"IF the people are sovereign, they have a right to govern themselves."

That word IF, means the people are NOT sovereign, otherwise you would not have to be forced to 
become a "citizen, person, or member." By the mere fact you live in a town, village or city 
incorporated, the "representatives" presume you are under their control. This I brought out in The 
New History of America in a case that stated the only way you can "legally" be coerced into their 
corporation is by your consent. I quote it here before moving onto the Law book.
    
"When a change of government takes place, from a monarchial to a republican government,
the old form is dissolved. Those who lived under it, and did not choose to become members of the 
new, had a right to refuse their allegiance to it, and to retire elsewhere. By being a part of the 
society subject to the old government, they had not entered into any engagement to become subject 
to any new form the majority might think proper to adopt. That the majority shall prevail is a rule 
posterior to the formation of government, and results from it. It is not a rule binding upon mankind in 
their natural state. There, every man is independent of all laws, except those prescribed by nature. 
He is not bound by any institutions formed by his fellowmen without his consent." CRUDEN v. 
NEALE, 2 N.C. 338 (1796) 2 S.E. 70. Emphasis added.
    
After reading the next passage in the Law Book I believe you will totally rethink your position of 
"citizenship," "body politic" and "member." It will also show why you are considered a "person," 
which is a "legal entity." Any legal entity is a fiction. How does a State address a "legal fiction" such 
as FOOD LION, A&P, FORD, CVS, WAL-MART? By capitalization of the name. How do they 
address you in driver license, voter registration, property tax bills and so forth? How does the IRS 
address you in Notices, Levy and Liens? You may think this is a trivial matter and pass people off as 
kooks when addressing this capitalization of their name. Think again after reading this.

    "A municipal corporation is a corporate institution, [Are not all corporations subject to the
Uniform Commercial Code?] established by a State as an agency of the State in the local
government of particular districts. By a corporate institution or body corporate is meant a collection 
of individual persons who are organized in such a way that a legal personality results distinct from 
the members that composed it. Footnote 7 This legal personality is possessed of a corporate name by
which it is known, and it continues to exist in spite of changes by death or otherwise in its
membership.

    First remember the above paragraph with the highlighted words. Also remember here we are not 
talking about private corporations for the law teacher stated, "A corporation may be formed, as we 
shall see hereafter, for the conduct of private business. It is then called a "private corporation;" but 
we are at present interested in those only which are formed for governmental purposes."

    We now go to footnote 7, NOT letting go of the fact the law teacher is talking about your town as 
a corporation, the State as the parent corporation or the United States corporation. I will interject 
parallels in brackets [ ].

    "The exact nature of a corporation can be best understood by an illustration. Let us suppose that 
five persons [55 signers of the constitution] wish to begin the conduct of a certain business, [read 
28 USC 3002 (15)] and think it desirable to do this in a form of a corporation. They agree among
themselves to purchase a certain percentage of the stock [US Treasury Notes or Bonds] of the
corporation as soon as formed. When the corporation is organized according to law, [The
constitutions, State and United States] the five member or stockholders do not become identified
with the corporation, but are merely in business relations with it. They are stock holders in it, and as
such entitled to their share of the profits. And so it is with a public corporation. Every citizen is in one
sense a member of it. And yet he is not identified with it. The corporation continues to exist even
though he may die or move out of its jurisdiction. The corporation, whether public or private, is, for the
most purposes, a legal entity. It can act only through its agents."

    Well I hope you have learned a bitter truth here. You, as a member of that body corporate politic 
called a "citizen" are part of the corporate structure of the city, town, village, county, township, etc. 
Being part of that corporate structure, you become a "legal entity" whether you say so or not. What 
counts is how the government looks at you. Legal entities are fictions. They call fictions "persons." 
They write all the corporate statutes with the term "person" and not the physical man in mind. This is 
why they capitalize your name on their documents because they presume that you are their corporate 
citizen. Therefore, you are of a corporate character and not a physical man.

    You may disagree with me because you say, Look I bleed, you cannot say I am not physical. Oh 
yes they can and they do. You have to read my post on www.atgpress.com on person to get a 
better understanding to see that you can be both a "legal entity" which is artificial character AND a 
physical man at the same time.

