All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 9, 1994 - Bill Cooper
56:48
Robert Ross, The Laws #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Light our lamp of power, please be power of the stars.
Light our golden rubies to build a world of souls and light.
Light our lamp of power, please be power of the stars.
Light our golden rubies to build a world of souls and light.
I'm William Cooper.
You're listening to the Hour of the Time.
I'm William Cooper.
And I'm Carolyn Nelson.
Folks, we're going to have a guest tonight who's going to, I believe, teach you a lot
of things that you need to know.
A lot of you who have been doubting what you heard on this program, or on others, or from other people, are going to find out that you should have been listening a long, long time ago.
Don't go away.
We'll be right back.
Welcome to the Western Hemisphere.
Welcome to the Western Hemisphere.
Welcome, Robert, to the Hour of the Time.
Hi, William.
How are you?
Fine.
Why don't you give our listeners your background, tell them who you are and what you do, and then, as we discussed earlier, teach them a few things.
Okay.
Well, my name is Bob Ross, and I work with an educational organization called Boston Pea Party Enterprises, based in Sedona, Arizona.
And we teach legal seminars.
On how to understand law, the principles of statutory construction and whatnot, so that we can understand the situation we're in and know what to do about it.
Our basic orientation is the Internal Revenue Service and the Internal Revenue Code, which is a great example to work with because, as you know, it's very vulnerable.
The code is just filled with It's a really obvious deception once you understand how to define legal terms and the principles of statutory construction.
The deception is really obvious and I hope to show that tonight.
I got involved in 1979, myself, by just deciding one day that it didn't feel right to hold systems.
It's just, I felt abused and I knew people that had been abused and it just didn't feel right so I stopped filing.
Since then, for about ten years, I've played around with that until 1989, during which time the IRS came after me sometimes.
Sometimes they didn't.
I fell through the cracks.
But I didn't know that there was a legal position.
I didn't understand the legality of it.
In 1989, I got involved with Phil Marsh and Marlene Marsh, who you know, and started learning the truth about the legal aspects of it.
Then in 1992 I became an associate member of their organization, which at that time was called the Pilot Connection Society, and started sharing it with my friends who had been pushing me.
I didn't want the responsibility at first, but eventually I took up the responsibility and started sharing it with friends and family and eventually started teaching publicly in full time.
That's the biggest hurdle to get over, isn't it, Bob, accepting the responsibility of your actions?
Oh, that's really true.
A lot of people don't realize that freedom is a responsibility.
It's not a gift that comes with being born in the USA.
It's really a responsibility.
And in fact, the courts have even ruled on this, and I don't have an exact citation right in front of me on this issue, but the courts have actually ruled that If you don't aggressively assert your rights and fight for them, and learn about them, then they are deemed to have been waived.
And I have lots of examples of that, which I'll be getting into this evening when we talk about jurisdiction.
But just one brief one, for example, that a lot of people don't know, is that, I'll say you're driving down the highway and it's late at night, you're a little sleepy, and you just go a little bit fast, and you're not watching your speedometer, And you get pulled over.
A lot of people don't realize that the minute that that police officer pulls you over to give you a citation, you are under arrest.
That is actually an arrest.
And you are actually within the jurisdiction of the court from that moment.
And the minute that you do anything, you are giving the court jurisdiction.
And that citation is handed to you as kind of like a... If you read your state statutes, you'll find out that a citation is in lieu of the arrest.
That they let you go after having arrested you, giving you this citation.
There are lots of little things like that that we don't know in the law that affect us.
I'll be getting more into jurisdiction a little later.
But to start out with, the whole thing boils down to understanding that the way you and I talk
to a conversation like right now is very, very different from what words mean in the law.
And there's a very important legal principle behind that that's actually a perfectly sound principle
that gets distorted by the way the words get twisted.
And the reason for that is most people don't know that words are different in law than they are in conversation.
They can actually make no mean yes and yes mean no.
In fact, they can. Absolutely. That's black and white.
So you read it and you read yes, so you go ahead and do it when the meaning in the law,
actually according to the definition of that particular piece of legislation or ruling,
might mean no, you could get yourself in big trouble.
That's right.
They can make black mean white in a particular section of the code.
And they do that a lot, because they know that you think that black means black, so they redefine it to mean white.
And this is a legal principle called substitute of phraseology.
It's a valid legal principle, and the reason it's valid when it's not abused is because conversational speaking, as you know, changes from day to day, from year to year.
What's hip talk now is very different than what hip talk was when I was growing up in the 60s, you know, as a hippie.
And we said, yeah, man, and, you know, groovy is out.
Now, you know, tubular is in, or something else.
You're younger than I thought you were.
Groovy was after me.
I don't want to give away too much here except for the secrets of the IRS.
But the language, popular language, changes.
So the law is written in such a way that it stands still.
It doesn't change with the vagaries of time and social stuff and stuff like that.
