"To Seek out that which was Lost..."

We present this Information and its Links as a Service to our readers... Its inclusion should not be construed as the Authors'
or the Relays' endorsement of our Beliefs... or as our endorsement of theirs.. the Truth will stand on its own Merit!

DO YOU

REALLY UNDERSTAND

THE TERM UNITED STATES?

Originally compiled by Richard J. McDonald
We found it at "http://www.aracnet.com/~fmccaule/US.htm"

"United States of America" and "united States of America"
DO THEY MEAN THE SAME THING?

---

Do not believe everything you read without demanding proof (this document included!)

EDUCATE YOURSELF: What is stated here is fact to the best of my knowledge, but do not blindly accept it. Trying to believe it without attempting to prove or disprove it at your local law library would be foolish. If you refuse to fully understand what is being said and implied here, then it cannot help you.

---

The very first thing you must do is look at a statute (law created by men) that uses the term United States and decide to which of the three (3) ways the "United States" is referred. The Supreme Court has stated that the term United States is a metaphor. In other words a figure of speech, it can mean more than one thing depending on how it is used. Cunard S.S. Co. v. Mellon (262 US 100 pg. 122), a case which dealt with the Eighteenth Amendment, stated:

"The immediate context and the purport of the entire section show that the term is used in a physical and not metaphorical sense"

I will not quote any of the cases here, but will only give you the cites, (case #s) unless it is pertinent that I quote from the case. The term "United States" can have more than one meaning. It is referred to in Black's Law Dictionary 5th Ed. Pg. 1375 and the Supreme Court states:

"The term 'United States' may be used in one of several senses. It may be merely the name of a sovereign in a family of nations. It may designate a territory over which sovereignty of the United States extends, or it may be a collective name of the States which are united by and under the Constitution."
Hooven & Allison Co. v. Evatt
324 US 652 Pg. 672 & 673.

The Court did not say "created by". Here is your first encounter with words that you might assume to mean something else, if you thought united by meant created by. I am talking to a large audience with different levels of education - I'll try to point out things that would be obvious to some but which others might not catch.

When looking at statutes, one must look at what the supreme Tribunal said with reference to understanding a statute. (No, it's not a Court. The word supreme was not capitalized because the founding fathers said that God was the Supreme court at judgment time and that's why they did not capitalize the "S" in supreme.) Today's Supreme Court is not a Constitutional Court, but a Tribunal, as stated right in the building itself, having a Title of Nobility.

"The starting point in any endeavor to construe a Statute is always the words of the Statute itself; unless Congress has clearly indicated that its intentions are contrary to the words it employed in the Statute, this is the ending point of interpretation."
Fuller V. United States 615 F. Supp. 1054 (D.C. Cal 1985). West's Key 188 quoting Richards V. United States 369 US. 1, 9, 82 S. Ct. 585, 590, 7 L. Ed. 2d.492(1962).

We now go to the Federalist Papers which explain what the words expressed in the Constitution meant, by the very people who helped to write them. They are explaining intent. Both the Federalist Papers and the Constitution are in plain English and contain no legal jargon, so they cannot be misunderstood. You must read Federalist Paper 39 wherein it states "...first in order to ascertain the real character of the government, it may be considered in relation to the foundation - [preamble] - on which it was established;..."

Now comes the hard part. I'm trying to make you understand and undo what you have been taught, Since most of you have never read the Federalist or Anti federalist papers - or for that matter, constitutions of your State and the United States. In Federalist Papers 1 through 7, the term United States is never mentioned except for the first sentence Federalist Paper No. 1. The Framers spoke only of America which was the thirteen colonies (States) as there was no United States yet. These Framers were the people of the Colonies. They were telling the people of America that they were going to form a more perfect Union (not a new Union), by creating first, the United States. This was not one of the Colonies, but an entity in itself. They were calling themselves "We The People" (governing body) of the United States, not the American people of the Confederate States, because they were the originators of the yet formed United States. Yet they were each, one of the people of the colonies.