    I now want to revisit my book of 1990 to illustrate what I said then and in comparison to this book 
just given to me by the para legal on the 28th of December 1999. See how it dovetails directly into 
what the law teacher stated.
 
 

                                                           From WHICH ONE ARE YOU
 
 
 

"Black's Law 5th Ed. The critical terms to look up are bolded.

          "Citizen. One who, under the Constitution and laws of the United States, or of a
          particular state, is a member of the political community, owing allegiance and being
          entitled to the enjoyment of full civil rights."

    Are they talking about you in the definition of Citizen? Is light being shed on what I said in 
Chapter VI? What happened to unalienable rights that do not appear in the definition? Lets go a little 
farther in the definition found on page 222;

          "Citizens are members of a political community who, in their associated capacity,
          have established or submitted themselves to the dominion of a government for the
          promotion of their general welfare and the protection of their individual as well as their
          collective rights. " cite omitted

    The word "establish" means an official relationship with the corporate administrators of the State or
United States. Such as an agreement. Establishment means business. Look up the word "or" in Blk's
4th, NOT the 5th, to get a better understanding of the word "or" when used in a statute. Unless "or"
has the word either before it, the word "or" will be understood to mean AND! Wherever you see the
word "or," replace it with "and," and see how much it brings to light the statute.

          OR, conj. A disjunctive particle used to express an alternative or to give a choice of one
          among two or more things. It is also used to clarify what has already been said, and in
          such cases, means `in other words,' `to wit,' or `that is to say.' Or is frequently misused;
          and courts will construe it to mean `and' where it is so used. However, where the word
          `or' is preceded by the word `either,' it is never given a conjunctive meaning. Black's
          Law 4th Ed.

    On an instrument such as a license application, when the statement appears asking for a "business 
or residence address," it is simply stating they want your business address of your residence. 
Remember the definition of "and?" I think you are going to look at words a little closer, aren't you?

    This all ties back to a commercial setting of the jurisdiction "state of the forum," to which you 
must be the United States citizen who is the resident alien in the State of the Union, who, having no
unalienable, but only civil rights, are subject to the corporate states dominion because you
submitted yourself to the jurisdiction of the United States when voting for the president and elected
officials by association. Read 26 USC 7701(a) (1) and find the word association used to 
define "person.". Read 26 CFR 1.861-8 (F) (3), then see what effectively connected with a 
trade or business of the United States means.

    Are not all residents, a.k.a. persons, required to register their guns? Haven't all "citizens" given up 
their 2nd Amendment protection of unalienable rights for civil rights? Don't all residents (persons) 
have a driver license? Don't all residents (persons) pay income taxes? Can people obtain a driver 
license if they claim to be a nonresident? Explain then how can you ever be, as all patriots claim, A
SOVEREIGN CITIZEN? How can you be sovereign in one breath and on the exhalation of the 
same breath be a citizen subject to the dominion of a government? Read definition of Sovereignty, 
page 1252 of Blk's Law and remember only sovereigns create government. What was the 
American before he "resided" in a State? Wasn't he a "free white person?" See Works of John 
Adams, 213 and Thayer, Cases on Constitutional Law, note on page 459, stated in part:

          "The proper english meaning of the term `citizen' imported membership of a borough
          or local municipal corporation. The usual word for a man's political relation to the
          monarch of the state was `subject'. . . . The word `citizen' is not found in any of our
          state constitutions before that of Massachusetts (1780); . . . In the Declaration of
          Independence (1776), we read it once, `He has restrained our fellow citizens,' etc. and
          once in the Articles of Confederation. "

                                                         END OF WHICH ONE ARE YOU

    Now think again. A "free white person" is an oxymoron. Why, you say? Think. A person is a legal 
fiction in law. A legal fiction is only as free as its creator wants it to be. Therefore a white person 
can never be free because despite his color he is a "person." Now if you said a "free white MAN." I 
would agree, but never a free white PERSON. Under a King you are a "subject." Under a President 
or Governor in this country you are still a "subject" only they use the term "citizen." There is no 
difference and this is where they have seduced the American people into thinking they are sovereign. 
Think for a moment that if all were sovereign, there would be no laws, except the Laws of the 
Almighty, nature’s laws, that you are bound to by any society standards. They understand those laws 
all over the world. That is why the term was used, "ignorance of the law is no excuse." However, 
when applied to man made laws that maxim no longer holds water.

