endorsing and SS.......a big question!

[Treefarmer]

EZrythm you cannot say you have no income and yet use an affidavit stating you are a willing participant of Social Security.
Ever really take an honest look into Social Security?
Earning 3121(a) "wages" is income.
For ease of understanding why you cannot say you dont have income and yet are a willing participant lets say to participate in Social security one earns a Social Security wage. This wage is going to be used as a means of measuring the credits towards benefits.

3121(a) "wages" is defined as all fruit except the term excludes-
1. Strawberry's and-
2. Banana's
Easy enough?

Ok onto defining 3401(a) "wages"
For the purpose of this chapter 3401(a) "wages" is defined as all vegetables except the term excludes-
1. Strawberry's
2. Banana's

Ok now you are wondering if 3401(a) "wages" is defined as all vegetables why in the heck does the 3401(a) "wage" exclude the same exclusions to 3121(a) "wages" that are fruit?
Good question huh?
This is where Hendricksons CtC theory falls apart and the reason why he's in prison today.
See EZRythm this is why the courts say 3401(a) "wages" is expansive to include the private sector along with government employees.
A little logic goes a long way.
By saying whats excluded in 3121(a) for the 3401(a) definition is telling you that 3121(a) "wages" are included in 3401(a).
You know Social Security covers a multitude of jobs or occupations that qualify for crediting the trust account for obtaining immediate and defered benefits offered by the government program.
So instead going the long route of listing every job or occupation they tell you the small list of jobs or occupations that dont qualify for crediting the trust account. This is a much simpler way.

This is exactly how the 3401(a) "wages" are written in Title 26.
Here see for yourself!



(1) for active service performed in a month for which such employee is entitled to the benefits of section 112 (relating to certain combat zone compensation of members of the Armed Forces of the United States) to the extent remuneration for such service is excludable from gross income under such section; or
(2) for agricultural labor (as defined in section 3121 (g)) unless the remuneration paid for such labor is wages (as defined in section 3121 (a)); or
[U](3) for domestic service in a private home, local college club, or local chapter of a college fraternity or sorority; or[/U]](9) for services performed by a duly ordained, commissioned, or licensed minister of a church in the exercise of his ministry or by a member of a religious order in the exercise of duties required by such order; [/U]or
(10)
(A) for services performed by an individual under the age of 18 in the delivery or distribution of newspapers or shopping news, not including delivery or distribution to any point for subsequent delivery or distribution; or (B) for services performed by an individual in, and at the time of, the sale of newspapers or magazines to ultimate consumers, under an arrangement under which the newspapers or magazines are to be sold by him at a fixed price, his compensation being based on the retention of the excess of such price over the amount at which the newspapers or magazines are charged to him, whether or not he is guaranteed a minimum amount of compensation for such services, or is entitled to be credited with the unsold newspapers or magazines turned back; or

EZRythm......prior the 1939 code you didnt see these Social Security exclusions in chapter 24's 3401(a) "wages".
Social Security didnt even exist until 1935.
This is why hendrickson is in jail because he wrote a book of his interpretive opinion that didnt line up with the actual law.
I hope you see why an affidavit such as yours isnt going to do anything except possible be used against you in a court of law.
You say you dont have income but yet by participating in Social Security you do because 3401(a) "wages" covers Social Security wages except for the exclusions. Whats excluded from Social Security is also excluded from the chapter 24 deduction and withholding requirement.
The only way you cannot have statutory "wages" is by either having a job that is excluded from the definition or dont even participate in the program altogether.

Thank you jesse james for your explanation of Pete HENDRICKSON's errors.

Now that you have brought up details of USC title 26, could you also please discuss how a person, who is a US citizen, becomes subject to title 26 statutes?

Since title 26 has never been enacted into positive law, but is only "prima facie evidence of the law", and since the Internal Revenue Service is not an agency of the Unites States Government
diver_justice_response-1.pdf,
I would like to know by what contract or mechanism a US citizen becomes subject to the Internal Revenue Code?

