[INLINE]
                                      
   ______________________________________________________________________
                                      
   An interesting letter that kind of sums it up as to what is wrong with
   the union of Sovereign states (but like always do some research to
   find out if this is true, then you have the knowledge).
   
   James Montgomery
   Knowledge is Freedom BBS
   910-869-1945
   High Point North Carolina
   
   August 27, 1995
   
   American people YOU have the ability to understand the information in
   this letter. YOU have the ability to understand the present law and
   past law, the Constitution. That's right!...I'm saying the
   Constitution is past tense, as a restrictive document on Congress. I
   do not make this statement lightly and I can prove it.
   
   The Constitution was a commercial compact between states, giving the
   federal government limited powers. The Bill of Rights was meant not as
   our source of rights, but as further limitations on the federal
   government. Our fore-fathers saw the potential for danger in the U. S.
   Constitution. To insure the Constitution was not presumed to be our
   source of rights, the 10th Amendment was added. I will use a quote
   from Thomas Jefferson, February 15, 1791, where he quotes the 10th
   Amendment...
   
     "I consider the foundation of the Constitution as laid on this
     ground; That "all powers not delegated to the United States, by the
     Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to
     the States or to the people." To take a single step beyond the
     boundaries thus specially drawn around the powers of Congress, is
     to take possession of a boundless field of power, no longer
     susceptible of any definition."
     
   
   The created United States government cannot define the rights of their
   creator, the American people.
   Three forms of law were granted to the Constitution, common law,
   equity (contract law) and Admiralty law. Each had their own
   jurisdiction and purpose. The first issue I want to cover is the
   United States flag. Obviously from known history our flag did not have
   a yellow fringe bordering three sides. The United States did not start
   putting flags with a yellow fringe on them in government buildings and
   public buildings until 1959. Of course the question you would ask
   yourself; why did it change and are there any legal meanings behind
   this? Oh yes!
   
   First the appearance of our flag is defined in Title 4 sec. 1. U.S.C..
   
     "The flag of the United States shall be thirteen horizontal
     stripes, alternate red and white; and the union of the flag shall
     be forty-eight stars, white in a blue field." (my note - of course
     when new states are admitted new stars are added.) A foot note was
     added on page 1113 of the same section which says: "Placing of
     fringe on the national flag, the dimensions of the flag, and
     arrangement of the stars are matters of detail not controlled by
     statute, but within the discretion of the President as
     commander-in-chief of the army and navy." 1925, 34 Op.Atty.Gen.
     483.
     
   The president as military commander can add a yellow fringe to our
   flag. When would this be done? During time of war. Why? A flag with a
   fringe is an ensign, a military flag. Read the following.
   
     "Pursuant to U.S.C. Chapter 1, 2, and 3; Executive Order No. 10834,
     August 21, 1959, 24 F.R. 6865, a military flag is a flag that
     resembles the regular flag of the United States, except that it has
     a YELLOW FRINGE, bordered on three sides. The President of the
     United states designates this deviation from the regular flag, by
     executive order, and in his capacity as COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF of the
     Armed forces."
     
   From the National Encyclopedia, Volume 4:
   
     "Flag, an emblem of a nation; usually made of cloth and flown from
     a staff. From a military standpoint flags are of two general
     classes, those flown from stationary masts over army posts, and
     those carried by troops in formation. The former are referred to by
     the general name flags. The latter are called colors when carried
     by dismounted troops. Colors and Standards are more nearly square
     than flags and are made of silk with a knotted Fringe of Yellow on
     three sides...use of the flag. The most general and appropriate use
     of the flag is as a symbol of authority and power."
     
   The reason I started with the Flag issue is because it is so easy to
   grasp. The main problem I have with the yellow fringe is that by its
   use our Constitutional Republic is no more. Our system of law was
   changed without the public's knowledge. It was kept secret, this is
   fraud, the American people were allowed to believe this was just a
   decoration. Because the law changed from Common Law (God's Law) to
   Admiralty Law (the kings law) your status also changed from sovereign
   to subject. From being able to own property (allodial title) to not
   owning property (tenet on the land). If you think you own your
   property, stop paying taxes, it will be taken under the prize law.
   
