“Investigating Terrorism and Criminal Extremism
Debunking the Department of Justice's Hit Piece, Part 1
Richard Anatone, Contributing Writer
You have all been lied to.
You were taught that the United States Constitution written by our Founding Fathers was the most important document regarding individual freedom ever written in the history of mankind, followed only by the Magna Carta. You believe that the Constitution set up a central government with limited powers, and that the powers not listed in the Constitution was left for the states and the people who make up the states. You believe that the powers of the central government were limited and that the powers of the individual states were indefinite, to quote James Madison. You believe that the first Ten Amendments, known as the Bill of Rights, gave to each citizen rights given to them by their Creator that no government led by man can take away.
That is why The Powers That Be hate you.
They hate our Constitution. They hate our Bill of Rights. They hate our freedoms, and they are doing everything they can to take these away from us.
Is this an overstatement? Is this being extreme? Hardly. For over two years, the Federal Government has been attacking anyone that believes in a strict interpretation of the United States Constitution, labeling them as “extremists” and “potential domestic terrorists.” We saw this with two documents recently released within the past few years, namely the "Department of Homeland Security's report on Rightwing Extremism" and the infamous Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC) report on home-grown terrorism that linked Libertarians, returning army vets, gun owners, Constitutionalists, Ron Paul, and Chuck Baldwin to white-supremacists and potential criminals. And now, yet another document has been released by the Department of Justice titled "Investigating Terrorism and Criminal Extremism: Terms and Concepts" that proves without a shadow of a doubt that the ruling class made up of people from both political parties (i.e., The Powers That Be), have nothing but contempt for our U.S. Constitution, our Bill of Rights, and our American sovereignty.
The document is a “Glossary” and describes itself as a “tool for criminal justice professionals to enhance their understanding of words relating to extremist terminology, phrases, activities, symbols, organizations, and selected names that they may encounter while conducting criminal investigations or prosecutions of members of extremist organizations.” And, like most things that come from the Federal Government, it is filled with lies. But that won't stop them from disseminating this glossary of ill-defined terms to local law enforcement all over the country.
But how ill-defined are these terms? Are they all ill-defined? No. The problem is with the terms that are typically associated with those involved in the American Patriot movement (i.e., the movement of citizens concerned with the integration of America into a global governing and economic system, or as George H.W. Bush and his associates and followers would call, the "New World Order”) and the fact that they are in a glossary that links those that use these terms with potential criminals, extremists, and potential and terrorists. The terms are typically defined as those used by “conspiracy theorists” -- terms like “Genetically Modified Organisms," “Precious Metal Dealers," “Council on Foreign Relations,” “Constitutionalist," "Bilderberg," etc.
Conspiracy theories? Hardly. Not when you actually read the mainstream articles about scientists altering the DNA of crops with pesticides and viruses. Not when you realize that the price of gold has increased almost $1000 in the last decade alone; not when you read the articles about sterilizing the water supply: not when you read the quotes and read the documents written by the prominent political leaders that belong to and speak at the Council on Foreign Relations. Every one of the definitions of terms in the glossary regarding the Patriot Movement is misleading, or an out-right lie, and that is what we should expose. When we do that, it will be clear as day as to why the government hates you, and why they are doing everything they can to silence you, especially by censoring the Internet. For the sake of organization, the terms will be listed categorically, not alphabetically.
For more than a century, ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it. -- David Rockefeller
This infamous quote in his autobiography, Memoirs, co-founder of the Trilateral Commission, member of the Council on Foreign Relations, and a frequent member and attendee of the Bilderberg meetings is at least proof that some people are working towards a World Governing System where the sovereignty of the individual countries is sacrificed, and where policy for each nation is decided by an international body rather than a local or national body. The mere fact that the European Union exists is proof enough.
The glossary defines Bilderberg Group, Council on Foreign Relations, New World Order, One World Government, and Trilateral Commission very similarly, by asserting that right-wing extremists and conspiracy theorists believe that these organizations are attempting to control the world and usher in a one-world government. But all one has to do is read the above quote from David Rockefeller who founded the Trilateral Commission to see that this is in fact a reality. He stated it himself, and admitted to conspiring to do so. But, that isn't enough for the Department of Justice, so let's look even further into these organizations.
