Voluntary Society - Conditioning - Taxes Adhesion Contracts The Right to Contract: Selling your Life to the Government By Brent Johnson, director of Freedom Bound International, October 10, 2005 One of the unalienable rights of all Americans is the Right to enter into any contract whatsoever. This natural Right is of inestimable value to free people. Without it, many of our rights (i.e. to acquire, own and possess property, to engage in business as we see fit) have little or no meaning. However, each American carries the responsibility of exercising and preserving his/her own rights. If you do not jealously guard and protect your rights, then certainly nobody else will. Almost everyone I meet today wants to know how it is that things have become so oppressive, how government has taken control over so much of daily life, and how America the land of the free has apparently become America the land of the enslaved. My reply is, America is still the land of the free. It’s just that most Americans have used their natural Right to contract to give up their natural rights! Each of you has the Right to engage in any contract whatsoever, even a contract in which you surrender your rights! In order to maintain your freedom in today’s world, it is essential that you clearly understand this. Rights or Privileges It is necessary that you understand the distinction between rights and privileges. A Right is something which you possess simply because you are a living human being. Your rights come from your Creator; they do not come from any government and no government can ever take them away. On the other hand, a privilege is a gift of the State (capital “S” denotes the corporate State) and as such can be regulated or even taken away by the government. In law, the acceptance of a privilege or benefit always incurs a liability, even if you do not know you are receiving a privilege or benefit, and even if you do not know what the liability is. Which Citizen Are You? Each American born in one of the fifty Union states possesses natural rights to life, liberty, travel, the pursuit of happiness, contract, acquiring, owning and possessing property, etc. State Citizens (with a capital “C”) hold all rights which formerly belonged to the king of England (Lansing v. Smith, 21 D. 89). Each Citizen is naturally endowed with all rights as described in the Declaration of Independence and protected by the Constitution for the United States. Unfortunately, most Americans have unknowingly given up these rights in exchange for the government “privilege” of being a “United States citizen” (with a small “c”). U.S. citizenship has been ruled by the Supreme Court to be a privilege (Hale v. Henkel, 201 U.S. 43; United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542, 549). It entitles you to receive benefits from the federal government, such as welfare, food stamps, unemployment insurance, Medicare, SSI, etc. It is interesting to note that any government benefit may be obtained more securely through the private sector. So, nobody needs to be on the government dole. Social Security Adhesion Contract The most notorious contract responsible for the encroachments on our personal freedom is embodied in the Social Security application, Form SS-5. This form is attached to an adhesion contract, which means that you can agree to its terms or not, but you cannot alter the contract in any way. This contract establishes you as a United States (federal) citizen. By accepting the privilege of U.S. citizenship you have waived your unalienable rights and given up the protection of the Constitution for the United States. Every time you sign your name to Form W-4, IRS Form 1040, endorse the back of a check, check the box on a government form identifying yourself as a “U.S. citizen” etc., you renew your contract with the federal government. If you are like most people, your parents originally obtained a Social Security number for you, thereby binding you to the federal government’s adhesion contract. Most likely, they were unwitting accomplices to the government’s efforts to subjugate the population. However, when you turned eighteen and did not revoke this contract, you agreed to its terms just as if you had originally signed it. Unconscionable Contracts However, there is a provision in law that requires all parties entering into a contract to do so knowingly, willfully, and voluntarily, with full disclosure of all of the terms of the contract prior to signing. Otherwise, the contract is considered unconscionable and an act of fraud, and may be nullified and revoked dating back to its original signing; anything that takes place under the terms of an unconscionable contract is void, as if it never happened in the first place. This means that technically, you are entitled to a refund of every penny you ever paid into Social Security, federal or State income taxes, SSI, Medicare, etc. Don’t count on a refund, though. You’re not likely to get one unless you are prepared for a lengthy court battle, and even then, the odds of your winning in the corrupt United States judicial system are very low. If you don’t want to engage in such a struggle, then just consider yourself fortunate to be out from under the thumb of government regulation and leave it at that. Licenses Social Security is by no means the only government contract which has been used to subject the people to a jurisdiction foreign to them. State issued licenses and registrations represent another type of insidious contract that State and federal governments use to control people. A license is a permit issued by the State, for you to do something that, were you not licensed, would be illegal. The State retains all control of your behavior with regard to the act being licensed. The State can revoke, suspend