NoSSN - Exchanging Liberty For Benefits

Exchanging Liberty For Benefits
November 13, 2001

How to mentally un-chain our fellow Americans? Let's
start an 'un'-chain letter together. Copy & paste the
following text box into the bottom of your e-mails:

«»-«»-«»-«»-«»-«»-«»-«»-«»-«»-«»-«»-«»-«»-«»-«»-«»-«»
Do regulated thoughts run freely through your head?
Isn't it about time you began washing your own brain?
Read 'THE INFORMED AMERICAN' and stay A.L.E.R.T.
http://www.informamerica.com/news/subscribe.htm
«»-«»-«»-«»-«»-«»-«»-«»-«»-«»-«»-«»-«»-«»-«»-«»-«»-«»

11-13-2001 A.L.E.R.T. (A.merica L.aw E.ducation R.ights & T.axation)

EXCHANGING LIBERTY FOR BENEFITS

Reproduced today is a thoughtful e-mail inquiry I recently received
regarding 'the relationship between the Social Security number and
participating in the social security system' and asking whether 'it [is]
possible to quit the Social security system and yet still retain the
number for identification purposes?.' Correspondent wrote:

Dear Mr. Phillips,

I am currently a graduate student in the Masters in Taxation program at
(Redacted) State University. While browsing the web for a class
presentation topic, I stumbled across your website. I am absolutely
astonished and fascinated by this information, and would like to do my
class presentation on the 'voluntary' social security system and our legal
right to elect non- participation.

I have been a homemaker for the last 15 years, and have just recently
entered the workforce. Because of this, I have not made significant
contributions towards SS, and would like to elect not to continue doing
so. I am not, however, ready to 'all out' fight the system by refusing
federal and state withholdings.

I'm unclear in my understanding of the relationship between the Social
Security number and participating in the social security system. Is it
possible to quit the Social security system and yet still retain the
number for identification purposes? I mean, if I were to file an Affidavit
of Revocation and Rescission in order to stop contributions towards and
participation in the system, then how would I file an IRS return for
federal withholdings? I want to take small steps. Can I quit one without
the other?

Furthermore, if you don't have a social security number, how are you
identified for credit purposes? We would like to purchase a house in a few
years and, as you know, the SSN links us to our credit history. It seems
that life would be very difficult without a SSN. Please share your
thoughts on this.

Thanks,

Name Withheld

* * *

Gordon Phillips replies:

Dear Name Withheld,

First of all, my sincerest kudos on your willingness to entertain new and
unfamiliar information on this subject. You obviously have your Thinker
set on 'high'. I'm certain that the facts available at my web site will
NOT be included in your 'Masters in Taxation' textbooks any time soon.

Of course, were I to point out the obvious collusion between college
administrators and federal bureaucrats with regard to student loans, Pell
Grants and other such seductive 'guarantees' (all of which I lump into the
category 'free cheese'), I would be a conspiracy theorist, so I will
refrain from commenting.

Regrettably, 'academia' in all of its purple robes and mortarboards
continues to demonstrate a well-honed mental laziness in the area of
constitutional taxation, running neck-in-neck with their well-heeled peers
in the financial professions in a photo-finish competition for the 'Dummy'
(an award I have proposed, comparable to the 'Emmy' ;-).

With regard to your comment that you 'would like to do my class
presentation on the 'voluntary' social security system and our legal right
to elect non- participation', you stated the situation precisely.

Participation in wealth (property) redistribution is -- and can only be --
100% voluntary for citizens within the States of the Union. The Framers of
the Constitution understood this well, guaranteeing under Amendment V '...
nor shall private property be taken for public use without just
compensation', thereby slamming the door on socialism.

Indeed, those twelve words bar all forced participation by the citizen in
government sponsored wealth redistribution (vote-purchasing) programs such
as the cleverly misnamed 'Social Security'.

I write the following in my book 'Losing Your Illusions', under the
chapter heading 'Exchanging Your Liberties For Benefits':

'After the Great Wall Street Crash in 1929, daily newspaper photographs of
mile- long soup and bread lines persuaded a frightened public to eagerly
embrace the introduction of European style socialism in the form of Social
Security, written and contrived in smoke-filled rooms by the same
politician-puppets of the bankers who had engineered both the crash and
the depression. A public eager to exchange liberty for benefits would now
vote for those politicians who would promise to provide them with the
greatest 'fair share' of the public trough.'