First, let's look at the Council on Foreign Relations. A list of members should be enough to make anyone raise their suspicions, because their membership reveals that they all share a common interest. Their entire roster can be found on their own website, titled “Council On Foreign Relations 2009 Annual Report." Generally speaking, the organization is a Who's Who of the political, banking, and corporate elite. They meet behind closed doors and discuss foreign and economic policy, hold public “talks” and publish a public journal called Foreign Affairs. Current members include politicians Bill Clinton, Dick Cheney (who even made an effort to not mention that he was a member during his election), Sen. Joseph Lieberman (CT), Sen. John McCain (AZ), Sen. John D. Rockefeller (WV), Senator Jack Reed (RI), Sen. Olympia Snow (ME), former Sen. Fred Thompson (TN), Sen. John Warner (VA), former Speaker Newt Gingrich (GA), former Secretaries of State Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice, Henry Kissinger, and Obama's Science Czar John P. Holdren, just to name a few.
Along with the political elite are members of the banking elite such as former Chairmen of the Federal Reserve, Allan Greenspan and Paul Volcker, Treasury Secretary/Tax Cheat Timothy Geithner, and former Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson . . . again, just to name a few.
Among the corporate and financial elite are former and current CEOs, Presidents, and Vice Presidents of corporations like Fannie Mae, CitiGroup, Goldman Sachs, American Express, Prudential Financial, SONY, Disney, First National Bank, Shell Oil, Exxon and Xerox. Again, just to name a few.
In case you are wondering why this group filled with such important people does not get much media attention, and why you possibly haven't heard of it, there's a very good reason. The top CEOs of the Mainstream Media outlets are also members, including over a dozen writers/editors of the New York Times, over a dozen columnists, editors, and writers for the Washington Post (including the Vice President of Washington Post Company, and the editor for the Editorial Page!), columnists, former presidents and former vice presidents of CNN, correspondents and journalists for CBS, including Katie Couric, several writers/editors for FOX News including CEO Rupert Murdoch himself. You get the idea.
The reason that an organization filled with so many important people discussing foreign, domestic, economic, and monetary policies gets no media attention is because those running the media are members and share the same agenda as the rest -- and they know full well that the agenda is vastly unpopular with the public.
Giving a speech in front of the Bilderberg Meeting, David Rockefeller said:
We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years...It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.
We must pause for a moment to analyze this quote. Other than admitting to the cooperation from the Mainstream Media publications regarding the “hush-hush” nature of their meetings discussing policy, and the fact that they acknowledge that the majority of the population oppose their ideas for a Global Governing System, he says something even more daring. He says that the supranational (international) sovereignty of the Intellectual Elite and World Bankers is preferable to our current system (i.e. a system made of sovereign nations with borders). In other words, a group of self-proclaimed Ruling Elitists, which essentially make up all of the organizations that the Department of Justice's glossary defines as “targets for right-wing extremists and conspiracy theorists,” is better than what we have now -- even though the very banking elite are responsible for the Global Financial Crisis we are currently facing! Even though the so-called intellectual elite have been calling for sterilization of the water, genetically altering food and salmon and reducing the world population through vaccines. Is this the world in which you want to live? You will notice that within the Rockefeller quotes, we see the term “World Government," similar to what George Bush and his associates would call a “New World Order.” So who are the conspirators? According to Rockefeller, the “internationalists” are the international elite. He said it himself when he said that some accuse him and his family of “conspiring with others” (i.e. the world elite) to build their integrated world system. The very same global elite that have bankrupted America and the European Nations through fraudulent derivatives trading . . . the very same elite that lied about WMDs in Iraq . . . the very same banking elite that funded both sides of virtually every war since World War I . . . the very same elite that lied about Global Warming and got caught doing so . . . the very same elite that printed trillions of dollars and gave them to foreign central banks . . . these are the elite that should be running the world, according to Rockefeller. And these people are members of the same club known as the Council on Foreign Relations. Does this mean that every person involved in the CFR (an organization made up of several thousand people) is evil and part of this plan to usher in a global governing system? No. But that does not alter the fact that many of these people are part of this plan, and that these organizations have incredible influence on policy making in our society. What's worse is that they are unaccountable. We elect people to Congress to decide policy, not these people that meet in secret like the Bilderbergs. If they were working in our best interest, they would not be working under secrecy.