     "The ultimate ownership of all property is in the state; individual
     so-called `ownership' is only by virtue of government, i.e., law,
     amounting to a mere user; and use must be in accordance with law
     and subordinate to the necessities of the State."
     Senate Document No. 43, "Contracts payable in Gold" written in
     1933.
     
   By our allowing to let these military flags fly, the American people
   have admitted our defeat and loss of status. Read on, you'll see what
   I mean. Remember the Constitution recognizes three forms of law, being
   governed by the Law of the Flag is Admiralty law. I will cover this in
   a minute, the following is a definition of the legal term Law of the
   Flag.
   
     "...The agency of the master is devolved upon him by the law of the
     flag. The same law that confers his authority ascertains its
     limits, and the flag at the mast-head is notice to all the world of
     the extent of such power to bind the owners or freighters by his
     act. The foreigner who deals with this agent has notice of that
     law, and, if he be bound by it, there is not injustice. His notice
     is the national flag which is hoisted on every sea and under which
     the master sails into every port, and every circumstance that
     connects him with the vessel isolates that vessel in the eyes of
     the world, and demonstrates his relation to the owners and
     freighters as their agent for a specific purpose and with power
     well defined under the national maritime law."
     Bouvier's Law Dictionary, 1914.
     
   Don't be thrown by the fact they are talking about the sea, and that
   it doesn't apply to land, I will prove to you that Admiralty law has
   come on land. Next a court case:
   
     "Pursuant to the "Law of the Flag", a military flag does result in
     jurisdictional implication when flown. The Plaintiff cites the
     following: "Under what is called international law, the law of the
     flag, a shipowner who sends his vessel into a foreign port gives
     notice by his flag to all who enter into contracts with the
     shipmaster that he intends the law of the flag to regulate those
     contracts with the shipmaster that he either submit to its
     operation or not contract with him or his agent at all."
     Ruhstrat v. People, 57 N.E. 41, 45, 185 ILL. 133, 49 LRA 181, 76
     AM.
     
   When you walk into a court and see this flag you are put on notice
   that you are in a Admiralty Court and that the king is in control.
   Also, if there is a king the people are no longer sovereign. You're
   probably saying this is the most incredible thing I have ever heard.
   YOU have read the proof, it will stand up in court. But wait there is
   more, you probably would say, how could this happen? Here's how.
   Admiralty law is for the sea, maritime law govern's contracts between
   parties that trade over the sea. Well, that's what our fore-fathers
   intended. However, in 1845 Congress passed an act saying Admiralty law
   could come on land. The bill may be traced in Cong. Globe, 28th Cong.,
   2d. Sess. 43, 320, 328, 337, 345(1844-45), no opposition to the Act is
   reported. Congress held a committee on this subject in 1850 and they
   said:
   
     "The committee also alluded to "the great force" of "the great
     constitutional question as to the power of Congress to extend
     maritime jurisdiction beyond the ground occupied by it at the
     adoption of the Constitution...."
     Ibid. H.R. Rep. No. 72 31st Cong., 1st Sess. 2 (1850)
     
   It was up to the Supreme Court to stop Congress and say NO! The
   Constitution did not give you that power, nor was it intended. But no,
   the courts began a long train of abuses, here are some excerpts from a
   few court cases.
   
     "This power is as extensive upon land as upon water. The
     Constitution makes no distinction in that respect. And if the
     admiralty jurisdiction, in matters of contract and tort which the
     courts of the United States may lawfully exercise on the high seas,
     can be extended to the lakes under the power to regulate commerce,
     it can with the same propriety and upon the same construction, be
     extended to contracts and torts on land when the commerce is
     between different States. And it may embrace also the vehicles and
     persons engaged in carrying it on (my note - remember what the law
     of the flag said when you receive benefits from the king.) It would
     be in the power of Congress to confer admiralty jurisdiction upon
     its courts, over the cars engaged in transporting passengers or
     merchandise from one State to another, and over the persons engaged
     in conducting them, and deny to the parties the trial by jury. Now
     the judicial power in cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction,
     has never been supposed to extend to contracts made on land and to
     be executed on land. But if the power of regulating commerce can be
     made the foundation of jurisdiction in its courts, and a new and
     extended admiralty jurisdiction beyond its heretofore known and
     admitted limits, may be created on water under that authority, the
     same reason would justify the same exercise of power on land."
     Propeller Genessee Chief et al. v. Fitzhugh et al. 12 How. 443
     (U.S. 1851)
     