    The legal profession saw to it that they carried over the maxim to man’s laws, which no man can 
possibly understand. Yet because of the fraud pulled upon you by the few who incorporated all 
governments in this country, they make you to believe that you should know all their laws. The real
laws that the maxims apply are, to mention a few, thou shall do no murder, thou shall not steal, thou 
shall not bear a false witness and you know the rest. Therefore, all governments in this country act 
on fiction. They have to make their grand scheme. You just read from the law book that everything 
as to be in the artificial character to allow the State or United States to have controlled all the
"members." This fraud goes so deep that others in the movement rely solely that they are a citizen 
and free white person. Now the law book has just toppled those convictions of the people so 
claiming. Like I say it is time to throw all past misconstructions away and regroup. This is how they
are operating today.

FICTION

    "The United States Government as such is fictitious and thus includes the States Government,
"Fictitious Party" where a suit or action is brought in the name of one who is not in being . . . To bring
such a suit is deemed a contempt of court"; see Blacks Com. 133, Bouvier`s law dict. pg 1215
(1914), and the 1859 edition pg 520, states; "Such an attempt has been held to be a contempt of court; 
and Lord Harwicke in such a case committed the parties and their attorneys". emphasis mine

    "An entity is intangible and unable to enter a court room to allege charges, or bear witness, 
against any natural individual. Fictions were invented (created by Roman praetors, who, not having 
the power to abrogate the law, were nevertheless willing to derogate from it under the pretense of doing equity and justice). Fiction stems from the resource of weakness, which in order to obtain its 
object, assumed as fact, what is to be contrary to truth and law and when the legislature desires to
accomplish an objective they command under the same. Fictions of law owe their origin to the
legislative usurpations of the judicial bench (4 Bentham`s Treatise on Judicial Evidence 300) 
and limitations imposed on their branch by the founding document and laws meant to protect the 
other branches and Citizens from their evil effects and as such they are not allowed to be carried 
further than the reasons which introduced them as necessity requires

    John Bouvier, law Dictionary Adopted to the Constitution and l of the United States of 
America.  V I,p. 520 (1859), and 6 Cranch 147 4 B Com. 133 which further explained by Justice Story in: US v 1.960 bags of Coffee, 8 Cranch 398,p. 415.

    "It seems to be a rule founded on common sense, well a strict justice, that fictions of law shall not 
be permitted to work any wrong". (see also 3 blk. com).

    "Fictions allow the assumption [assumption=fiction] that a certain thing is true by addition of 
a quality which is not natural to it in order to aid in its disposition, and which, without the fiction would 
be repugnant to the law and truth, whereas presumption requires and supplies the proof and evidence 
of truth and law." [ Vol. 3, Toullier`s works, 86].

Black`s law Dictionary 5th Ed. defines a Fiction of law as:

    "Supposition of law that sometimes which is or may be false is true, or that a state of facts exist
which has never really taken place. An assumption. Ryan v Motor Credit Co., 30 N.J.Eq. 531, 23
A 2d 607, 621.

    Furthermore, a Fictitious Plaintiff is defined as: a person appearing in the complaint yet who in 
reality does not exist. . .. It is contempt of court to sue in the name of a fictitious party. Fictitious 
is defined as being: "Founded on a fiction... not real, false, not genuine, non existent, arbitrarily
invented and set up.

See Blacks law pg. 562.

    So people, if the State of, or the United States comes after you, the accuser, it is fictitious. Its
employees are in contempt of court for bringing and causing wrongs to the Accused, IF the accused
are not a "person" who is a "member" such as a "citizen" of the State, city, town or village. IF,
however, the accused IS a "citizen" which is a corporate entity, they address that citizen in all capital
letters that denote, TO THEM, that they presume that you were a "legal entity" and artificial in
character. NOW they throw the whole defense that you put forth out the window and you are bound 
to all the statutes. They ask it simply, "did you or did you not do as the statute stated?" It is not a 
restraint upon your Life, Liberty, and property and you cannot entertain any constitutional 
protection of rights because artificial entities cannot invoke constitution for rights. The purported 
complaint is based upon legislative Fiction. YOU are a fiction as a citizen because the statutes 
define you as a person. We require an examination of the legislative definition of State.