By way of explanation, it would also be nice if you could mention to what the Revenue Code is Internal?

Thank you for your participation in this forum.
I appreciate your inquisitiveness.

[motla68]

Its funny how you think redeeming lawful money will hold in court and yet you cannot procure any statute the courts can use to see your side. Zilch, nada, nothing!
The bottom line is it wasn't redeeming lawful money that attributes your success....................its your nonparticipation in Social Security. Just accept it!
Redeeming doesnt stop reporting to the government. Reporting revolves around participation of SS.
All redeeming is was to get gold back fiat. It was just a transitional period.........................they took it away havent they as you dont get gold backed paper........infact you get the same fiat currency.

LOL LOL, yeah this is getting more comical by the post. Guess you have not perused through the archives of this forum yet. I have succeeded in court, setoff county valerim taxes on property, setoff yearly renewal of a vehicle registration, hospital bill, stopped check cashing fees all using lawful money language on it and most I did not even mention the statute cite for it. In stopping check cashing fee part of their procedure is to put a SSN into their card reader to get the job done. Yes I do use a SSN but it is not in the same context as your use of it, I am listed as Grantor, not beneficiary and I did not even have to sign anything to get it.

COURT. The person and suit of the sovereign; the place where the sovereign sojourns with his regal retinue, wherever that may be. [Black's Law Dictionary, 5th Edition, page 318.]

COURT. An agency of the sovereign created by it directly or indirectly under its authority, consisting of one or more officers, established and maintained for the purpose of hearing and determining issues of law and fact regarding legal rights and alleged violations thereof, and of applying the sanctions of the law, authorized to exercise its powers in the course of law at times and places previously determined by lawful authority. [Isbill v. Stovall, Tex.Civ.App., 92 S.W.2d 1067, 1070; Black's Law Dictionary, 4th Edition, page 425]

Court is wherever you are at any given time when communicating with a commercial agent, it is then you are first identified who you are and what jurisdiction before proceedings continue.

See the book of Galatians chapter 4, ascending from the age of minority to the age of majority.

[jesse james]

LOL LOL, yeah this is getting more comical by the post. Guess you have not perused through the archives of this forum yet. I have succeeded in court, setoff county valerim taxes on property, setoff yearly renewal of a vehicle registration, hospital bill, stopped check cashing fees all using lawful money language on it and most I did not even mention the statute cite for it. In stopping check cashing fee part of their procedure is to put a SSN into their card reader to get the job done. Yes I do use a SSN but it is not in the same context as your use of it, I am listed as Grantor, not beneficiary and I did not even have to sign anything to get it.

COURT. The person and suit of the sovereign; the place where the sovereign sojourns with his regal retinue, wherever that may be. [Black's Law Dictionary, 5th Edition, page 318.]

COURT. An agency of the sovereign created by it directly or indirectly under its authority, consisting of one or more officers, established and maintained for the purpose of hearing and determining issues of law and fact regarding legal rights and alleged violations thereof, and of applying the sanctions of the law, authorized to exercise its powers in the course of law at times and places previously determined by lawful authority. [Isbill v. Stovall, Tex.Civ.App., 92 S.W.2d 1067, 1070; Black's Law Dictionary, 4th Edition, page 425]

Court is wherever you are at any given time when communicating with a commercial agent, it is then you are first identified who you are and what jurisdiction before proceedings continue.

See the book of Galatians chapter 4, ascending from the age of minority to the age of majority.

Ahhhhh..............more pieces to the puzzle that redeeming money is NOT the source of your success.
You said you are listed as "grantor" and not beneficiary of the ssn.

I posted for johnthetaxist....aka "stonefree", "johnycash" in another forum a statute pretty much explaining this little tid bit of info "issues of law and fact regarding legal rights and alleged violations thereof" you listed above in Isbill v. Stovall, Tex.Civ.App., 92 S.W.2d 1067, 1070; Black's Law Dictionary, 4th Edition, page 425.

subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia.

