Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [tips_and_tricks] Refute not a "person" under the Tax code

Expand Messages
  • Occupant Family
    Greetings, All these cases did not have the record set against being an individual or against being federal personnel . See 5 USC 552a (a)(2) which states:
    Message 1 of 1 , Jan 26, 2004
      Greetings,
       
      All these cases did not have the record set against being an "individual"
      or against being "federal personnel".
      See 5 USC 552a (a)(2) which states:
      (2) the term "individual" means a citizen of the United States
      or an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence;
       
      And 5 USC 552 a (a)(13) states:

      (13) the term "Federal personnel" means officers and employees

      of the Government of the United States, members of the uniformed

      services (including members of the Reserve Components), individuals

      [FN1] entitled to receive immediate or deferred retirement

      benefits under any retirement program of the Government of the

      United States (including survivor benefits).

       

      They volenteered into subjection and never refuted the introduction

      of their "slave number" in the form of SS account number.

      One can claim to be an "elephant" but what does the record show? 

      Also see the 13 definitions in Black's Law [5th] for the term "of"!

      If one "belongs to" a corporate state they are a subject!

       

      Set the damn record [Administrative procedures] against them

      and you will never see the inside on a fed court on this issue!

       
      Also see Santa Clara County v Southern Pacific RR for the 1st time
      a corporate entity became a "person" and forever destroyed
      the term. It is called into question by the Fed Ct. clerks
      letter making the determination. See "Waite" under that
      case.
       
      Deo volente,
      Jim DeArman
       
      ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
      On Mon, 26 Jan 2004 00:31:04 -0000 "fastmuscleman" <m.schrader@...> writes:
      >
      Not a "Person" Under the Tax Code:
      >
      > Some have contended that
      they were not "persons" under the
      > Internal Revenue Code, an argument
      which has been lost.
      >
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.