But we have to make the clear distinction here that one meaning of one word or phrase in one set of legislation may not mean the same in another, and if the meanings change, then the new definition must be spelled out in the legislation somewhere.
Absolutely.
And there's actually encyclopedic reference works on definitions.
One is called Words and Phrases.
Words and Phrases is literally an encyclopedia botanica, or larger set of volumes.
That takes all the definitions that have ever been defined of any word in law and sets them
down on paper and tells you where that definition came from.
It usually came from a court decision.
Yeah, but I want to make sure that the listening audience knows that even though that is so,
and even though that when those words and phrases are used in all the courts in the
land, they have that particular meaning when used in that manner, there could be a law
our legislation or a set of regulations.
That's covered in an area that I call statutory construction.
are the word and that must be outlined and that definition must be clearly given in that
body of work.
It is available but too many people make the mistake of assuming that it means one thing
when it really does not.
That's absolutely right.
That's covered in an area that I call statutory construction.
When you understand that statutes are constructed, there's a type of definition which could be
applicable just to say a chapter in a statute.
And it applies only in that chapter.
For example, the definition of United States, which I want to get into anyway, in the Internal Revenue Code, Section 3121, which I just have open in front of me.
3121E actually says... I've got to buy my glasses.
That's state, United States, and the citizen.
For the purposes of this chapter, United States, the term United States, when used in a geographical sense, includes the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa.
And it also says state, excuse me.
The term state includes the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa.
So what they're really doing is putting a substitute of phraseology in there.
Now I want you to go back and read those over slowly and pronounce those names very clearly because the people out there don't realize how they've been scammed and I believe when you read the first set of names it sounded like you said America in there.
I know you said American Samoa.
So could you do that again please?
I'll do that real slow.
Now, this is under the chapter, by the way, Employment Tax General Provisions.
So, this isn't some little obscure chapter.
This is the actual general provisions for employment tax, which is the tax that most of us are under the impression we're involved with.
So, when it says, for the purposes of this chapter, the chapter is Employment Tax General Provisions.
Pretty important chapter.
The definition of state says, the term state includes districts of Columbia, The Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa, which are all territories of the United States.
The term United States means, when used in a geographical sense, includes the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa.
Slightly different definitions, but you get the point.
What they've done is they've taken the generic idea of a state.
A state can be anything.
My kitchen can be a state if I define it as such.
It's the state of disarray or whatever it is.
The state of hunger.
So when they're talking about someone in that context, in that chapter, being required to withhold money from someone's paycheck in order to withhold taxes.
And they say that this is applicable to a citizen of the United States.
It does not apply to a citizen of the state of Mexico, or New Mexico, or Canada, or Illinois.
Is that correct?
That's correct.
It applies only to the jurisdiction as defined right here.
And right here means District of Columbia and the U.S.
possession of the territory.
Now the reason for that is that the federal government in the Constitution was given very clear jurisdiction over Washington D.C., which was 10 square miles originally.
They can create all the laws and regulations for Washington D.C.
that they want.
They can't do that in a sovereign republic, which is also called a state, in the way you and I speak.
So in our speaking, we refer to states as, you know, the sovereign republics, California, Arizona, New Mexico.
but they also have the generic usage which means like you know France is a state.
Any political body.
Political body is a state.
And what they've done is they've defined state very specifically here to mean the District
of Columbia kind of state.
Now we know they don't mean a sovereign state because the District of Columbia is not a
sovereign state.
In fact they would like to be and have been unsuccessful at getting any legislation passed
that would make them a state.
But they never define this when they go to employers and say why aren't you withholding
taxes from your employees. If they're citizens of the United States, you must withhold taxes.
Is that correct?
Right.
You see, because a citizen of the United States tends to be like a federal employee, or somebody that actually lives in Washington, D.C.
So, those are the people within that jurisdiction, and the government is within its rights to collect taxes on those individuals.
And it's a type of an excise tax.
It gets really convoluted at this point.
We jump around too much, so I don't want to jump too far afield I'm just making the point that the definition, in terms of the way we say United States in conversation, when we think 50 states are, you know, united, is a different definition than the definition in the Internal Revenue Code for the chapter Employment Taxes, where that definition applying just to that chapter has a very limited and specific meaning.
And in fact it doesn't include the 50 states, and we know that for two reasons.
One, if you read the amendments in that section, Which is the historical notes.
You find out that prior to 1960, that paragraph, State, United States, and Citizen, used to include the term Hawaii.
And before that, the term Alaska.
And they took it out right around 1960.
When they became states, they were taken out.
They became sovereign republics.
That's correct.
They had to take it out because they no longer fell within the jurisdiction of the United States, the federal United
States.
And also there's another section, I think it's the sixth, let me just look it up real quick here.
See how easy it is, folks?
All you've got to do is read the darn thing.
You just have to know what you're reading and not be fooled by the statutory construction and legal terms.