My question posed to Johnthetaxist better known as "Johnycash" or "stonefree" here on this forum was how can the government force anybody to participate in a welfare program causing them to become a 2nd class "US citizen" who cannot access certain protections of the Bill of Rights as one of the People?

Thanks for agreeing with me.

[stoneFree]

Perhaps jesse hasn't been called.

"But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God."
1 Corinthians 1:23

[jesse james]

Thank you jesse james for your explanation of Pete HENDRICKSON's errors.

Now that you have brought up details of USC title 26, could you also please discuss how a person, who is a US citizen, becomes subject to title 26 statutes?

Since title 26 has never been enacted into positive law, but is only "prima facie evidence of the law", and since the Internal Revenue Service is not an agency of the Unites States Government
[ATTACH]730[/ATTACH],
I would like to know by what contract or mechanism a US citizen becomes subject to the Internal Revenue Code?

By way of explanation, it would also be nice if you could mention to what the Revenue Code is Internal?

Thank you for your participation in this forum.
I appreciate your inquisitiveness.

Your answer to all these questions is understanding where you stand within the law/laws.
Know the difference between a "US citizens" and the "People".
I gave plenty of court cites explaining how to identify the difference.
I'd start with reading the jurisdiction clause of the 14th amendment, then read those cites I provided, look up an SS5 form to see what or who you are under perjury of being, and read the IRS website about what or who gives them authority to collect.
Read regulation 26CFR 1.1-1(c) to get an idea whos being taxed and subject to title 26.

Sec. 1.1-1 Income tax on individuals.
(a) General rule.
(1) Section 1 of the Code imposes an income tax on the income of every individual who is a citizen or resident of the United States and, to the extent provided by section 871(b) or 877(b), on the income of a nonresident alien individual

Any mention of using FRN as the cause for the tax imposition in this regulation?......................nope, nada, zilch, nothing to that nature. So do you beleive the Reserve Act from 1913 that doesnt say squat about imposing anything has anything at all to do with citizenship, 14th amendment, and the impositions found Title 26?

(c) Who is a citizen. Every person born or naturalized in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction is a citizen.

Amendment XIV
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.

Heres what the IRS has to say about the 14th amandment.

1. Contention: Taxpayer is not a “citizen” of the United States, thus not subject to the federal income tax laws.
Some individuals argue that they have rejected citizenship in the United States in favor of state citizenship; therefore, they are relieved of their federal income tax obligations. A variation of this argument is that a person is a free born citizen of a particular state and thus was never a citizen of the United States. The underlying theme of these arguments is the same: the person is not a United States citizen and is not subject to federal tax laws because only United States citizens are subject to these laws.

The Law: The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution defines the basis for United States citizenship, stating that “[a]ll 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 Fourteenth Amendment therefore establishes simultaneous state and federal citizenship. Claims that individuals are not citizens of the United States but are solely citizens of a sovereign state and not subject to federal taxation have been uniformly rejected by the courts. The IRS issued Revenue Ruling 2007-22, 2007-14 I.R.B. 866, warning taxpayers of the consequences of making this frivolous argument.

See any mention of the IRS taxing the People of the United States of America?.......................................... ....nope! and they cant as the People are above their government!
But "US citizens" are NOT above the Peoples government!.......................they are subjects!

This is my arguement for those redeeming a check and yet have taxes deducted and withheld.......................they have jurisdiction over you. The 14th amendment gives them jurisdiction as you are still redeeming under their jurisdiction.
You have to first understand where you are standing within the law to identify the capacity you are operating in. Once you understand this you can easily figure a way out of the jurisdiction.
EZRythm thinks he can just write up an affidavit that he attest to not having income, but yet admits he is willing to participant in the same mechanism that turns his earnings into bonified reportable statutory "income". And the kicker here is hes sending this affidavit to a government agency that will use it against him as an attempt at tax fraud................how ignorant or smart is that?

