a Fence grows on Rio Grande

The title catch line above says it all but I find disappointing that the president of Mexico has encouraged an invasion and exodus of his people to cross the river into America without respecting our laws nor applying for and recieving a proper passport from Mexico. The government of Mexico has also taken to printing, distributing and teaching their people who would invade and cross our border just how and where to cross and travel for the best success to avoid being caught and how to survive the south western deserts. In related news, why; WHY is the fence going to cost a reported 9 billion dollars?!? That is just insane! And finally, lest the reader of this blog think me a racist or a hater of people, I too am a child of immigrants; but my folks obeyed international law and recieved passports to come to America.

This mess

So, by now you've learned the focus of my interest. The law is written to whom it is addressed. Just like the address on the face of an envelope of a letter to be mailed, law also has an address. Usually Congress puts the address up front at the beginning of the legislation it is voting on, but as always, there are exceptions. Most notable is when one reads or attempts to read the Internal Revenue Code. (here after, IRC) Also, in general, legislation is written in a linear, top-down order; but not so for the IRC. IN the first section of the IRC, it begins by saying that (paraphrase) ``taxpayers owe and pay taxes.'' Now, everyone who reads that, including teachers, lawyers and judges all assume they know what or who a taxpayer is and this assumption is just plain wrong. A "taxpayer" is not "everyone alive." The word "taxpayer" in section one is an undefined word and the next thing to do is to find a definition in the IRC. In section 7701, the word "taxpayer" is defined along with other necessary words. The key word definitions to look at are the words PERSON, STATE, and UNITED STATES. These three define to whom the law is written to and who is and is not a taxpayer. This is called Jurisdiction and all courts recognise that the law declares whom the law applies to; the courts call these groups "classes." The group named PERSON always and only refers to (corporations, trusts, partnerships and their agents who speak for them) Another word to learn well is "include" concerning which the courts have said that "include" consists only of the words which follow and what is not explicitly mentioned is completely excluded. For instance, the definition of STATE in the IRC ``includes the District of Columbia'' and therefore we can see that since no states of the union are specifically named then they are completely excluded from that definition. The same can be seen with the definition of the UNITED STATES in the IRC; ``the United States includes the District of Columbia.'' Now, one can easily contrast those definitions with those which are concerned with taxes that are called consumption taxes such those which are placed on cigars and cigarettes. The classes of federal taxes that apply on cigars and cigarettes must be the same within every state of the union and since this class of taxes is constitutional, we can see that in the definition of the word STATE. So then what is the difference between taxes on smoking materials and so-called "income taxes"? It is that the "income tax" defined in the IRC can only be enforced within the District of Columbia and the territories over which Congress has complete and absolute authority. Did We the People give absolute authority or any authority whatsoever to Congress when *We* formed the federal government to micro-manage our lives and activities? No, and absolutely not. We the people choose one of our own from among us who live in the voting area to send to Congress (both state and the District) to add our voice to how the government should behave and what activities it should undertake. But i digress.

The Purpose of elected office.

One who aspires to be elected to an office in government seeks a good thing. But, what is the purpose of government? And, What is the authority of one who is elected to office to serve the people? (corporations dont elect) Does an elected representative have any authority over the voters who elected him? Jurisdiction must always be evaluated to determine whether a civil servant has authority of Law to do or say something on a subject. Without the authority of Law, whether by an act of Congress or an act of some Legislature, no one can speak for their employer. Tacit procuration is the applicable term to describe someone who speaks without explicit permission for another. The speaker assumes a position of authority (they take it) to represent and speak for another as their agent when the one represented has neither appointed nor given permission for anyone to speak for them. The maxim of Law is that ``jurisdiction cannot be taken and must [explicitly] be given.'' Jurisdiction is property. It is owned by the potential giver of it; owned by the one who can give it. When you speak to someone who "claims" to have the authority of law to discuss a matter, then you give permission to them by your response to their speech on the matter. In other words, when you implicitly agree to discuss a thing, that is permission *to* them to continue to discuss. In common language it would be said "keep your mouth shut." Private matters are not private when they are discussed; or, ``don't be an open-book for all to read.'' Your mother probably told you when you were a child, "Do NOT speak to strangers." A stranger is everyone you don't know personally. "Danger, Will Robinson!!" Why are you discussing private matters with strangers? Police, civil servants, any and everyone else? Your Birth-Right, mentioned in the Bill of Rights (supposedly to be guaranteed, protected by the government) is to be silent but if you speak you indicate your choice to NOT be silent and the civil or military servant to whom you speak assumes and properly concludes that your speaking means that you are choosing to NOT to be silent. This is the Trap! Your right to be silent does not begin with the reading of the "Miranda Rights" statement; your rights began the day, at the moment that you were born. It is a lack of knowledge, a lack of education about your birth-rights that destroys you. In a uncitable court opinion, I recall reading that "one does NOT lose their rights because they are unused." Your birth-rights are not revokable; no act of Legislature gave them to you and NO act of any legislature can remove them from you. Your Birth-Rights predate all law since you were born and there is a constitutional prohibition on law ex-post facto, meaning after-the-fact. Again, in common language "Just say `no'" to every statement and question posed by a government servant. They work for us, the People, and not the other way around. All this applies to your signature. The purpose of elected office is to be the People's representative IN the government corporation as its steering-board, to determine what and how the corporation does with its property and in its relationship with other corporations, both internally in its district where it sits and with foreign corporations and their agents.