   And all the way back, before the U.S. Constitution John Adams talking
   about his state's Constitution, said:
   
     "Next to revenue (taxes) itself, the late extensions of the
     jurisdiction of the admiralty are our greatest grievance. The
     American Courts of Admiralty seem to be forming by degrees into a
     system that is to overturn our Constitution and to deprive us of
     our best inheritance, the laws of the land. It would be thought in
     England a dangerous innovation if the trial, of any matter on land
     was given to the admiralty."
     Jackson v. Magnolia, 20 How. 296 315, 342 (U.S. 1852)
     
   This began the most dangerous precedent of all the Insular Cases. This
   is where Congress took a boundless field of power. When legislating
   for the states, they are bound by the Constitution, when legislating
   for their insular possessions they are not restricted in any way by
   the Constitution. Read the following quote from the Harvard law
   review:
   
     "These courts, then, are not constitutional courts in which the
     judicial power conferred by the Constitution on the general
     government can be deposited. They are incapable of receiving it.
     They are legislative courts, created in virtue of the general right
     of sovereignty which exists in the government, or in virtue of that
     clause which enables Congress to make all needful rules and
     regulations respecting the territory belonging to the united
     States. The jurisdiction with which they are invested is not a part
     of that judicial power which is conferred in the third article of
     the Constitution, but is conferred by Congress in the execution of
     those general powers which that body possesses over the territories
     of the United States."
     Harvard Law Review, Our New Possessions. page 481.
     
   Here are some Court cases that make it even clearer:
   
     "...[T]he United States may acquire territory by conquest or by
     treaty, and may govern it through the exercise of the power of
     Congress conferred by Section 3 of Article IV of the
     Constitution..." "In exercising this power, Congress is not subject
     to the same constitutional limitations, as when it is legislating
     for the United States. ...And in general the guaranties of the
     Constitution, save as they are limitations upon the exercise of
     executive and legislative power when exerted for or over our
     insular possessions, extend to them only as Congress, in the
     exercise of its legislative power over territory belonging to the
     United States, has made those guarantees applicable."
     Hooven & Allison & Co. vs Evatt, 324 U.S. 652 (1945)
     
     "The idea prevails with some indeed, it found expression in
     arguments at the bar that we have in this country substantially or
     practically two national governments; one to be maintained under
     the Constitution, with all its restrictions; the other to be
     maintained by Congress outside and independently of that
     instrument, by exercising such powers as other nations of the earth
     are accustomed to exercise."
     "I take leave to say that if the principles thus announced should
     ever receive the sanction of a majority of this court, a radical
     and mischievous change in our system of government will be the
     result. We will, in that event, pass from the era of constitutional
     liberty guarded and protected by a written constitution into an era
     of legislative absolutism."
     "It will be an evil day for American liberty if the theory of a
     government outside of the supreme law of the land finds lodgment in
     our constitutional jurisprudence. No higher duty rests upon this
     court than to exert its full authority to prevent all violation of
     the principles of the constitution."
     Downes vs Bidwell, 182 U.S. 244 (1901)
     
   These actions allowed Admiralty law to come on land. If you will
   remember the definition of the Law of the Flag. When you receive
   benefits or enter into contracts with the king you come under his law
   which is Admiralty law. And what is a result of your connection with
   the king? A loss of your Sovereign status. Our ignorance of the law is
   no excuse. I'll give you an example, something you deal with everyday.
   Let's say you get a seat belt ticket. What law did you violate?
   Remember the Constitution recognizes three forms of law. Was it common
   law? Who was the injured party? No one. So it could not have been
   common law even though here, the State of N. C. has made chapter 20 of
   the Motor Vehicle code carry common law penalties, jail time. This was
   the only thing they could do to cover up the jurisdiction they were
   operating in. Was it Equity law? No, there is no contract in dispute,
   driving is a privilege granted by the king. If it were a contract the
   UCC would apply, and it doesn't. In a contract both parties have equal
   rights. In a privilege, you do as you are told or the privilege is
   revoked. Well guess what, there is only one form of law left,
   admiralty. Ask yourself when did licenses begin to be required? 1933.
   