And just like the CFR is a Who's Who of American elite, the Bilderberg Meetings are made up of the Who's Who of the global elite, and has an even smaller membership (a quality that shows just how elite the organization truly is). Investigative journalist Daniel Estulin has even spoken to the European Union Parliament at length about the secretive meetings made up the world elite.
Without going too deep into this, all one has to do is research the members of the Bilderberg Group and the Trilateral Commission, and you'll see that the very same people and corporations are involved; the same names of Rockefeller, Volcker, Kissinger, Goldman Sachs, and Federal Reserve show up time and again -- and that's just the American elite.
This is what the Patriot Movement means when they say they want to “Take the Country Back,” or that they want to “Restore the Government,” which interestingly enough is a phrase listed in the glossary in question. It is clear that the power structures of the government, the media, corporations, and banking are all members of these organizations, and that they are working against the interest of the American people who want to hold on to their national sovereignty (again, quoting David Rockefeller) . . . otherwise, they would be open about this.
To add insult to injury, this glossary defines “Restoring the Government” as the objective of the Patriot Movement who want to, “Restore the government to its status before it started ignoring the Constitution. Patriots claim that most actions of the Government are unconstitutional and illegal.”
Well, according to the Logan Act, which was passed in 1799, it is illegal for any U.S. citizen (including government officials) without authority to correspond with foreign governments or their agents to influence the measures of the foreign government in relation to any disputes or controversies of the United States. It is also, according to the Constitution, illegal to pass legislation over matters that the Constitution does not authorize the Congress to pass without first amending the Constitution (the 10th Amendment!) This isn't the “claim” of the Patriot Movement; these are the actual laws on the books! The Patriot Movement wants to Restore the Government by taking back the power centers of our government, our corporations, our media, and our financial system . . . in a peaceful way. No violence at all -- we can elect ourselves to the power centers and take back the country, and that is what the Government is afraid of. They are afraid of people becoming educated and running for office themselves to retain our national sovereignty. Why else would they issue this glossary that labels concerned citizens “potential terrorists” and “right-wing extremists?" This has nothing to do with right vs. left, as I have covered before; Right vs. Left is a false paradigm. This has everything to do with whether America remains independent, or if it is integrated into a global governing system. If you are a normal citizen that believes that the best kind of government is local, because the people have more of a say in policy decision, then the mere fact that these organizations exist is contrary to your belief -- which is why they hate you.
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.
This is the oath of office for all House of Representatives members, along with all members of the Senate. Similarly, the President, as instructed by Article II, Section 1 of the US Constitution, recites the following oath when sworn in:
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.
This is about the only thing they do that is Constitutional---they recite the oath to defend the very document for which they hold the most contempt.
Debunking the DOJ’s Hit Piece, Part 2: Assault on The Constitution and Those Who Revere It
October 8, 2010
In Part 1 of this essay, I showed that the Department of Justice’s glossary “Investigating Terrorism and Criminal Extremism: Terms and Concepts,” was nothing more than a hit-piece against the citizenry who are waking up to the lies of Big Government. The first part debunked their assertion that the Patriot Movement is made up of “conspiracy theorists” who believe that CFR, the Trilateral Commission, and Bilderbergs are working against the American people. This second of three parts debunks their attacks on the Constitution Party, as it represents a de facto attack on our Constitution: — the very foundation of our country.
If you need more convincing that the Power Elite running our government right now hates you and the Constitution to which they swore an oath to uphold, there is plenty more evidence from the DOJ’s glossary to prove this point. The mere fact that this glossary, which is defined by the Department of Justice as a “tool for criminal justice professionals to enhance their understanding of words relating to extremist terminology, phrases, activities, symbols, organizations, and selected names that they may encounter while conducting criminal investigations or prosecutions of members of extremist organizations” mentions the word “Constitution” or any permutation of that word literally over a dozen times should be an indication that these “officials” are on the lookout for anyone who either speaks passionately about the Constitution, or dares to refer to it to back up their arguments.