But it's important to understand that it didn't start out to be deceptive.
It's just being used deceptively.
It started out as a general principle that sometimes a statute has to define things a little bit differently than the way they are defined.
Conversationally, in order to be absolutely clear.
Now, used in this way, it becomes deceptive.
Because, you know, my belief is that anybody could know, the average person would know, the average attorney, certainly, who is highly educated, would know that most people, when they think of the United States, they think of the 50 states.
And the average person looking at this would obviously think that this term, United States, applied to them.
So, therein lies the deception.
They didn't have to define the United States that way.
They could have come up with another term that wasn't competitive in people's consciousness with the 50 states.
And that's where we part ways here, Bob, because where you don't think it was intentional, I know within my very soul that it was intentional from the very beginning.
Oh, I do think it was intentional.
What wasn't intentional was the original principle that, you know, definitions in law may be different.
Oh, I see.
Yes, you're right.
Yes.
the usage of that is a clear abuse.
Yes.
Because clearly everybody thinks the United States means America.
Everybody thinks that.
Is there anybody out there in the call and listening audience that
wouldn't normally assume that the United States meant all 50 other states?
Nobody but you and I and a few other people who have studied this.
Yeah.
Now, another way we know that they meant it exactly as they said is
if you look in the Internal Revenue Code under Section 6103 you'll see another definition of the United States.
And this is another definition that applies just to a particular chapter
or a subchapter.
I'll turn to 6103 here.
And this indicates that they know how to do it when the 50 states are involved.
Now, in this case, you're talking about the confidentiality of returns.
A return of a confidential wherever you happen to be as far as the law is concerned in the Internal Revenue Code.
If you're on Mars, these returns are still confidential.
So, they can rightfully include, in this section, a definition that is broader than the specific jurisdiction of the federal government.
And in this section, the term state is defined, 6103b-5, the term state means.
By the way, when it says means versus includes, Yes.
That's correct.
You can't, the word is and of, I mean the state of New York is different than New York
State, legally.
Yes.
In equity.
What really tripped me up when I was first beginning to study these things, and not just
the Internal Revenue Code, but other particular points of law, when I came to find that when
it said such and such includes Ohio, you'd take that to mean that there's a whole bunch
more plus Ohio when you really find out what it means, Ohio is the only thing it's talking
about.
That's right.
Includes in the law is generally a completely restricted term.
It means that everything that follows it, nothing more.
Yeah, pertains only to Ohio and no place else.
really good at using words to deceive people in the law.
And a lot of people out there are performing acts and doing things and paying the government money that they should never have done, been a part of, or paid.
Exactly.
And you know, it gets so complicated that the IRS has an out on the includes thing, just to make another point.
7701, which defines includes.
So that includes doesn't necessarily exclude anything else.
You're trying to build another monkey wrench into the thing, doesn't it?
Well, what it means is includes has no meaning whatsoever.
Until you read the Code of Federal Regulations, which enforce the statutes.
Right.
Which is yet another thing which we'll get into a little later in terms of legal principles.
Because, you know, statutes have no force of law unless they have accompanying regulations that give them the force of law.
That's correct.
So the law is actually the statute plus the regulations.
And the courts have ruled clearly in that that a statute that doesn't have regulations is not a law.
And a regulation that doesn't have a statute also, of course, is not a law.
So, just to get back real quickly to the term state as defined in 6103, Miscellaneous Divisions, Confidentiality of Returns, the term state means any of the 50 states, comma, the District of Columbia, comma, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, the Canal Zone, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of North and Mariana Islands, and Mars.
So they can throw in a bit of the United States there, you see, because it doesn't matter to them.
They can be generous, they can let returns be confidential anywhere.
So it shows that they know how to do it.
Now, just in case anybody thinks it's an accident that they just accidentally left out the United States in 3121, and they put it in here now because they didn't get that, it's not an accident.
These guys don't have accidents.
They agonize over every single word that goes in here.
There's an office of the Chief Consul of the IRS that does most of the research and writing on these things.
Even punctuation and capital letters are agonized over.
Everything!
A capital letter F on the word state changes the meaning from a sovereign state to a federal state, and it differs whether it's in state law or federal law.
The capital S reverses its meaning in state law.
So you have to watch these things very carefully.
The word or, there are at least six definitions of the word or.
And a comma before the or, or a letter, a comma after the or, changes its meaning.
The word or can mean end.
As an example, suppose I have on my desk here a cup and a plate, a cup of tea, and a plate with a piece of pizza on it that I didn't finish because I had to call you, and a spoon.
Now, I could say that I have a cup of tea, or A plate with pizza or a spoon on the desk.
That's all true.
They're all on the desk.
I could also lift up the spoon and say I have a cup on the desk and I can replace the cup with the spoon and I say or comma I have a spoon on the desk and I replace the spoon with the cup and I can say or comma I have a cup on the desk.
The comma changes it.
