Do you know that your signature belongs to you alone? No one can legally force or compel somebody to do anything, especially sign something against their will? When being forced or compelled to sign a confession, it is not admissible in a court of law.
Personally, I would never sign anything under penalty of perjury. I might make a mistake, or if I were inclined to, outright lie. Why would anyone give someone permission to use their signature in a court of law against them? Please consider the following.
The I.R.S. (Instant Robbery Squad) requires people to place their signature on the 1040 income tax forms under penalty of perjury. What is absolutely astonishing is that people do apply their signature voluntarily to these forms. Knowing full well that they " DID NOT EXAMINE " the form and " accompanying schedules and statements ." All the while, not knowing what the logical consequence might be or even how this incriminates them and makes them subject to the income taxes and other governmental rules, regulations, laws & statutes.
In the Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure is the following section:
§ 1746. Unsworn declarations under penalty of perjury.
Wherever, under any law of the United States or under any rule, regulation, order, or requirement made pursuant to law, any matter is required or permitted to be supported, evidenced, established, or proved by the sworn declaration, verification, certificate, statement, oath, or affidavit, in writing of the person making the same (other than a deposition, or an oath of office, or an oath required to be taken before a specified official other than a notary public), such matter may, with like force and effect, be supported, evidenced, established, or proved by the unsworn declaration, certificate, verification, or statement, in writing of such person which is subscribed by him, as true under penalty of perjury, and dated, in substantially the following form:
(1) If executed without the United States: "I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on (date).
(Signature)".
(2) If executed within the United States, its territories, possessions, or commonwealths: "I declare (or certify, verify, or state) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on (date).
(Signature)".
(Added Pub.L. 94-550, § 1(a), Oct. 18, 1976, 90 Stat. 2534.)
In noticing the differences between paragraphs (1) & (2) you might wonder what the differences really mean. Notice how paragraph (1) mentions the laws of the United States of America. While stating that it is to be executed without the United States. Additionally, paragraph (2) mentions within the United States, its territories, possessions, or commonwealths, while omitting the laws of the United States of America.
Before I go any further, we need to know exactly what is meant by the words without & within. Since paragraph (1) mentions without, I'll start with without. For ease in verifying the definitions below I'll use Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition. Which is readily available in public libraries all across America.
Without: Outside; beyond; in excess of. -- Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, page 1603.Within: Into. In inner or interior part of, or not longer in time than. Through. Inside the limits of; during the time of. -- Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, page 1602.
Since paragraph (1) says that it's to be used without (outside; beyond; in excess of) the United States and also mentions the laws of the United States of America, I'll need to define these terms also.
"United States. This term has several meanings. It may be merely the name of a sovereign occupying the position analogous to that of other sovereigns in family of nations, it may designate territory over which sovereignty of United States extends, or it may be collective name of the states which are united by and under the Constitution. Hooven & Allison Co. v. Evatt , U.S.Ohio, 324 U.S. 652, 65 S.Ct. 870, 880, 89 L.Ed. 1252." -- Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, page 1533.
Unable to find a definition for the term United States of America in Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition. I'll use the Living Webster Encyclopedic Dictionary of the English Language by The English Language Institute of America, Inc. 1975 North Hawthorne Avenue, Melrose Park, Illinois 60160.
"United States, n. A federal republic of N. America comprising 50 states, the District of Columbia, and various possessions. Abbr. U.S., US. Also America, United States of America." -- L.W.E.D. of the E.L. page 1081.
As we can see the term United States can mean the federal government and its possessions, while excluding the 50 states of the union. However, the term United States of America always includes the 50 states, the federal government (District of Columbia) and its possessions.
So what is the meaning of the term United States in paragraph (1)? Why doesn't paragraph (2) use the laws of the United States of America since it states that it is to be executed within the United States, its territories, possessions, or commonwealths?
The reason is that both the U.S.A., & the U.S., have their laws. Just like any other nation, i.e., Japan, Mexico, etc.. Although no one pays any attention to another country's laws unless they're within its geographical boundaries. The laws of the U.S.A., apply to the federal republic of North America comprising 50 states, the District of Columbia, and its various possessions. While the laws of the United States only apply within the United States (District of Columbia), its territories, possessions, or commonwealths and not within the 50 states.
Does this sound confusing? If it does, then that must have been the intent of the people who wrote the laws for both. If you can distinguish the infinitesimal differences, you'd readily understand that the federal government and its agencies are very limited in their authority. Thus, they'd lose power over you and your's when you're not on federal property.
Why do all I.R.S. forms use the declaration in paragraph (2)? It is a trap for the unwitting. When you sign that form, "you" are declaring that you are within the federal government's domain. If you live within the United States (District of Columbia), its territories, possessions, or commonwealths, fine, no problem. Then sign them.
However, if you live without the United States, and in one of the 50 states of the union, wouldn't you want the protection of the laws of the United States of America? Of course you would.
When the I.R.S. takes anyone to court who has signed any of their forms, the judge takes silent judicial notice of the signature and the perjury statement. That is all the judge needs to know you fall within the rules, regulations, laws & statutes of the United States. Also, that you are not protected by the laws of the United States of America, i.e., U.S. Constitution, and state constitutions.
© Copyright: 1999 anno Domini Autarchic, All Rights Reserved.
| Index | Links | Home |