Time: Mon Dec 01 06:37:07 1997
To: snetnews@world.std.com
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: SLS: What's in a NUMBER? Is it a WAIVER?
Cc: han-wi@ri.ultranet.com 
Bcc: sls

The immunity from direct taxes without apportionment
is a fundamental Right, because it is guaranteed by
the U.S. Constitution.  Waivers of fundamental Rights
must be knowingly intelligent acts, done with 
sufficient awareness of the relevant circumstances
and likely consequences.  And, waivers of fundamental
Rights cannot be presumed, ever.  Against this high standard
for waiving any fundamental Right, the acquisition of
a Social Security Number ("SSN") simply does not meet
the requisite conditions.  The same is true of the
SS-5 Application for Social Security Number.  Thus,
obtaining a SSN as a minor, without full disclosure,
worked a fraud upon all of us;  it hardly constituted
a competent waiver, as that term is well understood
in the legal community.  For authority, see Brady v. U.S.

/s/ Paul Mitchell

At 08:01 AM 12/1/97, you wrote:
>->  SearchNet's   SNETNEWS   Mailing List
>The Constitution protects you from the levy of a 'direct' unapportioned
>tax, unless you have surrendered that right  and protection. Do you have a
>valid Social Security Number? If you answered yes, than you voluntarily
>surrendered your constitutional protection from unapportioned direct taxes. 
>	The Great Depression, which lasted some 6 to 8 years, allowed the
>government of the united States to come to the peoples rescue with various
>'make work' programs and projects, and also introduced the Social Security
>Administration in 1935.
>	As most are aware, Social Security is nothing more than an elaborate
>'Ponzi' scheme, and with over 40 million now collecting it's benefits, it
>is sure to collapse under such a burden. Contrary to all the popular
>rhetoric, it WILL FAIL. This type of scheme has resulted in many, who have
>utilized it in the private sector, being  jailed for offering such plans.
>The government hates competition!
>	In the so called 'de-tax' and 'un-tax' movements, there is a propensity,
>by these 'groups', to point to the Pollock, Brushaber, and Stanton
>decisions [among others] to justify their claims that the so called income
>tax was never imposed upon the 'sovereign' citizen(s) of the 50 States. As
>true as this may be, the fact is that if you have a valid Social Security
>Number, these court decisions DO NOT apply to you! Why? Because you are a
>"taxpayer" as legally defined. (* see IRC Section 7701 (a)(14)) You have
>entered into an agreement with the government of the United States; you are
>required to allow money to be withheld from your pay; you are required to
>make contributions to Social Security and YOU ARE under the legal
>jurisdiction of the Federal Tax Collector--The IRS; as such, you are
>'presumed' responsible to pay the income tax even though it has not been
>legally imposed upon you, you are REQUIRED to sign a W-4 form; you are
>legally REQUIRED to allow your employer to withhold income taxes from your
>pay check; you are PRESUMED legally responsible to file an income tax
>return to report your earnings to your benefactor (The Federal Government);
>and you are presumed responsible to provide your financial information to
>the IRS when they ask for it!
>	In exchange for all this, you can expect to receive (if you qualify)
>welfare, food stamps, un-employment (another legal term) compensation,
>federal mortgages, farm subsidies, low cost federal disaster loans, small
>business loans, Medicare, Medicaid and social security....and the list goes
>That's the agreement!
>	If anyone informs you that you are NOT required to pay the tax or file the
>return, because there is no specific law that requires you to, and you
>still have a valid Social Security Number, they are WRONG! This kind of
>MIS-information can, and has, gotten a lot of people into deep sh** . But
>then it cost NOTHING for these people to disseminate false information and
>sell it to unsuspecting 'prey'.
>	If you have a social security number, you are subject to the laws found in
>Subtitle C of the Internal Revenue Code. No one forced you to “apply” for
>the number! You, or perhaps your parents applied for this number, and as
>result of this ‘voluntary act’ you are a taxpayer as legally defined! You
>are a ‘voluntary’ participant under the legal jurisdiction of the IRS and
>are presumed responsible to pay the income tax to support the government
>that YOU have made the agreement with, and are expecting the benefit from!
>It no longer matters whether or not the tax is an unapportioned direct tax
>or that they are only imposed upon the residents of the federal
>territories....you have to pay them!
>	On the other hand, if one does not have a social security number, you are
>NOT subject to those laws and  as such, NOT under the jurisdiction of the
>IRS, unless you are in the business of manufacturing Alcohol, Tabacco, or
>Firearms. You are not only beyond the scope of IRS jurisdiction but you are
>also beyond the scope of ALL internal revenue laws! You are a free citizen
>- see Delima v. Bidwell, 182 U.S. 176 - 179   and   Gerth v. United States,
>132 F. Supp. 894 (1955) to verify this.
>                                  Jay Robbins
>                               4 Your Information
>                                   PO Box 672
>                                Woonsocket, RI 02895
>                           Email: han-wi@ri.ultranet.com 
>                             Voicemail:1-800-947-1902
>                       Website: http://www.ultranet.com/~han-wi
>                  IRS: We've got what it takes, to take what you've got.
>-> Send "subscribe   snetnews " to majordomo@world.std.com
>->  Posted by: Jay Robbins <han-wi@ri.ultranet.com>

Return to Table of Contents for

Supreme Law School:   E-mail