or amend your license at any time; you have no rights as long as you possess the license. Take a look at some of the things which we have been told require licensing by the State. Are they inherently illegal? Right to Travel As a Citizen, you have a natural Right to travel upon the public roadways. Various state and U.S. Supreme Courts have ruled that this Right extends to and includes the use of automobiles. You cannot be required to pay a fee or tax in order to exercise this natural Right. Drivers licenses and vehicle registrations represent fees which, if they were required of all Citizens, would do exactly that. Today’s drivers license was originally just a certificate of competency, confirming that you were trained in the operation of a motorcar. Today’s drivers license is permission by the State for you to conduct commerce (drive) by operating a motorcar. Taxi drivers, truck drivers, and chauffeurs are among those who require licensing by the State. We have all been told that we must get a drivers license; it has even been made into a cultural “rite of passage”. Nevertheless, if you transport persons or property without charging a fee or fare for doing so, there is no legal requirement for a state Citizen to have a drivers license or vehicle registration! Property of the State Notwithstanding this fact, lower courts throughout the land ignore the law in favor of raising revenues. There is even an ordinance in the City of Thousand Oaks, California that clearly admits this to be true. At least, they’re honest. Government takes the position that you are a franchisee of the State, and as such, you are considered to be property of the State. You are a natural resource. In California, the State taxing authority is called the Franchise Tax Board. Criminal Police If you travel without paying registration or license fees, you are likely to be stopped and given a ticket some day. In some States, laws have been passed authorizing the police to confiscate vehicles when the driver is operating on a suspended or revoked license. This requires the police to make a determination that you are a commercial entity; a determination the police are not legally qualified or authorized to make. If you are ever in such a situation, do not leave your car! Your car is like your home: it is your private property and the police cannot enter it without first showing you a search warrant and affidavit, both signed by a magistrate. Open your windows a crack only, keep your doors locked. You do not have to submit to orders by police, but you should cooperate wherever possible. Remember, you are a Sovereign Being and do not have to obey laws which violate your natural rights. Police who try to enforce such laws are themselves criminals. Limited Jurisdiction The most significant thing to understand about traffic laws and vehicle codes is that they have limited jurisdiction and only apply to “United States citizens”, not to state Citizens. This is because state Citizens are supreme in America and can only be governed by their own consent. It is also important for you to understand that when you obtain a drivers license or register your car as a “motor vehicle” you are entering into a contract with the State, which gives them permission to regulate your behavior with respect to your car and its operation. Without this contract the State has no legal authority over your natural Right to travel. Be very careful! You must learn about the applicable laws of your state. You must accept full responsibility for the consequences of standing up for your rights. Many people in positions of authority in government are openly hostile toward Citizens who assert their natural rights under the Constitution. Some Judicial Districts in northern California have even coined the phrase “constitutionalist” and apply it freely and with disdain to those who want to live free from government. Supposedly impartial judges have openly expressed their disinterest in hearing “constitutionalist” arguments. These are violations of their oaths of office. These judges are also criminals. You are likely to meet with great resistance if you choose to assert your freedom to travel and other rights. I believe that meeting this sort of resistance is the price of freedom. Marriage Licenses What about marriage licenses? Getting married is not illegal so why is a license required? The truth is, it isn’t. However, the government has successfully trained the population to believe it to be necessary to obtain a license before marrying, thus giving the government greater control over the people. For example, by obtaining a marriage license the husband and wife make the State “guardians of their morals” (81 CA2d 871, 185 P2d 381). Originally, these were called “intermarriage licenses” and were permits for the marriage of a white person to a black person. Back in the days of open slavery in America, black people were not considered to possess the same natural rights as white people. Blacks were thought of as property. They had no Right to enter the contract of marriage. Therefore, if a white wanted to marry a black the couple needed to obtain the State’s permission. Further, the State retained control of both parties to the marriage. A marriage license invites the State to have an interest in your marriage and the fruit of your marriage (i.e. your children). Right to Conduct Business It is an inherent and natural Right for all Americans to be able to engage in and conduct business; that’s why America has been called the land of opportunity. Business licenses represent another contract with the State, transferring control over your business to the government. Why would you do that? Any time you obtain any license you enter into a contract with the State. A license represents transfer of power of attorney over the licensed activity from you to the State. Today, we are led to believe these and other licenses are mandatory. But think about it. A license is permission to do that which would otherwise be illegal. People were getting married, operating their cars, conducting business, voting, being born before these things were licensed, registered or certified. Why should you give control of your life over to the State? What do you get in return? Whenever you are confronted with licensing, registering or certifying anything with the State, it is attached to some contract; generally, one which places you under federal jurisdiction, since a Sovereign never needs to license or register his/her behavior. Ask yourself, “Am I a Sovereign or subject?”