That sounds trivial when you're talking about cups and spoons and forks on a desk, but when you get into whether or not you pay income tax or whether or not you're guilty of murder, these things have tremendous meaning.
Absolutely.
Because the change of the word or from meaning either or to meaning and.
So a good example of where that takes significance would be, say, in 6001, which is one of the statutes that the IRS quotes in their Privacy Act statement in the 1048 instruction manual.
That's right, folks.
It's not a movie.
You can go out to your bank and to your post office right now, or if you've already gotten one in the mail, look up your 1040A instruction manual, page 4, and you'll see several things that we'll discuss there tonight, including a statement that says, 6001, I might as well actually read it.
Let me open it up here, page 4.
Yeah, please do, Bob.
If you don't, people will get confused.
So it says, in the second paragraph, The Internal Revenue Code sections 6001, 6011, and 6012A say that you must file a retirement or statement with us for any tax for which you are liable.
So, 6001 says that only those who are liable have to file the form and pay the tax.
Well, I wasn't going to get into that just yet, the liability issue and the meaning of the word liable.
That's yet another topic.
But just to give you an example of the use of the word or, meaning and, in 6001 it says that they must give you a notice at or, I'll read it actually again to be precise.
The second half of the paragraph says...
Umm...
Dead air is a no-no, Bob.
What?
I said dead air time's a no-no.
Oh, okay.
I'll just keep that in mind.
You gotta talk even if it's nonsense.
I don't have this stuff all buried in my head.
I have a lot of pieces of paper lying around me here and I'll pick them up hopefully when I can find what I need quick.
I did make some notes here, but some things like this have really to be accurate.
I'm just going to look up and read.
What it says here is whenever in the judgment of the secretary it is necessary he may require any person by notice of upon such person or by regulations.
Well now there, there's a or without a comma.
So in that case the word or means and.
It says by notice and by regulations.
So you would expect that you would have to receive a notice and regulations that indicate that you're required to keep these records.
In fact, that is the case.
And if you study the regulations, you'll see that they're supposed to make you a notice that you have to keep records.
And what happens when a citizen tries to get a set of the Internal Revenue Service regulations?
Well, those can be gotten without... You can buy the regulations as a book.
They cost about $100 for the six volumes.
Well, I know you can, but if you're required to perform these regulations under the law, shouldn't the IRS service give you a copy?
That's another story.
The IRS, of course... That's the point I'm trying to make.
They won't give them to you.
They don't give them to you, no.
They won't advise you of the regulations that are... They won't even let you look at them.
They don't even acknowledge the questions.
They don't even acknowledge that they have regulations.
If you send them a question saying, and this is just my experience, you know, there might be cases where it's different, but I'll give you an example.
A friend of mine just recently received an audit.
I have a request for an examination appointment, which was not a sermon.
She was out of town, and during the time she was out of town, the IRS decided that she was being non-compliant and sent her a 30-day letter disallowing all of her deductions for that time period.
While she was still out of town, the 30 days ran out, and they sent her a statutory notice of deficiency.
Which was almost run out by the time she got back.
She was gone for quite a while.
And the entire procedure was completely illegal.
So she wrote them back a letter after I kind of sat down with her and showed her places in the Internal Revenue Code that covered her situation.
And it was clear that the only way they can do all of that is if the initial examination was required by summons.
And of course there was no summons.
It was received by ordinary mail.
So they were operating under color of law.
They were operating under color of law.
So she sent them a letter saying, being very cooperative, and I told her to stay cooperative, at least for the time being, because there was no point in being viewed as a tax protester.
Just asking, you know, well, gee, why did you guys do all this?
You know, there wasn't any summons or anything.
Could you please cite the regulation, and of course the statutes, that give you the power and authority to demand an examination from me without a summons?
And of course they ignored her, you know, saying, well, we'll see you in tax court.
Which was also questionable, because, you know, as most people probably don't know, but the tax court doesn't have jurisdiction over employment taxes.
And that's very clear in 601-102 in the Code of Federal Regulations.
The Code of Federal Regulations specifically excludes employment taxes from the tax court.
Well, I can assure you there are a lot of people out there right now feeling very, very dumb at this very moment.
But we don't want you to feel that way.
We want you to learn from this so you don't have to repeat the mistakes that you've made in the past.
I can assure you there are a lot of people out there right now feeling very, very dumb
at this very moment.
But we don't want you to feel that way.
We want you to learn from this so you don't have to repeat the mistakes that you've made
in the past.
A lot of you out there are guilty of being hoodwinked, hooked, hoaxed, scammed, and you've
had your money stolen from you.
you.
The whole thing is, you know, that we've been asleep.
And while we were asleep, somebody was kind of raiding the refrigerator.
And then some.
You know, they walked out with, you know, your living room and your... Well, actually, you know, you're asleep.
And there's nobody to, you know, sound the alarm.
And it happened very slowly, you know.
It's like not anybody's fault.
