| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Shiloh |
Posted - 05 Mar 2006 : 05:50:49
Anyone successful for revoking a Social Security number once it has been issued?
Shiloh |
| 17 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| I. Scriabin |
Posted - 17 Dec 2010 : 23:49:12
It is hard to believe that four years have passed
since I last posted to this topic. My apologies to
Jay Scott and others for not responding before now
to his questions of 21 May 2006.
Much water has passed under the bridge since then
and I can assure all that the Courts are cognizant
of the truth regarding the SOCIAL SECURITY ACCOUNT
TAXPAYER PERSON with the NAME (a copy of the applicant's
name) and NUMBER. Tax Court is also cognizant of the
truth regarding Form 1040 - no person is required by
law to make use of Form 1040 or to incur any obligation
for the 1040 TAX.
Once you learn Who You truly are (you haven't been
changed) and how You relate to the Corporate Government
Created SOCIAL SECURITY ACCOUNT TAXPAYER PERSON; and
how to properly "present" as Trustee of the Trust
Account, life becomes ever so much easier and enjoyable.
The "solution" is actually so simple that it is almost
unbelievable. It does, however, take some time to
overcome the "brainwashing" we've acquired by means of
the government and the media.
Remember, the NAME AND THE NUMBER are not "You." But,
You, as designated Trustee, give "life" to the CREATED
BUSINESS ENTITY SOCIAL SECURITY ACCOUNT TAXPAYER PERSON
by lending it your consciousness and physical ability.
Fortunately, the law provides immunities for the Trustee
which are not available to a GENERAL PARTNER. Assure
that "You" properly present as Trustee with proper
"language" and "terminology." It's not hard to learn.
If "You" should be mistaken for GENERAL PARTNER then
things get very difficult.
If any have questions please ask. I'll be paying closer
attention to this topic from now on.
|
| Lewish |
Posted - 08 Oct 2007 : 17:20:27
Hello Thomas,
You are very correct in your analysis of the situation. However, you are overlooking the fact, that Title 26 says you have 30 days to rescind the contract when you turn 18 or it is binding from then on.
But, let's look at some other sides of the problem. The bigger problem, as I see it, is that you are fiduciary for the vessel that was created sometime after your birth and to which is attached the SSN. It is NOT your number. Read the back of the card for confirmation.
Now, if you get rid of the fiduciary responsibility of the vessel, you are left with a contract, which is to your advantage. This is what David Merrill is referring to. Your sweat equity went into the SS account, why shouldn't you be able to revest that? No reason I can think of. Revestment is mentioned in Title 26.
Just a few thoughts.
Peace to you all,
Lewis
A Man on the Land on Washington as a Citizen thereon. |
| Thomas7 |
Posted - 30 Sep 2007 : 15:53:06
You guys should consider looking at SSN rescision as a contract issue. The heart of the matter is you entered into a contract when you signed up to get an SSN. However since the SS application is essentially an adhesion contract, fraud, both constructive and actual was involved, not to mention many people enter into the contract as a minor. As a minor you are not legally competent to enter into a binding contract. Free exercise of religion may also be asserted, especially if you practice the Mosaic Law of YHWH.
These are just a few of the valid points one must assert as the basis for nullifying that contract. The SSA doesn't want people to opt out so they have no internal procedures or forms to do so. One must approach the problem from a different angle. I don't believe 20 CFR 3 § 404.1905 is useful b/c if you still have access to benefits, you are subject to their control. I don't recall the case, but the Supreme Ct ruled that "That which the government subsidizes the government has the right to control".
Well, this is just what my research as uncovered so far at least.
2Co 3:17 Now #1497;#1492;#1493;#1492; is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of #1497;#1492;#1493;#1492; is, there is freedom. |
| David Merrill |
Posted - 18 Sep 2007 : 20:22:56
quote:
Originally posted by Shiloh
Anyone successful for revoking a Social Security number once it has been issued?
Shiloh
Dear Shiloh;
Years ago I rescinded, revoked or otherwise terminated my SSN. The lady at the desk became quickly annoyed and called the office supervisor who told me the correct way to do this.
I like to make this convincing by putting it in context of the posts already here on the thread. Brother Gregory, (presuming the same ministry) was "correcting" me that I should not take the word of a lower level administration supervisor on this removal. That was years ago and he seems to have learned better about complicated and sophisticated Forms with the SSA. The truth be told by the supervisor over a decade ago; there is no process to "get rid" of the SSN within the SSA.