   All district courts are admiralty courts, see the Judiciary Act of
   1789.
   
     "It is only with the extent of powers possessed by the district
     courts, acting as instance courts of admiralty, we are dealing. The
     Act of 1789 gives the entire constitutional power to determine "all
     civil causes of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction," leaving the
     courts to ascertain its limits, as cases may arise."
     Waring ET AL,. v. Clarke, Howard 5 12 L. ed. 1847
     
   When you enter a court room and come before the judge and the U.S.
   flag with the yellow fringe flying, you are put on notice of the law
   you are in. American's aren't aware of this, so they continue to claim
   Constitutional rights. In the Admiralty setting the constitution does
   not apply and the judge, if pushed, will inform you of this by placing
   you under contempt for continuing to bring it up. If the judge is
   pressed, his name for this hidden law is statuary law. Where are the
   rules and regulations for statutory law kept? They don't exist. If
   statuary law existed, there would be rules and regulations governing
   it's procedures and court rules. They do not exist!!!
   The way you know this is Admiralty, is from the yellow fringed flag
   and from the actions of the law, compelled performance (Admiralty).
   The judges can still move at common law (murder etc.) and equity
   (contract disputes etc.). It's up to the type of case brought before
   the court. If the case is Admiralty, the only way back to the common
   law is the saving to suitor clause and action under Admiralty. The
   court and rules of all three jurisdictions have been blended. Under
   Admiralty you are compelled to perform under the agreement you made by
   asking and receiving the king's government (license). You receive the
   benefit of driving on federal roads (military roads), so you have
   voluntarily obligated yourself to this system of law, this is why you
   are compelled to obey. If you don't it will cost you money or jail
   time or both. The type of offence determines the jurisdiction you come
   under, but the court itself is an Admiralty court, defined by the
   flag. Driving without a seat belt under Chapter 20 DMV code carries a
   criminal penalty for a non common law offense. Again where is the
   injured party or parties, this is Admiralty law. Here is a quote to
   prove what I said about the roads being military, this is only one
   benefit, there are many:
   
     "Whilst deeply convinced of these truths, I yet consider it clear
     that under the war-making power Congress may appropriate money
     toward the construction of a military road when this is absolutely
     necessary for the defense of any State or Territory of the Union
     against foreign invasion. Under the Constitution Congress has power
     "to declare war," "to raise and support armies," "to provide and
     maintain a navy," and to call forth the militia to "repel
     invasions." Thus endowed, in an ample manner, with the war-making
     power, the corresponding duty is required that "the United States
     shall protect each of them [the States] against invasion." Now, how
     is it possible to afford this protection to California and our
     Pacific possessions except by means of a military road through the
     Territories of the United States, over which men and munitions of
     war may be speedily transported from the Atlantic States to meet
     and to repel the invader?....Besides, the Government, ever since
     its origin, has been in the constant practice of constructing
     military roads."
     Inaugural Address of James Buchanan, March 4, 1857,..Messages and
     Papers of the Presidents, 1789-1902.
     
   I want to briefly mention the Social Security Act, the nexus Agreement
   you have with the king. You were told the SS# was for retirement and
   you had to have it to work. It sounds like a license to me, and it is,
   it is a license granted by the President to work in this country,
   under the Trading with the Enemy Act, as amended in March 9, 1933, as
   you will see in a moment. Was it really for your retirement? What does
   F.I.C.A. stand for? Federal Insurance Contribution Act. What does
   contribution mean at law, not Webster's Dictionary. This is where they
   were able to get you to admit that you were jointly responsible for
   the national debt, and you declared that you were a fourteenth
   Amendment citizen, which I won't go into in this paper or the Erie
   Railroad v. Tompkins case where common law was over turned. Read the
   following definition to learn what it means to have a SS# and pay a
   contribution:
   
     Contribution. Right of one who has discharged a common liability to
     recover of another also liable, the aliquot portion which he ought
     to pay or bear. Under principle of "contribution," a tort-feasor
     against whom a judgement is rendered is entitled to recover
     proportional shares of judgement from other joint tortfeasor whose
     negligence contributed to the injury and who were also liable to
     the plaintiff. (foot note * tort feasor means wrong doer, what did
     you do to be defined as a wrong doer???) The share of a loss
     payable by an insure when contracts with two or more insurers cover
     the same loss. The insurer's share of a loss under a coinsurance or
     similar provision. The sharing of a loss or payment among several.
     The act of any one or several of a number of co-debtors,
     co-sureties, etc., in reimbursing one of their number who has paid
     the whole debt or suffered the whole liability, each to the extent
     of his proportionate share.
     (Blacks Law Dictionary 6th ed.)
     