On top of linking the term “Constitution” to criminals and terrorists, it also attacks provisions within the Constitution; namely money, precious metals, and the right to bear arms — essentially anyone involved in the rising Patriot Movement, which is also mis-defined over and over (I lost count after 50). We will continue to debunk the glossary, which attacks this rising Patriot Movement to show that true Patriots merely want a strict interpretation of the U.S. Constitution, which is exactly what The Powers That Be fear.
The “Constitution Party,” defined by the DOJ as, “A minor right-wing extremist political party formerly known as the U.S. Taxpayers Party which is one of the primary parties that specifically tries to appeal to the ‘Patriot Movement.’” All you have to do is visit the U.S. Constitution Party’s website and see that calling it a “right-wing extremist” group is an outright lie. Yes, it is a minor party compared to the corporate-owned Republican and Democrat parties, but to label it “right-wing extremist” is to label our Constitution and our Founding Fathers right-wing extremists — which the Department of Homeland Security has no problem doing, by the way. So anyone who believes in a strict interpretation of the Constitution is a right-wing extremist and domestic terrorist according to the DOJ, which should be more than enough evidence to show how much they hate the Constitution. This will serve as a basis for this part of my essay, for everything mentioned henceforth can be linked back to the platform of the Constitution Party, which advocates actually reading and following the guidelines laid out for us in the U.S. Constitution.
Let us begin with money. There are several terms regarding money and precious metals that the DOJ links to domestic terrorists. For instance, they define “Constitutional Money” as “Gold and silver. Ignoring judicial interpretations of the Constitution and federal law, many anti-government extremists claim that gold and silver are the only constitutional forms of money in the United States.”
First, to say that those who are advocates for gold and silver money are “anti-government extremists” is a lie — they are merely advocates for a Constitutional Government and, therefore, a Constitutional way of coining the nation’s currency, not a fiat currency based on debt printed by a Private Central Bank that practices fractional-reserve banking, as we currently have. Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution says that the Congress shall have the power to coin money and regulate the value thereof, as well as fix the Standards of Weights and Measures. Article I, Section 10 states that: “No State shall . . . coin money, emit bills of credit, or make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debt. And of course, the 10th Amendment states, “The power not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people,” meaning if it’s not written in the Constitution (like the ability to create a Central bank that loans money to the government at interest), and it is not written as a power forbidden to the states (like the ability to emit bills of credit) then it is reserved for the States and the people.
Putting all of this together, we see that a strict interpretation of the Constitution (i.e. actually following what is written) shows that, yes, Gold and Silver is the only Constitutional form of money due to the fact that no amendments have ever repealed this section of the Constitution. The question is, how did we get away from it?
The answer is simple: Illegal actions on behalf of our Congress and past presidents. In order to make anything else legal tender in this country, the Constitution must be amended, which of course, never happened. The tyrants running the show right now know this, and so they label those who speak out as “anti-government extremists”, when it is they who are the anti-government extremists! Our government is set up with rules, and even with rules on how to change the rules! Every law regarding money and banking in this country has been a violation of our Constitutional Government’s rules. Legal tender laws — illegal. The Federal Reserve Act — illegal. The Emergency Banking Act — illegal. House-Joint Resolution 192 — illegal. Why? Because the Constitution does not say that Congress can give up their authority to coin money, give it to a privately owned bank, and have them create paper money backed by nothing and loan it to the government at interest, then declare the right to require gold and silver as payment “against public policy.” I mean, they literally passed a law saying that the previously mentioned section of the Constitution is against public policy! Why stop there? What about those pesky amendments that re-establish our God-given rights? Why not declare our rights as a violation of “public policy”?
If they wanted to change the monetary system, they needed to first amend the Constitution which, again, they never did, because they knew that the people would not go for it. As U.S. history shows us, fiat money along with fractional reserve banking always leads to economic depressions.
Is it any wonder, therefore, that the DOJ has the term “Precious Metal Dealers” in their glossary, which is defined as: “Dealers in gold and silver who form perhaps the most significant source of financial support for the ‘Patriot’ movement. Gold and silver dealers . . . sponsor shortwave radio programs whose hosts urge their listeners to put all their money into gold and silver so they can survive the ‘coming collapse.’ These cynical dealers will accept Federal Reserve Notes for precious metals.”