STATE

    "The States composing the Union of States are sovereign and independent in all things not 
surrendered to the national government by the Constitution and are considered in principles [by each 
other] as foreign States due to their domestic independence and rights to exercise supreme dominion 
and authority within the limits of their Constitution and laws and national and Federal provisions." (1
Story`s Com. on Con Sec. 208; 1 Kent Com. 189 at note b; ). Furthermore, Chief Justice 
marshal, in Hepburn and Dundas v Ellzey, 2 Cranch 425, expressed the definition of a State in 
relation to the District of Columbia as:

    "...Columbia is a district political society, and is, therefore, a State according to the definition of the
writers on general law. This is true; but as the act of Congress obviously uses the term State in
reference to that term as in the Constitution, it becomes necessary to inquire whether Columbia is a
State in the sense of that instrument. The result of that examination is a conviction that the members
of the American Confederacy only are States contemplated in the Constitution...............

    These clauses show that the word State is used in the Constitution as designating a member of the
Union, and excludes from the term the signification attached to it by the writers on the law of nations.
2 Cranch 452."

    The term State or state in its restricted Constitutional and root judicial sense means a member of 
the States united of the America (union), but the use of the term State as used in the Uniform
Commercial Code, statute pursuant to general law or law of nations, pursuant to their context
requirements and purpose, have a broader meaning, and may extend to organizations, members,
territories, agencies and legal entities of government or within the jurisdictional realm of government.
Furthermore, although the law of nations (international law) is a cunning coercement by Congressional
mischief, as part of the law of the United States, and fictions, are subject to the express acts of
Congress, and statutes, treaties' organic law and Constitutional provision, as superior to cannons of
international laws, and the courts are bound to recognize this fact.

    The forgoing clearly illustrates that the term State; and the term United States as defined by
legislative laws of the District of Columbia including this States legislative body is a fiction of terms.
This includes their Uniform Commercial Code statutes/law, when faced or compared with
Constitutional, judicial and restricted definitions of State as applies to States of the union following the
organic laws of this

It cannot get any plainer than this. So with this I close.

Sincerely,
The Informer

                                           Proof Supporting Article on Lets Regroup:
 

TITLE 8
-HEAD-
    Sec. 1185. Travel control of citizens and aliens

-STATUTE-

    (b) Citizens
      Except as otherwise provided by the President and subject to such
    limitations and exceptions as the President may authorize and
    prescribe, it shall be unlawful for any citizen of the United
    States to depart from or enter, or attempt to depart from or enter,
    the United States unless he bears a valid passport.
    (c) Definitions
      The term 'United States' as used in this section includes the
    Canal Zone, and all territory and waters, continental or insular,
    subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. The term 'person'
    as used in this section shall be deemed to mean any individual,
    partnership, association, company, or other incorporated body of
    individuals, or corporation, or body politic.
-SOURCE-
    (June 27, 1952, ch. 477, title II, ch. 2, Sec. 215, 66 Stat. 190;
    Oct. 7, 1978, Pub. L. 95-426, title VII, Sec. 707(a)-(d), 92 Stat.
    992, 993.)

-CITE-
    22 USC Sec. 1631

-EXPCITE-
    TITLE 22
    CHAPTER 21
    SUBCHAPTER II

-HEAD-
    Sec. 1631. Definitions

-STATUTE-
      As used in this subchapter the term -
        (1) 'Person' means a natural person, partnership, association,
      other unincorporated body, corporation, or body politic.
        (2) 'Property' means any property, right, or interest.
        (3) 'Treaty of peace', with respect to a country, means the
      treaty of peace with that country signed at Paris, France,
      February 10, 1947, which came into force between that country and
      the United States on September 15, 1947.