Lewish explains why. In an indirect manner anyway. The SSN is not yours to get rid of.
It comes into effect from a trust you must form constructively. A trust between yourself (beneficiary), and the Comptroller of the Currency and the Governor of the Fed as trustees. You may terminate the trust at any time, but the only way to terminate the SSN is a death certificate - meaning there no longer exists any beneficiary by that name in trust.
Quit saying or writing down any SSN for yourself. When anybody asks you if you have a SSN say, "No. I don't have a Social Security Number."
Lewish is also correct about rescinding any contracts that are effectual. But also remember that any bad faith renders that contract ineffective. So if you are unaware about extra obligations that stand in assumpsit, they do not exist. Otherwise at some point in the process they will be required to confirm you have a SSN and go back one paragraph as to how to answer. If the confirmation fails, there is no bond.
Regards,
David Merrill.
P.S. The beautiful aspect of this form (not Form) of removal is that since I have made for an entitlement by contributing more than 40 quarters of my career, I can claim benefits at any time in the future. Sometime when it serves me to have a SSN.
quote:
"According to international law it has long been established that, although a person who claims to be the owner of a ship is bound by the character fastened upon her by the flag, under which he has chosen to let her pass, captors are not affected by the flag, but are entitled to go behind it, and to show the true character of the ship by reference to the substantial interest in it, the effective control over it, and the real proprietorship of it." Prize Law During the World War, James Wilford Garner, MacMillian Co., (1927) § 284 pgs. 378, 379, quote of Sir Samuel in the "Kankakee, Hoching and Genesee," British Prize Court 1918. See 2 Benedict [6th Edition] § 400, pgs. 92 & 93. 254 U.S. 671 @ P. 689 Admiralty Rules of Practice - Claim-How Verified-Rule 25.
|
| Lewish |
Posted - 07 Sep 2007 : 12:40:25
Greetings brother Greg,
An alternative, and I think better approach to the Form 4029 is to use a W8-BEN, which shows you to be a non-resident alien and therefor not subject to such taxes.
Chris Hansen has a lot of good information on it on his website:
http://sedm.org/Forms/Tax/W-8BEN/AboutIRSFormW-8BEN.htm
He modifies the form to meet our needs. Check it out. I think you will find it interesting.
BTW, Chris has beaten the Feds a couple of times over shutting down his website. Been to court and won. Impressive.
Peace to all,
Lewis
A Man on the Land on Washington as a Citizen thereon. |
| Greg |
Posted - 07 Sep 2007 : 10:53:46
Just sharing a little info I found. Neither endorsing, refutting, or anything in the middle...jsut sharing. This does not disolve any relationship you may have with the account it's self...merely the obligation to pay into, or participate in the pyramid scheme.
people can fill out IRS form 4029 (PDF), the "Application for Exemption From Social Security and Medicare Taxes and Waiver of Benefits". Who is eligible? Members of a "recognized religious group" provided that:
* It is conscientiously opposed to accepting benefits of any private or public insurance that makes payments in the event of death, disability, old age, or retirement; makes payments for the costs of medical care; or provides services for medical care (including social security and Medicare benefits).
* It has provided a reasonable level of living for its dependent members.
* It has existed continuously since December 31, 1950.
You must be (1) a member of a religious group that (2) is ideologically opposed to insurance and (3) takes care of its dependent members and (4) isn't new.
Be Blessed.
His humble servant,
Greg |
| Greg |
Posted - 10 Jun 2007 : 22:24:00
Greetings and blessings group.
Found something interesting I did not know (hence it's not on the forum) so thought I would share.
"As the Trustees of Social Security, the Comptroller General of the United States and the Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board have said..."
This quote taken directly from Social Securities web site at
http://www.ssa.gov/qa.htm
Did you guys know the comptroller and FR were trustees for SS?
Be Blessed,
His humble servant,
Greg. |
| Lewish |
Posted - 14 Apr 2007 : 21:05:32
Greetings,
Here is what I now know about SSN and IRS matters, as of my latest incarceration by the feds.
There is no reason to revoke the SSN. It is not yours and never has been. Read the back of the card. It is theirs and it belongs to the federal entity which they created and assigned it to.
However, you do want to do a recission of your signature on all government documents, both the SSN and any IRS docs. Your signature is what binds you by contract to the vessel they are using in their private business courts.
More related to this will follow in other postings.