Never mind that gold continues to hit all-time highs. Never mind the fact that most people lost 40% of their 401K when Bush mercy-killed the Free Market System (he had to sacrifice free-market principles to save the free-market system, mind you), while precious metals have done nothing but rise as theFederal Reserve announces “quantitative easing.” But no, these are “cynical dealers” with ill-intent.
And to add icing to the cake, the DOJ has many definitions regarding precious metals. They define “Monetary Realist” as: “A term used to describe someone that adheres to the view that only gold and silver are lawful money.” The definition could easily be rewritten as: “A term used to describe someone that understands that our government has been hijacked and our Constitution ignored resulting in a confiscation of our nation’s wealth.”
The term “Silver and Gold” is defined by the DOJ as “The only ‘biblical’ and ‘constitutional’ money according to members of the ‘Patriot’ movement. Some members go so far as to refuse to use paper money conducting all of their transactions in silver or gold or through barter.”
Again, this could easily be rewritten as: “The only medium that the Constitution declares to be legal in payment of debt, which has been illegally violated by the government.”
One of the more laughable definitions is “Tax Protest Movement” defined as: “A movement consisting of people who do not simply want to avoid paying taxes but generally claim they should not have to pay them. The right-wing movement started in the 1950s and 1960s and has concentrated on interpreting the Constitution, U.S. law, and the tax code, in particular, in such a way as to be able to claim that most people do not have to pay income taxes. The motivating force behind the right-wing tax-protest movement was to find loopholes, actual or manufactured, that would allow people to claim that they had no tax obligation.”
If I recall, the Tax-Protest movement started back in the 1770s, and ended with a Constitution that stated that: “No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid unless in Proportion to the Census or Enumeration herein before directed to be taken.” The Constitution laid out the law to prevent taxes on people’s income, and it wasn’t until the Sixteenth Amendment that they finally stabbed America’s wealth-producers (i.e. the private sector) in the back and were able to legally rob and plunder the American People every April 15th.
But oh no! It looks like I’m a domestic terrorist, because the DOJ also defines “Sixteenth Amendment” as: “Passed in 1913, this amendment to the United States Constitution permits the collection of an income tax. Followers of Posse Comitatus and other right-wing organizations refer to the year 1913 as the ‘year of the great betrayal.’ Many groups do not believe the amendment was properly ratified by enough states to be valid and, therefore, believe the federal income tax is ‘voluntary’ and need not be paid.”
The problem is that nowhere in the Constitution is the term “income” defined, nor is it defined in the IRS tax code — the author of the IRS said this himself on video. Similarly, the U.S. Supreme Courts have ruled on numerous occasions that the term “income” does not refer to one’s wages, ruling that, “income tax statutes apply only to state created creatures known as Corporations no matter whether state, local or federal,” in the case Colonial Pipeline v Traigle. Unless people are now defined as “corporations,” then the Federal Income Tax does not apply to us (which we will get to later on).
Similarly, in the case Stapler v US, the Supreme Court ruled, “There is a clear distinction between ‘profit’ and ‘wages’ or compensation for labor. Compensation for labor cannot be regarded as profit within the meaning of the law…The word ‘profit’ is a different thing altogether from mere compensation for labor . . . Income within the meaning of the Sixteenth Amendment and Revenue Act, means ‘gains’ . . . and in such connection ‘gain’ means profit . . . proceeding from property, severed from capital, however invested or employed and coming in, received or drawn by the taxpayer, for his separate use, benefit and disposal. Income is not a wage or compensation for any type of labor.”
These are the facts and arguments reflected in the Tax-Protest movement — Constitutional arguments backed up by Supreme Court decisions. But apparently, if you want to follow the interpretations laid out by the Supreme Court regarding the US Constitution, the DOJ considers you a a potential extremist or terrorist.
And of course, the National Organization for the Repeal of the Federal Reserve Act and the Internal Revenue Code along with “Tax Protesters” are all listed in this glossary as terms used by potential criminals and/or terrorists and/or extremists. This goes hand-in-hand with the MIAC report that linked Ron Paul and other libertarians who advocate abolishing the Federal Reserve and returning to a commodity-based money to white-supremacist groups (apparently the Constitution and previous Supreme Courts that ruled on tax issues are racist.) Apparently, “anti-government extremists” use logic, laws, Supreme Court decisions, and the racist U.S. Constitution to justify their arguments.