   Guess what? It gets worse. What does this date 1933 mean? Well you
   better sit down. First, remember World War I, in 1917 President Wilson
   declared the War Powers Act of October 6, 1917, basically stating that
   he was stopping all trade with the enemy except for those he granted a
   license, excluding Americans. Read the following from this Trading
   with the enemy Act, where he defines enemy: In the War Powers Act of
   1917, Chapter 106, Section 2 (c) it says that these declared war
   powers did not affect citizens of the United States:
   
     "Such other individuals, or body or class of individuals, as may be
     natives, citizens, or subjects of any nation with which the United
     States is at war, OTHER THAN CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES,
     wherever resident or wherever doing business, as the President, if
     he shall find the safety of the United States of the successful
     prosecution of the war shall so require, may, by proclamation,
     include within the term "enemy.""
     
   Now, this leads us up to 1933. Our country was recovering from a
   depression and now was declared bankrupt. I know you are saying. Do
   What, the American people were never told about this? Public policy
   and National Security overruled the public right to know. Read the
   following Congressional quote:
   
     "My investigation convinced me that during the last quarter of a
     century the average production of gold has been falling off
     considerably. The gold mines of the world are practically
     exhausted. There is only about $11,000,000,000 in gold in the
     world, with the United States owning a little more than four
     billions. We have more than $100,000,000,000 in debts payable in
     gold of the present weight and fineness....As a practical
     proposition these contracts cannot be collected in gold for the
     obvious reason that the gold supply of the entire world is not
     sufficient to make payment."
     Congressional Record, Congressman Dies March 15, 1933
     
   Before 1933 all contracts with the government were payable in gold.
   Now I ask you? Who in their right mind would enter into contracts
   totaling One Hundred billion dollars in gold, when there was only
   eleven billion in gold in the whole world, we had about four billion.
   To keep from being hung by the American public they obeyed the
   banksters demands and turned over our country to them. They never came
   out and said we were in bankruptcy but, the fact remains, we are. In
   1933 the gold of the whole country had to be turned in to the
   banksters, and all government contracts in gold were canceled. This is
   bankruptcy.
   
     "Mr. Speaker, we are here now in chapter 11. Members of Congress
     are official trustees presiding over the greatest reorganization of
     any bankrupt entity in world history, the U.S. government."
     Congressman Traficant on the House floor, March 17, "1993"
     
   The wealth of the nation including our land was turned over to the
   banksters. In return, the nations 100 billion dollar debt was
   forgiven. I have two papers that have circulated the country on this
   subject. Remember Jesus said "money is the root of all evil" The
   Congress of 1933 sold every American into slavery to protect their
   asses. Read the following Congressional quotes:
   
     "I want to show you where the people are being imposed upon by
     reason of the delegation of this tremendous power. I invite your
     attention to the fact that section 16 of the Federal Reserve Act
     provides that whenever the Government of the United States issues
     and delivers money, Federal Reserve notes, which are based on the
     credit of the Nation--they represent a mortgage upon your home and
     my home, and upon all the property of all the people of the
     Nation--to the Federal Reserve agent, an interest charge shall be
     collected for the Government."
     Congressional Record, Congressman Patman March 13, 1933
     
     "That is the equity of what we are about to do. Yes; you are going
     to close us down. Yes; you have already closed us down, and have
     been doing it long before this year. Our President says that for 3
     years we have been on the way to bankruptcy. We have been on the
     way to bankruptcy longer than 3 years. We have been on the way to
     bankruptcy ever since we began to allow the financial mastery of
     this country gradually to get into the hands of a little clique
     that has held it right up until they would send us to the grave."
     Congressional Record, Congressman Long March 11, 1933
     