"We the People," meant the founding Fathers ONLY, who were the origin who were the origin (of), or creators of the specific noun (place, fiction because it had no specific place at the time). They were not talking about the Nation comprising the 13 confederate States united (Called America at the time, as in the Declaration of Independence.) If they were, they would have used the small "u" or the word "these." " So they created the entity called the United States and also a Constitution (agreement or contract) FOR, not OF, the United States belonging to (of) America. This agreement was to protect the people of America from the administrators of the government they were forming. Without your consent (which is a critical term), the administrators have no control over you, except those terms spelled out in the Constitution. These terms are only, treason in time of war; to provide punishment for counterfeiting the coin (money), not printed federal reserve notes; to punish Piracies and Felonies committed on the high Seas. That's it, unless you can find any other powers that were granted them in Article I, § 8, Clause 1 through 18.

Patrick Henry's speech before the Convention on June 4, 1788, was premised that the Sovereign People did not consent to the Framers to represent them, for he said:

"I have the highest veneration for those gentleman-- but, Sir, give me leave to demand, what right had they to say, 'We the People.' My political curiosity, exclusive of my anxious solicitude for the public welfare, leads me to ask who authorized them to speak the language of, We, the people instead of We, the States? States are the characteristics, and the soul of the confederation. If the States be not the agents of this compact, it must be one great consolidated National Government of the people of all the States... ...But there are other Gentlemen here, who can give us this information. The people gave them no power to use their name. That they exceeded their power is perfectly clear."

Read the Anti Federalist Papers and when you do, you will have to agree that the History books will have to be rewritten on this point. To prove this, the last eight words of the preamble explains it, wherein they stated that they were going to establish a Constitution for the entity called the United States belonging to America.

The Constitution was drafted in secrecy and the people had no idea what was being done. This is a fact in history. When the drawing up of the Constitution was completed, people waited outside the convention and asked, when the founding fathers came out, what have you accomplished? Franklin stated, "A Republic if you can keep it." Does this sound like the people knew what they were doing so they could state "We the People" which meant all the people? Wasn't Patrick Henry right?

Another point of grammar shows this to be true and that is the word People was capitalized. It was not the general term people (common noun) but a term referring to a specific class of people. So they capitalized People, thereby making it a proper noun to show the term meant the signers and not the people in general.

If you have a hard time grasping what I am saying, then look up the word "of" in the dictionary. Does it not say "belonging to"? It also means "Origin." Remember: America, the States of the Union, cannot and does not belong to the United States which was formed by the Framers (people) of America who were calling themselves at that time, "We the people of the United States", for they equated themselves as the origin of the United States. Look up the definition of "United States" in Bouvier's 1870 Dictionary. In this instance, the word "of" means Origin. They did not say, "We the people of the united States of America", did they?

They did create a Constitution (a contract) FOR the United States which belongs to (of) America. America is the Union of States united by and under the Constitution, as the Hooven Court stated, that ratified the contract in which it was understood the States gave up only limited rights which were enumerated (spelled out) in the main body of the Constitution. The Union was NOT created by the Constitution, only made more perfect. Federalist paper #15 proves my above statements.

"The great and radical vice in the construction of the existing confederation is in the principle of LEGISLATION for STATES or GOVERNMENTS, in their CORPORATE or COLLECTED CAPACITIES, and as contra-distinguished from the INDIVIDUALS of whom they consist. This principle does not run through all the powers delegated to the Union, yet it pervades and governs those on which the efficacy of the rest depends. Except as to the rule of apportionment, the United States have an indefinite discretion to make requisitions for men and money; but they have no authority to raise either by regulation extending to the individual citizens of America."

Emphasis in capitals are Hamilton's.

Please read the rest of the 15th, for they call the States independent nations. Now let us move to a modern day definition to help prove that the phrase "United States of America" means that entity called The United States, and not the 50 States of the Union. In a Tax case cited as:

Moore v. U.S. 87-1 USTC 9848 "MEMORANDUM ORDER AND OPINION ... Defendant United States of America ('United States') has filed…"

Here again is proof that the phrase United States of America, in plain English means the United States, and not the 50 States of the Union. We are dealing in tax law terms now, don't forget. Since you can define the United States three ways you had better be sure how the term United States is being used!