[Treefarmer]

Your answer to all these questions is understanding where you stand within the law/laws.
Know the difference between a "US citizens" and the "People".
I gave plenty of court cites explaining how to identify the difference.
I'd start with reading the jurisdiction clause of the 14th amendment, then read those cites I provided, look up an SS5 form to see what or who you are under perjury of being, and read the IRS website about what or who gives them authority to collect.
Read regulation 26CFR 1.1-1(c) to get an idea whos being taxed and subject to title 26.


Any mention of using FRN as the cause for the tax imposition in this regulation?......................nope, nada, zilch, nothing to that nature. So do you beleive the Reserve Act from 1913 that doesnt say squat about imposing anything has anything at all to do with citizenship, 14th amendment, and the impositions found Title 26?

Thank you for bringing up 26CFR 1.1-1(c) jesse james.
Would you add the IRC definition of the term "income" as well?

Now my question is still not answered:
I would like to know by what contract or mechanism a US citizen becomes subject to the Internal Revenue Code?

Are you saying that the 14th Amendment makes US citizens automatically subject to any private law, such as title 26, of any private entity, such as the privately owned international banking cartel that is known as the Federal Reserve Bank, whose private collection agency is known as the Internal Revenue Service?

What, exactly, is the IRS internal of or to?

I don't see how the 14th Amendment can enslave a whole country full of people to someone's private law, i.e. title 26, when the Amendment which immediately precedes it, the 13th, prohibits enslavement?

Even though your case cites had to do with distinguishing between US citizens and people, they do not explain how people are turned into inferior US citizen subjects.
For the people to become subjects of a private entity which is not governed by the Constitution of the United States, they must have entered some contract with that private entity?
This cannot be the contract with the Social Security Administration, because the SSA claims to be a public entity of the United States Government, which claims to be by and for the people.

I would appreciate it if you would address these questions.
Thank you.

[fishnet]

jesse james,

He is a man, earning lawful money in the capacity of a man, exempt from levy on two fronts. He is not the person, as defined by any man created entity. The person is still a participant in Social Security. Get yourself a Black's law dictionary and look up person and man. Better yet, get you a King James Version Bible and see what a man is and see what a person is.

[stoneFree]

Hmm, jesse spinning his wheels, not getting any traction amongst the suitors.

Bank run in Europe: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzGJWtYnAdE

[jesse james]

Thank you for bringing up 26CFR 1.1-1(c) jesse james.
Would you add the IRC definition of the term "income" as well?
Not sure what you mean by this!

Now my question is still not answered:
I would like to know by what contract or mechanism a US citizen becomes subject to the Internal Revenue Code?
See 26CFR 1.1-1 for that answer. I supplied the the regulation but I cant make you think on your own..........leading a horse to water kind of thingy!

Are you saying that the 14th Amendment makes US citizens automatically subject to any private law, such as title 26, of any private entity, such as the privately owned international banking cartel that is known as the Federal Reserve Bank, whose private collection agency is known as the Internal Revenue Service?
Nope, I'm saying the 14th introduces a voluntary jurisdictional citizenship. Title 26 isnt private law, who told you that? Title 26 also allows for the collection of Constitutional tariffs and such.
The IRS is the collection agency of the US Treasury, not the federal reserve. Again question who is telling you these things. I'd stop listening to who ever youare listening to and do your own dilligent study.

What, exactly, is the IRS internal of or to?
The US federal government!
A citizen of the United States is a citizen of the federal government ..."
Kitchens v. Steele, 112 F.Supp 383

I don't see how the 14th Amendment can enslave a whole country full of people to someone's private law, i.e. title 26, when the Amendment which immediately precedes it, the 13th, prohibits enslavement?
1. Title 26 isnt private.
2. Amendment 13 addresses "involuntary servitude" not your voluntary participation in a social welfare program that you attest to being a subject under penalty of perjury. Doesnt matter how or who applied for a ssn. What matters is you can stop being a subject at any time.

