Revoking a Social Security number once it has been issued...

submitted by Jesus from (self.conspiracy)

http://www.socialsecurity.gov/OP_Home/cfr20/404/404-1905.htm

Simply states:

"Each agreement shall contain provisions for its possible termination. If an agreement is terminated, entitlement to benefits and coverage acquired by an individual before termination shall be retained. The agreement shall provide for notification of termination to the other party and the effective date of termination."

Do you (the reader) recommend, to one who does not desire to be subject to the STATE, terminating the "agreement", as stated in 20 CFR 3 404-1905?

If so, would a simple letter sent to Mark W. Everson, acting as Commissioner of Internal Revenue? Anyone else? John Snow, acting as Secretary of the Treasury?

all 13 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]Jesus[S] 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I must provide my new employer with 2 forms of ID and my SS #....they want me to get a voter registration (AARGH) and/or fill out the required paperwork for assigning the old # to the name change......

Hi, my name is Wendy..... "we don't know that Wendy." I'm standing right here; I've worked for you for like 2 years..."we don't know if you're real, Wendy".... "please provide a fictional incorporation of a trust of yourself.... thanks."

[–]Jesus[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

All of the things the employer isasking for are the promulgation of the PATRIOT ACT! If you are not a UNITED STATES citizen, then these things don't apply to you.

It is like the bank manager said to me on friday, march 10, 2006 A.D.;

"If you can show me documentation of your Declaration of Citizenship, showing that you are no longer to be considered a US citizen, then I will be happy to open you an account without all the things required under the PATRIOT ACT." "The PATRIOT ACT does not apply to non-US citizens." "We open accounts for Canadian citizens all the time, without doing what we have to do with US citizens."

http://www.ecclesia.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=495

This shows that the US government or a 5th column within it is very afraid of people in the US.

[–]Jesus[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The creation of the CORPORATION U.S. GOVERNMENT which has been assigned a Social Security Account Number is indeed a business fiction and a Trust account, and as most have come to believe, it is really not you. But it has been created because we, perhaps ignorantly, requested it when we submitted our applications for a Social Security Account Number.

The good news is, there is no need to panic and take rash action - once we truly understand who we are and how we function in relation to the business fiction CREATION OF THE STATE - then life goes on with new meaning and vigor. The human creation of the Almighty One, you the Sovereign, are still intact. You've just been overlaid with the business fiction as a matter of convenience by the CORPORATION U.S. GOVERNMENT and it is their desire that you follow the herd and do as they do, rather than dig into the matter to uncover the Truth.

Once you decide to "dig in" and study the proper subject matter:

Contracts, Trusts and the Corporation Sole

the simplicity of the truth is utterly staggering!!

Yes, there is definitely a sensible way to interact with the CORPORATION U.S. GOVERNMENT AND ALL OF ITS POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS THE CORPORATION "STATES OF" AND THE CORPORATION "COUNTIES OF" AND THE CORPORATION "CITIES OF"

without any need for extreme and costly action to forfeit what is righfully yours by law.

Whoever it was that said "the truth shall set you free" was absolutely truthful!!

[–]Jesus[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The Bible is the Truth

Artificial persons:

  • Persons created and devised by human laws for the purposes of society and government, as distinguished from natural persons. - Black's Law Dictionary, Abridged Sixth Edition, page 74

Care to guess why they had to use the adjective "human" in the above sentence? Ever notice that that same dictionary does not define human or man? Care to guess why they don't? Here's a maxim of law that gives us a clue to the answer to both those questions we just posed.

Homo vocabulum est naturae; persona juris civilis. Man is a term of nature; person of civil law.

So, be a fellowcitizen of the commonwealth of Yisra'el, NOT the man-made, fictional USA or STATE OF ISRAEL.

Ephesians 2:12 & 19

An act done by me against my will is not my act.

[–]Jesus[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

While listening pay particular attention to the definition of Public Money; it includes legal tender. That is why FRNs say legal tender for all debts public and private! The author is wrong that you can exchange FRNs for US Notes. You can exchange Private Credit for Public Money. It may be confusing if you are trapped into conditioning that it is somebody else who determines whether the FRNs in your pocket are a confidence game (saying they are negotiable instruments) or debt notes. [If the Treasury agent pesters you about where you will be "spending" your FRNs tell him it is none of his business.*]

[–]Jesus[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Did you guys know the comptroller and FR were trustees for SS?

[–]Jesus[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

The form of exercise of this control, noting War Powers have long been revoked except in banking is called irrecusable obligation - through taxation. Since only indirect taxation can be collected on Income, that means an event is taxed, not the Income. The event is endorsement - endorsement of FRNs as negotiable instruments obligates a person the same as Congress in drawing Private Credit.

When cashing checks or even withdrawing from your account with a Withdrawal Slip stamp or write above your signature, "Deposited for credit on account or exchanged for non-negotiable Federal Reserve Notes of equal value". This may raise eyebrows and some suitors got notes telling them to stop. After they did not stop the banks would notify them that the bank, upon advice of the attorneys was not guaranteeing endorsement of the FRNs in any way too. So the attorneys know what is going on with private credit and public money. The bank would of course rather not draw FRNs from the vault - they want you to create them off your Private Credit privileges.

Do you get it? You create the money and then give them your promissory notes and they take them, without your knowledge and charge interest.

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

No, I don't get it. I've seen this type of stuff brought up before, and I've looked into Anna Von Reitz, who makes many mighty claims and seems to be considered as a charlatan.

If you want this to generate conversation, I would suggest taking the time to carefully lay this out with links and bullet points, and maybe even have a part 2, or more. Read it over, check for mistakes, all that jazz. You'd get more viewings and would perhaps help others understand exactly what it is you are saying.

I'm very interested in this because there's a lot of legitimate nomenclature concerning contract law, legal and non-legal persons, and so on. This stuff does exist in the legal and financial system, but I have yet to find a way to reconcile how to utilize any of this.

[–]Tom_Bombadil 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Have you gone through this process?