People are asleep.
It happened very slowly over time where these powers that be that are doing this and are doing the kind of things that you've been talking about over the last few weeks very slowly snuck up on us.
They started before the Civil War when the Civil War was manipulated as a means to erode state autonomy and also to try and get a central bank.
They failed at the central bank, but they did erode state autonomy.
A lot of people don't realize that Lincoln actually signed, prior to ratification, a 13th Amendment that would have given the states the rights to have slavery if they wanted to.
Lincoln had no intention of freeing the slaves, did not believe that freeing the slaves was right, and if they were freed, he believed that they would all have to be shipped back to Africa or the whole thing wouldn't work.
There wasn't a question of what was humanitarian or not.
That's right.
A question of state autonomy.
That's right.
And what that original 13th Amendment, which was never ratified, actually said was that the federal government cannot interfere in state affairs, period.
Correct.
And the only reason that he issued the Emancipation Proclamation was to hurt the South in the war effort.
He knew that that was going to cause an awful lot of trouble after that and he believed in his own mind that the only
solution was to ship the blacks back to Africa.
So...
It had to do with, you know, the Bank of London which was lending support to...
I gotta break in here, Ross. It's time to take our break.
Don't go away, folks. We'll be right back after this short pause.
🎵🎵🎵 🎵🎵🎵
Ladies and gentlemen, as you listen to this program each night, two hours a night, one at 5pm Pacific,
Pacific, another one at 9 p.m.
Pacific, I'm getting confused over these time zones, you're learning that things are completely
different in this world than you've dreamed they were all your life, different than you've
been living your life.
You had no idea that what you're hearing on the hour of the time was ever a possibility
in this country where we live.
But now that you're beginning to understand that, and now that your eyes are beginning
to open, and you're beginning to learn to think probably for the first time in your
whole life on your own, and some of you, thank God, have even had your first original thought
in your whole life.
Some of you have been awake for a long time, maybe even before I ever came along, maybe
before I even awakened.
Thank you.
But you're beginning to understand now that we, we are living, standing, breathing, eating, working on a board that's full of wormholes over the top of a bottomless pit.
And we've got to do something very quickly to save ourselves.
And one thing you have to do is provide for your family, your loved ones, yourself.
Now, things are going to continue to get worse, I can assure you.
They have to get worse before they can get better.
Remember the motto?
Ordo ab cao.
They're in the process of creating The destruction of our society as we know it, our traditions as we know it, they're destroying our heroes, they're destroying our education system, they've already taken our Constitution and Bill of Rights away from us.
We are, in fact, a vassal state of the United Nations.
Our military is not acting in defense of the United States of America, but as the world police force under the United Nations.
Understanding all of these things, and beginning to understand how the Internal Revenue Service And the Federal Reserve Banks have robbed us of almost everything.
Most of you are going to find out sooner or later, but whatever you have paid for with Federal Reserve notes, you do not own.
You don't own.
When all this occurs, when everything breaks down into a chaotic situation, if you're smart, you will have formed your resistance units, your militia units.
You will be able to exert political control in your area, you will be able to keep order in your communities and your neighborhoods, and you will be able to defend yourselves.
You're going to need some kind of a common currency.
The only thing throughout the history of the world that has functioned in that manner, and that everybody recognizes no matter who they are, or where they live, or what language they speak, is precious metals.
In all its various forms.
Our sponsor, Swiss America Trading, provides non-confiscatable, non-reportable hard assets that you can use in these situations to protect everything that you work for all your life and to make sure that you and your loved ones have a roof over your head, something warm to eat in your belly, and you have an opportunity to survive.
People who don't take those steps are going to find themselves in a very, very dangerous,
volatile and destructive situation.
That's going to be dangerous for all of us in the future, but you can take steps to ameliorate
that danger by calling 1-800-289-2646 right this moment.
1-800-289-2646.
Do it right now, folks.
1-800-289-2646.
Now look around you at the faces of your loved ones.
If you cannot assure them at this moment that you have provided for the safety of your assets
and their financial future, you must make this call.
1-800-289-2646.
That's 1-800-289-2646.
Do it now.
You'll be glad that you did.
You'll have a weight off your shoulders.
You'll have a weight off your shoulders.
Well, Robert, you are going to come back on the later part of the program.
episode of the hour of the time later tonight.
Yes.
Okay, so if we don't get through this hour with everything that we want to cover, you're going to cover it in the next hour, is that correct?
Absolutely.
Wonderful.
I can go up a few days, so we can probably cover a second hour.
Okay, go ahead, continue.
Okay, well, we were talking a little bit about how this started slowly, and I'd like to just make a few points on that and then talk a little bit about jurisdiction.
Because jurisdiction is the key.
How did they get jurisdiction over it, and what does jurisdiction really mean?
It's the beginning of the whole thing.
But before I get into that, I just want to finish where I started before the break about the fact that it happens slowly over time, and how insidious a step-by-step process this was.