. Act accordingly. Common Law Trusts You can use your Right to contract to protect and defend your family and property. Through establishing Unincorporated Contractual Organizations, Pure Trust Organizations, and other types of common law trusts, you can free yourself completely from government control. Just stay away from government contracts. Protect Your Rights Your Right to contract can be used to help you reach for your dreams. But there are those who would subvert this priceless Right to be used for their own ends. Birth certificates, voters registration, business licenses, Social Security, drivers licenses and vehicle registrations are only a few of the contracts of which all lovers of freedom must beware. Remember that your rights carry with them responsibilities: if you don’t jealously and diligently protect them, you may wake up one morning to find that you have given them away! There have always been 2 classes of citizens in America. The Constitution for the United States of America talks about 2 classes of citizens. Article IV, Section 2 Clause 1 says; The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The courts have talked about the two classes of citizens as shown below. there is in our Political System, a government of each of the several states and a government of the United States Each is distinct from the other and has citizens of its own. . US vs. Cruikshank, 92 US 542, The Fourteenth Amendment, ....creates or at least recognizes for the first time a citizenship of the United States, as distinct from that of the States. Blacks Law Dictionary, 5th Edition at pg 591; One may be a citizen of a State and yet not a citizen of the United States. Thomasson v State, 15 Ind. 449; Cory v Carter, 48 Ind. 327 (17 Am. R. 738); McCarthy v. Froelke, 63 Ind. 507; In Re Wehlitz, 16 Wis. 443. Mc Donel v State, 90 Ind. Rep. 320 at pg 323; Both before and after the 14th Amendment to the Federal Constitution it has not been necessary for a person to be a citizen of the U.S. in order to be a citizen of his State Crosse v. Board of Supervisors, Baltimore, Md., 1966, 221 A. 2d 431 citing US Supreme Court Slaughter House Cases and U.S. v. Cruikshank 92 US 542, 549, 23 L. Ed 588 1875 There are two classes of citizens, citizens of the United States and of the State. And one may be a citizen of the former without being a citizen of the latter Gardina v. Board of Registers 48 So. 788, 169 Ala. 155 (1909) Citizenship of the United States does not entitle citizens to privileges and immunities of Citizens of the State, since privileges of one are not the same as the other Tashiro v. Jordan, 255 P. 545 California Supreme Court The United States Supreme Court quite thoroughly expanded on the two classes of citizenship in the case Maxwell v Dow, 20 S.C.R. 448, where it said: ...that there was a citizenship of the United States and a citizenship of the states, which were distinct from each other, depending upon different characteristics and circumstances in the individual; that it was only privileges and immunities of the citizens of the United States that were placed by the amendment under the protection of the Federal Constitution, and that the privileges and immunities of a citizen of a state, whatever they might be, were not intended to have any additional protection by the paragraph in question, but they must rest for their security and protection where they have heretofore rested. Maxwell v Dow, 20 S.C.R. 448, at pg 451; These two classes of citizenship continue to this day, Privileges and immunities clause of the Fourteenth Amendment protects only those rights peculiar to being a citizen of the federal government; it does not protect those rights which relate to state citizenship. 14,§ 1. Jones v Temmer, 829 F.Supp. 1226 (D.Colo. 1993); Because there are 2 classes of citizens, and also because of circumstances that will become known below, it is necessary to assert your sovereignty. In order to understand how and why you assert your sovereignty, we need to have some background knowledge. A state citizen is one of We the People found in the preamble to the constitution. You can be in a state without being in the United States. In fact, if you read their codes, the United States in the United States Code is the District of Columbia and the Territories. The Puerto Rico website even talks about it. What is a US citizen? The US citizen A US citizen does not have any rights. ...the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States do not necessarily include all the rights protected by the first eight amendments to the Federal constitution against the powers of the Federal government. Maxwell v Dow, 20 S.C.R. 448, at pg 455; The only absolute and unqualified right of a United States citizen is to residence within the territorial boundaries of the United States, US vs. Valentine 288 F. Supp. 957 Therefore, the U.S. citizens [citizens of the District of Columbia] residing in one of the states of the union, are classified as property and franchises of the