By now, it is obvious that those running the show are the anti-government extremists, and that those in the Constitution Party are merely advocating a return to Constitutional Government.
The term “Sovereign Citizen” shows up a number of times in the DOJ’s glossary of terrorist terminology. It is far too long to reprint here, but can be viewed in its entirety here. What is important to document, however, is that part of the definition states that Sovereign Citizens believe that “they are not citizens of the United States but are ‘nonresident aliens’ with respect to that ‘illegal corporation.’”
We must pause and analyze this phrase regarding “illegal corporation” due to the importance of the Supreme Court rulings regarding income taxes and that they apply only to corporations. If this is true, and for some reason Americans are required to pay them, then the only logical explanation would be that American citizens are now legally defined as “corporations” by the United States Federal Government. This is one of the arguments of the Sovereign Citizen Movement, which I will briefly explain.
Fresh food that lasts from eFoods Direct (Ad)
On April 5, 1933, then-President Franklin Delano Roosevelt issued an executive order that required that the private gold of citizens be confiscated, stating: “All persons are required to deliver on or before May 1, 1933 all Gold Coin, Gold Bullion, & Gold Certificates now owned by them to a Federal Reserve Bank, branch or agency, or to any member bank of the Federal Reserve System.” The penalty was a $10, 000 fine or 10 years imprisonment, or both, as provided in Section 9 of the order.
Section 9 is the part about which the Sovereign Citizen Movement raises questions. Section 9 stated, “Whosoever willfully violates any provisions of this Executive Order or of these regulations or of any rule, regulation or license issued thereunder may be fined not more than $10,000, if a natural person, may be imprisoned for not more than ten years, or both.”
Now, let us take a look at the Emergency Banking Act text, which other than giving the same penalty regarding natural persons, imprisonment and fines, it actually defines “person,” stating, “As used in this subdivision the term ‘person’ means an individual, partnership, association, or corporation.” For some reason, the executive order and this legislation both make a clear distinction between persons and natural persons — persons in their natural state that live and breathe, as opposed to unnatural persons, meaning artificial persons or corporations.
Bouvier’s Law Dictionary (named “A LAW DICTIONARY: ADAPTED TO THE CONSTITUTION AND LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND OF THE SEVERAL STATES OF THE AMERICAN UNION”) has several definitions of person and corporation which is necessary to mention in order to clearly define the Sovereign Citizen Movement.
“Person” is defined this way: “In law, man and person are not exactly-synonymous terms. Any human being is a man, whether he be a member of society or not, whatever may be the rank he holds, or whatever may be his age, sex, &c. A person is a man considered according to the rank he holds in society, with all the rights to which the place he holds entitles him, and the duties which it imposes.” Bouvier goes on to say, “It is also used to denote a corporation which is an artificial person.”
Likewise, “corporation” is defined this way: “An aggregate corporation is an ideal body, created by law, composed of individuals united under a common name, the members of which succeed each other, so that the body continues the same, notwithstanding the changes of the individuals who compose it, and which for certain purposes is considered as a natural person.”
It is important to realize that “person” is defined as a term used to denote natural persons as well as artificial persons (corporations), and that “corporation” is defined as a term which “for certain purposes is considered a natural person.” In other words, the definitions clearly show no discernible difference between the definition of person and corporation. The only term that is clearly not referring to corporations is natural person.
Now before you start saying that this is all “semantic mumbo jumbo,” remember who we are dealing with here. We are dealing with politicians and lawyers — of course this is all semantic mumbo jumbo! Unfortunately, however, semantics plays a huge role in every interpretation of legislation and law since the inception of our country and Constitution.
Why is all of this important in understanding the Sovereign Citizen Movement? Well, remember that the Supreme Court ruled that income taxes only apply only to “state created creatures known as corporations whether state, local, or Federal.” Yet, we all have to pay these taxes to the IRS so they can give it to the privately owned Central Bank known as the Federal Reserve, or we go to jail (or get promoted, as is the case of our current Treasury Secretary).