Emmys and IRS seeks involuntary donations

So it's Emmy time this weekend and the news folks have been mentioning that along with the gift bags that are generously filled with for truly and amazing gifts there will be IRS 1099 forms for "required" filings. Now, I'd like you readers of this blog to consider these next points; follow along, por favor:

1. 1. The Internal Revenue Service is a foreign corporation established as Trusts on both Guam and Puerto Rico;
2. 2. The IRS is not listed in the Organisational Chart of the Federal Government;
3. 3. They are not a federal agency;
4. 4. No "tax payments" they recieve are deposited in the Federal Treasury;
5. 5. Federal misapplication of the law concerning income taxes is done by fear, uncertainty, doubt, hear-say, lies, coercion, theft, and gun.
6. 6. Constitutionally, Congress exists to make all needful rules regarding what the Government owns; that is, property owned by the governments, its own territories, land ceded to the federal government by the states and other things within those constitutional limits.
7. 7. If either the executive or judicial branch makes "law" (extra-constitutionally) then that "law" must comply and be completely encased within constitutional limits - that "law" cannot exceed constitutional boundaries.
8. 8. So, the question you have to ask yourself is this, "When did Congress and the other branches get the authority to micro-regulate the lives of people over whom Congress and the other branches were denied authority over?
9. 9. All government exists by the will of man, and in America, governments were formed to rule over that which is not alive! Corporations, Trusts, and Partnerships are dead and are subject to every Act of Legislatures; and "individuals", the last member of the group - Corporations, Trusts, Partnerships - who according to standard court interpretation means individuals associated with corporations, trusts and partnership, must by necessity be the agent-representative of those three dead-beings.
10. 10. Now, it is subtly presumed that every man and woman is an agent for a corporation, trust or partnership; and unless the man or woman KNOWS of this presumption, they will not object to its application against themselves.
11. 11. By the way, in law, the word PERSON is defined as "a corporation, trust, partnership, individual"; and as I just wrote above, according to statutory construction, standard court construction and interpretation, the individual as part of that definition must be understood as being a man or woman who is associated with those legislated, law-formed entities. An individual is the agent who speaks for PERSON.
12. 12. Now, by simple inference, the opposite can be also concluded that one who is NOT appointed an agent-representative is NOT a PERSON.

    (I realise that this appears to be a long winded trail to get to why the IRS form 1099 is in the Emmy gift bags but please bear with me)

13. 13. Congress and other legislatures can only make law that applies to lesser creatures. In this nation of America, government was formed to be the agent-representative of The People. This means that We The People are not the slaves of government. Lesser beings are those who are created by Law of Man. Man and woman born of woman are not lesser beings because no act of any legislature had any part in our being born. Government is the slave, the steward of The People. Government works for us to do Our Will. We the People do NOT exist for benefit of Government! Government exists to do Our Will; The Will of the People. For without the People to vivify government, to make it alive, there is no government.

Ok, allow me to factor that last paragraph a bit.

1. a. All law is addressed to whom it applies.
2. b. All law is to be read by everyone.
3. c. All law is not applicable to everyone.
4. d. No unpublished law can be obeyed.
5. e. All law applies to PERSONS defined in law.
6. f. Private citizens are not PERSON defined in law.
7. g. a Private non-federal citizen is a sovereign being.
8. h. a sovereign owes neither allegience nor obedience to another sovereign or to one who is lesser.
9. i. Congress and Legislatures cannot impose law against its sovereign maker, a Private citizen.

I know all of these points run counter to all that is taught and spoken as hear-say but any true evaluation of them will reveal that each of those points is truth. I'll stop here for the moment. Please come back.

Dubain company retracts plans

Today, it's mentioned that the Dubain company that wanted to operate several American ports has retracted its offer and apparently cancelled those plans. The Citizens of America have spoken to their representatives in Congress assembled and said "No." This is a very good thing. But as I asked yesterday, I'd still like to know what the answers are to my several questions. I've heard it mentioned several times during this situation that it's racist of people to deny the Company; it was never about racism and to even mention that non-sense is only an attempt to move our focus off the actual problem and truth. The Right issue of this problem is that (1) There is no Constitutional authority for anyone in any branch of government to allow the sale to be completed; and, (2) just because it was allowed previously doesn't mean that it was the correct thing to do then nor now. Wrong is always wrong and no amount of time would ever cure the wrong to make it right!

ports and disports of Congress

So, the news for the last few weeks out of the City of Washington, the District of Columbia has been about who owns and who wants to own the commercial ports on the east coast of America. Does the federal Constitution say that Congress owns them? Does the federal Constitution say that Congress has the authority to delegate authority or control of any port to any corporation or even foreigners? A corporation of Dubai, in which the the government of Dubai has some kind of interest, wants to purchase some authority over some American ports. Why? What is the purpose of the purchase that some foreign company wants to operate American ports? All activity in the world is commercial; it's always about the money. Always. What is the monetary value of exports and imports in each of the ports in play? How much income* did the British company who operates the ports earn during their operation? How much income* is the Dubain Government and the corporation likely to earn year over year? How much taxes are they likely to pay, excluding exemptions? N. B. Long ago the Supreme Court of The United States opined that in context of taxes, "income" means "profit" Also: Are there any other ports around America that are owned or operated by foreign companies and or governments? A British company currently owns or operates all the ports currently in play that the Dubain company wants to own or operate. Why did past Congresses, our elected senators and congress-men and women allow this to happen; and why was there apparently no up-roar by the members of the current Houses when this story was first revealed by the news media? Ponder these questions with me. That's all for now, thanks very much for reading.

Introduction to Spirit and Truth

Hello and Greetings from our heavenly father, his risen son Yeshua, and me. My alias on this blog is Ananias. Please stand by...