And much of that, of course, you've gone over in great detail in the last few days.
But insofar as the internal revenue and the economy is concerned, The Federal Reserve notes, which you mentioned, not only have they no intrinsic value, but they're a form of insurance script, which means that everything you purchase with a Federal Reserve note belongs to the company who issued the script, which in this case is a private bank known as the Federal Reserve.
Well, how did we get into that situation?
After the Civil War, Lincoln, of course, didn't go for the central bank idea at all.
He did get sucked into the 13th and 14th Amendments.
But he didn't do the central bank.
He issued greenbacks instead to finance the war, much to the chagrin of the central bankers who were trying to establish for many years here a central bank in the United States.
And they periodically, over time, did have short-term central bank charters.
But they wanted something more permanent.
So in 1910, they sent a guy here named Warburg, Paul Warburg, who got kind of cozy with this guy, Colonel Howes and Wilson.
You probably know this story.
And in secret meetings and whatnot, they managed to put together a program called the Aldrich Acts, which was a central banking act.
Now, they probably knew that wasn't going to pass.
This is one of the ways that they do things.
See, these guys, they own both parties.
Aldrich was a Republican, I believe, who wasn't well-liked among the people, because he was known to be aligned with the bankers.
So they voted down the Aldrich Plan, and then the other party, Which I believe was the Democrats, came out a couple of years later with the Federal Reserve Act saying, well this isn't going to be like those guys thing.
This time we're going to do it right.
The exact same plan, under a different name, under a different sponsor.
They defused people's caution by getting rid of the August plan, and then came in with the Federal Reserve Act when people weren't looking, which was something like, you know, midnight before Christmas or something like that, they, whoever was in the The House at the time got to vote on it, and they passed the Federal Reserve Act.
They just did that again with the Brady Bill?
They did it again with the Brady Bill.
They do it all the time.
They'll probably do it with the National Health Care Act, but don't get me started on that.
Because that'll make the IRS look like small potatoes, I believe.
But what happened is, once the Federal Reserve got control of the money supply in this country, and of course, Thomas Jefferson and many other people warned us about that.
The banks never get control of the economy of this nation.
We'll see our children homeless on the streets, and that's exactly what happened.
But once they got a hold of the money, they created the income tax, of course, to be able to help control the overall situation, to help pay the debts, which is the interest on the money that the Federal Reserve puts into circulation.
Just very briefly, the Federal Reserve puts money into circulation at no cost to it except for the printing.
And that money then becomes a debt of the treasury of Americans to the Federal Reserve at a very high interest.
And we now, of course, have, you know, $4 trillion worth of debt if you listen to the GAO.
And that is the guaranteed obligations of the United States.
Plus, of course, there's all the unguaranteed obligations of the United States.
Guaranteed obligations like your mortgage.
It's guaranteed by the collateral of your house.
But you still have phone bills to pay.
You still have gas bills and electric bills.
These are all unguaranteed debts.
Unsecured debts.
And of course, the United States government has trillions of dollars worth of bills also.
So when you add it all up, the debt of the United States is closer to $20 trillion than to $4 trillion.
But all that debt does a lot more, a whole lot more, very slowly and insidiously over time, like a cancer.
I don't believe these bankers really care about the money.
They've got plenty of money.
These guys, and you know who they are, and people listening have heard the names before.
I don't want to be a name dropper.
What they care about is the collateral.
They care about the collateral, the real estate, which is one thing.
They also care about a lot of other things that this debt allows them to do.
See, this debt has all kinds of wonderful results from their point of view.
For one thing, for example, and I'll get into some of the things, I didn't listen to your entire series for the last couple of weeks, but I'll mention some things that you may or may not have mentioned.
A lot of people don't realize that the high debt creates a national emergency.
Oh, wait, don't go into that, because that's, uh... That's coming up?
That's coming up, yeah.
Well, suffice it to say that we've been in a state of emergency since, oh, the 20s or 30s.
And a national emergency, a nationally declared emergency that hasn't gone away for 40 years.
And for those people that like to look up things, just let them look up Senate Report 93-549, where you can find a state where they actually discuss the history of the states of emergency we've been in for 40 years, under which most of the constitutional rights of the people have been admittedly, by the Senate admittedly, Uh, stripped.
You know, gone.
They're gone.
And of course, uh, you know, we filed bankruptcy way back at that time.
Another thing they did back at that time under those kind of, once they had control of the economy, is they eliminated the United States Treasury by public law.
I don't actually have the citation for that in front of me.
It was around the 1920s or 30s.
They just eliminated the U.S.
Treasury.
There is no U.S.
Treasury.
The, uh, Secretary of the Treasury is actually the receiver Yes.
But to short circuit this, we can get back to what our subject is tonight.
The goal is total control and total ownership.
And that means that they will end up owning every single piece of property, not only in this country, but probably in the world.