federal government as an individual entity. Wheeling Steel Corp. v. Fox, 298 U.S. 193, 80 L.Ed. 1143, 56 S.Ct. 773. “A “US Citizen” upon leaving the District of Columbia becomes involved in “interstate commerce”, as a “resident” does not have the common-law right to travel, of a Citizen of one of the several states.” Hendrick v. Maryland S.C. Reporter’s Rd. 610-625. (1914) A US citizen is a corporation. ...it might be correctly said that there is no such thing as a citizen of the United States. ..... A citizen of any one of the States of the Union, is held to be, and called a citizen of the United States, although technically and abstractly there is no such thing. Ex Parte Frank Knowles, 5 Cal. Rep. 300 This can also be confirmed in the definitions section of Title 5 USC, Title 26 USC, and Title 1 USC. Therefore a US citizen is a piece of property. If you read any of those old court cases prior to the civil war where slavery was the issue, the debate was ALWAYS over property rights, therefore a US citizen, is a SLAVE. The Fourteenth Amendment defines what a US citizen is; Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States,..... The so-called Fourteenth Amendment criminally converts US citizenship completely upside down from what the founding fathers intended. The rights of the individuals are restricted only to the extent that they have been voluntarily surrendered by the citizenship to the agencies of government. City of Dallas v Mitchell, 245 S.W. 944 Civil rights under the 14th amendment are for Federal citizens and not State Citizens; Federal citizens, as parents, have no right to the custody of their infant children except subject to the paramount right of the State. Wadleigh v. Newhall, Circuit Court N. Dist. Cal., Mar 13, 1905 and “US citizens” can even murder their unborn children by committing the common law crime of infanticide, and because the unborn are NOT “persons”, then they are by definition State Citizens, which means the BAR members (foreign agents of the Crown) in the so-called courts are engaged in genocide against the American sovereignty, and this is proof that it has nothing to do with race, and has everything to do with slavery; The unborn are not included within the definition of person as used in the 14th Amendment. Roe v. Wade, US Supreme Court, 410 US 13, 35L. Ed. 2d 147, 1973 The only absolute and unqualified right of a United States citizen is to residence within the territorial boundaries of the United States, US vs. Valentine 288 F. Supp. 957, “...it is evident that they [US citizens] have not the political rights which are vested in citizens of the States. They are not constituents of any community in which is vested any sovereign power of government. Their position partakes more of the character of subjects than of citizens. They are subject to the laws of the United States, but have no voice in its management. If they are allowed to make laws, the validity of these laws is derived from the sanction of a Government in which they are not represented. Mere citizenship they may have, but the political rights of citizens they cannot enjoy…” People v. De La Guerra,40 Cal. 311, 342 (A.D. 1870) [emphasis added] “SUBJECT. SUBJECT may imply a state of subjection to a person, such as a monarch, without much sense of membership in a political community or sharing in political rights … It may on the other hand simply indicate membership in a political community with a personal sovereign to whom allegiance is owed.” Websters Third New International Dictionary, MERRIAM-WEBSTER INC., Publishers 1986 “[T]he term citizen, in the United States, is analogous to the term subject in the common law.” State vs Manual 20 NC 122, 14 C.J.S. 4, p 430 and a “US citizen” is a fictitious entity, and has no rights; Therefore, the U.S. citizens residing in one of the states of the union, are classified as property and franchises of the federal government as an individual entity. Wheeling Steel Corp. v. Fox, 298 U.S. 193, 80 L. Ed. 1143, 56 S. Ct. 773 “In our opinion, it was not the intent of the legislature to restrict the operation of the statute to those only who were subjects of the United States government ...” Prowd v. Gore (1922) 57 Cal. App. 458, 459-461 [emphasis added] “Upon the other hand, the 14th Amendment, upon the subject of citizenship, Declares only that 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. Here there is a limitation to person born or naturalized in the United States, which is not extended to person born in any place subject to their jurisdiction.” Downes v. Bidwell (1900) 182 U.S. 244, 249-251, 45 L. Ed. 1088, 1092, [emphasis added] A “US Citizen” upon leaving the District of Columbia becomes involved in “interstate commerce”, as a “resident” does not have the common-law right to travel, of a Citizen of one of the several states. Hendrick v. Maryland S.C. Reporter’s Rd. 610-625. (1914) The right of trial by jury in civil cases, guaranteed by the 7th Amendment (Walker v. Sauvinet, 92 U. S. 90), and the right to bear arms, guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment (Presser v. Illinois, 116 U. S. 252), have been distinctly held not to be privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States guaranteed by the 14th Amendment against abridgement by the states, and in effect the same decision was made in respect of the guarantee against prosecution, except by indictment of a grand jury, contained in the 5th Amendment (Hurtado v. California, 110 U. S. 516), and in respect of the right to be confronted with witnesses, contained in the 6th Amendment. West v. Louisiana, 194 U. S. 258. The technical niceties of the common law are not regarded. . . ., 1 R.C.L. 31, p. 422. A jury does not figure, ordinarily, in the trial of an admiralty suit. . . the verdict of the jury merely advisory, and may be disregarded by the court. 