A close reading of the Constitution reveals that the sole jurisdiction of
the federal government within the Union States is twofold: interstate
commerce and postal roads. That's it: interstate commerce and postal
roads. Period.

President Franklin D. Roosevelt (a name that will one day live in infamy)
tried using the only one of these two avenues he possibly could --
interstate commerce -- as the pretense for his first attempt at socialist
wealth redistribution when he cajoled Congress into passing legislation in
1934 to provide for the retirement of railroad workers, arguing
(presumably with a straight face) that railroad workers cross state lines
in the course of their employment -- ergo, interstate commerce was
involved, thereby ostensibly justifying the viability of a federally
sponsored insurance retirement program.

Until that time, virtually no citizen in the entire history of America had
ever received so much as a dime of largesse from the federal government.
Many, including my maternal grandfather, God rest his soul, disparagingly
referred to FDR's proposal as the 'dole'.

Patrick Henry did NOT declaim: 'Give me Liberty, or give me Benefits!'

Fortunately, the supreme Court of that time, unlike today, still contained
a sufficient number of sagacious panelists who understood the principles
of republicanism as crafted by Madison, Jefferson and others. Seeing
through FDR's transparent ruse, they wasted no time in shooting down the
Railroad Retirement Act as wholly unconstitutional in their decision in
Railroad Retirement Board v. Alton Railroad Company decided May 6, 1935,
in which they stated:

'The catalog of means and actions which might be imposed upon an employer
in any business, tending to the comfort and satisfaction of his employees,
seems endless. Provisions for free medical attendance and nursing, for
clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a
hundred other matters might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to
relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. Can it fairly be said
that the power of Congress to regulate interstate commerce extends to the
prescription of any or all of these things? Is it not apparent that they
are really and essentially related solely to the social welfare of the
worker, and therefore remote from any regulation of commerce as such? We
think the answer is plain. These matters obviously lie outside the orbit
of Congressional power'.'

There you have it, the high Court informing Congress that is has NO
constitutional authority whatsoever to legislate for the social welfare of
the worker. Their cogent comments should have dissuaded Congress from ever
again even THINKING about trying to pass a federally sponsored,
vote-mongering giveaway scheme. And rightly so, for there is no provision
in the Constitution for the government to be in the insurance business,
wherefore all federal welfare give-away schemes can only ever be precisely
and exactly 100% participatory for citizens within the States of the
Union.

Not to be outdone by a bunch of old fogies in black robes, FDR sailed
around the geographical boundaries of the Constitution by getting the
Social Security Act passed under TREATY provisions. This remains one of
history's greatest secrets.

Under the Social Security Act, citizens of a foreign country with which
our government has enacted a reciprocal tax treaty can build up credits
towards our government welfare wealth redistribution scheme while residing
and working HERE as aliens in the U.S., while U.S. citizens can do
likewise when residing and working as aliens in the OTHER country.

This fact is none other than a revalidation of the federal taxing scheme
as it has existed since the day Washington took office: citizens are taxed
abroad and foreigners are taxed here at home. This is true not just with
regard to the employment (social security) wage tax, but the income tax as
well.

At this point in time, all 'civilized' nations of the world have
government sponsored and operated welfare giveaway programs. I name them
all in my book. Many Americans do not realize that the Social Security
Administration mails THOUSANDS of social security checks abroad each month
to citizens of other countries!

These federally subsidized foreigners once worked here in the U.S. (or in
the territories and possessions) and swapped enough of their property
(that is, contributed enough wages as employment taxes) to amass
sufficient 'credits' so as to qualify for a monthly check from Uncle Sam
for the rest of their natural lives.

Understanding the above, it is clear why 42 USC at section 405(c)(2)(B)(i)
states to whom Social Security Numbers are to be assigned by the Secretary
of Social Security:

(I) to ALIENS at the time of their lawful admission to the United States
either for permanent residence or under other authority of law permitting
them to engage in employment in the United States and to other ALIENS at
such time as their status is so changed as to make it lawful for them to
engage in such employment; (uppercase emphasis added)

(II) to any individual who is an APPLICANT for or recipient of benefits
under any program financed in whole or in part from Federal funds
including any child on whose behalf such benefits are claimed by another
person ...'. (uppercase emphasis added)

Please note that the 'applicant' under paragraph (II) is YOU. After all,
how can a U.S. citizen be forced to use a SSN for any purpose whatsoever,
including employment, when s/he cannot be forced to APPLY for one in the
first place? Answer: s/he cannot! Go to the head of the class!

