Posted on 08/12/2011 12:49:50 PM PDT by charlene4
HOW “WE THE PEOPLE” CAN PUT AN END TO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION by Jedi Pauly, ©2011 Are the 50 states in the same situation as the Colonies were in 1776? (Aug. 11, 2011) — The foregoing is an analysis of the political, legal, and historic situation regarding the current illegitimate United States Government, and the illegitimate unlawful President known as Barack Hussein Obama, which are the results of a fraudulent federal election in 2008. In this analysis, I will endeavor to describe the specific tangible injury to a specific and limited subset or political “class” of U.S. citizens, an injury that grants this particular class standing in the courts, and what I perceive as the only viable legal strategy or avenue available to successfully obtain a legal remedy that will cause the government to become lawful again and which could theoretically remove Obama from Office and restore the rights of the People.
(Excerpt) Read more at thepostemail.com ...
More like taxation without hesitation!
The entire legal analysis is gibberish. There is no difference between a “citizen” nd a “Citizen”; the original Constitution capitalized nouns, which was the 18th century style, and the 14th amendment did not. No court has ever said that the two words mean anything different.
Keep the freeloaders away from the polls.
TIIR.
This is interesting reading.
Yes there is...
Find the definition in the US Code or the IRS code
8 USC- 1101(a)(1)(b)
"Taxation WITH representation ain't so hot either." ---Gerald Barzan
IMO, they should go after something implemented or scheduled to be implemented by Obama's signature.
One that comes to mind is Obama care.
1. At least two courts have ruled it unconstitutional.
2. It meets criteria spelled out in the article.
3. Not implemented as yet though courts have allowed plaintiffs to contest it. Therefore no penalties for challenging it in use as standing to question Obama's legitimacy vs. challenging income tax burdens.
4. Challenging Obamacare from multiple entities (states and citizens) increases the odds of abolishment.
5. Fitting if Obamacare served to eventually bring down its creator!
What we need to put an end to is REPRESENTATION WITHOUT TAXATION.
Sorry, Jedi Pauly, but the force is not with you.
Would go a long way to end the corruption in D.C.
Next, repeal both the 16th & 17th.
:)
You are triply wrong:
First, 8 USC contains the immigration laws, not the Internal Revenue Code, which is 26 USC.
Second: There is no section 1101(a)(1)(b) in Title 8.
Third, if you meant 8 USC 1101 (a), that is the definition of the term "commissioner," not the term "citizen" or "Citizen."
The word that should have been used here is "prescribed," not "proscribed." The meanings are opposite. Proscribed means "banned." I don't think the author means that the sovereign citizen's rights are banned by the federal government.
When you want to be precise you should proofread before publishing..
I'm not sure what LL was supposed to find there--I don't see any capitalized "Citizens"--but I do notice this:
The term “naturalization” means the conferring of nationality of a state upon a person after birth, by any means whatsoever.which puts the lie to the P&E's contention that
The second class...would include...those who are born to a foreign father or foreign parents within a State of the United States. They are also called “naturalized” citizens.Nope. If you're born a citizen, you're not a "naturalized" citizen.
I agree 100%.
Let’s examine.
1) The citizens of federal territories and possessions are U.S. citizens.
2) The federal territories and possessions are subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S.
3) Those born in the federal territories and possessions to U.S. citizens parents from the territories and possessions would by definition, be natural born U.S. citizens with a lower case c.
4) Yet those citizens cannot have any voting representation in Congress or run for the office of President, hence not all natural born citizens can be President.
5) Therefore, Article II natural born Citizen, with a capitol C must be referring to the only group of natural born citizens that are left which must be State citizens.
6) Therefore, by the rules of logic and natural observation, the capitalization is meant to preclude those who are not State citizens. This makes perfect sense because when the original 13 States got together to form a federal government it was never their intention to compete political for representation with the federal government. If natural born Citizen was meant to include those natural born citizens of the federal territories and possessions, then there would be no reason for the federal territories to organize themselves into the other States beyond the original 13 because they could just send their own representatives to Congress and compete with the original 13 States.
LOGIC RULES I HAVE JUST PROVEN YOU WRONG THE FORCE IS WITH ME MAY THE FORCE BE WITH YOU
Therefore, you can't logically say there are two different types of natural born citizens, based on nothing more than the style of capitalization in the Constitution. Like a Wookie living on Endor, it doesn't make sense.
Go 1099, then send your tax money and the stupid payroll tax portion to your State. Let them forward it to the damn federal government.
They are the ones who are supposed to be sending what they think is fair and funding the feds instead of the backward way it is now being done.
We need our states to stand up and declare they don’t want part in the federal bankruptcy.
Don’t leave the Union, but refuse to do anything for them. When bambi threatens to prevent flights (FAA) and cut off funds, say good and set up your own FAA and alliance with like minded states.
The states need to grow a spine or all the states will fall.
It is the opposite of the old saying, together we stand, divided we fall.
Together we fall, divided, we can force some sanity in Washington and we won’t have to fall.
Wrong. There are only two forms of citizenship. By birth which is a function of Natural Law and by Naturalization which is a function of Positive Law (statutory authority) By definition, if you must rely on a statute for your citizenship then you are naturalized even if it is automatic at birth but you are not natural born. Here is a quote from the Supreme Court Minor v Happersett that proves there are only two ways to become a citizen:
“Additions might always be made to the citizenship of the United States in two ways: first, by birth, and second, by naturalization.”
Birth and naturalization are opposite to each other. One requires a statutory authority or Constitutional authority, and the other does not.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.