The Sovereign Citizen Movement sees this for what it is: Semantics garbage that enslaved an entire nation of people by turning us into Corporations with legal technicalities. Is this a conspiracy theory used by the Patriot Movement? Hardly. Again, using actual Supreme Court rulings, legal definitions, and the language of specific legislation signed by our elected politicians, the Sovereign Citizen Movement makes the claim that the Federal Government uses semantics and labels each U.S. citizen as a corporation so they can be financially raped every April 15th, even though a contract has never been signed between the Feds and the People to establish such corporations.
Sovereign Citizens believe that the documents American citizens are required to have, such as driver’s licenses, state IDs, social security cards, etc. are the contract; by taking part in such programs, the movement argues, we are binding ourselves into tyranny.
To quote the famous mobster Rocky from the beloved Bugs Bunny cartoons, “I don’t know how they does it, but they does it.” It really does not matter how the Feds are doing this; the fact is that all evidence points to We the People being legally considered corporations by the mere fact that we have to pay income taxes that are applicable only to “state created creatures known as Corporations no matter whether state, local, or federal,” to quote the Supreme Court. The legislation that declared the country bankrupt, and the executive order that pillaged the wealth from the citizens, made a clear distinction between natural person and other persons, showing us that this is not merely semantics for the sake of semantics, but that this is the kind of thing that they had in mind when drafting this illegal legislation and issuing the infamous illegal executive order.
The solution, offered by the Sovereign Citizen Movement is to apply for “Redemption,” which is trying to counter legal technicalities with more legal technicalities. This does not work of course, because the cards are stacked against the movement. The best way to to redeem ourselves would be to run for office and peaceably fix the system ourselves. As Freedom Force International says, why fight City Hall when you can be City Hall? With enough Constitutionalists in office, we can legally reverse the problematic legislation and make sure that illegal legislation and executive orders don’t take place!
Which brings us to the term “Executive Order” in the DOJ Glossary. They define these as, “The formal means by which the President of the United States determines the conduct of business in the Executive Branch. Typically, such executive orders take two forms: (1) orders governing administrative or policy matters in Executive Branch agencies or (2) orders for which the authority is derived from congressional authorizations. The ‘patriot’ movement, however, contends that executive orders are ‘presidential laws’ that bypass Congress and subvert the Constitution.”
Folks, it doesn’t take a genius to realize that what happened in 1933 by forcing Americans to give up their precious metals under penalty of fine, imprisonment, or both was outlawing private ownership of this metal, and therefore bypassing Congress — considering that the Executive Order was signed several months before HJR 192 that suspended the gold clause that would have authorized the order in question.
But the DOJ doesn’t stop there. As stated earlier, the “Patriot Movement” is mentioned over 50 times in this hit-piece. Let us review their definition of the Patriot Movement:
The ‘patriot’ movement is a general term used by its members to describe the collective movements and individuals on the extreme right wing. In one form or another, this practice dates back many decades; in the 1930s, many on the far right referred to themselves as ‘superpatriots.’ In the 1960s and 1970s, it was common to refer to the ‘Christian Patriot’ movement, but this term is less common now than then. Among the types of individuals that can be found within the ‘patriot’ movement are white supremacists, sovereign citizens, tax protesters, militia members, and sometimes antiabortion or anti-environmental groups.
That is what the Government thinks of you if you happen to agree with what I have discussed thus far in these two essays: You are on the “extreme right wing,” and belong to a list of terms defining terrorists. They don’t mention that sections within the Government have been caught infiltrating these groups (like the Tea Party) to make them look racist, or even outright lie about Tea Party Patriots spitting at Black Congressmen. They don’t mention that Political Operatives have been caught destroying their own property to blame the Patriot Movement, or that the SEIU was caught attacking Black Patriots for no reason outside a Town Hall meeting. No, the Patriot Movement is the problem, and that includes tax protesters, sovereign citizens, and the rest of the “terrorists.”
This is a classic example of how they continue to link innocent Constitution-loving citizens to violent radicals as a way to discredit them. We cannot let that happen. We must educate and engage in intellectual debates with our friends, families and, yes, our political “adversaries.” We will learn that we are not alone on the issue of our rights and our National Sovereignty, and that we actually share more in common than those who the establishment likes to tell us are our enemies.