And the citizens, anyone who has a birth certificate registered with the Department of Commerce, Department of Human Resources, is then indentured to pay the debt.
So they become slaves of this eventual New World Order.
That's right.
It's really a means of controlling economic policy and private property.
And if you study the Founding Fathers you'll see they say things like private property is what creates freedom.
Take away private property and you create slavery.
The difference between a slave state or a communist and socialist state and the free concept of the Founding Fathers was the ability to own private property.
I want to read you the definition of private property here in Black's Law Dictionary, 4th edition.
As protected from being taken for public use, Is such property as belongs absolutely to the individual, and of which he has the exclusive right of disposition.
Never before in history has a country been founded on that principle, private property.
When you have private property, you have freedom.
When you don't have private property, you have socialism.
It's as simple as that.
And the IRS, and the significance of why I focus on the IRS, is because it attacks that very principle.
Significantly, of course, as you'll probably point out when you go over the bankruptcy and other materials about the economy, that the IRS is currently working for the International Monetary Fund.
And that's who pays the bills.
Which is a branch of the United Nations.
Right.
And, you know, they work through the United Nations Agency for International Development, and you probably have the public laws that people can reference on that, under the Division of Human Resources at the United Nations.
This is the consummate treason.
The ultimate treason has been committed, and traitors are furthering it every day, supposedly working for our benefit.
And if you enter into another treaty, you have no competition.
This is the consummate treason.
The ultimate treason has been committed.
And traitors are furthering it every day, supposedly working for our benefit.
They're actually working to destroy us.
That's right.
But there is still a solution, as you know.
And the solution is education.
Educating ourselves, which is a source of power, and knowing what to do about it.
The law still has some effect.
Basically, as you pointed out in your series, the guys that did this to us can't afford for the common man to find us out yet.
They have to kind of, like, they've done all the legal groundwork, but they have to kind of take the guns away slowly first.
Even though They've already passed plenty of laws for unilateral disarmament.
They can't enforce it until there's a popular opinion behind it.
Right, they're in the process of creating what they call a consensus of opinion among the populace, which will make it politically incorrect for someone to own guns, and when they see their neighbors frowning at them because they have a gun, they will eventually, the theory goes, buckle into social pressure and give up their weapons.
With cigarettes, for example.
I don't smoke and I don't think cigarettes are healthy, particularly.
But they've legislated and enforced a point of view where cigarettes are no longer politically correct.
If you light up, even outside someplace, people look at you.
And they'll do the same thing.
It's not that hard.
I don't watch a lot of TV, but I do like to watch enough to see how they're programming the people so that I can watch out for it.
It kind of gives me an insight into what the current plan is of these guys.
Every major news show, CNN, all the news shows on ABC, NBC and CBS, and all the morning news
shows in particular are really good at this, Good Morning America and those shows, they
are all talking gun control, gun control, gun control, and it's always about safety,
you know, anti-crime, violence in the streets.
It's always children that are getting killed.
Yeah, versus hunting.
Everybody, nobody on any of these news shows has dared to mention the original reason in
the Bill of Rights for guns.
Well, some of them I don't think really understand or know those reasons.
The others have sold out.
Yeah.
But it gets back to jurisdiction.
As long as they can't afford for us to find out the truth as a nation, as a whole, we the people, The legal system still basically functions, and it's founded on the Constitution.
It doesn't function well.
It's complicated.
It's convoluted.
It's overburdened.
In some cases, like in the Internal Revenue Code, it's clearly deceptive.
But if you can decipher it, and if you can learn the little ins and outs, you can protect yourself and stand up for your rights on a legal level.
And if you do that as a group, you become very powerful.
I believe in fostering groups that study the law together, that work with each other to work on pleadings in court.
You can file suits against government officials that are usurping authority, receding their authority.
But you can't do this alone.
You need to do this at the group level, at the community level, and stuff like that.
And the key is understanding jurisdiction.
That's the beginning.
What makes you a U.S.
citizen I just want to give you an idea of how long you've got.
You've got about six minutes before we have to go into the closing of the show.
OK.
Well, with jurisdiction you find out that what we do is we give away our jurisdiction to You don't become a United States citizen just by birth.
You become a United States citizen which means a federal citizen.
A citizen of the federal United States as we defined earlier in 3121 of the IRC.
You become a U.S.
citizen by, you know, filling out an application for anything and it has a little box on it that says, are you a U.S.
citizen?
And you check yes.
Well, you just volunteered.
That has legal effect.
Every piece of paper in your life that you sign is a legal document.
Every word in that legal document has been considered and thought over for hours and hours by attorneys.
It all means something.
And we just go ahead and we just sign it.
How do you give away jurisdiction?
You take privileges or benefits from the federal government.
They can tax privileges.
They can tax benefits.
When you get something from somebody, you are creating a contract by default.
Because They have a right to expect something back.
That's called a consideration.