So, what are you?

• A Citizen of the united States?
• A citizen of the United States?
• A nonresident alien of the U.S.?

1. I am a Citizen of the United States like you are a Citizen of China. Here you have defined yourself as a national from a Nation with regard to another Nation. It is perfectly OK to call yourself a "Citizen of the United States." This is what everybody thinks the tax statutes are inferring. But notice the capital "C" in Citizen and where it is placed. Confused now?, please go back to study basic English.
2. I am a United States citizen. Here you have defined yourself as a person residing in the District of Columbia, one of its Territories, or Federal enclaves (area within a Union State) or living abroad, which could be in one of the States of the Onion or a foreign country. Therefore you are possessed by the entity United States (Congress) because citizen is small case. Again, if confused, go back to basic English. This is the "United States" the tax statutes are referring to. Unless stated otherwise, such as 26 USC § 6103 (b) (5).
   
3. I am a Citizen of these United States. Here you have defined yourself as a Citizen of all the 50 States united by and under the Constitution. You are not possessed by the Congress (United States). In this way you have a national domicile, not a State or United States domicile and are not subject to any instrumentality or subdivision of corporate governmental entities.
   

The way to make statement #3 grammatically correct is, "I am a Citizen of these united States". This would be as it was written in the Declaration of Independence providing you get a copy of the Original Document. What is now printed in the books has been changed to a Capital "U" in united, which changes the word to mean something entirely different. Just like the "S" has been changed to capital "S" in Supreme Court, thereby changing the status of the word. One other way #3 can be stated is; I am a Citizen of the united States, but remember, we are talking at the National level in ordinary everyday terms, NOT TAX LAW TERMS. you will see how critical it is to ask the usurpers how they define the term "United States," and boy are they tricky on their answers.

When you use the term United States, it can be plural or singular. This phrase: "Every person born or naturalized in the United States and subject to its jurisdiction is a citizen.", defines the United States in its singular form because of the word "its". Also "jurisdiction" is singular as it has no "s". You are possessed by or belong to "it" because citizen is not capitalized. CONGRESS, THE ADMINISTRATORS, ARE THE UNITED STATES. Remember that!

THIS IS FOUND IN 26 CFR 1.1-1(c) which is A United States regulation, THAT CANNOT BE USED ON AN AMERICAN CITIZEN. See Hamilton Fed. Paper #15 supra. Citizen with a small "c" denotes an inferior subject to the capitalized United States, which is a proper Noun. For the United States to be plural the phrase would have to state, "...and subject to their jurisdictions..." Notice how nicely the people who write the tax laws use correct and proper English. It is the syntax that gets you into trouble. Most Americans don't bother to sit down with Congress' definitions and find out how the exact words are used in the Taxing Statutes. Hey, if you can't grasp the correct understanding of the phrase "We the People of the United States" and the phrase above, how are you ever going to understand the Tax Laws that apply only to that entity called the United States?

The definitions used in 26 USC or 26 CFR are very clear in defining State and United States. In every definition that uses the word "include" only the words that follow are defining the Term. For example:

26 USC § 3121 (e) "The term 'State' includes the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa."

26 USC 7701 (a) (9) "United States. The term "United States" when used in a geographical sense includes only the States and the District of Columbia."

The Government has used these definitions correctly but people assume they mean the 50 States of the Union (America) when they look at the word "States" in 26 USC § 7701 (a) (9). You cannot apply the common everyday usage of the word "United States" or "State" when talking about the Tax Laws and many other laws belonging to the United States.