Even though your case cites had to do with distinguishing between US citizens and people, they do not explain how people are turned into inferior US citizen subjects.
For the people to become subjects of a private entity which is not governed by the Constitution of the United States, they must have entered some contract with that private entity?
This cannot be the contract with the Social Security Administration, because the SSA claims to be a public entity of the United States Government, which claims to be by and for the people.
Please see the SS5 form. Its signed under penalty of perjury of being a "US citizen". You signed the back of the ssn card dont you? And you used the number didnt you?
Your account is active correct?...........then you somewhere or somehow told the US government.......not the federal reserve you wish to be treated as a US citizen.
I would appreciate it if you would address these questions.
Thank you.

Hope this helps

[stoneFree]

Whatever water you're selling jesse, this horse ain't drinking it. As an addendum to my "typical American company" post, let's look at my average employee. He earns $800 per week. The payroll software calculates his pay with the following federal deductions (married with 1 W4 allowance):

800.00 gross
-70.00 Federal withholding (income tax)
-33.60 Social Security
-11.60 Medicare
-------
684.80 net pay

And then, software says my company must kick in the following amounts towards this employee's account:
49.60 Social Security
11.60 Medicare
4.80 Federal unemployment
------
$66.00

So, 115.20 deducted plus 66. from my company equals $181.20 to the US Treasury, a/k/a The Washington-Wall Street oligarchy. To be on the receiving end of this amount from every employee each & every week is quite a nice little scam, you must admit. And all operated in conjunction with the US government. Understandably, jesse's boss doesn't want the truth revealed, doesn't want us to learn IT'S ALL OPTIONAL.

[shikamaru]

Key word right there......."opinion".

It is my understanding courts issue their opinions as do agencies, departments, and bureaus.

Its all OPINION.

The real question is who has a monopoly on force to enforce their opinion on others?

[Treefarmer]

Hope this helps

Would you add the IRC definition of the term "income" as well?
Not sure what you mean by this!

What I mean is that if the IRC defines who has to pay income tax, then surely it defines what exactly is "income", because it's obviously not all that comes in.

Are you saying that the 14th Amendment makes US citizens automatically subject to any private law, such as title 26, of any private entity, such as the privately owned international banking cartel that is known as the Federal Reserve Bank, whose private collection agency is known as the Internal Revenue Service?
Nope, I'm saying the 14th introduces a voluntary jurisdictional citizenship. Title 26 isnt private law, who told you that? Title 26 also allows for the collection of Constitutional tariffs and such.
The IRS is the collection agency of the US Treasury, not the federal reserve. Again question who is telling you these things. I'd stop listening to who ever youare listening to and do your own dilligent study.

In this case I was listening to the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO, which is why I also included the source document:
diver_justice_response-1.pdf
see page 2, where I highlighted it for convenience.
Are you saying that the United States of America, through undersigned counsel lied in the cognizance of a United States District Court?

The reason I think that title 26 must be private law is because it was never enacted as positive law.
So how can it be a law of the United States of America?

Please see the SS5 form. Its signed under penalty of perjury of being a "US citizen". You signed the back of the ssn card dont you? And you used the number didnt you?
Your account is active correct?...........then you somewhere or somehow told the US government.......not the federal reserve you wish to be treated as a US citizen.

If admitting to being a US citizen amounts to becoming a voluntary slave, then it is only so by guile and deceit. At no point in history were the American people ever alerted to the fact that participation in Social Security is akin to slavery, because it converts a free man or woman into a debt slave without any constitutionally protected rights.
If Social Security is a contract in which the participants agree to waive all their unalienable rights, then somewhere there must be a disclosure of this fact. Otherwise, there is no meeting of the minds, and therefore no contract.

Can you point out where and when the American people were officially informed of the fact that voluntarily admitting to being a US citizen will make one a subject of an extra-constitutional statutory dictatorship?

Thank you for your time jesse james.

[jesse james]

What I mean is that if the IRC defines who has to pay income tax, then surely it defines what exactly is "income", because it's obviously not all that comes in.

Here is what the IRC says "income" is. No need to go any further than number 1 for the "employed".