1 R.C.L. 40, p. 432. [The] rules of practice may be altered whenever found to be inconvenient or likely to embarrass the business of the court. 1 R.C.L. 32, p. 423. A court of admiralty. . . acts upon equitable principles. 1 R.C.L. 17, p. 416. A libel of information [accusation] does not require all the technical precision of an indictment at common law. If the allegations describe the offense, it is all that is necessary; and if it is founded upon a statute, it is sufficient if it pursues the words of the law. The Emily v. The Caroline, 9 Wheat. 381 ...that there was a citizenship of the United States and a citizenship of the states, which were distinct from each other, depending upon different characteristics and circumstances in the individual; that it was only privileges and immunities of the citizens of the United States that were placed by the amendment under the protection of the Federal Constitution, and that the privileges and immunities of a citizen of a state, whatever they might be, were not intended to have any additional protection by the paragraph in question, but they must rest for their security and protection where they have heretofore rested. Maxwell v Dow, 20 S.C.R. 448, at pg 451; ...the privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States do not necessarily include all the rights protected by the first eight amendments to the Federal constitution against the powers of the Federal government. Maxwell v Dow, 20 S.C.R. 448, at pg 455; — Timeline Photos We the People Most people are aware that We the people are sovereign in America. ...at the revolution the Sovereignty devolved on the people; and they are truly the sovereigns of the country, but they are sovereigns without subjects ......and have none to govern but themselves; the citizens of America are equal as fellow citizens, and as joint tenants in the sovereignty. Chisholm v Georgia, 2 Dall. 440, at pg 471; The words people of the United States and citizens are synonymous terms, and mean the same thing. They both describe the political body who, according to our republican institutions, form the sovereignty, and who hold the power and conduct the Government through their representatives. They are what we familiarly call the sovereign people, and every citizen is one of this people, and a constituent member of the sovereignty. Dredd Scott v Sandford, 60 US 393, at pg 404; So what does it mean to be sovereign? It means that you have all of the rights of the King. People of a state are entitled to all rights, which formerly belong to the King by his prerogative. Lansing v Smith, (1829) 4 Wendell 9,20 (NY). The people or sovereign are not bound by general word in statutes, restrictive of prerogative right, title or interest, unless expressly named. Acts of limitation do not bind the King or the people. The people have been ceded all the rights of the King, the former sovereign,.....It is a maxim of the common law, that when an act is made for the common good and to prevent injury, the King shall be bound, though not named, but when a statute is general and prerogative right would be divested or taken from the King (or the people) he shall not be bound. People v Herkimer, 4 Cowen (NY) 345, 348 (1825) It will be admitted on all hands that with the exception of the powers granted to the states and the federal government, through the Constitutions, the people of the several states are unconditionally sovereign within their respective states. Ohio L. Ins. & T. Co. v. Debolt, 16 How. 416, 14 L.Ed. 997. Every nation on the planet, is a nation of Kings and Queens. Many people will find this hard to believe but the courts have affirmed this on numerous occasions. This is because of what is known as common law. In fact, the courts have ruled that there is NOTHING that the government can do to affect the people. Sovereignty itself is, of course, not subject to law, for it is the author and source of law; ….. Yick Wo v Hopkins, 118 US 356, at pg 370; Inasmuch as every government is an artificial person, an abstraction, and a creature of the mind only, a government can interface only with other artificial persons. The imaginary, having neither actuality nor substance, is foreclosed from creating and attaining parity with the tangible. The legal manifestation of this is that no government, as well as any law, agency, aspect, court, etc. can concern itself with anything other than corporate, artificial persons and the contracts between them. Penhallow v. Doanes Administraters 3 U.S. 54; 1 L.Ed. 57; 3 Dall. 54, (1795) In fact the courts have also ruled that the ONLY authority held by the government is authority that is delegated by the people. …., while sovereign powers are delegated to the agencies of government, sovereignty itself remains with the people, by whom and for whom all government exists and acts. Yick Wo v Hopkins, 118 US 356, at pg 370; The ONLY legitimate authority that any government has is delegated by we the people, so what does that mean? Can I delegate to the government the authority to take some money from you and give it to the guy down the street because he is broke? NO! So how do they do it? There are 2 classes of citizens. They do it by way of what the courts view as a contract, through our own ignorance. Much of it is our own fault, because of our own ignorance of the law and how it works, and it is as old as time itself. Firstly, foreign agents infiltrated our government. Secondly, the foreign agents converted citizenship to the opposite of what the founding fathers intended. Thirdly they passed color of law statutes. Fourthly, we dont know who we are.
Posted on: Wed, 20 Nov 2013 20:27:31 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015