You see, Congress left the cell door wide open for the U.S. citizen living
and working here within his own country to APPLY to participate in the
social security scheme. Mandatory wealth redistribution is barred under
the Fifth Amendment's absolute protection of private (personal) property
ONLY when ABSENT the CONSENT of the citizen.

The citizen who is naive enough to knowingly remove himself from under the
absolute protection of the Constitution and actually trust his property to
a tax-and-spend legislature bent on hocking America to those foreign
bankers who designed the system can volunteer to participate in the
government welfare scheme of his own free will, simply by making
contributions of his property (wages) towards the political promise of
'security' in old age, compliments of Washington, D.C..

Of course, all such government welfare eventually received by today's
contributing worker will have deteriorated so drastically by 'retirement'
(due to banker-engineered 'inflation') as to be essentially worthless when
compared to today's buying power. That is, of course, assuming that the
retiree actually receives anything at all. Congress could turn off the
valve on all federal largesse at any time simply by voting to do so. Such
a vote could occur at 10:00AM tomorrow morning and there's not a thing the
worker could do about it (except weep).

You go on to ask 'Is it possible to quit the Social security system and
yet still retain the number for identification purposes?' The answer is:
No.

The SSN is used for the crediting of wages to be applied against
future 'benefits'. Without the number, how can the Social Security
Administration possibly distinguish YOU from every other person with your
same name?

Using the Internet, I recently found 126 'Gordon Phillips' here in America
alone. Since the British Isles, Canada and Australia all speak English as
their native language as well, there must be hundreds of additional Gordon
Phillips' around the world. Which am I? Without a number, I'm lost in the
crowd.

Note that you or your parent (or legal guardian) must:

* APPLY for a SSN on SSA Form SS-5;
* APPLY for wage withholding on IRS Form W-4, and;
* APPLY for benefits from SSA at the end of the wealth redistribution
gravy train.

See a pattern here? Can the act of making application (applying) for
ANYTHING ever be required be law (forced, mandatory, compelled)?

You ask '... if I were to file an Affidavit of Revocation and Rescission
in order to stop contributions towards and participation in the system,
then how would I file an IRS return for federal withholdings? I want to
take small steps. Can I quit one without the other?'

You misunderstand. The Affidavit of Revocation and Rescission is NOT
required in order to stop participation in the Social Security federal
welfare program. Participation is elective. A citizen can elect to
participate one quarter and not the next, and so on. If the law does not
require a citizen within the Union to participate (and it doesn't), then
s/he has no lawful requirement to report ANYTHING (i.e., make a return) to
the government in that regard.

The sole purpose of the Affidavit of Revocation And Rescission is to put
the Secretary of the Treasury on notice of one's new found understanding
of the law and to challenge the Secretary's jurisdiction pursuant to 5 USC
section 556(d) which states that the proponent of a rule or order has the
burden of proof.

The Affidavit of Revocation And Rescission becomes a powerful part of an
evidentiary foundation of exculpatory evidence that can be used to educate
a juror in a criminal tax trial should the government someday attempt to
move forward with false charges of 'willful failure to file', etc.

The Affidavit has already played a key role in the acquittal of at least
one member of the Save-A-Patriot Fellowship, as covered in the past issue
of our newsletter 'Reasonable Action' and titled 'Sweet Victory In
Kentucky' which dealt with the 1995 'willful failure' trial of Fellowship
member, Donald Paul.

The prosecuting U.S. Attorney deceitfully attempted to portray the
Affidavit as a dangerous, anti-government document, thereby drawing so
much attention to it that the jury requested a copy to read. The
subsequently educated jurors emerged from deliberations to acquit Mr.
Paul. After the trial, more than one panelist asked for information about
the Fellowship! It appears at this time that the Justice(?) Department is
reluctant to discuss the Affidavit before a jury.

You ask '.... then how [without a SSN] would I file an IRS return for
federal withholdings?' Answer: You couldn't. Aside from the fact that the
IRS would not accept the form without a SSN, the SSA wouldn't know whose
account to credit the contributions to.

