection duties on Miller Brothers Co. violated the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment. The Due Process Clause requires some "definite link, some minimum connection, between a state and the person, property, or transaction it seeks to tax." Residence within the state, the doing of business or the hiring of employees within the state, or the owning of property within the state would all qualify as such a connection.
Here, none of Miller Brothers' activities rose to that level. Maryland residents had to affirmatively come to the Delaware store. Miller Brothers' only contact with Maryland was through "the incidental effects of general advertising". As a result, "the burden of collecting or paying their tax cannot be shifted to a foreign merchant in the absence of some jurisdictional basis not present here." The residents of Maryland are, however, still liable for the use tax. It is only that Miller Brothers Co. was not responsible for collecting it.

Quoting that case regarding the federal income tax will get you laughed out of court, and that’s only the start of troubles…

Regarding an earlier comment by Xenophanes, let me attempt to clarify; Roger Elvick was the inventor, developer, the father of the redemption movement/technology, whatever. Look where it got him and a very long list along with him already. Here she talks about the straw man Following the Redemption/Strawman Nonsense? I brought up the other guy (D.W. Miller) because if you haven’t seen this guy in action you need to (home page? :HOME ). Enjoy him! Listen to the first 1:15 seconds of this: Judge David Wynn Miller on ET's, Time Travel, Gold, Wars, 9-11 and more - YouTube . Of course you can listen to as much of him as you please! Will he lead you to redemption – and so, so far beyond. Wanna stop aging? He’ll tell you what worked for him! And more!

I did visit the site posted regarding the straw man and will revisit other sites on the issue.

[aljhoa]

Excellent quote.

If that’s true than the rest of this document is for the lost sheep of the house of Israel
where the house of Judea is no more and the Ashkenazim as well as Sephardim serve
on either sides of a divided and ruled nation.

Now let's look at something practical?

Where well fed are always hungry making executive decisions?
Windows on the World - Mary Sean Young Interview - Awakening - YouTube

Al

[aljhoa]

I brought up the other guy (D.W. Miller) because if you haven’t seen this guy in action you need to (home page? :HOME ). Enjoy him! Listen to the first 1:15 seconds of this: Judge David Wynn Miller on ET's, Time Travel, Gold, Wars, 9-11 and more - YouTube . Of course you can listen to as much of him as you please! Will he lead you to redemption – and so, so far beyond. Wanna stop aging? He’ll tell you what worked for him! And more!

Good e.g. of an atypical onatopp squeezing and screwing his followers.
Xenia Onatopp Vs James Bond - YouTube

Al

[zapzap]

Tommy Cryer's briefs?

While searching around on another matter I came across a lawyer that wrote some interesting information ostensibly on taxing (because you know who was trying to lock him up) but that quotes all kinds of cases regarding "rights" and other such concepts. A real eye opener. There are quotes from cases regarding state's rights versus the federal government - a proverbial cornucopia of supposed ruling law on various issues (well, at least to up to around 2006-2007 timeframe) written by someone who has research and other skills most don't.

The one I came across was a "memorandum", who knows what else is out there?

[aljhoa]

While searching around on another matter I came across a lawyer that wrote some interesting information ostensibly on taxing (because you know who was trying to lock him up) but that quotes all kinds of cases regarding "rights" and other such concepts. A real eye opener. There are quotes from cases regarding state's rights versus the federal government - a proverbial cornucopia of supposed ruling law on various issues (well, at least to up to around 2006-2007 timeframe) written by someone who has research and other skills most don't.

The one I came across was a "memorandum", who knows what else is out there?

Cryer contested a determination by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service that he owed $1.7 million in taxes and penalties.
Before the case could come to trial, Cryer died June 4, 2012.[1] He was 62.
Tom Cryer - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

https://www.ustaxcourt.gov/UstcDockI...ndexID=5975532

Al

[5150]

certainly anyone like 5150 contemplating using these 'arguments' in court needs to carefully consider the consequences, etc. You can be a 'prisoner of consciounce' if you want, just think long and hard before you 'leap'.

Hey hold your horses! I have no plans to be in any court room much less have any interactions with LEOs. Except in my dreams where I am at the rear-end of a gun capping their asses in a hail of gun fire and brimstone like a hero in a movie going up against the corrupt system.

My plan is really simple, avoid the clutches of the system (or the man) and its slow crushing cogs of injustice. I've been there and done that and learned that the system doesn't care about justice, honor, integrity, or even my well versed lawyer. Once entangled in the cogs of they system it's hard to get out or get any real relief. Prisons are nothing more than warehouses for pawns of the system and it's inmates are used to incite fear of incarceration for others who do not submit to the man. It's all a huge racket that keep many people in a job while generating revenue all while intimating and controlling the general public into further submission.

That LA cop Dohner ? was a real stand up guy who had the balls to expose the police and although he killed some innocent people you have to break a few eggs to make an omelet. I personally don't want to go out in a body bag yet but rest assured that when the SHTF I wont be an arm chair warrior.

As for using these case laws I think its good to know them and understand them. I think the main goal with any LEO interaction is live to see the next day, and getting away from them as soon as possible. Whent he gloves one day come off well thats a whole other situation!

[5150]

Here, in excruciating detail, Dan Meador (deceased) left an affidavit that spells out exactly how things played out for him (and others) IN THE REAL WORLD. While the whole document is well worth a read, the details of his woes start at page 9.
Dan Meador : compla~1

I read the entire thing and its so sad yet so true,

Even with the facts and truth in writing and in their face many of these elected (under oath) figures refuse to do whats right. You can argue facts and law until you're blue in the fact but it still doesn't matter. This is why some people result in taking extreme measures to get their point across.

remember the 2010 Austin IRS suicide attack? And the government still doesn't care!




2010 Austin suicide attack - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Farmhand]

Seems the psychologists agree that the "conspiracy" theorists are more sane
than the believers of the official stories. The anti conspiracy theory people are
the ones that have mental issues.

New studies: ‘Conspiracy theorists’ sane; government dupes crazy, hostile.

PressTV - New studies: ‘Conspiracy theorists’ sane; government dupes crazy, hostile

So now we are considered the majority and seeing reality more so than the anti conspiracy people.

Cheers

The times, they are a changin !
The Times They're a Changing! Bob Dylan - YouTube

..

Of course if TPTB feel they are losing too much ground on the mind control front we can expect an escalation of violence and evil acts from them.
We ought to be prepared for that.

..

[aljhoa]

Seems the psychologists agree that the "conspiracy" theorists are more sane
than the believers of the official stories. The anti conspiracy theory people are
the ones that have mental issues.

New studies: ‘Conspiracy theorists’ sane; government dupes crazy, hostile.

PressTV - New studies: ‘Conspiracy theorists’ sane; government dupes crazy, hostile

9 11 Hologram Planes "Holographical Technology" - YouTube

NEW 9/11 Video and Radar Analysis - YouTube

911 - NO PLANES + CGI + HOLOGRAMS + SCALAR WEAPONS + CONTROLLED DEMOLITION - 1 - YouTube


Al