© 1994 - 2009
Against the Grain

YOU CONSENTED TO BE GOVERNED BY PRIVATE CORPORATIONS

The Right of Self-Determination is about Self-governing. It is a choice and that choice was succinctly stated by Theodore Roosevelt in the Jamestown Exposition on April 26, 1907; when he said: “ It behooves us to remember that men can never escape being governed. Either they must govern themselves or they must submit to being governed by others. If from lawlessness or fickleness, from folly or self-indulgence, they refuse to govern themselves, then most assuredly in the end they will have to be governed from the outside. The question is “governed how or by whom”? As subjects they must submit?

The answer is Natural Law. Natural Law is God's law, which is opposite to Government Statute law (i.e., Man's law). In Natural Law, all humans are self governing. Under Government laws, one must consent to be govern by them those who write the laws, albeit one does not realize consent is granted. I am governed by God's Natural Law, and I have escaped the Government laws via legal process.

No State or United States corporation can invade Gods Law. This point is very clearly stated by the courts in the US and England to wit:

Now all acts of legislature apparently contrary to natural right and justice, are, in our laws, and must be in the nature of things, considered as void. The laws of nature are the laws of God; whose authority can be superseded by no power on earth. A legislature must not obstruct our obedience to him from whose punishments they cannot protect us. All human constitutions which contradict his laws, we are in conscience bound to disobey. Such have been the adjudications of our courts of justice. Robin v. Hardaway, 1 Jefferson 109, 114, 1 Va. Reports Ann. 58, 61 (1772) aff'd. Gregory v. Baugh, 29 Va. 681, 29 Va. Rep. Ann. 466, 2 Leigh 665 (1831) And cited 8 Co. 118. a. Bonham's case. Hob. 87; 7. Co. 14. a. Calvin's case.)

Since my Covenant With the Lord is in Genesis 17, then all my allegiance is given to the Lord and not the Fictions of the State And United States. Such is the case of MAN, the one defined as a non resident Alien or Plain Alien. As he is not a person in contract.

A person is one in contract to be governed by the corporations and as such he is called a PERSON/ CITIZEN/ SUBJECT. The Alien does not reside in contract, hence he is non resident. He is therefore an Alien and not a subject of the corporations of States or United States , who are really the religious corporations of the Vatican owned by and controlled by the White Pope since 1215. And the Black Pope since 1541.

Nonresident Alien is not used in a geographical nature but a contract nature. But the Pope's Private Collection agency you call IRS, sees to in the Private IRC that it is used in a geographical nature to control you by contract nature. And you are never the wiser . They use TERMS; and TERMS have their own Private special meaning devised by Attorneys of the Vatican and are not words. Usually in the IRC definitions, every definition starts with "The TERM “ ( Use what ever they use I.E. PERSON) and then they give the definition. This is in all 50 Private Titles of US Code. Especially the definition of PERSON in 26 U.S.C. 7701 (a) (1) .

You will never see the word MAN used in any statute law. This is why Whiting , the Solicitor General, stated what he did in his book.. He had to use the word ALIEN, and could not use the word MAN. If he had chosen to use Man, then people would catch on that Man does not come under statute. Only Persons do. Person is a Fiction. The State and United States are all fictions. Man is the Physical being and you can find that in PERSON on atgpress .

The quote to look for in PERSON is this.:

A moment's reflection enables one to see that man and person cannot be synonymous, for there cannot be an artificial man, though there are artificial persons. Thus the conclusion is easily reached that the law itself often creates an entity or a being which is called a person; the law cannot create an artificial man, but it can and frequently does invest him with artificial attributes; this is personality, which we see and by which we are affected.

AND THIS:

Ortolan's explanation of personality.(45) The substance of the above was undoubtedly taken from Ortolan's treatment of the subject as given in his History of the Roman Law, which is submitted because it is clear and concise :

"The word ‘person' (persona) does not in the language of the law, as in ordinary language, designate the physical man.