Please go to your Library and pick up the omnibus Acts. They can be found by looking up 86th Congress volume 73, 1959, volume 74, 196O. These are Public Laws 86-70, 86-624. This is an example of the crafty way the Government uses correct English and how Congress changes words by using their definitions. For example, all the United States Code definitions had to be changed to allow Alaska and Hawaii to join the Union of States. Another example is when Alaska joined the Union and left the designation of "States OF the United States," Congress then added a new definition that never appeared before, that being;

Continental United States "Sec.48. Whenever the phrase 'continental United States' is used in any law of the United States enacted after the date of enactment of this Act, it shall mean the 49 States on the North American Continent and the District of Columbia, unless otherwise expressly provided."

Where is it expressly provided?

"Sec. 22 (a) Section 2202 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 (relating to missionaries in foreign service), and sections 3121 (e) (1), 3306 (j), 4221 (d) (4), and 4233 (b) of such code (each relating to a special definition of 'State') are amended by striking out Alaska.' (b) Section 4262 (c) (1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 (definition of 'continental United States') is amended to read as follows: '(1) Continental United States.--The term 'continental United States' means the District of Columbia and the States other than Alaska."

When Hawaii was admitted to the Union they changed the definition again to wit;

Internal Revenue Sec. 19 (a) 4262 (c) "(1) Continental United States.---The term 'continental United States' means the District of Columbia and the States other than Alaska and Hawaii."

WHAT ARE THE STATES OTHER THAN ALASKA AND HAWAII? They certainly can't be the other 48 States united by and under the Constitution, because Alaska and Hawaii just joined them, RIGHT? The same definitions apply to the Social Security Acts. So what is left, Puerto Rico, Guam, Virgin Islands, Etc.. These are the States OF (belonging to) the United States and are referred to as "the States of the United States." Do not confuse this term with States of the Union. Can you remember what the word "of" means?
Congress can change the definition of United States for two sentences and then revert back to the definition it used before the two sentences. This is what they did in Public Law 86-624 P;. 414 under School Operation Assistance in Federally affected areas (d) (2):

"The fourth sentence of such subsection is amended by striking out 'in the continental United States (including Alaska)' and inserting. in lieu thereof '(other than Puerto Rico, Wake Island, Guam, or the Virgin Islands)' and by striking out 'continental United States' in clause (ii) of such sentence and inserting in lieu thereof 'United States (which for purposes of this sentence and the next sentence means the fifty States and the District of Columbia).' The fifth sentence of such subsection is amended by striking out 'continental' before 'United States' each time it appears therein and by striking out '(including Alaska)'."

Just this little section contains all the evidence you need, by words of construction, to prove the term United States on either side of these sentences did not mean the fifty states. If that is not conclusive to you then how about this:

26 CFR § 31.3121 (e)-1 State, united States, and citizen
(a) When used in the regulations in this subpart, the term "State" includes [in its restrictive form] the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, the Territories of Alaska and Hawaii before their admission as States, and (when used with respect to services performed after 1960) Guam and American Samoa.
(b) When used in the regulations in this subpart, the term "United States", when used in a geographical sense, means the several states (including the Territories of Alaska and Hawaii before their admission as States), the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the virgin Islands. When used in the regulations in this subpart with respect to services performed after 1960, the term "United States" also includes [in its expansive form] Guam and American Samoa when the term is used in a geographical sense. The term "citizen of the United States" includes [restrictive form] a citizen of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico or the Virgin Islands, and effective January 1, 1961, a citizen of Guam or American Samoa.

Note the bolded terms. In (a), Alaska and Hawaii only fit the definition of "State" before joining the Union. That meant the definition of "state" never was meant to be the 48 now 50 States of the Union unless distinctly expressed. Well, you are now confused by (b) are you not? The word "geographical" was never used in tax law until Alaska and Hawaii joined the Union, and it is not defined in the Internal Revenue Code, so we use the Standard Random House Dictionary:

"ge.o.graph.i.cal 1. of or pertaining to geography. 2. of or pertaining to the natural features, population, industries, etc., of a region or regions."

Were you born in the United States?

Do you believe that you were you born in the United States? The preposition "in" shows that "United States" in this question is a place, a geographical place named "United States." It is singular even though it ends with "s." Although it also can be considered plural when talking about a Union (things existing by agreement.) Every human is a natural Citizen of the nation they were born in. Those same people must be Naturalized (born again) if wanting to become a citizen of another Nation. Original Citizenship exists because of places, not agreements.

