who owns me?

@10806AA.LTR -- A letter regarding the "Remonstrance" document LTR00214

Bill Medina
c/o Post Office Box 70400
Sunnyvale, California (locale)
Postal Zone: 94086-0400
Telephone: None at this time

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Monday, August 6th 2001

In care of: .........................
Mr. Mike Kline
c/o .................................
........, California
Postal Zone: .....


Subject: .............. A letter regarding the "Remonstrance" document


Dear Mike,

Thank-you for your August 3rd visit, and thank-you for sharing a copy
of the "Remonstrance" document, which I have read very carefully.

The "Remonstrance" document appears to be an effort by some of the
" *** people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for
a redress of grievances," as provided for in the First Article
Amendment to the Constitution for the United States of America.

Wrong question - right answer:

Based on the fundamental philosophical premise that all answers to all
questions are preexistent, then would that not obligate one to ask the
right question, such as would disclose the preexistent right answer ?

Then, if one asks the wrong question, one will get the right answer,
but that right answer will be the right answer to the wrong question.

To ask the right question one needs valid and verifiable information.

Humbly presented:

It is not my intent to reiterate twenty (20) years of my work on these
subjects; however, I do feel that the well-intended people who wrote
the "Remonstrance" document, simply do not have sufficient informa-
tion, and for their fine minds, I humbly present the following.









Page 1/5

@10806AA.LTR -- A letter regarding the "Remonstrance" document

The United State - a singular corporation:

Notabily, I am again, and properly, referring to the "United States"
as the "United State" because it is a singular corporate
entity, as defined in Title 28 USC Sec. 3002(15), to wit:

28 USC Sec. 3002. Definitions

(15) "United States" means -

(A) a Federal corporation;

(B) an agency, department, commission, board,
or other entity of the United States; or

(C) an instrumentality of the United States.

[Emphasis added]

Some questions:

Does this definition raise the question as to how one can be a born in
a corporation ?

Does this definition raise the question as to how one can be a "citi-
zen" of a corporation ?

Does this definition raise the question as to how one can owe alle-
giance to a corporation ?

Does this definition raise the question as to who are the stockholders
of the corporate United States ?

Dictionary definitions:

As to "citizen", the dictionaries provide as follows:

Bouvier Law Dictionary, and Concise Encyclopedia Third Revision,
(1914), page 490.

All persons born in the United States and not
subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians
not taxed, are declared to be citizens of the
United States.

--------------------- ooOoo ---------------------

[Emphasis and ellipsis added]








Page 2/5

@10806AA.LTR -- A letter regarding the "Remonstrance" document

Webster's New World Dictionary of the American Language, copyright
1957, page 257, provides:

CITIZEN n. [ME. & Anglo-Fr. citizein, altered
after denizen, etc.,(OFr. citeain (Fr. Citoyen)
<cite; see CITY; sense 3 influenced by use of
Fr. citoyen during the French Revolution] --

1. formerly a native or inhabitant, especially a
freeman or burgess, of a town or city; hence

2. loosely, a native, inhabitant, or denizen of
any place.

3. a member of a state or nation, especially one
with a republican form of government, who owes
allegiance to it by birth or naturalization and
is entitled to full civil rights; as, this
British subject is now an American citizen:
abbreviated cit.

4. a civilian, as distinguished from a person in
military service, a policeman, etc.

[Emphasis and ellipsis added]

On the basis that one is declared to be a "citizen" of the United
State, and on the basis that a "citizen" owes allegiance to government
by birth, then is a United State's "citizen" a partially or wholly
owned property belonging to the United State ?

A digital question:

Ú-¿ Ú-¿
Does the United State own me ? À-Ù Yes ? À-Ù No ?

If yes: Is the United State in violation of the Thirteenth Article
Amendment to its Constitution ?

AMENDMENT XIII (ratified December 6, 1865)

Section 1.

Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except
as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall
have been duly convicted, shall exist within the
United States, or any place subject to their
jurisdiction.








Page 3/5

@10806AA.LTR -- A letter regarding the "Remonstrance" document

If no: Do I own me ?

Notably: Under English Common-law someone claims to own each thing.

If I own me, do I also own my life, do I also own my mind, do I also
own my time, and do I also own my body, and all that it includes ?

On the basis of no actual United State claim, is not the sum of my
life, mind, time, and body exclusively my own private property ?

As my private property, if I were to exchange any portion my life, in-
clusive of my time, labor, intellectual property, productivity, or any
other aspect of my life, with another, does the United State have any
demonstrably lawful interest in any such exchange ?

Is my resulting portion of such an exchange also my private property ?

Can I be deprived of my private property without due process of law ?

Can my private property be taken for public use, without just compen-
sation ?

If the United State trespasses upon any aspect of my private property
by making any claim upon my private property, in which it has no de-
monstrably lawful interest, is the United State in violation of the
Fifth Article Amendment to its Constitution ?

AMENDMENT V

No person shall be held to answer for a
capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a
presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except
in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or
in the Militia, when in actual service in time of
War or public danger; nor shall any person be
subject for the same offence to be twice put in
jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled
in any criminal case to be a witness against
himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or
property, without due process of law; nor shall
private property be taken for public use, without
just compensation.
[Emphasis added]

Notably: As set forth in Article I., Section 2. (Clause 3), as set
forth in the bi-conditional Fourteenth Article of Amendment,
and as reiterated in the Bouvier Law Dictionary (supra), the
texts state: " *** excluding Indians not taxed *** ".

Notably: The so-called "Indians" are not "citizens", they are not
owned properties of the corporate United State, they do not
partake in any privileged electoral franchise, they are non-
represented, and they cannot be taxed because taxation with-
out representation would be imposed without their consent.


Page 4/5

@10806AA.LTR -- A letter regarding the "Remonstrance" document

On the basis that the Internal Revenue Service is an agency, depart-
ment, or other entity of the corporate United State, presumedly acting
under directions from its congressional board of directors, presumed-
ly acting under its constitutional corporate charter, then any act of
trespass made upon the non-citizen's private property, perpetrated by
the Internal Revenue Service, is a direct assault by the United State.

Finally, on their consideration of this information perhaps the well-
intended people who wrote the "Remonstrance" document may choose to
become non-citizens, and thereby break the chains that bind them.

I believe the primary question to be presented to these congressional
bimbos in Washington D.C. is: Does the United State own me ?

Ú-¿ Ú-¿
À-Ù Yes ? À-Ù No ?

Then thanking you for your evaluation of these concepts, I remain,

very truly yours,




Bill Medina.































Page 5/5

@10806AA.LTR -- A letter regarding the "Remonstrance" document

<EOF>_