CITE-
    22 USC Sec. 1641

-EXPCITE-
    TITLE 22
    CHAPTER 21
    SUBCHAPTER III

-HEAD-
    Sec. 1641. Definitions

-STATUTE-
      As used in this subchapter the term -
        (1) 'Person' means a natural person, partnership, association,
      other unincorporated body, corporation, or body politic.
        (2) 'National of the United States' means (A) a natural person
      who is a citizen of the United States, or who owes permanent
      allegiance to the United States, and (B) a corporation or other
      legal entity which is organized under the laws of the United
      States, any State or Territory thereof, or the District of
      Columbia, if natural persons who are nationals of the United
      States own, directly or indirectly, more than 50 per centum of
      the outstanding capital stock or other beneficial interest in
      such legal entity.  It does not include aliens.

   TITLE 42
    CHAPTER 38
    SUBCHAPTER VII

-HEAD-
    Sec. 3220. Penalties

-STATUTE-
    (a) False statements; security overvaluation
      Whoever makes any statement knowing it to be false, or whoever
    willfully overvalues any security, for the purpose of obtaining for
    himself or for any applicant any financial assistance under section
    3131, 3141, 3142, or 3171 of this title or any extension thereof by
    renewal, deferment or action, or otherwise, or the acceptance,
    release, or substitution of security therefor, or for the purpose
    of influencing in any way the action of the Secretary, or for the
    purpose of obtaining money, property, or anything of value, under
    this chapter, shall be punished by a fine of not more than $10,000
    or by imprisonment for not more than five years, or both.
    (b) Embezzlement; misapplication of funds; false book entries;
        schemes to defraud; speculation
      Whoever, being connected in any capacity with the Secretary, in
    the administration of this chapter (1) embezzles, abstracts,
    purloins, or willfully misapplies any moneys, funds, securities, or
    other things of value, whether belonging to him or pledged or
    otherwise entrusted to him, or (2) with intent to defraud the
    Secretary or any other body politic or corporate, or any
    individual, or to deceive any officer, auditor, or examiner, makes
    any false entry in any book, report, or statement of or to the
    Secretary, or without being duly authorized draws any order or
    issues, puts forth, or assigns any note, debenture, bond, or other
    obligation, or draft, bill of exchange, mortgage, judgment, or
    decree thereof, or (3

 TITLE 48
    CHAPTER 4
    SUBCHAPTER I

-HEAD-
    Sec. 733. Citizens; former Spanish subjects and children; body
        politic; name

-STATUTE-
      All inhabitants continuing to reside in Puerto Rico who were
    Spanish subjects on the 11th day of April 1899, and then resided in
    Puerto Rico, and their children born subsequent thereto, shall be
    deemed and held to be citizens of Puerto Rico, and as such entitled
    to the protection of the United States, except such as shall have
    elected to preserve their allegiance to the Crown of Spain on or
    before the 11th day of April 1900, in accordance with the
    provisions of the treaty of peace between the United States and
    Spain entered into on the 11th day of April 1899; and they,
    together with such citizens of the United States as may reside in
    Puerto Rico, shall constitute a body politic under the name of the
    People of Puerto Rico, with governmental powers as hereinafter
    conferred, and with power to sue and be sued as such.

-SOURCE-
    (Apr. 12, 1900, ch. 191, Sec. 7, 31 Stat. 79; May 17, 1932, ch.
    190, 47 Stat. 158.)
 

                              CROSS REFERENCES
      Persons born in Puerto Rico declared citizens of United States,
    see section 1402 of Title 8, Aliens and Nationals

   TITLE 50
    APPENDIX
    TRADING WITH THE ENEMY ACT OF 1917
    ACT OCT

-HEAD-
    Sec. 38. Shipment of relief supplies; definitions

-STATUTE-
      (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act (sections 1
    to 6, 7 to 39, and 41 to 44 of this Appendix), it shall be lawful,
    at any time after the date of cessation of hostilities with any
    country with which the United States is at war, for any person in
    the United States to donate, or otherwise dispose of to, and to
    transport or deliver to, any person in such country any article or
    articles (including food, clothing, and medicine) intended to be
    used solely to relieve human suffering.
      (b) As used in this section -
        (1) the term 'person' means any individual, partnership,
      association, company, or other unincorporated body of
      individuals, or corporation or body politic;