   What did Roosevelt do? Sealed our fate and our childrens fate, but
   worst of all, he declared War on the American People, remember the War
   Powers Act, the Trading with the enemy Act. He declared emergency
   powers with his authority being the War Powers Act, the Trading with
   the enemy Act. The problem is he redefined who the enemy was, read the
   following: (remember what I said about the SS# being a license to
   work)
   
     "The declared National Emergency of March 9, 1933 amended the War
     Powers Act to include the American People as enemies:
     "In Title 1, Section 1 it says: The actions, regulations, rules,
     licenses, orders and proclamations heretofore or hereafter taken,
     promulgated, made, or issued by the President of the United States
     or the Secretary of the Treasury since March 4, 1933, pursuant to
     the authority conferred by subdivision (b) of section 5 of the Act
     of October 6, 1917, as amended, are hereby approved and confirmed."
     "Section 2. Subdivision (b) of section 5 of the Act of October 6,
     1917, (40 Stat. L. 411), as amended, is hereby amended to read as
     follows: emergency declared by the President, the President may,
     through any agency that he may designate, or otherwise,
     investigate, regulate, or prohibit, under such rules and
     regulations as he may prescribe, by means of licenses or otherwise,
     any transactions in foreign exchange, transfers of credit between
     or payments by banking institutions as defined by the President,
     and export, hoarding, melting, or earmarking of gold or silver coin
     or bullion or currency, BY ANY PERSON WITHIN THE UNITED STATES OR
     ANY PLACE SUBJECT TO THE JURISDICTION THEREOF."
     
   Here is the legal phrase subject to the jurisdiction thereof, but at
   law this refers to alien enemy and also applies to Fourteenth
   Amendment citizens:
   
     "As these words are used in the first section of the Fourteenth
     Amendment of the Federal Constitution, providing for thecitizenship
     of all persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject
     to the jurisdiction thereof, the purpose would appear to have been
     to exclude by the fewest words (besides children of members of the
     Indian tribes, standing in a peculiar relation to the National
     Government, unknown to the common Law), the two classes of cases,
     children born of *ALIEN ENEMIES(emphasis mine), in hostile
     occupation, and children of diplomatic representatives of a foreign
     state, both of which, by the law of England and by our own law,
     from the time of the first settlement of the English colonies in
     America, had been recognized exceptions to the fundamental rule of
     citizenship by birth within the country."
     United States v Wong Kim Ark, 169 US 649, 682, 42 L Ed 890, 902, 18
     S Ct 456. Ballentine's Law Dictionary
     
   Congressman Beck had this to say about the War Powers Act:
   
     "I think of all the damnable heresies that have ever been suggested
     in connection with the Constitution, the doctrine of emergency is
     the worst. It means that when Congress declares an emergency there
     is no Constitution. This means its death....But the Constitution of
     the United States, as a restraining influence in keeping the
     federal government within the carefully prescribed channels of
     power, is moribund, if not dead. We are witnessing its
     death-agonies, for when this bill becomes a law, if unhappily it
     becomes law, there is no longer any workable Constitution to keep
     the Congress within the limits of its constitutional powers."
     (Congressman James Beck in Congressional Record 1933)
     
   The following are excerpts from the Senate Report, 93rd Congress,
   November 19, 1973, Special Committee On The Termination Of The
   National Emergency United States Senate. They were going to terminate
   all emergency powers, but they found out they did not have the power
   to do this so guess which one stayed in, the Emergency Act of 1933,
   the Trading with the Enemy Act October 6, 1917 as amended in March 9,
   1933.
   