So when you receive Social Security benefits, and that's the number one, the big one, in our country, when you get Social Security benefits, then you've allowed the United States, the Federal United States, to have jurisdiction over you.
Because they're giving you something.
In return for, you know, your taxes, your allegiance, you're following their rules, their statutes.
The statutes are the terms of the contract.
Um, tax court is similar.
You know, you go into tax court, you don't question it.
You know, a lot of very good, uh, so-called tax protesters have logged cases in tax court just because they did it in tax court instead of U.S.
district court.
They gave the tax court jurisdiction over something that it normally wouldn't have any jurisdiction over.
And they can now say that your entire argument is frivolous.
Because in tax court, it is frivolous.
In tax court, it's frivolous that there are no regulations dis- spelling out exactly what kind of tax you're liable for.
Because you gave them your jurisdiction.
So, jurisdiction is very, very, very important, and we'll be talking more about that in the next session.
The judge won't explain that when it's going on, but that is exactly the case.
Absolutely not.
In fact... So, so many people come out scratching their head and wondering what in the world happened, because what just happened is totally illegal.
The truth is, it's not illegal.
They just didn't understand.
And you are ignorant to no excuse for the law.
They're under no obligation to tell you what's going on.
You go into court on something, even just a minor traffic violation, And the judge asks you, well, do you understand the charges against you?
And you say yes, thinking, you know, you know what he's talking about, you think that's what it means.
No!
When he says, do you understand the charges, he's asking for your jurisdiction!
You've got to say, uh, no, your honor, I don't fully understand the charges against me.
I need to see a formal complaint.
Now, that doesn't mean to keep silent until you talk to your attorney, because the moment you hire an attorney, you declare yourself legally incompetent, and you become a ward of an officer of the court who is pledged to uphold the court, and not you.
That can actually happen.
Not necessarily, though, if you handle it properly, if you know how to handle the complaint.
But most people don't.
That's what I'm getting across here.
It's just a question of jurisdiction again.
Yeah.
If you don't know how to handle the jurisdictional issue, You could blow it by hiring an attorney.
You could blow it by just saying that you understand the charges.
A lot of people know better than to plead guilty or not guilty in the Patriot community.
They won't plead.
But if you even say that you understand what they're talking about... And that goes for NOLO contenders, too.
That's right.
If you... Let them fingerprint you.
Or give you a breathalyzer test if you've been stopped.
In the case of people that try to drive without a license.
You know, you've given them jurisdiction.
So, uh, there are a lot of little things like that, uh, that we must understand so we don't get into the area in which they have power.
So that we maintain our own power.
And there are ways to do that.
Legal ways.
And you just have to understand the terms that are involved.
The difference between a special appearance before the court and a general appearance before the court, for example.
Uh, and whereas in a general appearance before the court, You know it says, you must appear?
The word appear is a legal word!
When your citation says, you must appear, that's a legal word.
If you appear, it's considered a general appearance, and you've given them jurisdiction.
You have to go in there and say, uh, your honor, I'm appearing here on a special appearance.
Meaning, I don't give you jurisdiction.
Because I don't understand the charges against me.
I need to see a formal complaint.
Which will really bollocks them up, because they don't Not only that, but they have to have someone who makes the
complaint, and usually there isn't anyone.
That's right.
It sounds complicated, ladies and gentlemen.
It's not that complicated.
Withdrawing adds you a lot of stuff very quickly to give you an idea of how convoluted it is
and how the system has been twisted intentionally.
That's right.
A user can withdraw a complaint and then have a complaint filed against them.
And then they can withdraw a complaint and then have a complaint filed against them.
The system has been twisted intentionally.
That's right.
You should not go away from this program and try to apply any of this.
You'll get yourselves in trouble.
You should find someone, a good someone, who teaches constitutional law and who teaches these things, like Bob Ross, and learn from them.
Attend classes.
There are some classes that I'm giving in the Phoenix area.
Hopefully there are some people talking about getting some classes going in other areas.
Right now I have classes scheduled in Phoenix in February 19-20th coming up.
And then again in March, mid-March and early April.
And I call it what the IRS doesn't want you to know.
But as you can tell, it's about a lot more than just the IRS.
It's about your life, it's about your country, it's about your family.
It's about taking back your rights and understanding the law.
And what I teach is an understanding of the law.
I don't give you any magic bullets.
I don't have any magic bullets.
The only magic bullet out there is for the people to understand, learn and educate themselves
stand together to stand up for their rights.
So, if you learn these things, and you learn then to apply them, and all of us begin to do that, then we begin to exert some power.
Instead of us being afraid and living in fear, the traitors will become afraid and live in fear.
Right.
Now, should I give my phone number, or do you want people to contact you if they're interested in any of those things?
No, go ahead and give your phone number.
Okay.
And you've got to do it real quick, because we're out of time.
You can reach me at Boston Tea Party Enterprises.
The area code is 602-282-0111.
▲
Export Selection