Hence the US solicitor general wrote in 1864 , his war powers book and in there defines Alien=MAN and Subject=PERSON in this statement within the book and the source is given at the end so you can check it out yourself.

An alien owes no allegiance or obedience to our government, or to our constitution, laws, or proclama tions. . A citizen subject is bound to obey them all. In refusing such obedience, he is guilty of crime against his country, and finds in the law of nations no justification for disobedience. An alien, being under no such obligation, is justified in refusing such obedience. Over an alien enemy, our government can make no constitution, law, or proclamation of obligatory force, because our laws bind only our own subjects, and have no extra-territorial jurisdiction.

Over citizens who are subjects of this government, even if they have so far repudiated their duties as to become enemies, our constitution, statutes, and proclamations are the supreme law of the land.

The fact that their enforcement is resisted does not make them void. It is not in the power of armed subjects of the Union to repeal or legally nullify our constitution, laws, or other governmental acts .

SOURCE: The Legal Classics Library War Powers under The Constitution of the United States 1864 tenth Ed Entered by Act of Congress In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the District of Massachusetts Special Edition 1997.

Now you know why they had to create the strawman for devious means to steal from you when you voluntarily consented to be governed by corporations from the day you were born and never told.? Can you say FRAUD in 12 foot high letters?

You have to read my article PERSON in it's entirety at least 20 times before it will sink in what they have done, and you volunteered of your own free will without reading the fine print. As the PadleFord Court stated circa 1857 in a sales tax case:

"Supposing this not to be taxed for inspection purposes, has Congress consented to it being laid? It is certain that Congress has not expressly consented. But is express consent necessary? There is nothing in the Constitution which says so. There is nothing in the practice of men, or in the Municipal Law of men, or in the practice of nations, or the Law of nations that says so. Silence gives consent, is the rule of business life.

A tender of bills is as good as one of coin, unless the bills are objected to . To stand by, in silence, and see another sell your property, binds you. [Ok people how many times has your property (labor included) been stolen and turned over to the tax man in your silence? Did you file a refusal for good cause shown?] These are mere instances of the use of the maxim in the Municipal Law. In the Law of nations, it is equally potent. Silent acquiescence in the breach of a treaty binds a nation.(Vattel, ch. 16, sec.199, book 1. See book 2, sec. 142 et seq. as to usucaption and prescription, and sec. 208 as to ratification). Express consent, then, not being necessary, is there anything from which consent may be applied? There is-- length of time. "

AND THE COURT SAID THIS. But watch how sly they are to NOT mention MAN like that did in the beginning. (This is how close one needs to read and comprehend what they are saying. No patriot I know of for the last 40 years knows how to comprehend what they read.) And the courts all lie in mentioning PERSON. Yes the courts know how to lie thru their teeth to cover the fraud and make you believe person is Private. PERSON is not private when IT is the Citizen subject as Whiting stated. Read close:

“But, indeed, no private person has a right to complain, by suit in court, on the ground of a breach of the Constitution. The Constitution, it is true, is a compact, but he is not a party to it. The States are the parties to it. And they may complain. If they do they are entitled to redress. Or they may waive the right to complain."

NOW you know why ONLY the STATES can complain about OBAMA, NOT the Private man. NOT even a person can complain. Why? YOU are a fiction having no meaning, but to suck the life blood out of You to run their corporations debt so you, not they, can pay for their folly. NOW do you know why Bob Schultz's can never get redress? No private man or person/subject can either.

No one knows how to read a case unless they know all the parameters and no patriot does. That's how they get away with subjecting MAN to become a PERSON in law to control with a ring in your nose. PERSON is the subject of all statutes and has NO NATURAL LAW RIGHTS. YOU gave them up to become a citizen/subject for Privileges ONLY. Every PERSON will file, Every PERSON shall not , Every PERSON liable and so on and so forth. It cannot say Every Man liable and for good reason. Look at all statutes. Do they mention Man or PERSON?

The Informer
June 2010