Here are a couple of questions that present a dilemma which only your answer will solve. In a geographical sense where is the continental Iowa located on the continent? In a geographical sense where is the continental United States (Congress) located on the continent?

Now since typewriters were purchased from the areas that just joined the Union, Alaska a Hawaii. According to Title 1, Congress had to use a term that is NOT used in the Internal Revenue Code in order to buy the same typewriters from the same area.

"Sec. 43. Title 1 of the Independent Offices Appropriation Act, 1960, is amended by striking out the words 'for the purchase within the continental limits of the United States of any typewriting machines' and inserting in lieu thereof 'for the purchase within the STATES OF THE UNION and the District of Columbia of any typewriting machines'."

See, they can do it when it serves their purpose. Another point brought out by the omnibus Acts is that Selective Service Sec. 36 Section 16 (b) does not apply to the 50 States of the Union. Sorry all you nonresident aliens (Americans), if you have to defend the United States when it gets into wars to protect its corporate interests, like the bankers who control the oil companies and all branches of the corporate government, you're nothing more than cannon fodder for the bankers protection who loaned all their debt to the oil companies and expect a return. The rationale of such deviousness can be seen in Henry Kissenger's comment,- "Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy." Quoted from "The Final Days" by Woodward and Berstein. How would you like to have your son or daughter rotting away in some enemy's cell, knowing that the Secretary of State considered him/her nothing more than bargaining fodder to be used for the foreign policy to effect the one world order? Does this prove that lack of knowledge will keep you in chains?

An analogy to the above term "United States," or "State," using the term "Car."

Lets say Congress passed a law saying anybody owning a car would be required to pay a tax. Congress could write the statute like this:

26 USC § XXDD. TAX on CAR. Every person owning a car is required to pay a tax.
(a) Definition of taxable car. The term "CAR" includes Chevrolet, Buick, Oldsmobile, Pontiac and Cadillac.

Let's go on to say you own a Ford "Mustang" or Chrysler Plymouth. You do own a car, so, are you required to pay a tax, according to the wording of the above (made up) law? Everybody would assume you would have to pay a tax because you own a car. Aw come on, "it's the law" and everybody knows what a car is, just like they know what the term "United States" is, right? If you voluntarily assume you own a taxable "CAR" and fill out any "car" tax Form, you subject yourself to the wrath of the IRS and must pay a tax on a car that is not, by statutory construction, designated to be a taxable "CAR". "Includes", used above, is restrictive. The correct way to make all cars taxable would be stated in either of these ways:

(a) Definition of taxable car. The term "CAR" also includes Chevrolet, Buick, Oldsmobile, Caddilac and Pontiac.

OR

(a) Definition of taxable car. The term "CAR" means all cars including Chevrolet, Buick, Oldsmobile, Caddilac and Pontiac ,Etc..

Remember this simple explanation throughout this document. I never say I am a United States citizen. Since this term is used in 26 CFR 1.1-1 (c), it means you are subject to its (United States) jurisdiction since you are deemed to be a citizen "of" the U.S., residing "at home" (D.C.) or residing abroad, i.e. foreign state of say New York, or anywhere else in the world. Remember, Congress can and does define any term to its liking as long as it serves their purpose. A grey elephant today can be defined as a pink elephant tomorrow, so don't argue that it's a grey elephant in court the day after tomorrow. This is the "presumption" rule expressed later on in his book.

Have you ever heard the President being introduced on TV or at any public function as "the President of the united States of America"? NO? why not? Who does he preside over? Does the Governor of your State ask Clinton to OK a final Bill that he just signed?

Here are the facts concerning the term "United States" used in the Tax Laws:

1. "united States" does not mean the fifty States of Union, unless expressly stated.
2. "United States" means areas within the the Union which are ceded to the "United States."
3. "United States" means the possessions which are the States of Guam, American Samoa, Puerto Rico, and Virgin Islands.
4. Both 2 and 3 are "states" and not to be confused with States of the Union.
   