     "Since March 9, 1933, the United States has been in a state of
     declared national emergency....Under the powers delegated by these
     statutes, the President may: seize property; organize and control
     the means of production; seize commodities; assign military forces
     abroad; institute martial law; seize and control all transportation
     and communication; regulate the operation of private enterprise;
     restrict travel; and, in a plethora of particular ways, control the
     lives of all American citizens." "A majority of the people of the
     United States have lived all of their lives under emergency rule.
     For 40 years, freedoms and governmental procedures guaranteed by
     the Constitution have, in varying degrees, been abridged by laws
     brought into force by states of national emergency....from, at
     least, the Civil War in important ways shaped the present
     phenomenon of a permanent state of national emergency."
     Senate Report, 93rd Congress, November 19, 1973
     
   You may be asking yourself is this the law, and if so where is it,
   read the following: In Title 12 U.S.C, in section 95b you'll find the
   following codification of the Emergency War Powers:
   
     "The actions, regulations, rules, licenses, orders and
     proclamations heretofore or hereafter taken, promulgated, made, or
     issued by the President of the United States or the Secretary of
     the Treasury since March 4, 1933, pursuant to the authority
     conferred by subsection (b) of section 5 of the Act of October 6,
     1917, as amended (12 U.S.C., 95a), are hereby approved and
     confirmed." (March 9, 1933, c. 1, Title 1, 1, 48 Stat. 1)
     
   So you can further understand the word Alien Enemy and what it means
   to be declared an enemy of this government, read the following
   definitions: The phrase Alien Enemy is defined in Bouvier's Law
   Dictionary as: One who owes allegiance to the adverse belligerent. 1
   Kent 73. He who owes a temporary but not a permanent allegiance is an
   alien enemy in respect to acts done during such temporary allegiance
   only; and when his allegiance terminates, his hostile character
   terminates also; 1 B. & P. 163.
   Alien enemies are said to have no rights, no privileges, unless by the
   king's special favor, during time of war; 1 Bla. Com. 372; Bynkershoek
   195; 8 Term 166. [Remember we've been under a declared state of war
   since October 6, 1917, as amended March 9, 1933 to include every
   United States citizen.]
   
     "The phrase Alien Enemy is defined in Words and Phrases as:
     Residence of person in territory of nation at war with United
     States was sufficient to characterize him as "alien enemy" within
     Trading with the Enemy Act, even if he had acquired and retained
     American citizenship."
     Matarrese v. Matarrese, 59 A.2d 262, 265, 142 N.J. Eq. 226.
     
     "Residence or doing business in a hostile territory is the test of
     an "alien enemy: within meaning of Trading with the Enemy Act and
     Executive Orders thereunder." Executive Order March 11, 1942, No.
     9095, as amended, 50 U.S.C.A. Appendix 6; Trading with the Enemy
     Act 5 (b).
     In re Oneida Nat. Bank & Trust Co. of Utica, 53 N.Y.S. 2d. 416,
     420, 421, 183 Misc. 374.
     
     "By the modern phrase, a man who resides under the allegiance and
     protection of a hostile state for commercial purposes is to be
     considered to all civil purposes as much an `alien enemy' as if he
     were born there."
     Hutchinson v. Brock, 11 Mass. 119, 122.
     
   Am I done with the proof? Not quite, believe it or not it gets worse.
   I have established that war has been declared against the American
   people and their children. The American people that voted for the 1933
   government were responsible for Congress' actions, because Congress
   was there in their proxy. What is one of the actions taken against an
   enemy during time of War. In the Constitution the Congress was granted
   the power during the time of war to grant Letters of Marque. What is a
   letter of Marque? Well, read the following:
   
     A commission granted by the government to a private individual, to
     take the property of a foreign state, as a reparation for an injury
     committed by such state, its citizens or subjects. The prizes so
     captured are divided between the owners of the privateer, the
     captain, and the crew.
     Bouvier's Law Dictionary 1914.
     
   Think about the mission of the IRS, they are a private organization,
   or their backup, the ATF. These groups have been granted letters of
   Marque, read the following:
   
     "The trading with the enemy Act, originally and as amended, in
     strictly a war measure, and finds its sanction in the provision
     empowering Congress "to declare war, grant letters of Marque and
     reprisal, and make rules concerning captures on land and water."
     Stoehr v. Wallace 255 U.S.
     
   Under the Constitution the Power of the Government had its checks and
   balances, power was divided between the three branches of government.
   To do anything else means you no longer have a Constitutional
   government. I'm not even talking about the obvious which we have
   already covered, read the following:
   
     "The Secretary of the Treasury and/or the Attorney General may
     require, by means of regulations, rulings, instructions, or
     otherwise, any person to keep a full record of, and to furnish
     under oath, in the form of reports or otherwise, from time to time
     and at any time or times, complete information relative to, any
     transaction referred to in section 5 (b) of the Act of October 6,
     1917."
     Title 12 Banks and Banking page 570.
     