Sec. 61. Gross income defined.
(a) General definition.
Except as otherwise provided in this subtitle, gross income means all income from whatever source derived, including (but not limited to) the following items:
(1) Compensation for services, including fees, commisions, fringe benefits, and similar items;

Compensation for services = "employment" by definition 3121(b) to be exact.
Havent I've been saying if you are "employed" as far as Social Security is concerned you are not required to have deductions and withholding for occupations that are excluded?........yes I have been saying that the whole time.
So common sense says if you are not under a W4 agreement then the same can be said for the requirement of withhold and deduction..................not required......it voluntary to participate and therefore not statutory "income". The same as it was before 1935 when millions didnt file taxes because they didnt have to.

In this case I was listening to the UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO, which is why I also included the source document:
diver_justice_response-1.pdf
see page 2, where I highlighted it for convenience.
Are you saying that the United States of America, through undersigned counsel lied in the cognizance of a United States District Court?
Have no idea as I didnt listen or click the link.............and dont care to. If a lie has been said its of no concern of mine. I'm only focused and concerned with my Bill of Rights first and foremost, as you should be. They can lie to themselves all they want!
Ok so I did click on your file. The thing you should be more concerned about is the corporation "United States" is not the same as the United States of America. The USofA is the states united as in several states. The US is a corporation.

The reason I think that title 26 must be private law is because it was never enacted as positive law.
So how can it be a law of the United States of America?
If I were you I would research both positive and nonpositive to get a better understanding what it is. Some here beleive I'm a lawyer........I'm not any such thing I'm an union electrician (electronics degree in aviation) whos been studying tax laws since 1995. I have a few lawyer friends and a very good public defender friend from California who have really helped.

If admitting to being a US citizen amounts to becoming a voluntary slave, then it is only so by guile and deceit. At no point in history were the American people ever alerted to the fact that participation in Social Security is akin to slavery, because it converts a free man or woman into a debt slave without any constitutionally protected rights.
If Social Security is a contract in which the participants agree to waive all their unalienable rights, then somewhere there must be a disclosure of this fact. Otherwise, there is no meeting of the minds, and therefore no contract.
Yes there is a disclosure pamphlet that comes along with the ssn application stating the beneficiary doesnt have to use the number as Rights are effected. Seen this with my very eyes when my wife went behind my back and applied for the ssn at the hospital for my daughter.
Also, ignorance of the law is no excuse. We are to know and understand the laws.

Can you point out where and when the American people were officially informed of the fact that voluntarily admitting to being a US citizen will make one a subject of an extra-constitutional statutory dictatorship?
1935 when the Act was enacted. I know it really sucks but we are to understand the law and not break it that applies.
Thank you for your time jesse james.

Thank you for not being of a demeaning nature as some here are.

[stoneFree]

Typical American Company

continuing the narrative...

So then an employee comes to me saying he wants to opt-out of social security and all "federal employment" and can I "stop the withholding?"
"Let me check into that." I answer. I put in one last call to my attorney relative with a couple questions:
"Is social security optional?"
"Can you give me the regulation requiring all my workers to sign a W4?"

My attorney launches into a long rambling explanation mentioning 3121 "wages" and citizenship & penalties, etc. I sense I'm being snowed. In fact, his speech is very reminiscent of "jesse" here! With the way Washington DC has been $pending & destroying liberty, I begin to wonder if I've been victimized too. After all, I stand to save $66 a week by letting this guy out of withholding.

I call mister "Free Man" employee into my office. "If you're willing to handle all the risk involved here, I'm willing to cut out the federales" I say.
"Great. I'm willing."
So together we dig out the W4 from the cabinet & shred it (I must add here the W4 was never sent anywhere, the SSA & IRS don't know it exists. I asked my workers to sign it and I feel somewhat guilty about that). I pull up my payroll software and sure enough, all the options are there to stop withholding, SS, Medicare & FUTA and pay him a full $800 paycheck:

[motla68]

Have you all considered the conversion, do you covert to U.S. Currency or do you convert to equity? Anyone see the last episode of Little House on the Prairie?
Your using a currency other men created, your using statutes other men created. Watch that episode on youtube and see if this makes any sense to you?