Peace be with you in Jesus,
Lewis
A Man on the Land on Washington as a Citizen thereon. |
| Oneisraelite |
Posted - 22 May 2006 : 05:48:23
Our President, Yahushua, said those words...Wonderful Counsellor isn't he?
Yahu'hanan [John] 8:32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.
"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." - I. Scriabin
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.
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. |
| Jay Scott |
Posted - 21 May 2006 : 10:50:01
Thanks for posting! It's been rather lonely around here.
quote:
Originally posted by I. Scriabin
...without any need for extreme and costly action to forfeit what is rightfully yours by law.
Are you saying termination of the SSAN (or your connection with it) is not necessary to remove the presumption of subjection to the STATE?
quote:
Originally posted by I. Scriabin
Once you decide to "dig in" and study the proper subject matter:
Contracts, Trusts and the Corporation Sole
Please recommend some study materials. UCC? Business Law? The Holy Bible 1611 Edition KJV?
What are your thoughts on this article?
WHY THE UCC FILING?
http://www.worldnewsstand.net/law/ucc.htm
The author seems to state you can remove presumption of subjection to the STATE by claiming a security interest in the STRAWMAN that bears your legal name, via a county recorded document, then filing a UCC-1 Financial Statement listing it as collateral.
How would you make it clear (publicly) you do not accept STATE benefits?
quote:
Originally posted by I. Scriabin
The creation of the CORPORATION U.S. GOVERNMENT which has been assigned a Social Security Account Number...
Out of curiosity, when was the SSAN assigned? Upon creation of the Birth Certificate? Or upon application for SSN card?
Jay
|
| I. Scriabin |
Posted - 20 May 2006 : 23:25:30
Mark above is most nearly correct but there is a bit more to
elaborate upon. 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!!
|
| stefree |
Posted - 14 Mar 2006 : 14:00:10
Lewis,
....thanks for responding to my quandry...this is truly a sticky wicket as the job is actually one for which I have been getting paid in cash for on a part time basis (not enough to pay taxes on) but has now been made "legit" with more hours (it is being a primary caregiver to a quadraplegic lady and the "job" is being her driver amongst other things....she depends on me and I am pretty devoted to caring for her and her boss has gone out on a limb to accomodate both her and myself in alleviating her monthly out of pocket expenses and would probaly call the whole thing off if there are any legal red flags...ironically, I was stripped of all my civil rights in a plenary guardianship 10 years ago which were "restored" in 2002 (the Lord used the occasion to teach me what true freedom is and where my true citizenship is....) and by a fluke the court never discharged the guardian (although my rights were restored)...anyway, I am praying and if these requirements are a result of the Patriot Act, then the employer may be under the gun....Ah me, shades of things to come....did you see that a law was passed penalizing those on medicaid who tithe? Mans law vs the Law of God...
I had also written David Merrill and he says that it is an itimidating attorney behind this....
Blessings and thanks again for writing back...
Stefree |
| Lewish |
Posted - 13 Mar 2006 : 14:16:32
Dear Stefree,
Your new employer is asking for things beyond their right to ask. Are you going to "volunteer" for it, or are you going to stand on your beliefs?
The old SSN follows you regardless of whether or not you change your name legally. If you compare birth certificates of someone who was adopted, you will find that the registration number on the pre-adoption BC is the same as the one on the post-adoption birth certificate.
All of the things your employer are asking 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."
Well, ther you are.
You decide how you want to live your life.
Peace,
Lewis |
| stefree |
Posted - 13 Mar 2006 : 12:34:18
Dear Ecclesia Forum Members,
I changed my name several years ago and never notified SS having no intention of working in the public sector again..however, this has now become an issue and 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...I need to know waht to do here before 2:00 HELP!
Stefree |
| Jay Scott |
Posted - 08 Mar 2006 : 11:14:33
Greets,
I believe here is a link to the termination code:
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?
Be blessed.
Jay
|
| Lewish |
Posted - 07 Mar 2006 : 21:43:20
Hello all,
You can revoke your legal relationship to the SSN. Take a look at 20 CFR 3 § 404.1905. Revoke is also used at 26 CFR 1.676 and says the power is a power to revoke, to terminate, .....
Hope these code cites will be useful.
Regards,
Lewis |
| Mark |
Posted - 06 Mar 2006 : 18:10:28
You can't revoke it. It's not yours to revoke. It is issued to the trust they created; the person (legal fiction) with the ALL CAPS NAME, that you may believe is you, but is not. Just stop using it. |
|
|