   How about Clinton's new Executive Order of June 6, 1994 where the
   Alphabet agencies are granted their own power to obtain money and the
   military if need be to protect themselves. These are un-elected
   officials, sounds un-Constitutional to me, but read on.
   
     "The delegations of authority in this Order shall not affect the
     authority of any agency or official pursuant to any other
     delegation of presidential authority, presently in effect or
     hereafter made, under section 5 (b) of the act of October 6, 1917,
     as amended (12 U.S.C. 95a)"
     
   How can the President delegate to un-elected officials power that he
   was elected to have, and declare that it cannot be taken away, by the
   voters or the courts or Congress. I tell you how under martial law,
   under the War Powers Act. The American public is asleep and is unaware
   nor do they care about what is going on, because it may interfere with
   their making money. I guess Thomas Jefferson was right again:
   
     "...And to preserve their independence, we must not let our rulers
     load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between
     economy and liberty or profusion and servitude. If we run into such
     debts as that we must be taxed in our meat and in our drink, in our
     necessaries and our comforts, in our labors and our amusements, for
     our callings and our creeds, as the people of England are, our
     people, like them, must come to labor sixteen hours in the
     twenty-four, and give the earnings of fifteen of these to the
     government for their debts and daily expenses; and the sixteenth
     being insufficient to afford us bread, we must live, as they now
     do, on oatmeal and potatoes; have not time to think, no means of
     calling the mismanager's to account; but be glad to obtain
     subsistence by hiring ourselves to rivet their chains on the necks
     of our fellow sufferers..." (Thomas Jefferson)
     THE MAKING OF AMERICA, p. 395
     
   Submitted January 28
   
     "Lloyd Bentsen, of Texas, to be U.S. Governor of the International
     Monetary Fund for a term of 5 years; U.S. Governor of the
     International Bank for Reconstruction and Development for a term of
     5 years; U.S. Governor of the Inter-American Development Bank for a
     term of 5 years; U.S. Governor of the African Development Bank for
     a term of 5 years; U.S. Governor of the Asian Development Bank;
     U.S. Governor of African Development Fund; and U.S. Governor of the
     European Bank for Reconstruction and Development."
     Presidential Documents, February 1, 1993.
     
   At the same time, Bentsen was the Secretary of Treasury. Gee I don't
   know, this sounds like a conflict of entrust to me, how about you?
   Also, Congress is the only one under the Constitution able to
   appropriate money. How about a few months ago when Secretary of
   Treasury Ruban sent tons of money to Mexico, without Congress'
   approval. Also, Seretary of Treasury Ruban was president of the bank
   that made the loans to Mexico, he was then made Secretary of Treasury
   and paid Mexico's debt to his bank with taxpayers money. Again, sounds
   like a conflict of entrust to me.
   
     "Without limitation as to any other powers or authority of the
     Secretary of the Treasury or the Attorney General under any other
     provision of this Order, the Secretary of the Treasury is
     authorized and empowered to prescribe from time to time
     regulations, rulings, and instructions to carry out the purposes of
     this Order and to provide therein or otherwise the conditions under
     which licenses may be granted by or through such officers or
     agencies as the Secretary of the Treasury may designate, and the
     decision of the Secretary with respect to the granting, denial or
     other disposition of an application or license shall be final."
     Section 7, Title 12 U.S.C. Banks and Banking
     
   Do the issues I have brought up sound like this is a Constitutional
   government to you? I have not covered the main nexus, the money. If
   you would like to read about this, read my other papers, The History
   of Lawful Money and A Country Defeated In Victory. I didn't make this
   information up, it is the government's own documents and legal
   definitions taken from their dictionaries. I wish the hard working
   Americans in the government that are loyal to an American Republic
   could read this, the more that know the truth the better.
   ______________________________________________________________________
                                      
                           Back to Article Index
                                      
   ______________________________________________________________________
                                      
                         Created: 09/23/95 1:07 PM
                 Last Updated: August 28, 1996 01:01:09 PM
                    WebPage Designer - Jah Red - [LINK]
                         © 1995 Jah Red Productions