5. "United States" are; Congress assembled, at home (the seat of Government), District of Columbia and its territories (called states) and possessions (ceded areas.)
6. "United States" citizen does not mean a Union State Citizen.
   

Fact number 5 "at home" as used in the first Income Tax Act of 1913, means the seat of Government as defined in the Dictionaries of that time. You will not find the term "at home" in modern day dictionaries. What are ceded areas? Look in your State Statutes for the areas which your State ceded (turned over) to the United States. Here are some examples:

• New Jersey Statute Annotated, Title 52, Chapter 30, Sec.
  1,2,& 3
• General Laws of Idaho Annotated, Chapter 7, Sec. 58
  701,702,705
• Missouri Statutes, Chapter 12, Sec. 12.
  010, 020, 030 & 040
• Constitution of the State of Texas, Art.16, Sec.34, & Revised Civil Statute, Title 85.
  Articles 5242 to 5252
  

Why all this confusion over the simple term "United States"? Everybody knows that the District of Columbia is not a State, like the 50 States of the Union, and yet it is referred to in All the United States Codes as a "State". This is why;

"The District of Columbia is not within meaning of the constitution."
U.S. v. Virginia 1805

"Under Act of Congress of 1801, 2 Stat. 103, assuming the government of the District of Columbia in virtue of the cession from Maryland and Virginia, the laws of those states and the proceedings in their courts as parts of those laws were recognized within such portions of the district respectively, as originally were within the limits of the ceding states."
U.S. v. Eliason,
41 U.S. 291, 16 Peter 291, 10 L Ed. 968

"The corporation which 16 Stat. 419 created by the name of the District of Columbia succeeded to the property and liabilities of the corporations which were thereby abolished."
District of Columbia v. Cluss,
103 U.S. 705, 26 L. Ed. 445

The District of Columbia is a corporation which is also known as "United States". It must have its own definition for "State" since it and the Territorial states (Guam, Etc.) were not formed by and under the Constitution. Since it is THE Primary State owning Guam, Puerto Rico, Etc. , which are federal states, it is referred to as "State" in Income tax and Social Security laws, as well as all other Codes of the United States.

How are these states lumped together with the 50 American States in the Internal Revenue Code when they cannot be classed as States under the Constitution? Use the word means, because to use "includes" as defined in because to use "includes" as defined in IRC is restrictive. An example:

26 USC 6103 (b) (5) State.
"The term State means any of the 50 States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, the Canal Zone, Guam, American Samoa, Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands."

This definition only applies to code section 6103 and not to the entire title. Congress had to do this for exchange information that has to be exchanged to those States of the Union that have income tax laws. It is also for Social Security information for those government workers that operate within the States of the Union for unemployment compensation they receive from the States.

HOW THE TERMS ARE USED IN THE WRITTEN FORM

NONTAXPAYER

• I am an American Citizen. *
• I am a united States Citizen. *
• I am a Citizen of a Union State. *
• I live in the United States.
• I have no income from a source within the United States.
  

TAXPAYER

• I am a United States citizen.
• I am a citizen of the United States of America.
• I am a united States person.
• I reside in the United States.
• I have income from a source within the United States.

In the spoken form you must ask the person who is asking the question to define the way they are using the term "United States." Is it the 50 States of the Union united by and under the Constitution? Is it the District of Columbia and its Enclaves & Possessions? Or are they referring to the Nation?
Remember, this Chapter deals only in defining the terms United States, united States and America. The terms above, Nontaxpayer and Taxpayer will be explained as they are flawed (Notice the *), and are food for thought...

The answer to the opening question, "Do you Understand. . ", and do they mean the same thing, is NO!

FEDZone

So... Where you wanna go... and How you wanna get there?

This is a Java applet... click on the title to go to page... hope this works for you...
If not try the Redirect box... or the link below.

The Source of the CONSTITUTION
And the PURPOSE it SERVES!!!

************************************************************

Create a no-obligation e-gold™ account