With regard to the executing of returns of income, the only citizens
required to do so are those working abroad and who have FOREIGN sources of
income (see IRC sections 1 and 6012(a) and their regulations). Certain
other code sections make the citizen working here in the Union also
required to file returns when involved in regulated, excise taxable
business activities such as the manufacture, sale and distribution of
alcohol, tobacco and firearm products.

The only lawful application of the Form W-4 'Employee's Withholding
Allowance Certificate' with regard to the U.S. citizen is for the use of
s/he to whom a SSN has been assigned upon application, who applies to have
wages withheld to accumulate credits towards benefits, and who is working
within the federal territories and possessions or abroad under a treaty.
That's it.

The Code of Federal Regulations at 26 CFR section 31.3402(p)-1 refers to
the W- 4 form as the 'voluntary withholding agreement'. Yes, Virginia, the
W-4 is VOLUNTARY! C.P.A.'s and small business owners of America - take a
'Clue Card'!

Furthermore, 26 Code of Federal Regulations, section 301.6109-1(c) states:

'Requirement to furnish another's number. Every person required under this
title to make a return, statement, or other document must furnish such
taxpayer identifying numbers of other U.S. PERSONS AND FOREIGN PERSONS
that are described in paragraph (b)(2)(i), (ii), (iii), or (vi) of this
section as required by the forms and the accompanying instructions. The
taxpayer identifying number of any person furnishing a withholding
certificate referred to in paragraph (b)(2)(vi) of this section shall also
be furnished if it is actually known to the person making a return,
statement, or other document described in this paragraph (c). IF THE
PERSON MAKING THE RETURN, STATEMENT, OR OTHER DOCUMENT DOES NOT KNOW THE
TAXPAYER IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF THE OTHER PERSON, and such other person is
one that is described in paragraph (b)(2)(i), (ii), (iii), or (vi) of this
section, such person must REQUEST the other person's number. The request
should state that the identifying number is required to be furnished under
authority of law. When the person making the return, statement, or other
document does not know the number of the other person, and has complied
with the request provision of this paragraph (c), such person must SIGN AN
AFFIDAVIT ON THE TRANSMITTAL DOCUMENT forwarding such returns, statements,
or other documents to the Internal Revenue Service, so stating. A person
required to file a taxpayer identifying number shall correct any errors in
such filing when such person's attention has been drawn to them.''
(uppercase emphasis added)

Note that the law does NOT say that the covered employer (i.e.,
participating for social security purposes) upon tendered a W-4 to the
worker to be signed and returned to him shall 'obtain' or 'demand' the
number. The law says 'request', presumably politely. Note also that here
is no form necessary upon which to report the employer's request for, and
failure to obtain, the number. Citizen-employers (and workers) engaged in
their common law right to pursue unregulated (and therefore untaxed)
occupations within the Union don't use government forms. They use
self-generated, sworn statements - i.e., affidavits. Do Congress and the
Department of the Treasury understand this? You bet. They wrote the law.

You ask 'Furthermore, if you don't have a social security number, how are
you identified for credit purposes? We would like to purchase a house in a
few years and, as you know, the SSN links us to our credit history. It
seems that life would be very difficult without a SSN. Please share your
thoughts on this.'

I know of no credit reporting company -- TRW (now Experion), CBI,
Trans/Union, etc. -- that will establish or track a credit record without
a taxpayer identification number (TIN) being associated with the account.

A state-chartered statutory entity such as a Limited Liability Company can
apply on IRS Form SS-4 for an Employer Identification Number in order to
open a bank account. It can then take out a collateralized loan and begin
establishing credit in the name of the LLC. As for 'purchasing a house in
a few years', you might want to consider the advisability of owning
anything titled in your own name when your own government is provably a
serial scofflaw. Rent any version of 'Robin Hood' for deeper
understanding.

Should you desire further information in this area, feel free to ask me
for a referral to a reputable provider of asset protection services. I
hope this has helped to answer your questions. Keep in touch!

Yours For Liberty In Our Lifetime,

Gordon Phillips

«»«»«»«»«»«»«»«»«»«»«»«»«»«»«»«»«»«»«»«»«»
Let's INFORM AMERICA together! Tell a friend...
http://www.informamerica.com/news/tellafriend.htm
«»«»«»«»«»«»«»«»«»«»«»«»«»«»«»«»«»«»«»«»«»

T H E · I N F O R M E D · A M E R I C A N
'Real News For Real Americans!'
· Protected by the 1st Amendment; Defended by the 2nd
· Life-empowering truths not covered by the 'watchdog' media
· Converting taxpayers back to citizens; a compass for freedom
· Read the current issue at http://www.informamerica.com/news

SUBSCRIBE
· Subscribe to receive Gordon's latest articles.
· Click here --> http://www.informamerica.com/news/subscribe.htmv

ACCESS THE ARCHIVES
· Read past issues of THE INFORMED AMERICAN and ALERT's
· Click here -- > http://www.informamerica.com/news/archives.htm

DOWNLOAD OUR EYE-OPENING 'FREE REPORTS'
· Learn the facts about IRS computer fraud.
· Employers: Who is really required to deduct and withhold?
· Is Congress really honest? What's Senator Grassley up to now?
· Click here for download details: http://www.informamerica.com

FREEDOM RESOURCES FOR THE FREEDOM MINDED
· It's Your Stuff -- Protect It Now at http://www.PrivateArena.com
· The Truth Behind The Income Tax at http://www.InformAmerica.com
· Prepare For The Coming Collapse at http://www.FullyDiversified.com
· No More W-4! Take Home 100% at http://www.AmericanContracting.com
· Financial Freedom Thru No-Risk Realty at http://www.RealtyFreedom.com

THE 'THREE RULES'
The principled American who decides to exercise his or her rights in the
face of a government that ignores the Constitution and due process needs
to pay careful heed to the following THREE RULES, and in this exact order:

· RULE #1 -- Protect Property
· RULE #2 -- Get Educated
· RULE #3 -- Take Action? (see rules 1 and 2)

Regrettably, many unwisely reverse this order of events. Their eyes become
open to the truth and, in their frustration or outrage, they may stop
filing tax returns as 1 in 5 Americans already have, by the IRS' own
admission.

They have already taken action (RULE #3), yet they remain largely
uninformed as to our nation's written tax laws (RULE #2). And their
property and income streams are still fully exposed to plunder (lien, levy
and seizure) and/or opportunistic/predatory lawsuits (RULE #1). The
result: they have just shot themselves in one or both feet.

Savvy Americans who are serious about applying the advantages of
real-world asset protection complete RULE #1 before all else. As a bonus,
their estate will never be probated nor will their children's inheritance
one day be shrunk due to misapplication of federal estate and inheritance
tax law.

The bottom line: too many procrastinate and later regret that RULE #1 was
not their primary order of business. Don't let this happen to you. Feel
free to ask us for a referral to a reliable and knowledgeable asset
protection provider.

Yours For Liberty In Our Lifetime,

Gordon Phillips
· Founder & CIO: INFORM AMERICA!
· Nat'l Representative: Save-A-Patriot Fellowship
· National Spokesperson: American Contractor Services

P.S. Living life in a fishbowl? Or in the Private Arena? Visit
http://www.privatearena.com and get your FREE REPORT.

LEGAL DISCLAIMER
· Nothing published by INFORM AMERICA! is to be construed as legal or tax
advice. If you find yourself in need of such advice, please seek the
services of a licensed attorney, CPA or other tax or legal professional
who is fully versed in the Federalist Papers, the Anti-Federalist Papers,
Madison's Notes, Elliot's Debates, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights,
the Internal Revenue Code and the tax regulations. This may be a
protracted search.

SUBSCRIBE -- If you were forwarded this e-mail by a friend and would like
to 'opt in' to our e-mail distribution list and receive the latest
A.L.E.R.T.'s and issues of THE INFORMED AMERICAN!, click here -->
http://www.informamerica.com/news/subscribe.htm

"The truly unique power of a central bank, after all, is the power to create money, and ultimately the power to create is the power to destroy." --
Pringle, Robert; and Deane, Marjorie: The Central Banks; Viking, 1994, page viii.

DISCLAIMER: The data on this website is the collaborative experience, contributions, and research of various websites, legal books, tax documents, researchers, associates, attorneys, CPA's, etc. and does not constitute legal advice. The primary purpose of this site is education. We do not advocate any specific course of action. What you do with this information and any course of action you decide to take, if any, is entirely your responsibility.

]